[Tactics] How is a BVR Air-to-Air combat actually handled ?

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

18 years 7 months

Posts: 563

All is in the title: I wonder how exactly is handled a BVR Air-to-Air combat , I suspect it's far more complex than simply "close-in, aim, shoot!", as I used to perform in most simulations games...

So ? What are the main methods and tactics ? How to approach the ennemy aicraft(s) ? What are the best angles of fire ? What are the evasive manoeuvers ? How to "dodge" a missile ? And how effective are missiles in general ? What incidence have Fox1, Fox2 and Fox3 missiles on combat ta&ctics respectively ? What to do and what NOT to do ? etc, etc... and probably many more questions I'm forgetting here...

Thanks for your answers... :)
________
HASH HONEY OIL

Original post

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 845

Well guess the whole thing is about - see them first and let them have one up the tail :p

Member for

18 years 7 months

Posts: 563

Well guess the whole thing is about - see them first and let them have one up the tail :p

Good point, those are the basics! :)

But then:
1-How to see first ?
2-How not to be seen first ?
________
MAZDA 717C

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 3,131

Good point, those are the basics! :)

But then:
1-How to see first ?
2-How not to be seen first ?

one thing you are correct, it's quite complicated. From bits and pieces of transcripts, it's not only first see, but first lock, then first to a firing solution, then first to reacquire lock if countermeasures were encountered, then first to launch, then first to follow up if that first launch got foiled. It is not easy and requires a lot of patience too. Russian systems with their powerful radars should usually get the first look (as seeing an indication), but first track usually comes out at roughly the same time as western planes, and then first successful lock to fire is lacking behind western planes. What Russian planes really lack is the ability to regain track after losing it to countermeasures (either electronic or physical). This is what i've heard....but there are supposed to be some fighter pilots here. Hope they reply. And you better hope this doesn't degenerate down to my daddy can beat up you daddy subjectiveness.

Member for

19 years 9 months

Posts: 12,109

1/13/93 Aerospace Daily: Transcript of Close F-16/AWACS coordination

v Radar acqusition and lock-on of the lead MiG was almost immediately

at around 20 nm as the MiG's "turned to confront" the F-16's

v The MiG-25's were reported to have fired at least one missile

v AWACS: "Benji 41, Lock Leader, Leader Past the Line, now 18 miles, Angels 29".

Benji 41: "Roger, they're south of the line."

AWACS: "Benji 41, status trailer"

Benji 42: "I have a lock, it's tracking"

AWACS: "OK, I show 'em well south of the line, 14 miles.

Toot Sweet, try to get the trailer"

Benji 41: "Benji Burners"

AWACS: "12 miles, 12 miles"

Benji 41: "Bogey Dope"

AWACS: "Benji, I show them 8 miles"

Benji 41: "Benji, I am looking for a Clearance to Fire"

AWACS: "Benji 41, Cleared Kill, Cleared Kill"

Benji 41: "Benji, understand Cleared Kill?"

[sound of lock-on tone]

AWACS: "Cleared to Kill, Cleared to Kill, you've got .....Bandits"

[sound of launch tone]

Benji 41: "Benji Fox"

AWACS: "Benji let's come hard left"

Benji 41: "Splash" [missile running time around 8 seconds]

Benji 41: "Benji, burners, let's take it down. Go Low."

[F-16's dive from 29,000 ft to 17,000 ft, new lock]

Benji 41: "Benji, Splash One, Splash One"

AWACS: "Copy, Splash One."

although depiction of a small operation it goes a long way in describing the enviroment that engagements take place in and how they are dealt with.

Member for

19 years 11 months

Posts: 451

RE: [Tactics] How is a BVR Air-to-Air combat actually handled ?

> Merlock
> How is a BVR Air-to-Air combat actually handled ?
There are bunches of variables.
A) Is one aircraft protecting some other aircraft?
Is one fighter protecting an AWACS or tanker, if so this aircraft could be forced into a situation of which the pilot would not want to be in.

B) Are there any time constraints?
Do eighter of these two fighters have to do something right now and leave?

C) Are all of these aircraft just on patrol and can engage, dis-engage at will or, is this for "probing" value?
If both fighters are on patrol then, they can jockey for best position and if that can not be obtained, go home and come back another day. Don't push a bad position!

