DescentBB

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 11:28 am**

I mean this. This guy on another message board said Vietnam was the last war with dogfighting. But my brother says "Then what are the fighter jets doing in Iraq" and "What about Top Gun(the movie) that was after vietam!". I watched this show last night on Discovery Wings and it had all the fighter planes from WWII to present. It said like the US started building planes not 4 dogfighting, but missile platforms or something. But it said the F4 had guided missiles, but they rarely hit they target so they had to go back to good old dogfighting.........?
what the ★■◆●!? isn't dogfighting the engagement between two fighter airplanes?

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 11:42 am**

Dogfighting(to me) is the process where 2 planes duel it out like we do in D3. Fly by and shot, turn, deak, fire again. None of this Fire a missile from 40 miles and turn around.

WW2 had dog fights. As did WW1. Any place where the pilots have to use their "flying skills" to get the kill is dogfighting. If he ahs to hit a button and go abck to base, it's not DF to me.

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 11:58 am**

Um, one of your sources is based off a cheezy, 80's-early 90's action movie?

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 3:52 pm**

ask Ace, im sure he knows

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 4:03 pm**

What Merlin said. Close-in, turning aerial combat, as opposed to long-range missile engagements.

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 4:46 pm**

You'll only see dogfights between planes of similar performance capabilities, weapon features, and avionics.

It isn't the death of dogfighting per se, its the death of fighters with human pilots. In order to use your plane to its fullest potiential means you might risk black/redouts, then you are probably going to rely on your missiles more. a red/blackout would mean the other guy has a significant advantage over you.

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 4:56 pm**

I'll take press the button, turn around and fly away over "close aerial combat any day". So would most normal people I believe.

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 5:16 pm**

bo, bo, bok bok

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 5:31 pm**

Or we could be like Canadians and throw lots of stupid and insults at it and hope that the enemy jet spontaneously combusts.

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 5:33 pm**

Vertigo 99 wrote:Um, one of your sources is based off a cheezy, 80's-early 90's action movie?

Hey! I resemble that remark!

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 5:55 pm**

no dogfighting huh? well tell that to the developers of the YF22 Raptor,it is being designed specifically for super manouverabilty ( dog fighting ) when the F4 Phantom was designed they built it with no guns because they thought with the advent of guided missles they wouldn't need them
they soon found out that most air combat took place at below 400 kts hence a dogfight ensued. so tell your friend that he has no Idea what he's talking about with the last dog fight being in the Nam era

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 6:04 pm**

Cuda - that's all well and good - except what plane can match the F-22 in a fight? None, I'd hazard a guess. None at least that could get close enough to warrant an actual dogfight.

I suspect air superiority now is about avoiding ground-based seekers rather more than beating other flying craft. When was the last US fighter jet knocked down? IIRC, it was in Kosovo, and it was a stealth fighter which was knocked out by ground fire.

The days of manned aerial combat are fast coming to a close. UCAVs (Un-manned Combat Air Vehicles) are the fighter craft of the future: capable of making 30G turns and not having a pilot means the craft can have that much more weapons systems, ammo or maneuverability I imagine.

Whether UCAVs will be fully independent, or flown by remote control is unknown. I guess lag will be a big factor here!

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 6:12 pm**

The Irony of the F-22(no more Y, it goes into service in 2006, IIRC).

It was designed to fight an enemy that the US outlived.

There are planes that you can engage a F-22 can dogfight, the problem is that they are all on our side.

Russian Planes are manoverable, but they still a long ways to catch up to the F-22, in terms of avionics and stealth. You can't hit what you can't see, but what you can't see can hit you.

the Rafale, the Eurofighter, the Grippen. all of them are effective dance partners for the F-22, but you'd most likely find them flying beside F-22s rather than against them.

Unless we declare war on Sweden, France, and Germany.

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 6:51 pm**

fliptw wrote: There are planes that you can engage a F-22 can dogfight, the problem is that they are all on our side.

not exactly true, Russia designed, built and now flies the Sukoi SU-37 Flanker-B to directly combat the F-22

Russian Planes are manoverable, but they still a long ways to catch up to the F-22, in terms of avionics and stealth. You can't hit what you can't see, but what you can't see can hit you.

The SU-37 can already out-turn, out-climb, and out-fly the F-22.

the Rafale, the Eurofighter, the Grippen. all of them are effective dance partners for the F-22, but you'd most likely find them flying beside F-22s rather than against them.

true true true, but we have the ONLY "Stealth" Air Superiority Fighter.

