Re: [OFFICIAL] Some FT background stuff (guidelines for writers) - LONG POST!

On Wed, 11 Feb 1998, Los wrote:

> This is MOST definately wrong. It's exactly the opposite. A good pilot
wil
> usually win over an inferior piloy in a better plane. Even some
cursory
> study of air combat history or any discussion about Red Flag or Top
gun
> will show that.
> 
> instructors at ARed Flagg in F5s and A7s are constantly whipping dudes
in
> F18s and F14s and f16s.
> 
> Los

But then again the point of Red Flag and Top Gun are to teach
dogfighting
skills and the rules specifically eliminate high-tech long range items
such as Radar guided missiles - a big part of modern combat.  Plus the
Agressors are given a lot of advantages, such as knowledge of when and
where the fight is going to be, they can focus their attention instead
of
having to scan the entire sky - surprise is always a major factor in
combat.  F5's and used to be A4's were chosen for their small profiles,
making it much more difficult to spot them visually but they have
terrible
radar profiles, but once again radar is not used in these exercises.  So
I
think that Allan's point that technology can make up for a lot of skill
is
correct - You could be a dogfighting ace in a Mig-21 but it doesn't do
much good against an F-14 firing a Phoenix missile from 60 miles away.
You then have to depend on your jamming equipment and chaff to survive,
not much skill there.  When you think about it the missile is basically
a
pilotless suicide drone and they don't do half bad in getting within a
few
dozen meters of their targets.

--Binhan