Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!lll-winken!sun-barr!newstop!sun!amdcad!amdcad!military
From: fsdjt2@thebox.rain.com (Dean Tabor)
Newsgroups: sci.military
Subject: Re: European fighter designs
Message-ID: <1991May17.063344.1835@amd.com>
Date: 17 May 91 04:15:56 GMT
References: <1991May16.052804.17718@amd.com>
Sender: military@amd.com
Organization: TheBox - Public Access Xenix
Lines: 27
Approved: military@amd.com


From: fsdjt2@thebox.rain.com (Dean Tabor)


> General comment:  the importance of dogfights is vastly overestimated.
> 80%+ of all victims of air combat never even see the attacker, much less
> have a chance to maneuver against him.

I don't think it's vastly overestimated to the 20% of pilots who do see 
their opponent!  Going on pure facts and figures, this logic would mean it 
makes more sense to have heavilly armed long range interceptors with 
little/no true fighter capability, a concept that has been proven wrong time 
and time again.

It reminds me of a part of an interview I saw with Gen. Robin Olds, USAF.  
It seems that when then Colonel Olds was doing a stint at the Pentagon, he 
was raising a stink about the F-4 not having a cannon integral to the 
airframe.  He was told in no uncertain terms by his superiors that "that 
sort of fighting will never happen again."  Later, over Viet Nam, Olds and 
his GIB were in it hot and heavy.  The GIB was a young lieutenant and was 
understandably nervous.  Olds told him "kid, don't worry about it.  I've 
been told by the high brass this isn't happening."

--
Dean Tabor
No Electronic Affiliations To Speak Of Anymore
fsdjt2@acad3.fai.alaska.edu