Unless we declare war on Sweden, France, and Germany.

i dont see anything like that happening in the near or far future.....but then again im not psychic.

Mobius wrote:Cuda - that's all well and good - except what plane can match the F-22 in a fight? None, I'd hazard a guess. None at least that could get close enough to warrant an actual dogfight.

easy answer...........the Russian Sukoi SU-37 Flanker, it was designed and built to counter our F-22.

Vertigo 99 wrote:Um, one of your sources is based off a cheezy, 80's-early 90's action movie?

but its also based on Mirimar Naval Air Station, the Home of Top Gun Weapons School

Battlebot wrote:ask Ace, im sure he knows

actually, in this case i do know this answer...

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 7:28 pm**

I don't know much about the SU-37 but I know we have the best AWAC's in the world so those SU-37's even if they are better (And I doubt it) are a done deal when they get hit from the blindside. Topgun moved from Miramar over 10 years ago get current

I was just in two squadrons who were aggressors when we were not doing the boat thing. We had our jets painted like Mig-29's and we flew the Russian jets way to train the nub's or fleet guys how to fight them. So yes Dogfighting is still a needed skill. But like someone said ground fire is the worry for the brush fires we are fighting of late...

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 7:31 pm**

http://members.lycos.co.uk/aerospace21/su-27.html

designed in the 60's and built in the 70's. How good can it be now against the F22?

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 7:46 pm**

He said SU-37, merlin, not the SU-27.

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 7:47 pm**

The Su-37 'Super flanker' Can outturn the F-22 Raptor, it has the sharpest turning radius of any aircraft in the world. But it doesn't have nearly the stealth technologies or weapon systems that the F22 Does. The supercruise and thrust vectoring abilities allow the Raptor to stay on par with it in maneuverability however. The Russian S-37 could keep up as well, and although it is stealthier than the Su-37, it still lacks the weaponry of the F22.

Dogfighting is still possible, but with our stealth and weaponry advantages it is unlikely. SAMS are the main concern these days.

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 7:57 pm**

Pretty soon, aircraft in general might become basically flying missiles. ICBMs. What's the need for a pilot to risk his life flying a plane when a robotic system can do it better? A good AA gun can counter most types of enemy aircraft.

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 8:04 pm**

F-22 armorment

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 9:03 pm**

Of course on further reflection I must add this thought. As our current crop of weapons can be targeted from way high even AA or AAA is out classed anymore. I wish I could tell you how accurate we can be but needless to say even with our "lesser" technology now days the AAA emplacements won't be round to long one we know where they are at. That being done well above what the range they can shoot is...

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 9:06 pm**

Wasn't the full-scale deployment of F-22s canceled due to the extreme costs? I know they awarded a contract to Lockede-Martin to build a new universal jet.

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 9:10 pm**

F-35 JSF, I believe. Who knows, I think dogfighting may have gone the way of gentelmently swordplay, if you know what I mean.

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 10:08 pm**

i flew fighter airplanes for 8000 years in a galaxy far far away. so here's what i learned from that:

dogfighting is just close combat. i figured if an aircraft had a cannon designed into it, then it was designed for dogfights.

and don't knock the swordplay

. the only reason we don't have sword duels anymore is because it's legally and socially questionable to be seen with one hanging from your belt. it's much easier to carry a flick knife, so that's what ppl carry.

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 10:56 pm**

I was wondering about that the other day - with my recent acquisition of a job, the first thing i thought about spending [read: wasting] my money on was an authentic japanese katana.

of course, i wouldn't actually use it to defend myself (i would probably end up cutting my own arm off sooner than an attacker's), but i was wondering - is it legal to carry a katana around on your belt? do you have to get some sort of permit for that?

Posted: **Mon Jul 05, 2004 11:07 pm**

Vertigo, i think you can "get away with it" if you declare it's for religious reasons. The samurai were as much a religious class a warrior class. Otherwise I think you need a permit for carrying a lethal weapon on your person. It might fall under "consealed weapons" but I kinda think not as you are not to tell ANYONE that you are "packing".

btw, my wife's brother-in-law as 2 authentic WW2 katana's and 1 wahkasahi. He's been appraohed by several sword hunters and offered LARGE sums of money for them. These guys fins Family Katanas and SELL them back to thier rightful owners for HUGE amounts of money.

Posted: **Tue Jul 06, 2004 12:30 am**

edit: forget it, i'm gonna start a new thread for the SWORD discussion in E&C, so discuss all sword things in there, when i start the topic i'll quote all the relevant posts from this thread.

edit: here, discuss sword issues there.

