Best Fighter For It's Time

"John Carrier" wrote:

Duh? Here's where those qualifications come into play. While the F-14
with its programmed wing-sweep and well-BVR weapons had some
advantages over the F-15, when you get to close engagements, the Eagle
is considerably more agile than the Tom.

Well, not actually. The F-15 has sufficiently superior T/W to the F-14A
that through careful energy management and skill, the F-15 will win the
engagement ... but in terms of instantaneous turn, pitch rate, etc, it's not
quite the equal of the Tom. Put the F110 engines in (F-14B/D) and it's
quite different. T/W is almost equal and the F-14 has an advantage
throughout much of the envelope. I think the F-15 weapon's system is
superior in most environments ... obviously so when AMRAAM is in the mix
(personally I think those individuals that denied the F-14 the AMRAAM ought
to face charges).

The voice of experience is hard to disagree with. My impression had
always been that the Eagle was considerably more agile, but the AIM-54
and TWS ability to engage multiple targets simultaneously made the Tom
a very dangerous airplane. I'd have to look at the performance charts
and find some Ps corners to compare. Regardless of outcome, I'll stand
by the original challenge regarding the Tom having distinct
superiority over the Eagle.

My opportunities to engage the Eagle in the Turkey were somewhat limited,
but when gas was not an issue (ie: I had a tanker and the use of A/B) I had
little difficulty in gaining a pipper-on guns position.

You've said a mouthful there. If you can't have full reheat available
in every engagement you're distinctly handicapped.

OTOH, while in a Phantom, I found myself quite helpless. I think the only
thing I could do where I might have had no disadvantage was to depart the
jet. The single seat A-4 (as configured for adversary work) often
frustrated the "superior" F-15.\

My first encounter with a Tom while in a Phantom (an exercise in the
Med against America around '77) was to be intercepted during a low
(very) altitude attack on the boat. The -14 got vectored against me
from the left front quadrant--I picked him up visually at 10 o'clock
with about 150 degree heading crossing angle. Because I was (as usual)
very fast, I told the WSO--"no sweat, he's going to overshoot big
time" --followed immediately by an absolutely amazed, "holy ****, did
you see that" as the Tom did an incredible bat-turn into firing
parameters.

And regarding F-15s--I was often quite successful against Eagles when
working 2-v-2 in the lowly AT-38, provided the ROE was VID and the
Eagles were driven by relatively inexperienced guys. With a high-time
wingman and operating in fluid attack, we could run out of film taking
high angle gun shots.

To return to the topic, I'd cast a vote for the F-8. Best air superiority
fighter in the US arsenal for its era (mid-50's competing with century
series, etc). Best kill ratio in real world combat (Vietnam). Best ramp
strike rate ... oh well.

Kill ratio for the F-8 is the highest, but the numbers involved reduce
the stat to irrelevance. Not enough kills to be statistically
significant. Still, had there been enough of them and had the war been
one of air superiority, it sure would have been nice to have a whole
herd of F-8s.

Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (ret)
***"When Thunder Rolled:
*** An F-105 Pilot Over N. Vietnam"
*** from Smithsonian Books
ISBN: 1588341038

Ed Rasimus wrote in message
My first encounter with a Tom while in a Phantom (an exercise in the
Med against America around '77) was to be intercepted during a low
(very) altitude attack on the boat. The -14 got vectored against me
from the left front quadrant--I picked him up visually at 10 o'clock
with about 150 degree heading crossing angle. Because I was (as usual)
very fast, I told the WSO--"no sweat, he's going to overshoot big
time" --followed immediately by an absolutely amazed, "holy ****, did
you see that" as the Tom did an incredible bat-turn into firing
parameters.

Been there seen that! I did have one fight where my flight of
Phantoms (Chiefs out of S-J), with the help of a couple of Marine
Harriers out of Cherry Point, waxed a pair of Turkeys off some boat in
the Atlantic. Med alt head on setup, ROE was BVR but no Phoenix, we
ran in in tac spread (in mil power on our diesel J-79s) with a Harrier
tucked in tight on each Phantom. Just outside AIM-7 R-Max (I think),
we chaffed and did a 180 and dragged, smoking all the way, while the
Harriers split vertically to the bottom of the block. As planned, the
Turkeys glommed on to us and chased us, giving the Harriers
simultaneous, unobserved,low to high vertical conversions to Aim-9
kills followed by some guns tracking (Amazing how Marines love
shooting at the Navy). At this point we had pitched back, called the
Harriers off, and blazed in for a high speed F0X 1, FOX 2, Snap shot
to a separation. Poor Turkeys never got a shot off. God it was fun!