D) Is there any real difference in altitude or speed between the two aircraft?
If one aircraft is entering the combat area at a high energy state and the other at a low energy state. If one aircraft enters the combat area with a 20,000 foot or more advantage, this is something for the lower altitude fighter to consider.

E) Is there any real difference between the weapons used?
Does one side have ARH missiles while the other have SARH missiles.

F) Are the two aircraft using somewhat similar tactics?
Does one side have tactics tailored to its needs while the other uses generic tactics.
On January 4, 1989 two US Navy F-14A's approached two Libyian Air Force MiG.-23's, the F-14's stayed low because they knew the MiG.-23's would have difficulty locking on to them while looking down into sea clutter.
So while at a distance the MiG.-23's had lock-on the F-14's five times. A little before twenty miles the F-14's dropped down several thousand feet which effectively blinded the MiG.23's.

G) Does one aircraft have an acchilles heel?
Does one fighter have a particular problem? Such as the MiG.-23 and MiG.-29 having difficulty with its interface with the Alamo and Adder Missiles. That is why USAF fighters have charged head-on at these aircraft and fire their Slammer Missiles right down the throat of the MiG's. The MiG.'s have little ability to fire on the Americans while with the Slammer Missile the Americans have is very effective in this situation.

H) What is the difference in performance between the two aircraft?
If one aircraft is an energy fighter while the other is a maneuvering fighter well, these are opposits in aircraft performance. The energy fighter has a high T/W ratio and wing loading. The maneuver fighter has a lower T/W ratio and wing loading. These two features dictate these aircraft fight differently.

In a fight between an F-16 versus a F/A-18;
The F-16 should use its high thrust to weight and high wing loading to keep the fight in the vertical plane and to keep the speed up above 350mph at all times.
The F/A-18 with a lower T/W and wing loading should try and fight in the horizontal plane and keep the fight speed below 300mph at all times.
Which ever pilot who is able to bring the fight to the strength of his fighter to bare first will most likely be the winner.

One thing to remember is that, a missile is not accurate to the same percentage everywhere in its envelope. So as a pilot you would like to place the bad guy in his weapon's high percentage of kill areas while you stay in the bad guy's low percentage of kill area.
Now, all the above was for 1V1 engagement. These parameters change and become more complex for a 2V2, 4V4 or, for a furball.

Modern aerial combat is very complex and fluid.

Adrian

Member for

18 years 7 months

Posts: 563

Thanks for your answers, guys... :)

A) Is one aircraft protecting some other aircraft?
Is one fighter protecting an AWACS or tanker, if so this aircraft could be forced into a situation of which the pilot would not want to be in.

No. Let's set things simples at first. Assume it's a Fighters-only combat.

B) Are there any time constraints?
Do eighter of these two fighters have to do something right now and leave?

No. No other constraint than fuel capcity, and I assume they are similar for both aircrafts.

C) Are all of these aircraft just on patrol and can engage, dis-engage at will or, is this for "probing" value?
If both fighters are on patrol then, they can jockey for best position and if that can not be obtained, go home and come back another day. Don't push a bad position!

It's a "fighter-vs-fighter" engagement. The Lybian Mig-23s vs. F-14 Tomcats is the best example...

D) Is there any real difference in altitude or speed between the two aircraft?
If one aircraft is entering the combat area at a high energy state and the other at a low energy state. If one aircraft enters the combat area with a 20,000 foot or more advantage, this is something for the lower altitude fighter to consider.

Again, let's assume no real difference: both sides know that "there"s an hostile out there". Assume that the Rules of Engagement are those of a conventionnal conflict: shoot as soon as you identified the enemy.

E) Is there any real difference between the weapons used?
Does one side have ARH missiles while the other have SARH missiles.

Again: no. It's a tie in armament with both ARH and SARH missiles of comparable capabilities.

F) Are the two aircraft using somewhat similar tactics?
Does one side have tactics tailored to its needs while the other uses generic tactics.
-SNIP-

Yes. Assume there are no significant differences in tactics.

G) Does one aircraft have an acchilles heel?
-SNIP-

Nothing particular.

H) What is the difference in performance between the two aircraft?
If one aircraft is an energy fighter while the other is a maneuvering fighter well, these are opposits in aircraft performance. The energy fighter has a high T/W ratio and wing loading. The maneuver fighter has a lower T/W ratio and wing loading. These two features dictate these aircraft fight differently.