Posted: **Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:54 am**

i think dogfighting is on the end, hey for the price of 1 superfighter like the f22 or the su37 you can buy a hundred guided or seeker missiles.

btw saw a video from the su37 flying on a techchannel, that thing makes manouvers you think would be absolute impossible for a plane, really. but what is it good for if the third or fourth missile for a few (million) bucks takes it down? dogfighting with planes in a war, that will become a rare scenario.

Posted: **Tue Jul 06, 2004 4:22 am**

Krom wrote:Or we could be like Canadians and throw lots of stupid and insults at it and hope that the enemy jet spontaneously combusts.

This remark sounds like you're Canadian too, at least by these terms of yours ...

Posted: **Tue Jul 06, 2004 10:33 am**

DigiJo wrote:btw saw a video from the su37 flying on a techchannel, that thing makes manouvers you think would be absolute impossible for a plane, really.

AKA: The "Cobra". its one of only a few Russian planes capable of performing this manuever.

Posted: **Tue Jul 06, 2004 3:47 pm**

The cobra certainly looks nice at an airshow, but its combat value has not been proven. Dogfighting is about energy management, and the cobra leaves you with little velocity.

Posted: **Tue Jul 06, 2004 5:49 pm**

Flatlander wrote:The cobra certainly looks nice at an airshow, but its combat value has not been proven. Dogfighting is about energy management, and the cobra leaves you with little velocity.

okay typical scenario for Cobra:

NATO Jet is chasing a SU-37 in a dogfight at guns range.....SU-37 plays on a attempted flee from the scene tactic, NATO Jet pursues.....SU-37 gets up in speed, NATO Jet matches and attempts to overtake the 37. SU-37 Suddenly flips up, pulls off a Cobra....NATO Jet goes soaring by in a vain attempt not to let the SU-37 get a shooting angle....SU-37 blasts NATO jet with a cannon burst or a AAM-12 Atoll.

thats the sole reason for the Cobra, to allow the SU-37 to damn near do a in-flight "stop" and cause a pursuing enemy to fly clear past the Flanker and now the flanker has a perfect shooting angle.

Posted: **Tue Jul 06, 2004 6:11 pm**

AceCombat wrote:
Flatlander wrote:The cobra certainly looks nice at an airshow, but its combat value has not been proven. Dogfighting is about energy management, and the cobra leaves you with little velocity.
okay typical scenario for Cobra:

NATO Jet is chasing a SU-37 in a dogfight at guns range.....SU-37 plays on a attempted flee from the scene tactic, NATO Jet pursues.....SU-37 gets up in speed, NATO Jet matches and attempts to overtake the 37. SU-37 Suddenly flips up, pulls off a Cobra....NATO Jet goes soaring by in a vain attempt not to let the SU-37 get a shooting angle....SU-37 blasts NATO jet with a cannon burst or a AAM-12 Atoll.

thats the sole reason for the Cobra, to allow the SU-37 to damn near do a in-flight "stop" and cause a pursuing enemy to fly clear past the Flanker and now the flanker has a perfect shooting angle.

That isn't a scenario exclusive to soviet fighters. Any plane with a high thrust to weight ratio can do that.

Consider the high speeds that f-22 class planes can achive... well the NATO plane would be quickly out of range if the SU-37 pulled it off.

Wow a plane is gonna do a Cobra. slam on the afterbuners, and increase altitude.

Posted: **Tue Jul 06, 2004 6:15 pm**

Yeh, I'd like to see a dogfight between an F-22 and an SU-37. It'd just be fun to watch.

Posted: **Tue Jul 06, 2004 9:59 pm**

fliptw wrote:That isn't a scenario exclusive to soviet fighters. Any plane with a high thrust to weight ratio can do that.

Consider the high speeds that f-22 class planes can achive... well the NATO plane would be quickly out of range if the SU-37 pulled it off.

Wow a plane is gonna do a Cobra. slam on the afterbuners, and increase altitude.

thats just it flip, the cobra can be executed so quickly and be over with before the pilot has a chance to react and think about what to do next....the SU-37 is already lining up for a kill.

Any plane with a high thrust to weight ratio can do that.

show me one single NATO or US aircraft that can pull a Cobra

Posted: **Wed Jul 07, 2004 1:34 am**

You are letting the coolness of the move blind you to what I've said.

F-22 class planes can achieve the cobra, lets say, the F-22 and the Eurofighter, two new planes with two engines. You might be able to coax a F-15 into do ing it.

