![]() The massive and intricate ballet of combat aircraft leveraged in 1991’s Gulf War air campaign seemed to substantiate this shift. And although things like Basic Fighter Maneuvers (BFM) and Advanced Fighter Maneuvers (both focused on air-to-air combat) are still a common part of the fighter pilot syllabus, you’ll often hear pilots touting these training exercises not as the development of important combat skills, but rather as a good way to learn the capabilities-and limits-of their aircraft.į-16A Fighting Falcon, F-15C Eagle and F-15E Strike Eagle fighter aircraft fly over burning oil field sites in Kuwait during Operation Desert Storm. With advanced fighters like the F-35 finding homes in hangars across at least 15 nations and both Russia and China touting their own 5th generation entries’ ability to detect and engage opponents under a cloak of low observability, technological trends are clearly moving toward longer-range engagements. In that regard, the F-22 Raptor’s combination of high performance and stealth capabilities could be seen not as a sign of things to come, but rather as the bridge between modern data-focused air combat and the olden days, when dogfights were decided by things like turn radius, power-to-weight ratios, and a pilot’s ability to maneuver his or her aircraft. Instead, the focus seems to be on ensuring air superiority platforms have “first-shot opportunity,” or the ability to spot and fire upon an enemy aircraft before said aircraft is aware of the threat. In other words, the Pentagon seems to be leaning away from the idea that close-in dogfights will decide the fate of the skies in the 21st century. Herbert “Hawk” Carlisle, former commander of America’s Air Combat Command, argued in 2017, substantial weapons capacity, fuel range, and low observability to radar may all be more important than dogfighting performance when it comes to securing air supremacy in the decades to come. ![]() A heavy aircraft that can dominate the skies against aerobatic opponents through things like support drones and directed energy weapons could theoretically prove just as effective as a fleet of highly maneuverable fighters at owning any given airspace. (DoD photo)Ī number of senior defense officials seem to agree with those pilots, with some even hinting at the idea that America’s next air superiority fighter may have more in common with the B-21 Raider than the F-22 Raptor.Īir dominance, as the Congressional Research Service has pointed out, doesn’t have to look like it has in the past in order to be effective. But as we explore this question, it’s important to note that, while many within America’s defense apparatus seem to believe air combat has become a sniper’s game rather than a boxer’s, my own experiences with pilots have made it clear to me that training for air combat is still a very serious matter within America’s fixed-wing communities.Īmerican fighter pilots train to win fights of all sorts, but it does seem true that within fighter pilot culture, Aviator sunglasses are still in, but dogfights are clearly out.į-16 Fighting Falcon (foreground) passed an F-14 Tomcat (background) in a simulated dogfight. The truth is, “ are dogfights dead?” is a simple question with a complicated answer. It seems logical, then, to question whether or not the collective experiences of operations over Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria and elsewhere could potentially be skewing the perspective of today’s prevailing wisdom. It’s hard to deny the fact that, after more than two decades of conducting counter-terror operations around the world, the vast majority of America’s aviators and even senior leaders at this point have spent the entirety of their careers operating in uncontested airspace against adversaries with few or no air assets to put up a fight. Air Force F-105D Thunderchief being shot down during the Vietnam War (WikiMedia Commons)
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |