*** Top Gun 2 “Maverick” *** thread

[Teddy Jack]

LOL, now that thinking will get people killed.

I am going to let you go. You were wrong.

Just keep in mind, time and time again it has been proven that the military overestimates the effectiveness of missiles.

Missiles can be defeated, then you are within range of the enemy. Then you are fucked.

The F-14 was never ever really tested. The F-15 has been through our sales to Israel.

I hope no one in the Pentagon is thinking "so nobody ever has to dogfight again."

Geez, that is freaking terrible

Ok, bye.

 

[Teddy Jack]

LOL, now that thinking will get people killed.

I am going to let you go. You were wrong.

Just keep in mind, time and time again it has been proven that the military overestimates the effectiveness of missiles.

Missiles can be defeated, then you are within range of the enemy. Then you are fucked.

The F-14 was never ever really tested. The F-15 has been through our sales to Israel.

I hope no one in the Pentagon is thinking "so nobody ever has to dogfight again."

Geez, that is freaking terrible

Lol dude they aren’t designing fighters to dogfight anymore. That’s not how fights are fought in this day in age.

They design them to kill the bad guy from a very long distance.

F-35 pilot: Here's what people don't understand about dogfighting, and how the F-35 excels at it

It may be news to "Top Gun" fans, but the idea of a "dogfight" long ago faded from relevance in the world of aerial combat.

www.google.com

 

[RJ2kWJ]

Another one, that still gets me rock hard and vascular. When ordinance was about to "expire" we would either do a controlled detination or use them on the next op. We did one on the Pakistani border that was tremendous. Used a miclic to flatten a town. The guys that ran or shot at is got hit with either a himar or a jdam. One dude rode a bike away got hit with a himar. Complete overkill. Shit was great.

Can you please be the gent that posts the SR-71 story? I won’t do it.

 

[bigassmoney]

we got a interweb fight ITT and guys are very passionate about their military air knowledge

 

[RJ2kWJ]

we got a interweb fight ITT and guys are very passionate about their military air knowledge

 

[Hb35]

You have no idea what you are talking about. Firing missiles from far off still does not work. Everyone knows that and that is why the new fighters do not look like the F-14.

You can't protect an aircraft carrier except through fighter engagement.

The F-15 is old, but it was designed to manueverable, not as much as the F-16. However, both fighters are vastly, vastly superior to the F-14.

When I questioned you, you brought up a long range bomber.

Dude, I know you are all riled up, and are correct about the missile dependence problems of early Vietnam, but “firing missiles from far off” is entirely what the F35 and F22 weapons systems are based on.

The stealth and beyond visual weapons are the advantage they have over every other fighter on the planet . In exercises they are killing multiple 4th generation fighters without ever being seen.

The F22 is untouchable, old school up close gunfight, or beyond visual. The only drawback is the idiot politicians stopping production. The F35 has reliability problems, but all it’s advantages are still based on stealth, information management, and beyond visual capabilities.

 

[TJHall1]

@AgEngDawg

 

[Dtcliffo]

The line I highlighted is complete bullshit. That thinking got pilots killed in Vietnam. Missiles are avoidable and always have been and are today.

The Americans thought they could depend on missiles and fire for far off. Guess what?? The manueverable Soviet planes avoided the missiles and then got within visual range and downed our heavy planes!!!! That thinking got people freaking killed and still would today.

John Boyd saved the Eagle, Falcon, and Raptor from this fate. He led to changes into those planes (his disciples the Raptor). The Eagle, Falcon, and Raptor are much more manueverable than the F-14!!! They were specifically designed to be maneuverable. Do you see a swing wing design on any of those fighters???

LOL, you are wrong and completely wrong. There are no fighters designed like the Tomcat anymore because it was a disaster.

My source if Freaking Colonel John Boyd!!! He knows much more about fighter design than your "source."

The F-14 was too heavy, not manueverable, and would have got pilots killed if we went up against the Soviets.