Kirk Stant
WSO (Ret)

Subject: Best Fighter For It's Time
From: (Kirk Stant)
Date: 7/25/03 9:50 AM Pacific Daylight Time
Message-id:

Ed Rasimus wrote in message
My first encounter with a Tom while in a Phantom (an exercise in the
Med against America around '77) was to be intercepted during a low
(very) altitude attack on the boat. The -14 got vectored against me
from the left front quadrant--I picked him up visually at 10 o'clock
with about 150 degree heading crossing angle. Because I was (as usual)
very fast, I told the WSO--"no sweat, he's going to overshoot big
time" --followed immediately by an absolutely amazed, "holy ****, did
you see that" as the Tom did an incredible bat-turn into firing
parameters.

Been there seen that! I did have one fight where my flight of
Phantoms (Chiefs out of S-J), with the help of a couple of Marine
Harriers out of Cherry Point, waxed a pair of Turkeys off some boat in
the Atlantic. Med alt head on setup, ROE was BVR but no Phoenix, we
ran in in tac spread (in mil power on our diesel J-79s) with a Harrier
tucked in tight on each Phantom. Just outside AIM-7 R-Max (I think),
we chaffed and did a 180 and dragged, smoking all the way, while the
Harriers split vertically to the bottom of the block. As planned, the
Turkeys glommed on to us and chased us, giving the Harriers
simultaneous, unobserved,low to high vertical conversions to Aim-9
kills followed by some guns tracking (Amazing how Marines love
shooting at the Navy). At this point we had pitched back, called the
Harriers off, and blazed in for a high speed F0X 1, FOX 2, Snap shot
to a separation. Poor Turkeys never got a shot off. God it was fun!


Kirk Stant
WSO (Ret)


Great stuff. More. More. More.

Arthur Kramer
Visit my WW II B-26 website at:
http://www.coastcomp.com/artkramer

(ArtKramr) wrote:

Great stuff. More. More. More.

I'd have ya' ****tin' yer pants in my *ultralight*, hardguy.

-Mike Marron

(Kirk Stant) wrote:

Been there seen that! I did have one fight where my flight of
Phantoms (Chiefs out of S-J), with the help of a couple of Marine
Harriers out of Cherry Point, waxed a pair of Turkeys off some boat in
the Atlantic. Med alt head on setup, ROE was BVR but no Phoenix, we
ran in in tac spread (in mil power on our diesel J-79s) with a Harrier
tucked in tight on each Phantom. Just outside AIM-7 R-Max (I think),
we chaffed and did a 180 and dragged, smoking all the way, while the
Harriers split vertically to the bottom of the block. As planned, the
Turkeys glommed on to us and chased us, giving the Harriers
simultaneous, unobserved,low to high vertical conversions to Aim-9
kills followed by some guns tracking (Amazing how Marines love
shooting at the Navy). At this point we had pitched back, called the
Harriers off, and blazed in for a high speed F0X 1, FOX 2, Snap shot
to a separation. Poor Turkeys never got a shot off. God it was fun!


Great story. My comments--you can get away with that in training ACM,
but if it were for real you'd have to have "cojones al piedra" to pull
the trick. Assurance that your R-Max is the same for the bad guys
based pm intel takes a lot of confidence. Second, I'm surprised that a
Harrier can stay with a Phantom "in mil power on our diesel J-79s".
Third, I don't think I'd have the faith that my staunch Marine allies
would make the vertical conversion in a Harrier against a Tom in full
blow pursuit of the Phantoms. Finally, your pitch back, acquisition
and rapid FOXing shows a bit of befuddlement from the Nasal Radiators,
since they should have been face shooting you at the same rate.

