Posted: 2/14/2015 8:35:29 PM EDT
|
This is pretty much exactly what it's like. Feels like being a contortionist under G. Enjoy.
Video won't embed due to website, but it's awesome |
|
You know, I don't remember how much they weigh. I'm not wearing a JHMCS right now in the capacity I'm flying and I can't wait to get back to using one. I found that the biggest problem with mine wasn't the overall weight, but the uneven distribution of the weight. For the first few times it would try to pull your dome forward and down until you got used to it. It also has to be fit so tight that it tears up the bridge of my nose worse than NVGs. Usually when I was flying a DBFM sortie I wouldn't wear it because it was a pain with the HVI cable limiting your nugget rotation ability.
Edit: Quoted:
DBFM is awesome because you're expected to lose Or reverse and go offensive!! |
|
Quoted:
Interesting video. I was surprised by how much maneuvering was done in a (mostly) horizontal plane. I think I saw a couple of split-S type pulls along with a couple of oblique turns. Was it scripted as such or did it just work out that way? If F-16s fly their BFM like ours, then yes it is a mostly horizontal fight. You will end up eating some altitude in order to maximize your performance, but to completely change the plane of the fight requires a very specific reason, especially as the defender. There are a few reasons I will go from horizontal to vertical, but if I am winning and the offender can't kill me, then I'm going to keep doing what I'm doing and not perhaps induce a BFM error. As for being scripted, that depends. If it's FTU BFM then it's pretty scripted just to show the student a picture. If it's ops BFM, then anything goes and he's probably just fighting the appropriate fight for the picture he's seeing. Either way it's an absolute blast, except I thought I threw my back out the other day mid-break turn. Edit: Grammar |
|
Quoted:
Wow, stunning. What a workout that must be. That's all I ever wanted to do as a kid. Reminds me how much I wanted (and still want) it. Time to grow up I guess.  There's still hope. Read Frank O'Brian's book "Every Man a Tiger". O'Brian was an AF pilot and brings the basics of 1v1 ACM to light aircraft and describes basic tactics and such. Once you've read/mastered that, pick up a copy of "Fighter Combat: Tactics and Maneuvering" by Robert Shaw. This is an amazing work of ACM and describes pretty much everything you need to know. Find a group that is into this in your area (they're around, but you need to ask) and have at it. There is a former F-16 guy and a former Navy F-4 TopGun graduate near us who have given us great info and training. Buy (or build) an aerobatic homebuilt - RVs work surprisingly well - and meet up with some mock ACM groups. This was our video from last fall; I'm flying the red & silver monoplane. I have never had so much fun in my life. 
|
| It appears from the video either they are flying canned scenarios, or they have forgotten vertical maneuvering. In the F-4 we had to do a lot of vertical stuff because it didn't turn that well. Are these F-16 guys being lulled into a false sense of security with pretty good horizontal turn capability. Is that why F-15 guys feel the F-16 is easy? |
|
Quoted:
In the F-4 we had to do a lot of vertical stuff because it didn't turn that well. Quoted:
In the F-4 we had to do a lot of vertical stuff because it didn't turn that well. HAD TO, is the operative statement here. The F-4 has a turn circle the size of Texas Quoted:
Is that why F-15 guys feel the F-16 is easy? Ha...that's funny. |
|
Pretty good video. However nothing compares to actually being there. I was lucky enough, not having been a pilot, to get a few "pit" rides in the 16 and 15 during my career. The F-15 guys will NOT allow you in a F-15C "Mission" sortie due to "Tactics" involved however it's easy to get on a "Qual" flight. I was able to be on a "Qual Check" out over the Gulf of Mexico flying out of Eglin. My pilot was administering a check ride to the pilot in the other Eagle. After some approaches to Tyndall we headed out over the Gulf. Proceeded with 3 engagements performing BFM. One starting from the offensive, one defensive and one neutral. Turning your head and looking around it's just as depicted in the video. After only 3 engagements I was amazed at how much fuel was burned.