Look at the F-22 and F-35, they look nothing like the F-14. The F-14 looks like the planes that got pilots killed in Vietnam.

Read this book, you will learn a lot about fighter design because everything you freaking posted is bullshit.

Amazon.com: Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War: 8601421754750: Coram, Robert: Books

Amazon.com: Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War: 8601421754750: Coram, Robert: Books

www.amazon.com

John Boyd is an American hero. He should receive the MoH IMO.

 

[AgEngDawg]

John Boyd is an American hero. He should receive the MoH IMO.

You are daggum right!!! Genghis John was an American freaking hero!!!

 

[AgEngDawg]

Lol dude they aren’t designing fighters to dogfight anymore. That’s not how fights are fought in this day in age.

They design them to kill the bad guy from a very long distance.

F-35 pilot: Here's what people don't understand about dogfighting, and how the F-35 excels at it

It may be news to "Top Gun" fans, but the idea of a "dogfight" long ago faded from relevance in the world of aerial combat.

www.google.com

I see you came back for another debate whipping.

OK son, you think the near peer opposing jets are going to stick to the script? No, they are not. Your enemy always adjusts.

The theory that the US can kill enemy jets from far off with missiles is not new. The enemy is not just going to allow you to do that.

The enemy gets a vote also. The article you posted is bullshit and the enemy will make countermoves to defeat this strategy.

That strategy is bullshit and will get people killed.

The US has long said well, let's just build the maneuverability into the missile instead of the fighter. Well, guess what, that does not work and never has.

I notice how the article says that dogfighting has not happened like that for 40 years.

Question: How many near peer wars have happened in the last 40 years???

If there have been none, what the fuck is he talking about???

Son, you were wrong, and are still wrong!!

Just accept it an move on as a man does.

 

[AgEngDawg]

Dude, I know you are all riled up, and are correct about the missile dependence problems of early Vietnam, but “firing missiles from far off” is entirely what the F35 and F22 weapons systems are based on.

The stealth and beyond visual weapons are the advantage they have over every other fighter on the planet . In exercises they are killing multiple 4th generation fighters without ever being seen.

The F22 is untouchable, old school up close gunfight, or beyond visual. The only drawback is the idiot politicians stopping production. The F35 has reliability problems, but all it’s advantages are still based on stealth, information management, and beyond visual capabilities.

I am saying that is not going work. The enemy has a vote and China has methods that easily our "stealth" technology.

The F22 is maneuverable, I agree. However, this argument started over the F-14. It was not maneuverable and was a turkey.

If we are betting on beyond visible range kills, God help us. It is not going to work and is arrogance.

 

[Hb35]

I am saying that is not going work. The enemy has a vote and China has methods that easily our "stealth" technology.

The F22 is maneuverable, I agree. However, this argument started over the F-14. It was not maneuverable and was a turkey.

If we are betting on beyond visible range kills, God help us. It is not going to work and is arrogance.

I agree, we don’t need to be dependent on long range only, that’s just what they are aiming for.

I was saying last night, I think the production stoppage of the F22 was a terrible decision. I don’t know if it was some type of back room politics or what. It’s not the money, because first off they dont give a shit about wasting money, but they just shifted all the focus to the F35, which is still having problems.

I understand that the F35 was supposed to be versatile, one size fits all, and replace the F15,F16, and F18 across all services, but it looks like it’s going to fail. New story this morning on pulling the plug on it.

House Armed Services chairman wants to ‘stop throwing money’ at F-35s

House Armed Services Committee chairman Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., railed against the vast expenses of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the stealthy fifth-generation fighter jet.

www.foxbusiness.com

 

[shiv]

Can you please be the gent that posts the SR-71 story? I won’t do it.

You talking about this one? I love this story:

 

[GatorOK]

You have no idea what you are talking about. Firing missiles from far off still does not work. Everyone knows that and that is why the new fighters do not look like the F-14.

You can't protect an aircraft carrier except through fighter engagement.

The F-15 is old, but it was designed to manueverable, not as much as the F-16. However, both fighters are vastly, vastly superior to the F-14.

