A aviation & planes forum. AviationBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AviationBanter forum » rec.aviation newsgroups » Military Aviation
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Defensive circle



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #5  
Old October 1st 03, 05:27 AM
Dudley Henriques
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default


"WaltBJ" wrote in message
om...
Cub Driver wrote in message

. ..
I have seen references to the circle's SNIP:

In the Western Desert in WW2 Hans Marseille solved the Lufberry Circle
problem by high angle deflection shooting at minimum range - knocking
down serial kills of Hurricanes and P40s daily. The 'circlers' were
essentially helpless against this tactic when used by an opponent of
superior energy capability. Note that with more or less equal aircraft
(and more aircraft available to join the fight) the Circle isn't that
successful. It's also a way to get 'anchored' over enemy territory -
when the fuel level rate of drop becomes an item of interest. The
Circle worked well against conventional curve of pursuit attacks aince
an attacker necessarily flew in front of the preceding defender,
unless attacker had a much higher rate of knots so he could get in and
get out before said second defender could get guns on him. Nowadays
missiles defeat the defensive circle.
Walt BJ


Right on!

Lufberry's looked good on paper....that is until the circle was engaged by
fighters with lower wing loadings; and flown by pilots who knew how to bleed
down and arc. Snap shooters like Marseille could play dixie on these
circles...and did just that...against poorly flown Lufberry's. In fact, even
a higher wing loaded fighter could engage through low yo yo's and arcing if
flown by superior pilots. This was the "real" learning period in ACM. It
involved the painful transition from thinking defensive to thinking like a
Hans Marseille......attack! Just like Hartmann, he boresighted for
conversion range using the windshield bow for wingspan instead of using the
sight, then he pulled g for lead; raised the nose in the turn for gravity
drop; centered the ball for trajectory shift, and hosed them at high angle
off before he bled down and out of the cone.
Pilots who were thinking about things like Lufberry's as they entered the
war didn't last very long in combat. Nothing kills a fighter pilot faster
than over thinking the defensive side of the ACM equation.
Dudley Henriques
International Fighter Pilots Fellowship
Commercial Pilot/CFI Retired
For personal e-mail, use
dhenriquesATzarthlinkDOTnzt
(replacezwithe)


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Are aircraft cost-effective for defensive purposes? Chad Irby Military Aviation 6 September 12th 03 01:23 AM
NACO charts - why have a reference circle? Bob Gardner Instrument Flight Rules 5 September 6th 03 01:15 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:56 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 AviationBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.