Again, no. Assume aircrafts of differents models, but of the same class, generation, general performances and technology. (i.e. Mirage 2000-5 vs F-16C)

Modern aerial combat is very complex and fluid.
Adrian

Yes, and it's a sort of arcane mystery for me. The kind of mystery I'm interested into solving...
________
B-Series (International)

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 527

The Lybian Mig-23s vs. F-14 Tomcats is the best example..

I thought BVR was the issue at hand?

Member for

18 years 7 months

Posts: 563

I thought BVR was the issue at hand?

Yes, but correct me if I'm wrong: it ended into a dogfight only because of the ROE, it could have been a BVR in case of on side decided to open fire before the planes made contact, right ?
________
1958 dodge specifications

Member for

19 years

Posts: 1,071

Please consider the following scenario from a novice and correct where needed:

In the unlikely event of a 1 vs 1 encounter between an a/c with better radar (M2K-5) but shorter range missiles (mica) and an a/c with less powerful radar (Su 30k or MiG21 Bison) but with longer range ARH (R77), would it be a smart tactic for the MIrage (in the likely even that it detects first) to dive below altitude of the enemy a/c thereby further pressing advantage against look-down range of enemy and having it detect against ground clutter while playing to own advantage of detecting/tracking a/c at lookup range? Based on this, would the M2K be able to sneak in closer (mica range) without being detected and then letting off some mica?

Are there any other tactics that the M2k could employ?
similarly what option does the flanker/bison have in such a scenario have?

Could someone shed some light on this scenario my imagination suddenly came up with?

Regards,
USS.

Member for

19 years 6 months

Posts: 101

ECM

-SK

Member for

18 years 6 months

Posts: 13

The main concpet of BVR combat is "first look, first shoot" There are many factors to compare when considering BVR combat. The main factor of 'First look" is definitely The radar of the jets. Mostly the plane that has a longer radar range when activating the VS mode takes the advantage when spotting a foe.(The term 'Situation Awareness")

And the plane that has a smaller RCS(Radar Cross Section) value is more favorable. (The reason that the Raptors are the best BVR fighters: absolute advantage spotting the foe with it's AN/APG-77 radar(Rmax 220km in Vs mode) and absolute advantage in RCS(0.01m^2~0.001^2) The RCS value is some small the foe might even can't smell the F-22)

Now if the plane A that has more radar range and little RCS discovers plane B first, it starts to beam attack.(Beam attack is a maneuver escaping the azimuth of the foe's radar in order to be un detected) And after that, the plane A moves to the E-pole or F-pole position.(E-pole and F-pole is the best position that the missile can bite the bogey.Especially the E-pole is also known as the 'No Escape Zone' because the motion(kinetic energy) of the missile is so great the target cannot dodge the missile)

If the power of the engine(perhaps Thrust) si good enough, the weapon envelope expands and the F-pole of misslie also increases.(Simply put ,the range of the missiles increase. Even with the same misslie, the plane with more thrust can fire the misslie with more range)

BVR is actually postion fighting. The guy who occupate the best position first sweeps out the foe. Even if the target tries or have dodged the misslie, it had already exhausted kinetic energy and is likely to blast on the second attack. Under the same condition of Wacs back up when the situation awareness is equal, it might depend on the thrust, climbing ratio of the plane. Is is clear that the guy with longer F-pole and wider weapon envelope is likely to win.

Member for

18 years 6 months

Posts: 13

And for missile envasion, the dodger is likely use high-G manuvers. But if the missile bites the tail of the dodger 0 degrees angle off and under 90 degrees aspect angle the dodger is likely to splash or lose kinetic energy, which is a drawback when avoiding susceeding missiles.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 527

Now if the plane A that has more radar range and little RCS discovers plane B first, it starts to beam attack.(Beam attack is a maneuver escaping the azimuth of the foe's radar in order to be un detected)

Your description could fit for a 1 v 1 situation were both parts lack AEW and/or GCI support. Plane B is still likely to receive an RWR indication once plane A starts to paint him, though.

Member for

18 years 6 months

Posts: 13

Your description could fit for a 1 v 1 situation were both parts lack AEW and/or GCI support. Plane B is still likely to receive an RWR indication once plane A starts to paint him, though.

I agree. :) The circumstances if there are AWACS or Ground Control Intercept or if the combat is taking out on a ADIZ zone or a DCA zone should be realistic factors to examine. But I was just presenting the old theoretical examples.