When I questioned you, you brought up a long range bomber.

You just outed yourself as having no clue about aerial combat.
Everything is designed around Beyond Visual Range (BVR) targeting and employment. The idea is to never see your enemy except to see him disappear off your radar screen.
Look up the terms F-Pole and A-Pole. The Chinese built the J20 around the PL15 that is supposed to out range the AIM120D and has a radar to support it.
The F14 was built around the the AWG 9 and then APG 71 radar firing the AIM 54 (longest at its time) missile.
Should a fighter get inside BVR and into a dogfight the F14 swept wing was automatic based on airspeed unlike the MIG 23 that was manual. It more than held its own in a single circle fight because of it thrust to weight ratio and wasn’t meant to fly against US aircraft.

 

[GatorOK]

I agree, we don’t need to be dependent on long range only, that’s just what they are aiming for.

I was saying last night, I think the production stoppage of the F22 was a terrible decision. I don’t know if it was some type of back room politics or what. It’s not the money, because first off they dont give a shit about wasting money, but they just shifted all the focus to the F35, which is still having problems.

I understand that the F35 was supposed to be versatile, one size fits all, and replace the F15,F16, and F18 across all services, but it looks like it’s going to fail. New story this morning on pulling the plug on it.

House Armed Services chairman wants to ‘stop throwing money’ at F-35s

House Armed Services Committee chairman Rep. Adam Smith, D-Wash., railed against the vast expenses of the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter, the stealthy fifth-generation fighter jet.

www.foxbusiness.com

It was the money and SECDEF saying the USAF was not supporting the CAS war with the ARMY. Gen Mosley was fired when he told SECDEF to pound sand we are not buying all these UAVs. We now have the F22 we wanted 20+ years ago.

 

[GatorOK]

Are you like 15? You know the Afghans and other insurgents are pretty adept at defeating our technology.

Wait til we go up against a near peer.

Part time farmers on motorcycles are a targeting nightmare.
There is no more need peer. The Chinese are a Peer.

 

[GatorOK]

Beyond visible range is bullshit. Missiles are never as good as anticipated and this has been proven time and time again. You have no idea what you are talking about.

Depending on beyond visible range kills has gotten pilots killed.

This is an interesting hill to die on.

 

[AgEngDawg]

You just outed yourself as having no clue about aerial combat.
Everything is designed around Beyond Visual Range (BVR) targeting and employment. The idea is to never see your enemy except to see him disappear off your radar screen.
Look up the terms F-Pole and A-Pole. The Chinese built the J20 around the PL15 that is supposed to out range the AIM120D and has a radar to support it.
The F14 was built around the the AWG 9 and then APG 71 radar firing the AIM 54 (longest at its time) missile.
Should a fighter get inside BVR and into a dogfight the F14 swept wing was automatic based on airspeed unlike the MIG 23 that was manual. It more than held its own in a single circle fight because of it thrust to weight ratio and wasn’t meant to fly against US aircraft.

Bullshit. Colonel John Boyd would say you are full of chit and he would have hosed you. His principles are still solid today.

It was the weight of the sweep wing design that caused the extra weight and decreased it's ability to lose or gain energy quickly.

Sweep wing designs are abandoned in fighters because of John Boyd.

The F-14 also had one to many of everything. One too many engines and one too many humans.

 

[AgEngDawg]

This is an interesting hill to die on.

It is not a hill to die on. It is a solid, solid position that is infinitely defendable.

 

[GatorOK]

Bullshit. Colonel John Boyd would say you are full of chit and he would have hosed you. His principles are still solid today.

It was the weight of the sweep wing design that caused the extra weight and decreased it's ability to lose or gain energy quickly.

Sweep wing designs are abandoned in fighters because of John Boyd.

Hence the reason it was retired. At its time it was a formidable plane. Ask the Lybians.
BTW Col Boyd was the father of COG theory. He would t argue against BVR shooting and dog fighting.

