Fighter Combat - Tactics and Maneuvering

1 78 ONE-VERSUS-ONE MANEUVERING, DISSIMILAR AIRCRAFT
After the RQ missile, the next revolution in air combat was the development
of truly dogfight-compatible all-aspect AAMs. Although all-aspect
radar-guided missiles have been operational since the mid-1950s, it was
not until the mid-1970s that these weapons had been perfected to the point
where they were a factor to be reckoned with after the first pass of a visual
dogfight. At about the same time there appeared all-aspect-capable heatseeking
AAMs. By this period most fighters, with or without guns, carried
RQ missiles, and the more advanced fighters were sometimes adapted to
(or were already compatible with) the new weapons. Thus, encounters
between high-T/W fighters armed with all-aspect AAMs and low-wingloaded
aircraft having guns and RQ missiles are now possible.
For the high-T/W, high-wing-loaded fighter, the addition of all-aspect
weapons greatly improves offensive potential. It is very difficult to obtain a
good RQ shot against a better-turning target using the almost obligatory
energy tactics, but these methods do allow a high-T/W fighter to generate
high-aspect firing opportunities consistently. Unfortunately, these shots
are most often of the look-down variety, which may limit their usefulness
under many conditions.
Defensively, the high-T/W fighter pilot's job is made considerably more
difficult by the inclusion of RQ missile armament in the opponent's
arsenal. Zooms must be timed and performed more precisely, and the
usual escape option of the energy fighter may no longer be available.
The pilot of a low-wing-loaded fighter in this case must be more careful
of his energy state during the engagement. He can no longer afford the
luxury of allowing the energy fighter to zoom with impunity to gain
separation. Whenever the bogey zooms, the angles fighter pilot must either
put a weapon in the air, even if only for effect, or immediately attempt an
escape beyond visual range. It is even more critical in this scenario for the
low-wing-loaded fighter pilot to follow the guidelines of angles tactics
strictly; he must use nose-to-nose geometry to stay inside the bogey's
min-range parameters, and he must remain below the opponent's altitude
whenever he is positioned in the opponent's forward hemisphere.
At this time there do not seem to be any valid examples available of
actual combat engagements in this scenario, although the potential certainly
exists. There have been several conflicts in which these weapons
mixes were matched, including the Gulf of Sidra incident (1981), the
Falklands Conflict (1982), the Bekaa Valley encounters in Lebanon (1982),
and the ongoing Iran-Iraq War. In all these cases, however, the high-T/W
fighters equipped with all-aspect weapons also had at least parity in turn
performance, if not outright superiority in instantaneous or sustained
turn, or even in both. This scenario is covered in the next section.
Single-Dissimilarity Engagements
So far this chapter has discussed situations in which a low-T/W, low-wingloaded
fighter was pitted against a high-T/W, high-wing-loaded aircraft.
This pairing might be termed "double dissimilarity," since there are significant
differences in both of the critical performance parameters.
Another likely situation is that the two fighters will be similar in one of