Re: [OFFICIAL] Some FT background stuff (guidelines for writers) - LONG POST!
From: "Cleyne, Daniel" <DCleyne@v...>
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 15:05:00 +1000
Subject: Re: [OFFICIAL] Some FT background stuff (guidelines for writers) - LONG POST!
> This is MOST definitely wrong. It's exactly the opposite. A good pilot
> usually win over an inferior pilot in a better plane. Even some
> study of air combat history or any discussion about Red Flag or Top
> will show that.
> instructors at ARed Flagg in F5s and A7s are constantly whipping dudes
> F18s and F14s and f16s.
I agree with your sentiment but what is the distinction you are making
between superior and inferior planes? These aircraft all perform very
different roles IIRC and so shouldn't be used as a baseline for pilot
performance. The F14 is an interceptor. I believe that it is at its best
at stand off fights lobbing AIM 54s at inbound fighter-bombers. I would
have thought that getting the Tomcat into dog fights with enemy aircraft
as last resort type stuff. The A7 and F5 are much more manoeuvrable than
the bigger aircraft (F14,F15,F18) and so should out perform them in dog
fights, regardless of pilot ability. The F16 would be the only one I'd
have trouble believing being outmatched by an A7.
The only factor as I see it in your example is the guys that fly the
"enemy" aircraft at the instruction schools (Top Gun being the only one
I know about) fly them day in day out every day against people they are
trying to teach. They could I believe fly their aircraft fast asleep and
this means that they know where the performance envelope lies and push
If you swap these guys into the opposite planes I'm sure the score would
be just about the same.
So as I see it what is important in your example isn't aircraft ability,
its pilot experience. In the SF realm that was being discussed that
boils down to AI sophistication. A more sophisticated AI should beat a
less sophisticated AI regardless of the machinery most of the time. So
once the AIs have progressed to the point where they can match or exceed
human pilot ability with the advantages that Alan pointed out it then
becomes a race between AI manufacturers. Until the AI matches human
ability in combat then the best 'man' will win.
I like the example in Iain Banks' "Culture" universe where human pilots
cannot hope to match the AI's
I'm just rambling now...