 

[Teddy Jack]

You just outed yourself as having no clue about aerial combat.
Everything is designed around Beyond Visual Range (BVR) targeting and employment. The idea is to never see your enemy except to see him disappear off your radar screen.
Look up the terms F-Pole and A-Pole. The Chinese built the J20 around the PL15 that is supposed to out range the AIM120D and has a radar to support it.
The F14 was built around the the AWG 9 and then APG 71 radar firing the AIM 54 (longest at its time) missile.
Should a fighter get inside BVR and into a dogfight the F14 swept wing was automatic based on airspeed unlike the MIG 23 that was manual. It more than held its own in a single circle fight because of it thrust to weight ratio and wasn’t meant to fly against US aircraft.

Good grief thank you!

 

[AgEngDawg]

Hence the reason it was retired. At its time it was a formidable plane. Ask the Lybians.
BTW Col Boyd was the father of COG theory. He would t argue against BVR shooting and dog fighting.

He absolutely would argue about the dependence on BVR shooting as he did multiple, multiple times. He said that people who argued to build the manueverability into missiles were morons. He explained that this is what led to pilot deaths in Vietnam.

He would argue that the fighter should be manueverable that is what made an excellent fighter. He would also say that dog fighting is never, never going away.

Boyd hated the fucking F-14 and F-111.

He told one air force general that they should pull the wings off the F-111, paint it yellow and use it as a high speed taxi to the planes.

The F-14 and F-111 were everything he taught against.

He also taught against reliance on BVR. He was fine with BVR, but not dependence on it.

Also, the Libyans were not near peer.

 

[AgEngDawg]

Good grief thank you!

You are wrong still son.

 

[AgEngDawg]

Hence the reason it was retired. At its time it was a formidable plane. Ask the Lybians.
BTW Col Boyd was the father of COG theory. He would t argue against BVR shooting and dog fighting.

Before the first F-14 was ever built, Boyd and his reformers knew it was a turkey. He was just glad the air force did not get sucked into the F-14.

He was even unhappy with the F-15 because the pentagon had added unnecessary weight.

 

[GatorOK]

You realize we don’t fly any of the same planes as when Boyd was around, right? Also he was probably quoting the AIM 7 from Vietnam , that would literally fall off the rail when fired. Robin Olds has a few stories about that. Boyd is not an expert at Air-to-air but he is a great strategist.

You keep changing topics when it doesn’t look like it is going your way.

The F14 did exactly what it was supposed to do. Carried lots of gas, had two engines, had a massive radar and long range weapons. Protect the carrier.

BVR weapons is exactly what every fighter pilot wants. Getting into a dog fight is a last resort. Going Guns is last resort, but it is practiced. AIM 9x is a short range missile and is still used BVR.

I will leave you with this. As a graduate of USAF Weapons School, and MAWTS-1, hundreds of air to air engagements, actual combat shooting at Iraqi MIG25s (missed BTW but was a mission kill) and an air to air missile expert you have no idea what you are talking about.

 

[AgEngDawg]

You realize we don’t fly any of the same planes as when Boyd was around, right? Also he was probably quoting the AIM 7 from Vietnam , that would literally fall off the rail when fired. Robin Olds has a few stories about that. Boyd is not an expert at Air-to-air but he is a great strategist.

You keep changing topics when it doesn’t look like it is going your way.

The F14 did exactly what it was supposed to do. Carried lots of gas, had two engines, had a massive radar and long range weapons. Protect the carrier.

BVR weapons is exactly what every fighter pilot wants. Getting into a dog fight is a last resort. Going Guns is last resort, but it is practiced. AIM 9x is a short range missile and is still used BVR.

I will leave you with this. As a graduate of USAF Weapons School, and MAWTS-1, hundreds of air to air engagements, actual combat shooting at Iraqi MIG25s (missed BTW but was a mission kill) and an air to air missile expert you have no idea what you are talking about.

He helped design the F-15 and F-16.

You realize his major contribution was to plane design while at the Pentagon in the 1970s???

