View Single Post
  #3  
Old 30th October 2010, 11:12
Six Nifty .50s Six Nifty .50s is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 246
Six Nifty .50s
Re: Fighter performance; F-4 vs MiG-21; actual plane analysis

By 1970 just about every air force in the western world (including German, Israeli and British) had copied the U.S. Navy's standard tactical formation, the Loose-Deuce, which was a slight modification of the World War II Thach Weave.

Before then, Germany's pre-World War II Schwarm (a.k.a. Finger Four, Fluid Four, etc.) was the most popular formation, but proved to be less flexible and controllable in jet vs. jet combat.

The USAF actually had a Fighter Weapons School before the Navy, but air force training still focused on intercepting bombers (non-manuevering targets). The air force also obtained flyable MiG-17s and MiG-21s, but these jets were not flown hard or evaluated thoroughly until after they were passed to the Navy. Meanwhile the USAF continued with Fluid Four tactics even after West Germany abandoned it. And unlike the U.S. Navy, the USAF officially tried to discourage realistic training (violent and dangerous manuevering in practice combats) because it resulted in more flying accidents. Many of the pilots did not agree with this logic, and due to internal pressures (and greater success enjoyed by the Navy) the USAF rebuilt its fighter training programs after the Vietnam War.

Technical limitations of missiles and radar was a separate issue, but some of the problems were caused by pilot error (firing the missiles well outside of the weapon's locking and tracking capabilities) and improper maintenance.
Reply With Quote