That being said. the Cobra kills all forward momentum, and in the case of the f-22, it can go super sonic without using the afterburners. given that, the F-22 would be leaving the effective gun range of the Super Flanker before it got itself leveled to fire its gun. And the target plane might be in too close for the AA-12, as its a meduim range, radar guided missile, it could easily fly right past the F-22 before it got a lock, and by that time, the F-22 pilot is already jocking to find the SU-37 that disapeared on him.

That assumes the F-22 pilot isn't looking for signs that the SU-37 is going to perform a Cobra manuver.

And if you had missiles, why bother getting in that close to begin with?

You don't dogfight with guided missiles.

Posted: **Wed Jul 07, 2004 6:28 am**

http://yarchive.net/mil/cobra_maneuver.html

Posted: **Wed Jul 07, 2004 10:24 am**

>Yes in fact the Cobra does have a meaningful purpose in real combat.
>When the Su-27 is being chased at a some what slower than normal speed,

"being chased at a some what slower than normal speed" means the SU-27
has depleted his energy below optimum and allowed his enemy into a
position of advantage.

>the pilot can pull the Cobra and the other plane would most likely be
>going too fast and he would over-shoot the flanker.

If the SU-27 is about to be gunned then the solution is to "get out of
plane"--not out of his aircraft but out of his plane of maneuver or
move in a different direction than his current flight path. That
doesn't mean stopping in place.

When properly flown with a shooter "in the saddle" (a position he
should maintain for no more than about two seconds), the shooter will
plan to come off target and separate after firing. WHILE HIS WINGMAN
WILL THREATEN THE TARGET AIRCRAFT AND PREVENT REVERSAL. (a principle
of air/air combat is NEVER fight alone!)

If the shooter is not about to shoot, the Cobra will merely solve the
lead and maneuvering problems of the shooter and hasten the solution.

>Then the Flanker
>would have a very good chanch of getting a well deserved kill added to
>his list.

In your scenarion, the Flanker pilot would have already manifested
incompetence and it is doubtful that he would survive the experience.
If the result were a kill, it would hardly be "well-deserved" but
would only mean his attacker were (incredibly!) less capable than he
was.

that says it enough for me.

That being said. the Cobra kills all forward momentum, and in the case of the f-22, it can go super sonic without using the afterburners. given that, the F-22 would be leaving the effective gun range of the Super Flanker before it got itself leveled to fire its gun. And the target plane might be in too close for the AA-12, as its a meduim range, radar guided missile, it could easily fly right past the F-22 before it got a lock, and by that time, the F-22 pilot is already jocking to find the SU-37 that disapeared on him.

i need to make a correction, its not a the AA-12 Atoll, the missile i am thinking about is the AA-11 Archer, a Short Range IR All Aspect missile. it is the Russain Counterpart to our AIM-9M Sidewinder.

That assumes the F-22 pilot isn't looking for signs that the SU-37 is going to perform a Cobra manuver.

thats just it.....the cobra can be done without very much warning, at first it will appear that the SU is about to make a vertical climb....but instead it snaps over 90deg vertical flight....makes a sudden stop..and then flips back over in a matter of seconds.

Posted: **Wed Jul 07, 2004 11:00 am**

Flatlander has already said all there needs to be said about the cobra.

Combat maneuvering "dog fighting" is all about energy management. If you perform a cobra in the middle of a dogfight you are toast. It's that simple. Even if you could get a shot off, the chances of it being within the weapons lethal envelope would be slim. And, while you are performing said cool maneuver, your energy has been bled off to the point that you are a sitting duck for any hostile aircraft to rape and pillage at will.

For anyone who is interested in the intricacies of dog fighting I highly recommend you read Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering by Robert Shaw.
It is a graduate level book on dog fighting. Not an easy read but worth it for the true enthusiast.

Posted: **Wed Jul 07, 2004 10:45 pm**

The F-22 will come equipped with an internal cannon. Lockheed Martin will install a M61A2 cannon, which is an improved version of the original M61. A new feature includes longer, composite-wound bullets. The M61A2 will be mounted just above the right wing root. To preserve the F-22's stealthy characteristics, an inward opening door will cover the muzzle until the weapon is fired. It is capable of firing 100 rounds per second, carrying 480 rounds in all.

That really says it all right there. Dogfighting hardware's still there, a whopping 4.8 seconds' worth of shooting. That's maybe 6 blasts.

DescentBB

What is dogfighting?

What is dogfighting?