"Ignoramus21329" wrote in
message ...
On 2015-10-08, John B wrote:
On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 15:45:46 -0500, Ignoramus21329
wrote:

Let me ask a stupid question, does it need to "dogfight"?

In today's world it is doubtful that a "dogfight" in the concept of
a
WW I dogfight is even possible due to the speed. Cruising speed of
an
F-15, for example, is 500 MPH. Two aircraft approaching each other
at
a combined speed of 1,000 MPH can't even see each other for more
than
a very limited time, say 3 seconds.

If you were to go to afterburner than you are talking about a
combined
approach speed of almost 4,000 MPH.

Right.

I think that fighter plane dogfight is like a bayonet attack. Both
are
examples of tactics of past wars. They are no longer flying and
shooting
cannons at each other. They shoot missiles from a distance. Same
with
bayonetting. Still possible but not really very useful.

I do own a bayonet rifle. I would hate to have to bayonet anyone.

i

BVR or Beyond Visual Range combat with missiles has been the goal for
50 years, while WVR, Within Visual Range combat surrounded by plenty
of your friends whom you don't want to risk hitting with stray
missiles is the recent historical reality. The ROE, Rules of
Engagement, have forbidden shooting before positive visual
identification, especially where enemy aircraft are rare.
http://smokeandstir.org/2013/02/15/p...at-you-prefer/

There hasn't been enough combat between first-rate air forces since
WW2 to really know what will happen when large, well-trained forces
collide, and the experts aren't revealing their best estimates.
http://hushkit.net/2014/01/09/the-to...er-assessment/

It's always possible that a higher assessment of opposing aircraft is
an attempt to increase funding for your own.

One of the lessons of WW2 was that almost all prewar theories about
air power had been wrong.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giulio_Douhet
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan-Gurevich_MiG-3
"It had been designed for high-altitude combat but combat over the
Eastern Front was generally at lower altitudes where it was inferior
to the German Messerschmitt Bf 109 as well as most modern Soviet
fighters."

Painful experience soon led to the superior Yak series.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-9

In contrast aerial combat over Germany went to extreme altitudes as
the bombers climbed above effective Flak range. The US P-40 which
fought well at lower altitudes in China and North Africa was useless
over Europe. The British Spitfire, an excellent dogfighter both high
and low, lacked and never gained the range to escort raids over
Germany.

On the other side the Luftwaffe had planned to support the Wehrmacht
tactically and neglected long-range strategic bombing, allowing us to
build up the Normandy invasion force in Britain unhindered and Stalin
to move his massive war production out of reach, while our air power
forced German factories to widely disperse and go underground, and
then crippled the transportation they needed to move materiel [war
supplies] between them.
http://germanyinworldwar2.com/Germanfuelshortage.htm
The German fuel crisis significantly aided Zhukov's advances.
"Meanwhile the army, too, had become virtually immobile because of the
fuel shortage."

FYI
http://lend-lease.airforce.ru/

-jsw