All that said, it sounds like a bold plan well-executed. My own
experience in low-tech vs high-tech ACM often did the same thing--a
vertical rather than horizontal split of the element. Seems that young
aggressive warriors fixate on the first target and only sporadically
search for the second (despite the training artificiality of knowing
all the players). They search in sweep for the remainder, but seldom
scroll up and down to find the other threat.

I guess it reinforces what Dudley has already mentioned extensively
here--the training, experience and quality of the driver will often
compensate for the technology of the system.



Ed Rasimus
Fighter Pilot (ret)
***"When Thunder Rolled:
*** An F-105 Pilot Over N. Vietnam"
*** from Smithsonian Books
ISBN: 1588341038

Ed Rasimus wrote in message Great story. My comments--you can get away with that in training ACM,
but if it were for real you'd have to have "cojones al piedra" to pull
the trick. Assurance that your R-Max is the same for the bad guys
based pm intel takes a lot of confidence. Second, I'm surprised that a
Harrier can stay with a Phantom "in mil power on our diesel J-79s".
Third, I don't think I'd have the faith that my staunch Marine allies
would make the vertical conversion in a Harrier against a Tom in full
blow pursuit of the Phantoms. Finally, your pitch back, acquisition
and rapid FOXing shows a bit of befuddlement from the Nasal Radiators,
since they should have been face shooting you at the same rate.

All that said, it sounds like a bold plan well-executed. My own
experience in low-tech vs high-tech ACM often did the same thing--a
vertical rather than horizontal split of the element. Seems that young
aggressive warriors fixate on the first target and only sporadically
search for the second (despite the training artificiality of knowing
all the players). They search in sweep for the remainder, but seldom
scroll up and down to find the other threat.

Well, it was a while ago - and as any good story, has gotten better in
the retelling - but the gist is correct. The reference to "Mil Power"
was that we didn't go to Idle/Min AB to kill our smoke on the run-in,
instead ran in at a tactical speed that the Harriers (fast little
AV-8Cs not big slow Bs, I think) could stay with, leaving a nice big
smoke trail for the Toms to see! But you are absolutely right about
this being a "training ACM sortie" kind of thing - the whole point was
to find a way to get the Harriers into the fight unobserved, tie up
the Tomcats in a turning fight, then play 7th Cavalry and save the
day. That day the plan worked.

I always felt that a lot of our ACM missions were wasted (probably
unavoidably) on canned setups, predictable 1V1 or 2V2, etc. Good for
practicing basics, but no relation to the real thing, as described in
all the Red Baron reports, WW2 books, etc. Then once and awhile
(usually during some exercise like Cope Thunder or Red Flag) a fight
would develop that would be uncannily similar to "the real thing".
And it usually didn't involve any fancy tactics, just (surprise!)
being at the right place at the right time and catching some guy
looking the wrong way. Case in point - A Cope Thunder in the mid 80s,
huge furball off the coast West of Iba, and we are coasting out from
Crow Valley after dropping some inert Mk-82s on rattan targets. No
real tactics, just stay low, skirt the outside of the furball, and
shoot an F-5 that pops out in front of us. Then back to the deck and
beat feet for home, low on gas as usual. Hardly had to turn at all,
just a quick stab-out lock up and a couple of Fox-1s, then sweating
out the illumination period.

When things get complicated and messy, the fancy tactics are the first
things to go. Then it's a matter of SA, systems knowledge, crew
coordination, and luck - not necessarily in that order!

I guess it reinforces what Dudley has already mentioned extensively
here--the training, experience and quality of the driver will often
compensate for the technology of the system.

ABSOLUTELY!!!!


Kirk

to go along with Dudley and Kirk I reiterate what I always told my
students - in aviation what you don't now won't hurt you - it will
kill you. And in aerial combat you have to have the facts at your
fingertips. 'Let's see now' won't get it. For the same reason frequent
real intensive maximum performance training is mandatory if you have
to be ready to fight at a moment's notice. And you st be perfectly
honest in your critique of your performance and take remedial action
when you find weaknesses. God (fate, chance, karma, Buddha) has a way
of giving you a no-s--t tac eval every now and then and if you screw
up badly enough . . .
Cheers - Walt BJ