P.S. I remember that the the kill made by F-14s were no match to F-15s in the first gulf war, due to the large out put simple wave of the Tomcat radar, letting the Iraqi migs RWR scream and giving them the chance to avoid the cats. :cool:The IRST might have been handy in that situation.

Member for

18 years 7 months

Posts: 563

Wow! Thanks for your posts @Julious@ thet are quite interesting. :)

E-pole and F-pole is the best position that the missile can bite the bogey.Especially the E-pole is also known as the 'No Escape Zone' because the motion(kinetic energy) of the missile is so great the target cannot dodge the missile

Hey! I hadn't heard those terms before, and I need further explanation: where is the attacking aircraft is sopposed to place herself in order to be in "E-Pole" or "F-Pole" position ? :confused:

This lead us to a next question: what are usually the best position(s) to fire a BVR missile from ? Low ? High ? In face to face ? In Pursuit ?
And how do the circumstances (altitude, target maneuvers and speed, incoming or escaping trajectory... etc) modify the missile's range and accuracy ?

BVR is actually postion fighting. The guy who occupate the best position first sweeps out the foe. Even if the target tries or have dodged the misslie, it had already exhausted kinetic energy and is likely to blast on the second attack. [...]Is is clear that the guy with longer F-pole and wider weapon envelope is likely to win.

Wow! That's clearer for me! Thanks!
________
HAWAII DISPENSARIES

Member for

18 years 6 months

Posts: 13

Glad I cound help. Merlock

The E-pole postion is CLASSIFIED. Only the pilots and the manufactors of the AAM know the exact position. Although it can be estimated that the E-pole may be the position when the missile's loading factor is the greatest. When a plane try to dodge a missile or trying to escape the boresight of a foe, it has to turn almost with the greatest loading Factor, 9Gs(Some theories insist that the plane and the pilot can pull 13Gs but that will kill the pilot in real combat)

If an old fashion version of Sidewinders bites the E-pole and rushs with over 25G the pilot has to pull 9Gs in order to evade the misslie.(That is because of the 3 multiple G rule. In order to splash a 9G evading foe the missle has to maneuver 27Gs the least.) The new missiles like AIM-9X manuvers about 100Gs which means the pilot has to at least manuever over 33G~34G in order to evade it) Impossible. :dev2: It's hard for the pilot to breathe even in 5Gs.(If Black outs or Red outs occur the situation is even worse)

The more the missiles are advanced the easier it may be to bite the E-pole. :) And of course foxing the misslies at high altitude is better than foxing it at low altitude. If you drop a coin on the top of the Sears the kinetic energy of the coin will keep incresing, and a can kill a person in the end. Missiles fired from high altitudes are definitely have more kenitic E, so the ranges of the missiles can expand.(That's why the climbing ratio of fighters is IMPORTANT)

Air to Air combat is Energy fighting. And all planes(from the biplanes to F-22s) are in the palm of Sir Newton. :D

Member for

19 years 11 months

Posts: 451

RE: [Tactics] How is a BVR Air-to-Air combat actually handled ?

> Merlock
> I wonder how exactly is handled a BVR Air-to-Air combat , I suspect it's far more complex
> than simply "close-in, aim, shoot!"
At first I didn't think the F-14A versus the MiG.-23 was a good match since the MiG.-23 is of the F-4 Phantom's generation -the third while the F-14A was the first of the fourth generation aircraft. It is a good example of how a BVR "degenerated" into a WVR fight. Not because of ROE's but, the caution both sides took. Tactics and technology have changed and there are good tactics that prevent a series of small fights degenerating down to a furball. During the PGW#1, there was only one dogfight where the aircraft got to the merge! Most kills occurred using BVR weapons in the WVR envirement.
Once the aircraft crossed within thirty miles of each other, all four aircraft knew the rules of engagement had been crossed, "fight's on!".

The only "real" even match in dogfighting will occur when both sides have the same equipment, such as Greek Air Force versus Turkish Air Forces using F-16's or Russian versus Moldovan Air Forces using MiG.-29C's (06/23/92).

One thing to keep in mind is, tactics are not universal. Tactics are ususally based upon what the air services involved have and don't have. Example, the Soviet Union had quanity while the USA had a technical advantage. So the Soviet Union would like aerial battles to be a few very large furballs. The reason is in a furball, the unseen shooter makes 80% of the kills. Russia also prefer "team tactics" over individual tactics.

