Originally Posted by Astro14
Originally Posted by d00df00d
Originally Posted by Virtus_Probi
As for the posts about dogfighting not being meaningful, that's what they said before Vietnam.
When they said it then, it was an expectation based on early scenarios and testing.
When they say it now, it's an observation based on decades of experience.
I disagree.
Don't know who "they" are, but "they" are wrong to make the argument that dogfighting is no longer meaningful.
We haven't seen a dogfight (which I'm going to call BFM, or visual engagement with basic fighter maneuvers) in decades, because, frankly, we haven't faced a credible air force. Afghanistan didn't have one. Iraq didn't have one (they used to, but we took care of that in 1991).
But our lack of recent combat BFM does not mean that it's an irrelevant capability. War of the future may not go the way we think. BFM remains an important capability. Yes, in 1959, the air to air missile eliminated the need for a gun, because there would be no more dogfighting... but real combat with a determined enemy changed our outlook.
Long range missile shots presumes that the enemy will show up on your scope at long range, or that they will show up at all (stealth changes that). The fighter pilot of the future may well find themselves in a short-range, pure maneuvering fight.
Now, granted, current all-aspect, high off-boresight missiles, have changed the nature of a close range fight, but countermeasures to sensors, and enemy tactics, took away the long range fight in Vietnam. Not at all hard to imagine a future scenario in which a combination of adversary technology and tactics precludes the long range fight, and pilots are, once again, in a short range, BFM fight.
If you find yourself in a BFM fight, it sure would be nice to have an airplane that is good at it.
The F-35 is good at it. The F-22 is simply awesome at it.
Always appreciate your posts, Astro14.
I don't think "not meaningful" was meant literally. There was a bit of whisper-down-the-lane here, but I'm pretty sure the original sentiment was simple hyperbole in response to the implication that if a plane is useless if it can't dominate every single dogfight. Pretty sure we all understand dogfighting is important.
Or maybe I'm just projecting my own thinking on others...