re: Air to Air combat

Its cool you're an enthusiast but even those shows don't get everything 100% right.

quote:

---

drop WP on them

---

>FULL BODY SHIVER<
Willie Pete's a mean and dirty motherfricker.

Sure, I have a few.

Air to Air wars would be fought very differently than anything fought in the past. They are definitely still a possibility and the F-35 will never be the answer to everything.

You can never ever scoff the merge and bank on your superior fighter to find everyone BVR. There are limitations to everything.

Make no mistake about it, the F-22 is the baddest jet in the sky. The EF-2000 and new Su's are badass but not nearly as badass as the Raptor.

quote:

---

Its cool you're an enthusiast but even those shows don't get everything 100% right.

---

I witnessed a tomcat shootdown in the 80s in the med.... I was on the surface...

also heard the play by play of that one and many

warning yellow whoops.. now they are turning back.. engagements....

quote:

---

The Air Force and Navy made that same mistake in the mid-60s. The result was the F4 Phantom which didn't even have a gun on it initially. Worse yet, our pilots were not trained to dog fight because it was deemed "obsolete". They reasoned all a fighter aircraft had to do now was get radar lock and launch air-to-air missiles.

Only when our pilots started getting their asses handed to them in the skies over Vietnam by communist Mig 21s did they realize how big of a mistake they'd made. The result was the Navy established their "Top Gun" school and the Air Force hastily reinstituted dog fight training.

---

Why are you comparing this to the F-35? The 35 hasn't seen combat yet you're assuming that its pilots will be clueless in combat. The truth is that the F-35 is going to be disgusting in combat due to the way the planes can share targeting information. The possibilities are endless and they haven't even scratched the surface on developing tactics for the airframe.


ETA:

quote:

---

(Downvote it all you want, that won't change the fact I'm right)

---

quote:

---

Because just as the F-22 F-35 are the "most" advanced fighter today, they won't be that way for long. Yes they can do all these amazing things and that's wonderful.

---

Yes, and technology is constantly evolving and progressing. No one is touting either of these as the end-all to air combat.

quote:

---

But just as the Allies found a answer for the "Fokker Scourge" in 1916 and the Americans found an answer to the A6M Zero in 1943, all technology that is the latest and greatest is eventually answered and surpassed.

---

Yep.

quote:

---

That's why no matter how awesome these aircraft are, it's stupid to assume they'll never be confronted with the need to be able to dogfight.

---

They likely won't. How many times did 15s, 16s, and 18s need to dogfight? The chances of the 35 or 22 ever meeting their enemy in close range is miniscule. Your argument is a far-fetched "what if" in today's world. The fact is that the US doctrine is firmly invested in BVR combat and they're not going away from it no matter the chances of getting into a close-range dogfight. That means they're willing to make the entire fighting force into a collective sensor array and missile truck (F-35). We've yet to see how it'll actually work out but the early returns are that the 35 is unmatched in combat.

quote:

---

I did downvote it because you're too busy wanting to try and prove me wrong, that you failed to take into account that any and all electronic measures can and will be countered by other electronic countermeasures. It's only a matter of time.

---

And this is your argument to scrap BVR characteristics? Both sides will continue to make measures and countermeasures to defeat one another. It will never reach a point where they cancel each other out.

ETA:

And why, oh why, do you always get offended when I try to discuss something with you?

quote:

---

Yes, and technology is constantly evolving and progressing. No one is touting either of these as the end-all to air combat.

---

Exactly. That's the precise reason why just as our fighters need to be able to engage targets "over the horizon", they also need to be able to engage in point blank dogfighting as well.

I'm not saying we don't need the most advanced targeting and radar system. I'm saying we need those AND the ability to dogfight as well.

quote:

---

They likely won't. How many times did 15s, 16s, and 18s need to dogfight? .

---

during the service life of all these aircraft, how many air wars did they have to fight against an enemy with an air force willing or able to fight?

Hint: It's less than 1.

quote:

---

Your argument is a far-fetched "what if" in today's world. The fact is that the US doctrine is firmly invested in BVR combat and they're not going away from it no matter the chances of getting into a close-range dogfight. That means they're willing to make the entire fighting force into a collective sensor array and missile truck (F-35). We've yet to see how it'll actually work out but the early returns are that the 35 is unmatched in combat.

---

Again. You're making the same mistakes the generals and admirals of the mid-60's made. They saw that technology had advanced that allowed aircraft to engage other aircraft with air-to-air missiles at ranges no gun could ever hope to match. What they failed to take into account is that just as technology allowed planes to do this, other technology would also be developed to counter this technology. And when our fighters encountered this in the sky's over Vietnam, they were at a huge disadvantage.

And yes, I fully understand the fighters of today are so far advanced from then it's not funny. But that doesn't mean this technology won't be countered. Because as history has proven since the days of antiquity is that every single military leap forward is answered eventually by another leap. Thus, as I said before, you can find a counter to the most advanced targeting and radar systems to make them ineffective. But you can't stop a 20mm round that's on it's way.

Let's hear your expert opinion on the video I posted. I'm sure you know everything.
------------------------------------------------------------

I'm not 100% positive, but I think Drew Orleans has some hands on experience flying F-15s. He may know what he's talking about. Maybe even more than the average OTer.

quote:

---

Maybe even more than the average OTer.

---

You fricking kidding me? The average OTer is 7 feet tall with a ten inch dick and flies an F-22 that's custom designed for their size. You think they call it a cockpit for nothing?

And those are just the AVERAGE ones, what the OT considers middle of the pack losers.

Get that "Drew knows what the frick he's talking about" bullshite out of here.