Forum: Air Power

Salute!

What Snake said.

Also, the 21 got heavier and lost visibilty the more it was modified. I would imagine that the toughest models to fight were the early versions, regardless of armament. As Snake said, ya got to see it to believe it.

Same for the Viper. I would take a small-tail Block 10 against anything they have today if placed in a telephone booth with our knives out.

Sure, the bigger motors may let you accelerate better, but I can flat-a$$ guarantee we had better pitch rate and could maintain a higher AoA and roll rate than the latest models.

oh well, guess I'm still yearning for the "good old days", huh?

out,

F-16.net Sponsor

Regardless what is said above, I still think that it is not correct make conclusions for 70s or 80s from testing basically mid-50 model, what MiG-21F undoubtfully is.

21F was out of date by this testing time, not to mention 70s.

Several assumptions based on 21F are not valid even for 21PFM, not to mention even 21MF (that made to Nam bu 72) or 21bis that NATO forces were problably facing in Europe's theatre on late 70s.

So that is not any serious analysis and the main reason is, that US did not have any modern 21s this time.

I would wounder if USAF would do performance analysis about German Me-109 early models for year 1944? I dont think so.

HK

While your basis book analysis may be correct and show the results of engineers to show the capabilities of the machine you make a cardinal mistake in your assumptions -- the same way McNamara did as Secretary of Defense -- you place to much faith in numbers and statistics and disregard the human element and experiences in testing and evaluation.

What you are reading is the best that that aircraft can do under very static conditions with well trained test pilots and not in actual combat where the experience level and varied conditions can radically change.

Now some more corrections --

You say the conclusions were out of date because the newer 21 models were on the line. But yet they still worked for us and we kept killing more and more 21's as the war progressed. And since we were using the same equipment against the improving 21 -- as you say -- those positive results must to attributed to the man in the seat, the training he received, and the tactics he used. It's a classic case of using prepositional logic.

After SEA -- the U.S. did acquire later model 21's from several Mid Easter and Eastern Europe countries and the tests and evaluations were upgraded accordingly. We just didn't talk about them.

Next, in the late 70's the F-15 were already picking up the F-4 role as front line fighter so the tactics were modified again to maximize the superior F-15 performance capabilities against the 21.

Finally, I can't think of any period in aerial combat where the capabilities of the enemy were not studied in great detail, compared with our own and then find ways to defeat any enemy advantages. Two cases I know about with some authority are the P-40 against the zero and the P-51 against the ME-262. It would be pure stupidity not to. And those studies, conclusions, and tactics seemed to work as we won.

While your forte seems to in stat's please don't put 100% of your faith in only numbers on a page. They are a very good starting point to put to the test of human testing and evaluation.

In other words I think you may be beating a dead horse and trying to defend a position that won't stand the light of day. We all agree that the 21 had great performance factors on paper -- better then the double ugly -- but the tactics used against its weak points worked -- and worked very well.

The Snake

HK

To add substance to what I'm trying to tell you, there is a great example of this presently on TV today, Saturday and Sunday. It's called "Dogfights: THe Greatest Air Battles" and runs for two hours on the History channel. It covers WW1, 2, Korea and Nam with a good portion of the last hour dedicated to Randy Cunningham's battles with 19's and 21's.

Listen closely to the narration of the guys who were there in all the wars and in some cases against superior aircraft and what was the deciding factor for success.

Snake

Salute!

What the Snake said (and I still can't believe he got a Mig while flying the Double Ugly unless the gomer flew right out in front of him, heh heh).

Only jet I ever saw that flew like the books was ,,,, you guessed it, the Viper. In early days, before others figured out a few things to help them, we would make one or two quick turns, then watch the other jet do its "last ditch" maneuver, then gun his brains out or hose a Lima at the sucker from some unbelieveable aspect angle. Doubters about the Lima should ask the Brit Harrier dudes about the Falklands. Or the IAF folks.

later,

Gums

We Did and he did!!!!

Snake

With you word for word Snake and Gums...and I'll add something else that goes along with what Snake was alluding to.

Steve Ritchie once said that the first dissimilar aircraft he ever flew against was a MiG-21 over Vietnam. That's the absolute wrong time to start a training syllabus. Fortunately, though, it worked out in Ritchie's favor...5 times!

Snake, I'm not sure if you trained on F-4s around the same time that Steve Ritchie did, but I'm willing to bet that the MiG you got was probably one of the first dissimilar jets you ever flew against as well, right?

I've heard a lot of guys, most especially the original TOPGUN studs, say that seeing the MiG-17 and 21 in the "Have Donut" and "Have Drill" program was their first chance to fly with and against something dissimilar. Flying against the same basic airframes that you will be flying against in combat is some of the most invaluable training a fighter pilot could ever get. Some of those guys even got to fly those MiGs. That gave them the chance to actually see through the MiG driver's eyes, so to speak. How does he fly? Where can he look outside of the cockpit?...or, more importantly, where CAN'T he look? How many G's can he pull, and sustain? What's the optimum firing solutions for his weapons? Man, you can't buy training like that, and it is that experience that made being able to train with ANY type of MiG-17 or 21 worthwhile, and I believe the results in 1972 speak volumes in favor of that.

TC -- HOWDY!!!!!

I think that Steve and I did train about the same time but I did recurrency at Luke with the 311th. I'm not sure where Steve did his.

