Dogfight
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
A dogfight or dog fight is a common term used to describe close-range aerial combat between military aircraft. The term originated during World War I, and probably derives from the preferred fighter tactic of positioning one's aircraft behind the enemy aircraft. From this position, a pilot could fire his guns on the enemy without having to lead the target, and the enemy aircraft could not effectively fire back. The term came into existence because when two fighter aircraft circle each other trying to achieve this position, it resembles two dogs chasing each other's tails.
Modern terminology for aerial combat between aircraft is air-to-air combat and air combat maneuvering, or ACM.
Contents |
[edit] History
[edit] World War I
Dogfighting emerged in World War I. Aircraft were initially used as mobile observation vehicles and early pilots gave little thought to aerial combat—enemy pilots at first simply exchanged waves. Intrepid pilots decided to interfere with enemy reconnaissance by improvised means, including throwing bricks, grenades and sometimes rope, which they hoped would entangle the enemy plane's propeller. This progressed to pilots firing handheld guns at enemy planes. Once the guns were mountable to the plane due to the invention of synchronization gear in 1915, the era of air combat began.
During the first part of the war there was no established tactical doctrine for air-to-air combat. Oswald Boelcke was the first to analyze the tactics of aerial warfare, resulting in a set of rules known as the Dicta Boelcke. Many of Boelcke's concepts, conceived in 1916, are still applicable today, including use of sun and altitude, surprise attack, and turning to meet a threat.
[edit] World War II
During the first part of World War II, the basic ideas behind dogfighting changed little. However, the airplanes were improved drastically over their World War I counterparts. Aircraft like the Messerschmitt Bf 109 and the Mitsubishi Zero surprised the Allies with their superior maneuverability and speed. Allied fighters, such as the Supermarine Spitfire, would continually "bunny hop" with Axis planes, going through numerous variants in the continuing effort to gain technological superiority.
The Battle of Britain was largely determined by dogfighting between British and German fighters.
The American Volunteer Group (AVG), which was later better known by its nickname the Flying Tigers, led by Claire Chennault, was among the first to successfully counter the highly maneuverable Japanese fighters. Chennault interviewed Chinese pilots carefully and learned all he could about Japanese fighter performance characteristics, tactics and methods. He realized that the Japanese fighters were extremely maneuverable and classic tactics would not work against them, so he advised pilots to work in teams rather than alone and devised tactics to take advantage of the strengths of the P-40 and avoid fighting on Japanese terms.
The P-40 Warhawk had pilot armor, self-sealing fuel tanks, sturdy construction, powerful machine guns, and a much faster diving speed. It could defeat the more maneuverable Japanese fighters by remaining out of range and using diving attacks and reattacks after a zoom climb, or "vertically". This was important, because their opponents could outmaneuver the Warhawk in a horizontal turning contest. Chennault also created a relatively primitive, but effective early warning network to enable his fighters to take off in time to gain an altitude advantage before the Japanese arrived. By using speed and resisting the deadly error of trying to out-turn the Zero, eventually the .50 caliber machine guns could be brought to bear and a single burst of fire was usually enough to shoot down the Japanese fighters, which did not have self-sealing fuel tanks or armor. In a time when most of the news was of defeats, the AVG was officially credited with 297 enemy aircraft destroyed (although author Daniel Ford discounts the total to 115). Even at Ford's lower figure, the AVG was a notable success in the first few months of 1942, when the Allies were being thrown back throughout the Pacific theater.
Another pilot who realized that new tactics had to devised was then-Lieutenant Commander John S. "Jimmy" Thach, commander of Fighting Three in San Diego. He read the early reports coming out of China and wrestled with the problem of his F4F Wildcats being relatively slower and much less maneuverable. He devised a defensive maneuver, called the "Thach Weave" by LtCdr James H. Flatley, another fighter tactician and contemporary of Thach. Thach reasoned that two planes, a leader and his wingman, could fly about 200 feet apart, and adopt a weaving formation when under attack by Japanese fighters. He later faced the A6M Zero during the Battle of Midway in June 1942 for the acid test of his theory. Although outnumbered, he found that a Zero would lock onto the tail of one of the fighters. In response, the two planes would turn toward each other. When the Zero followed its original target through the turn, it would come into a position to be fired on by the target's wingman, and the predator would become the prey. His tactic proved to be effective and was soon adopted by other squadrons. The Thach weave helped make up for the inferiority of the US planes in technology and numbers, until new aircraft could be brought into service. Its usefulness survives until today.
The Lufbery circle was another defensive maneuver used when faced with attack by superior numbers or less maneuverable opponents. The Lufbery is executed by several aircraft turning horizontally in same direction which forces an opponent to get down into the same circle where an attack cannot be made without coming under attack by the following fighter. When the allies fielded the Hellcat and Corsair in the Solomon Islands, the Zero could not outrun the faster Navy fighters and resorted to the Lufbery in an attempt to draw their opponents into a horizontal turning contest they could win. Likewise, the North Vietnamese MiG-17 resorted to use of the Lufbery on occasion when cornered by faster F-4 Phantom fighters. Whereas the Thach Weave is used as aircraft move towards a point in space, the Lufbery is fixed over a point.