Physics is physics. Boyd is not great because he was a fighter pilot. 40 second Boyd was the best pilot in the AF, but that is not his main contribution.

He is great because of his contributions to aviation.

 

[AgEngDawg]

You realize we don’t fly any of the same planes as when Boyd was around, right? Also he was probably quoting the AIM 7 from Vietnam , that would literally fall off the rail when fired. Robin Olds has a few stories about that. Boyd is not an expert at Air-to-air but he is a great strategist.

You keep changing topics when it doesn’t look like it is going your way.

The F14 did exactly what it was supposed to do. Carried lots of gas, had two engines, had a massive radar and long range weapons. Protect the carrier.

BVR weapons is exactly what every fighter pilot wants. Getting into a dog fight is a last resort. Going Guns is last resort, but it is practiced. AIM 9x is a short range missile and is still used BVR.

I will leave you with this. As a graduate of USAF Weapons School, and MAWTS-1, hundreds of air to air engagements, actual combat shooting at Iraqi MIG25s (missed BTW but was a mission kill) and an air to air missile expert you have no idea what you are talking about.

"Boyd was later assigned to the USAF Weapons School, where he became head of the Academic Section and wrote the tactics manual for the school."

http://code7700.com/pdfs/john_boyd/aerial-attack-study-1964_john_boyd.pdf

 

[AgEngDawg]

You realize we don’t fly any of the same planes as when Boyd was around, right? Also he was probably quoting the AIM 7 from Vietnam , that would literally fall off the rail when fired. Robin Olds has a few stories about that. Boyd is not an expert at Air-to-air but he is a great strategist.

You keep changing topics when it doesn’t look like it is going your way.

The F14 did exactly what it was supposed to do. Carried lots of gas, had two engines, had a massive radar and long range weapons. Protect the carrier.

BVR weapons is exactly what every fighter pilot wants. Getting into a dog fight is a last resort. Going Guns is last resort, but it is practiced. AIM 9x is a short range missile and is still used BVR.

I will leave you with this. As a graduate of USAF Weapons School, and MAWTS-1, hundreds of air to air engagements, actual combat shooting at Iraqi MIG25s (missed BTW but was a mission kill) and an air to air missile expert you have no idea what you are talking about.

LOL, if the F-14 was not expected to dogfight what the hell was the Top Gun school about???

 

[Juro]

LOL, if the F-14 was not expected to dogfight what the hell was the Top Gun school about???

Volleyball matches.

 

[Hb35]

Hey @GatorOK, what did you fly?

I grew up wanting to be a fighter pilot, so bad. I got my pilots license at 16 and wanted to goto one of the academies. My family didn’t want me too, and stats about how few hours actual pilots flew at the time (late 80’s) finally got me.

I have a bush plane now, but next family trip to Orlando I’m going to shell out the money to fly a Mustang down there. It’ll be worth every penny.

 

[RJ2kWJ]

Volleyball matches.

Gotta be more specific. Sweaty, slightly homoerotic volley ball matches.

 

[Mahozzle]

Volleyball matches.

Dan Pedersen wasn't overly fond of Boyd?

 

[shiv]

 

[AgEngDawg]

My favorite John Boyd quote:

“You know what? I’ve never designed an airplane before... but I could fuck up and do better than this.” - Colonel John Boyd

 

[Teddy Jack]

My favorite John Boyd quote:

“You know what? I’ve never designed an airplane before... but I could fuck up and do better than this.” - Colonel John Boyd

He’s an interesting guy with an interesting career for sure. Very smart dude. But I think some of his analysis was passed by with the advantages in technology. Missiles are not the same today as they were in the 60s.

I will ask someone (and gator) could opine as well, what skills of his are taught and or used in teaching Air to air combat maneuvers today.

 

[AgEngDawg]

He’s an interesting guy with an interesting career for sure. Very smart dude. But I think some of his analysis was passed by with the advantages in technology. Missiles are not the same today as they were in the 60s.

