Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum  

Go Back   Luftwaffe and Allied Air Forces Discussion Forum > Reviews > Books and Magazines

Books and Magazines Please use this forum to review or discuss books and magazines.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 29th October 2010, 12:49
mars mars is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 412
mars
Re: Fighter performance; F-4 vs MiG-21; actual plane analysis

I may wrong, but as far as I know, North Vietnam Mig-21 pilots rarely engated any dogfight because Mig-21 had fewer weapons than US fighters and there were simply too many US fighters around, their tacitcs were usually "hit and run".
And the US navy "top gun" programs was mostly about to develop correct tactics on high speed jet armed with modern missles, in the early stage of the Vietnam war, Americans still used tacitcs develped in WWII, and that caused many problems
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 30th October 2010, 10:12
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
  #13  
Old 30th October 2010, 14:40
mars mars is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 412
mars
Re: Fighter performance; F-4 vs MiG-21; actual plane analysis

Some one said that one of the reason USAF continued with Fluid Four tactics was that US Navy air force switched to the Loose-Deuce despite many USAF pilots favored US Navy tactics
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 11th November 2010, 10:45
michael82 michael82 is offline
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 10
michael82 is on a distinguished road
Re: Fighter performance; F-4 vs MiG-21; actual plane analysis

what about their performance? (that's the topic)
both were designed as a top performers...
speed (up & down, min & max), climb/acceleration, turns ....
Reply With Quote
Reply


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

BB 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
“Operation Pandemonium” Stephen Smith Allied and Soviet Air Forces 11 30th August 2011 22:23
Most One Sided Luftwaffe Victory over the 8th Air Force Rob Romero Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 22 18th August 2010 22:55
Rudolf Mueller: claims vs actual 'kills' Sanchez Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 26 21st December 2007 15:17
Aircraft performance curves Christer Bergström Luftwaffe and Axis Air Forces 17 19th November 2005 21:49
Fighter pilots' guts Hawk-Eye Allied and Soviet Air Forces 44 8th April 2005 14:25


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 00:15.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004 - 2018, 12oclockhigh.net