[edit] Modern air combat
Even in the jet age, modern air-to-air combat often develops into dog fights. A fighter can evade a supersonic missile by turning and outrunning a missile under certain circumstances, or "beaming" an incoming missile - potentially escaping its field of view - if the pilot has excellent situational awareness and a good anticipation of the attacker's moves. Supersonic head-on closure with the enemy while evading further missile flights may eventually achieve a visual dogfight with Gatling guns at a range of less than one kilometer.
Superiority in a dog fight can depend on a pilot's experience and skill, and the agility of his fighter when flown at minimum air speeds approaching loss of control (causing a danger of stalling); the winner typically plays to the strengths of his own aircraft while forcing his adversary to fly at a design disadvantage. Dogfights are generally contests fought at low airspeeds, while maintaining enough energy for violent acrobatic maneuvering, as pilots attempt to remain within air speeds with a maximum turn rate and minimum turn radius: the so-called "corner speed" that often lies between 300 and 400 knots, depending on conditions. Therefore a dogfight has nothing to do with supersonic speed, but much to do with the engine power that makes supersonic flight possible. The F-22 Raptor can stand on its steerable nozzles at less than 100 knots airspeed, yet quickly maneuver to bring its M61 Vulcan cannon to bear on a nearby evasive target.
The continued importance of maintaining dogfighting proficiency was demonstrated during the Vietnam War. American pilots flew aircraft such as the F-4 Phantom II, equipped with long-range AIM-7 Sparrow missiles, and AIM-9 Sidewinder missiles. However, air crews were required not to fire any missiles without having visually identified the target first, to make absolutely sure they were not an ally, thus losing this technological advantage. The AIM-7 missile was also not very reliable, making heavy use of delicate components such as vacuum tubes which had to endure the SE Asia climate, carrier takeoffs, and high stress maneuvers. Also, they had semi-active radar homing, meaning that they used the carrier plane's radar signals to home in on the target. The missiles themselves did not have a radar system, but "listened" to the pings of the attacker's radar and used the reflection of the prey aircraft to home in on it. AIM-9 missile were heat-seeking fire-and-forget missiles, meaning that once they had a lock on a heat source, they would attempt to hit it. They were only useful in short range, and in many cases fail due to a number of factors including delicate instruments and false heat sources such as the sun. Additionally, early versions of the F-4 (prior to the E model) relied solely on missiles, having no guns nor lead-computing Gyro gunsight, and were therefore very vulnerable in the gun-range combat that could ensue.
Lightweight, short-endurance, point-defense fighters such as the MiG-17 and MiG-21 are typically far more agile than heavy, long-range, fighter-bombers (see the F-105 Thunderchief). Still, using superior tactics, the AIM-9 Sidewinder short range missiles, and cannon fire, American pilots were able to gain significant victories in the air over North Vietnam, especially after the establishment of the US Navy's FIghter Weapons School (TOPGUN) to restore dogfighting ability to its pilots.
With modern air-to-air AMRAAM guided missiles greatly extending the general engagement range of jet fighters, some experts hypothesize that dogfighting may be headed toward extinction, but others cite the occurrences in Vietnam as evidence otherwise. However, it is worth noting that there have been a great number of Beyond Visual Range (BVR) kills occurring during and after the Persian Gulf War. This was due to the improved reliability of BVR missiles, radars, and most importantly, the integration of C3I assets such as AWACS aircraft into the realm of aerial warfare. This provided Coalition forces with a superior picture of the battlefield, and in conjunction with airspace management allowed utilization of BVR weaponry.
Despite this, the improvement of all-aspect IR missiles coupled with helmet-mounted sights has mitigated the necessity of tail-chase attacks. In addition, Russian development of tail-mounted radar and rear-firing missiles has reduced the vulnerability to tail-chase attacks.
Yet because this feature is only present on the most modern jets, and missiles are a finite resource, The US Navy (TOPGUN) and Air Force (Red Flag) continue to teach postgraduate level classes in air combat maneuvering engagements. Russian aircraft manufacturers heavily emphasize superagility and dogfight capabilities in fighter design, with aircraft such as the Su-37 or the Su-30MKI demonstrating advanced thrust vectoring systems to achieve these goals, pushing the aircraft to its limits to give it an advantage in combat
[edit] Fictional depictions in space
Although combat in space involves different considerations due to the lack of drag and gravity, science fiction films and space simulations often invoke analogies to aeronautical dogfighting to better relate to the audience's experience. Some films and games, such as Babylon 5, Battlestar Galactica, Escape Velocity (computer game), and I-War have tried to accurately model Newtonian physics and tactics in such an environment. For example, since a body will remain in motion without additional thrust, a fighter could orient itself to face directions other than its direction of travel, i.e. if being chased, a space fighter can make a 180 degree spin on its axis to shoot its forward guns at its pursuer, while still moving in its original direction.
[edit] See also
[edit] References
- Shaw, Robert L. (1985). Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering. Annapolis, MD: Naval Institute Press. ISBN 0-87021-059-9.
[edit] Footnotes
- ↑ Su-37 Flanker Report from Farnborough '96 (http://www.sci.fi/~fta/Su-27.htm)