I will ask someone (and gator) could opine as well, what skills of his are taught and or used in teaching Air to air combat maneuvers today.

LOL. Boyd was nothing less than generational human being.

 

[AgEngDawg]

Thee is only two engineers that I study their philosophy, methods, and leadership.

One was Admiral Hyman Rickover, the father of the Nuclear Navy:



The second one is Colonel John Boyd, father of the F-15 (though the hated the changes made to it), F-16 (though he had his gripes here in the final product also), energy manueverability theory, and the OODA loop.



Both were extraordinary human beings who anyone can learn a lot from.

Both were not liked by their fellow officer corps in their services. Both were old school bureaucratic knife fighters.

Both could be serious assholes. Per the Coram's book on Boyd, Boyd got grounded one time when he made a trip to Andrews Air Force Base from Eglin Air Force Base. He was flying a small training jet and took off from Andrews. He saw a B-52 coming in to Andrews. He could not resist his impulse go give the B-52 a feel for what it would be like if a real shooting war broke out one day.

He did a couple of dangerous passes of the B-52 yelling, "guns, guns, guns" on the radio. Anyway, the B-52 crew found it none too funny and reported Boyd. He was grounded for the safety infraction. He said he just wanted to give B-52 a feel for what a fighter pilot could do if a real shooting war broke out.

 

[Teddy Jack]

LOL. Boyd was nothing less than generational human being.

I think we all get it. You’re obsessed with him lol.

 

[Teddy Jack]

Just talked to a pretty good source of info and he stated specifically that yes, the tomcat was a heavier airplane with some close combat limitations. As it’s job was to protect the carrier, different mission package than the f15 and f16.

however, he did say he fought against them multiple times as well as against f16s. He kicked the shit out of both. However he did specifically say the tomcat was a very good jet with good capabilities and would absolutely way more than hold its own in a dogfight situation.

I trust my source.

 

[HunterPKP]

The line I highlighted is complete bullshit. That thinking got pilots killed in Vietnam. Missiles are avoidable and always have been and are today.

The Americans thought they could depend on missiles and fire for far off. Guess what?? The manueverable Soviet planes avoided the missiles and then got within visual range and downed our heavy planes!!!! That thinking got people freaking killed and still would today.

John Boyd saved the Eagle, Falcon, and Raptor from this fate. He led to changes into those planes (his disciples the Raptor). The Eagle, Falcon, and Raptor are much more manueverable than the F-14!!! They were specifically designed to be maneuverable. Do you see a swing wing design on any of those fighters???

LOL, you are wrong and completely wrong. There are no fighters designed like the Tomcat anymore because it was a disaster.

My source if Freaking Colonel John Boyd!!! He knows much more about fighter design than your "source."

The F-14 was too heavy, not manueverable, and would have got pilots killed if we went up against the Soviets.

Look at the F-22 and F-35, they look nothing like the F-14. The F-14 looks like the planes that got pilots killed in Vietnam.

Read this book, you will learn a lot about fighter design because everything you freaking posted is bullshit.

Amazon.com: Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War: 8601421754750: Coram, Robert: Books

Amazon.com: Boyd: The Fighter Pilot Who Changed the Art of War: 8601421754750: Coram, Robert: Books

www.amazon.com

Your a pretty good poster so I'm not flaming you. The very line you bring up actually was accurate for the F14. The Phoenix missile was the only Mach 5 capable air to air missile in the world with 100 nautical mile range for nearly 15 years. They could fire the damn thing from far away and Russians would've been toast. Not to mention that the Phoenix could maneuver better than all but the late in F14 life introduced vectored thrust capable SUs could.

Mig 25? Toast. Talk about an unmaneuverable bird. Mig 31? Same. Mig 29? Some say similar maneuverability to our f16? Toast against a Phoenix. God forbid we send two Phoenix missiles per adversary aircraft. Older Mig and SU24s? Toast. The F14s would've faired fine in most of those situations. Especially out over the ocean where the Russians would have to travel farther to engage.

John Boyd is a legend though.