The USA/NATO having a qualitive advantage prefers many small fights (8V8 or less) where the unseen shooter is not a problem or large component in the kill ratio.

I posted the URL for the F-16C that killed the MiG.-25 on "F-16.net", the first kill of a "Slammer Missile!" This is classic case dissimilar aerial combat.
URL;
http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-3555-postdays-0-postorder-asc-start-0.html

> @Julious@
> absolute advantage spotting the foe with it's AN/APG-77 radar(Rmax 220km in Vs mode)
Actually, the maximum range of the AN/APG-77 radar is 192Km and there is serious talk about reducing the range even more down to 172Km (108Mi). This will allow a significant reduction in broadcast power which means the likelyhood of "thinking" the signal from the APG-77 is just background noise is far greater!

> it starts to beam attack.
The beam maneuver can't be done just anyplace! Each type of radar has its vulnerabilities that are a function of frequency and distance. You have to have an idea as to the type of radar you are facing so you can perform the beam maneuver at the proper time and remain undetected.

To me the best example of BVR combat is the aerial combat (Israeli version) which occurred along the BVR/WVR boundary.
The F-15A's were top cover, due to their superior radar its ability to look down, while the F-16's dealt with the majority of the Syrian fighters (F-15 -31 kills, F-16 -45 kills, Kfir -4). The IDF/AF requires visual ID before firing on any aircraft in the moderate attitudes.

USAF "Air Intelligence" discovered that a very high speed, head-on approach caused an "inter-face" problem between the fire control system and the missile. This is why the US aircraft charge head-on at Russian/Soviet aircraft! This problem appears to exist with the AA-10 Alamo and AA-12 Adder!

The best book I know of on this topic is, "Fighter Combat" by Robert L Shaw. While it has 150 diagrams and pictures over the 428 pages. This book is a text book type referrence book and, you will not read it like a novel.
It starts with BFM in 1V1 with similar aircraft. Later dissimilar aircraft and missile considerations. The missile considerations start with rear quarter then all aspect missiles. It is shown how being a "low wing loaded" aircraft versus a "high thrust to weight" aircraft should approach the same situation with different outlook and goals. It spends a lot of time on section and division tactics.
I purchased the book from the US Naval Institute Press (the same folks who first printed the "Hunt For Red October" and "Flight of The Intruder" in one year. Both books made the NY Times top ten books being sold for several weeks.) I would imagine that Amazon Books now carries the book.

This is a hobby of mine but, unfortunately the tactics are changing faster than my ability to understand what happened in a previous aerial encounters!
I have been fortunate in being able to find a couple of transcripts of dogfights and then some articles about what the aircrew did.

Adrian

Member for

18 years 7 months

Posts: 17

get a simulator and find out for yourself

Member for

18 years 7 months

Posts: 563

The best book I know of on this topic is, "Fighter Combat" by Robert L Shaw. While it has 150 diagrams and pictures over the 428 pages. This book is a text book type referrence book and, you will not read it like a novel.

Is that this book ?
http://www.amazon.com/gp/reader/0870210599/ref=sib_dp_pt/103-7474975-9627026#reader-link

If so, I think you just sold it to me. Thanks... :)
________
Arizona medical marijuana dispensaries

Member for

19 years 11 months

Posts: 451

RE: [Tactics] How is a BVR Air-to-Air combat actually handled ?

> Merlock
> Is that this book?
YESSSS, this is the book! What is nice is when you use it as a reference book, you can read about aerial combat that happened somewhere (like US Navy F-14's versus the Libyian MiG.-23's on 01/04/89), you can go to the book and from mass media accounts see the tactics as they are diagrammed in the book and have a complete picture of that aerial combat. On this particular dogfight, they played the complete transcript of the encounter on TV and I recorded it on my VCR. Then I made a transcript from the recording and then figured out from what was being said, the tactics used.

Gawd, inflation has really hit. I paid $15.95 (late 1980's) and now they want $31.96 for members ($39.96 for non-members). Amazon is cheaper!
http://www.usni.com/ _____________________ Main Site
http://www.usni.org/press/press.html _____ Press Site

On the Amazon Site you are able to read some twenty-one sample pages and you can see the level of knowledge required to read and understand. If the index does not get you salivating, nothing will.

If you want copies of the transcript and illustration of the 01/04/89 F-14 dogfight tactics, E-mail me (from my profile).

I will go back to the Forum on the Naval Institute!!

Good Luck and Enjoy -Adrian