You are parcelly right. We got bounced four times before we got lucky. Three times by 21's and once by a 19. But after turning into to them to start an engagement they'd either break and run or try to drag you down into a triple A, flak, or SAM trap. Besides, they were after the bombers and tried to avoid the escorts like the plague.

On our lucky day we had turned towards them when they were some 20 away from the strike flight in almost a pure persuit profile so when we showed up we were the only show in town for them and the odds were definitely in there favor until the guys from the 432nd arrived and saved our bacon.

TO HK

In my haste to respond to your notes the one important thing I forgot to include in my replies to you was situation awaredness. In an Air-to-Air fight you have only nano seconds to determine the other guys moves (based upon observation, altitude, airspeed, positioning -- in relation to the Sun, actions of his mutual support if available, and aggressiveness in relation to your own profile. And then only nano-nano seconds to determine and make your move and then execute those actions. If you are late or hestiant in these actions and he moves first he has the advantage and you have to re-adjust to gain it back. And advantage is much more importatnt then any statistical advantage any aircraft can have.

The Snake

Snake-1 wrote:

...Besides, they were after the bombers and tried to avoid the escorts like the plague.

The Snake

After talking to Steve and reading your comments (along with Dave Waldrop, and a couple of others who were lucky enough to get "theirs" as bombers) is it any surprise that they tried to avoid you guys?!?

Mike Kopack

Mike

You know -- it didn't make any difference in the world if you were a bomber, escort, Hunter Killer, or what ever. We had the greatest bunch of guys in the world over there and if the opportunity was presented, any one of them would fight the good fight and still do their primary mission. Steve and the rest of the great guys of the 432nd. went after them -- and very effectively. The rest of us were lucky enough to be in the same acre of sky at the wrong time for the gomers. Then we turned that luck into success by using training, experience and aggressiveness and great mutual support. It's a very different world you experience in a very few minutes of an air fight but one that will last a lifetime.

Snake

For all you snake eaters

Tonight on the History Channel they are going to present Robin Olds infamous "Bolo" flight that made the Gomers think Weasels were coming at them instead of 4's loaded for bear. An interesting and gutsy story. Its called "Dogfights".

Snake

Salute!

What the Snake said...

Bolo is worth seeing. We have one local dude who is featured and is mentioned in the film.

One of my classmates was in Olds' back seat, and a few others were there, as well.

At the time, the Snake and ol' Gums were about to get to Bien Hoa to try out the A-37, so we were SOL.

USAF didn't do stuff like that again until 1972, and we were much better prepared, and successful.

out,

That program is actually really cool. I've seen it (not yet the Bolo one), but it's pretty cool. I wish they'd have some more modern dogfights... but those would be rather boring... "Fox 2! Fox 2!" over. I know its not that simple, but you get the idea... what would be really cool is the EF-111 vs. the Mig-25 (crap I forgot which Mig) where the EF got a kill using... um terrain. Falklands might be pretty cool really.

LordOfBunnies wrote:

forgot which MiG

It wasn't any sort of MiG at all. It was actually a Dassault Mirage F.1 Wink

Actually, some of the modern dogfights would be pretty interesting...

1) Mark Fox and his wingman (Mongillo) getting two MiG-21s on the first night of the war. That was the first time Hornets had earned AA kills. The pilots simply switched their arming switches from AG to AA, bagged the MiGs, then switched back to AG, completed their strike mission, and landed on the Saratoga.

2) The two Gulf of Sidra incidents with F-14s v. Libyan fighters (1981, and 1989). The second incident was very similar to the final fight in the film "Top Gun", as both aircrews had just recently graduated from TOPGUN and returned to the fleet.

3) Ben "Coma" Powell (2 MiG-23s) and Jay "Opie" Denney (Flogger and Mirage) getting their two a piece...followed 10 days later by their squadron mates (Dietz and Hehemann) both getting their first two out of 3 a piece. Oh, to have been an Eagle Driver at Bitburg or Eglin in Jan, 1991! Sierra Hotel! Cool

4) Rick "Clouseau" Tollini getting a MiG-25 on 19 Jan 91, in the first USAF Eagle v. Foxbat engagement.

*********************************************************************

Back to the topic, yeah, Bolo was a very Sierra Hotel mission. Olds later copied the feat to a lesser degree, this time posing as Recon Voodoos.

Olds was hell-bent on becoming an ace in 2 wars, and almost pulled it off (4 in Vietnam). He had some cases of missiles going stupid, and having guys who were a little quicker on the trigger than he was. Otherwise, he would have done it.

Pops used to crew Rhinos with a couple guys who crewed the birds he flew at Ubon. They said that Olds used to sit in the plane with the canopies up, and listen to the radio. He'd wait until he heard that there were MiGs, and then he'd scramble, and head to the action.

When he was promoted to Brigadier General, he tried to get himself reduced to full bird, so he could take command of another fighter wing in Vietnam. His superiors refused, and said that the way he talked would assure him of never seeing Major General. Olds retired shortly afterward.

Awesome mission, Bolo was, devised by an awesome pilot. I'd love the opportunity to fly with Robin Olds.

Yes, someone is going to get me a recording of an episode of dogfights, and that might be the one. Great mission, and I looked back and found that I had made a post describing it and forgotten. The advantage of surprise, it just can't be beat. That and the advantage of having good pilots who weren't shocked out of their minds by seeing something they didn't expect.

Forum: Air Power

Air tactics during the Vietnam War