Jump to content

Is dogfighting already obsolete?


cutiger83
 Share

Recommended Posts

I read an article that stated “dogfighting is all but obsolete as more aircraft attack by using precise, long-range guided missiles.”

 

The article goes on to quote one person:

 

"In the future, most of the air combat will be what they're beginning to do today: long-distance firing and drones," Powell says. "Recently, I heard a general say that the last fighter pilot has already been born. It takes about 20 years to raise and train a fighter pilot. Imagine what the technology will be in 20 years. In the future, there won't be any dogfighting."

 

 

 

IMO, there really hasn’t been any true aerial dogfighting since Vietnam. With the technology developed to “lock on target” and fire a missile rather than truly trying to outmaneuver and shoot down your opponent with guns, there already are no longer any true aerial dogfights. While it can be argued that trying to dodge a fired missile is a dogfight, to me, a true aerial dogfight is two pilots trying to outmaneuver each other to gain the firing advantage of using guns instead of “locked on target” missiles.

 

What do any of you think? Is dogfighting obsolete?

 

...Kat

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I can see how the "true dogfight" is gone if we compare it to the dogfights of WW1, WW2, Korea and Vietnam. But I believe that dogfights will continue, though they may take place at longer distances using different technologies.......as long as two opposing aircraft are fighting each other, it is a dogfight. Now it appears that militaries are leaning towards drone tech, it may be two drones fighting in the future. But seeing as pilots have played such an important role in the past 100 years, I do not see the military phasing them out any time soon.

 

The last dogfight took place during the Balkan Islands Conflict in 1999....... NATO aircraft (F16M, F15s, F16) shot down 5 MiG-29's.

 

Philip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dogfighting has been declared obsolete several times in the past. This resulted in the elimination of a gun from some fighter designs because the missiles would be the primary weapon. The Vietnam cropped up, and we found ourselves with missiles that didn't always function correctly, missiles that had a minimum arming distance (wouldn't work if too close to the target), and Rules of Engagement that mandated visual identification of the target before firing. Those ROEs negated the value of long-range missiles, and virtually guaranteed the need for a gun.

 

I believe there will always be some sort of maneuvering involved between aerial combatants, and there will always be a need for a gun. Whether that qualifies as a true dogfight is open for discussion, but I think it qualifies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As mentioned, the dogfighting is obsolete bit has appeared many times. All those guys who had to go into combat in Vietnam with no gun and no training on ACM paid a huge price for believing it. As long as there are pilots in the cockpits air combat will exist and the need to know how to dogfight with it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Cobrahistorian

Unfortunately current thinking pays no attention to history. I've heard the argument that "the F-35 eliminates all previous metrics for air to air combat", which is a crock. I flew the simulator and when I was out of missiles, I did the only thing I could; I turned and ran. There's no way in hell an F-35, (which is limited to 7 Gs, is too slow, not maneuverable enough and has minimal weaponry in the swing-fighter role) can mix it up with three Su-27 class fighters and survive.

 

Dogfighting is not dead. It may change with the technology, but if you can get close in, a "knife fight" will ensue. And then you're gonna have to have a fast-firing, hard hitting gun to deal with that.

 

Jon

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...
  • 5 months later...
Sgt. Swigart

This has been brought up many times, as far back as the early 50's Britain was seriously considering dropping all maned fighter aircraft. The F4 phantom was never set up as a dog fighter and had to have a pod cannon added when it was seen that close in air to air combat was still a reality. Planes like the F104 starfighter were never meant for close in combat. No guns and just two medium range missiles. The new F 35 is certainly no dog fighter in its current incarnation. The problem is that when your long range ordinance is expended and the fight is still going on you are in a dog fight like it or not.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sgt. Swigart

Simple answer: There are no effective counter-measures against a gun. Until that changes, the dogfight remains.

 

Well your counter measures against a gun are speed and distance, but when you run out of those you are in a dogfight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The manned fighter is obsolete. That's why Canada canceled the Avro Arrow in 1959. I assume that they only bought CF-18's to use at airshows.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This same argument has been going on since I first started reading about military aviation in the mid 1950's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This has been brought up many times, as far back as the early 50's Britain was seriously considering dropping all maned fighter aircraft. The F4 phantom was never set up as a dog fighter and had to have a pod cannon added when it was seen that close in air to air combat was still a reality. Planes like the F104 starfighter were never meant for close in combat. No guns and just two medium range missiles. The new F 35 is certainly no dog fighter in its current incarnation. The problem is that when your long range ordinance is expended and the fight is still going on you are in a dog fight like it or not.

The F-104 did indeed originally come with a gun, the 20 mm Vulcan cannon. These were not installed on 2 seaters or the recce version. The F-104 was designed for fighter vs fighter combat, it was a culmination of ideas from fighter pilots about what they wanted in an aircraft to combat the MiGs. As noted this question keeps popping up and probably will until they have something to replace a cannon with, like some energy-like weapon.

 

Randy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

hbtcoveralls

What's the point of fighter/interceptors? it is air superiority or in other words shooting down the enemy's attack aircraft or bombers before they can interdict your own ground forces or attack your war infrastructure or can prevent your attacks on their own ground forces and war infrastructure. Drones are now capable of destroying ground forces and infrastructure on small scale. Future wars may be fought with drones smaller than WWI aircraft rather than full size combat aircraft and employed on a large scale. The real subject isn't really weather or not there will be dogfights it is weather or not there will be pilots to dogfight with

Tom Bowers

Link to comment
Share on other sites

phantomfixer

IMO the USAF would fall on the sword before it gave up manned combat aircraft....will there be combat drones most definetly, already here in ops...but the Air Force still has many generations to go before it will concede its fighter and bomber pilots....

As far as dogfights??? air to air combat (different than the "dogfight" will continue as long as one country thinks they can outgun the USAF...it hasn't happened in a while.

 

USAF fighter pilots are still trained to get tight and blast em out of the sky...so to speak...lesson learned from Vietnam...yet they, the fighter pilots, are also trianed to use their weapons systems. in a manner that will prevent a full blown dogfight, an enemy acft will never get that close to the F22...not sure about the F35 but the F22 has proven itself in combat in the middle east, last year they deployed and were effectively used....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I was going to share comments about this being said many times, particularly in Vietnam with the Phantoms being retrofitted with guns, etc, but you guys beat me to the punch. LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes there will continue to be what is termed "dog fights" between aircraft and pilots. While the long range stand off missiles will be a primary choice in order to end the fight quickly, anything mechanical can and will fail and when they do, the aircraft will still close and the pilots forced to maneuver in order to continue the fight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

phantomfixer

If I am reading the online articles correctly, the last time the USAF fighter pilot was challanged air to air, was in 1999, and that was Yogslavia, and the Yogaslavians lost, I think it was a MiG-29....

In the Middle East, the F-22s (and other allied acft) have made contact, but the aggressors turned tail and did not press the attack, according to the Air Force magazine article I was reading

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...