One thing for sure it is very difficult to talk at 8 or 9 "gs" you are straining so hard. |
|
Quoted:
It appears from the video either they are flying canned scenarios, or they have forgotten vertical maneuvering. In the F-4 we had to do a lot of vertical stuff because it didn't turn that well. Are these F-16 guys being lulled into a false sense of security with pretty good horizontal turn capability. Is that why F-15 guys feel the F-16 is easy? My guess is that's it's canned - you'll still need vertical when the bandit (i.e. Mig-29 etc.) has turn capability approximately equal to your own. Then again, pure dogfighting is kind of like fencing - it's an art made obsolete, more or less, by technology. But if all you have left is a sword, it's still a good art to know... |
|
After Korea we somehow got the idea that henceforth and forever, air to air would be technology, I.e., missiles. Then we got into Viet Nam. How did that limitation work out. That is why the F-15 and successors have visibility, turn capability and a gun. Now the F-22 doesn't have a gun. Didn't anyone learn anything?
|
|
Quoted:
After Korea we somehow got the idea that henceforth and forever, air to air would be technology, I.e., missiles. Then we got into Viet Nam. How did that limitation work out. That is why the F-15 and successors have visibility, turn capability and a gun. Now the F-22 doesn't have a gun. Didn't anyone learn anything? ...and the kill ratios in Vietnam were horrible, until we learned to stop dogfighting. The F-22 has a gun. |
|
Quoted:
...and the kill ratios in Vietnam were horrible, until we learned to stop dogfighting. The F-22 has a gun. Quoted:
Quoted:
After Korea we somehow got the idea that henceforth and forever, air to air would be technology, I.e., missiles. Then we got into Viet Nam. How did that limitation work out. That is why the F-15 and successors have visibility, turn capability and a gun. Now the F-22 doesn't have a gun. Didn't anyone learn anything? ...and the kill ratios in Vietnam were horrible, until we learned to stop dogfighting. The F-22 has a gun. I believe you have it backwards. They may have been trying to dog fight, but too many of them didn't know how. Robin Olds took over his wing and cleaned up their act. It took others a bit longer. At least in the Navy and Marine Corps, the kill ratio of the Navy's last gunfighter, the F-8 was, as I recall 8-1. The F-4, before 1968 was between 2-1 and 4-1. The Navy had CAPT Ault look into it. The Ault Report resulted in the establishment of the Navy Fighter Weapons School, aka Top Gun. The guys trained in ACM went north in 1972 and had a 12-1 kill ratio in the F-4s. If the F-22 has an internal gun, I stand corrected. The F-35 does not. For the Air Force, the F-15 was the result of the experience of VN. It was and is a terrific fighter. Wait until the ROE requires VID, as it did during much of VN, or the system goes down. Good luck with the F-22, which is the fighter equivalent of a 747. |
|
Quoted:
I believe you have it backwards. They may have been trying to dog fight, but too many of them didn't know how. Robin Olds took over his wing and cleaned up their act. It took others a bit longer. At least in the Navy and Marine Corps, the kill ratio of the Navy's last gunfighter, the F-8 was, as I recall 8-1. The F-4, before 1968 was between 2-1 and 4-1. The Navy had CAPT Ault look into it. The Ault Report resulted in the establishment of the Navy Fighter Weapons School, aka Top Gun. The guys trained in ACM went north in 1972 and had a 12-1 kill ratio in the F-4s. If the F-22 has an internal gun, I stand corrected. The F-35 does not. For the Air Force, the F-15 was the result of the experience of VN. It was and is a terrific fighter. Wait until the ROE requires VID, as it did during much of VN, or the system goes down. Good luck with the F-22, which is the fighter equivalent of a 747. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
After Korea we somehow got the idea that henceforth and forever, air to air would be technology, I.e., missiles. Then we got into Viet Nam. How did that limitation work out. That is why the F-15 and successors have visibility, turn capability and a gun. Now the F-22 doesn't have a gun. Didn't anyone learn anything? ...and the kill ratios in Vietnam were horrible, until we learned to stop dogfighting. The F-22 has a gun. I believe you have it backwards. They may have been trying to dog fight, but too many of them didn't know how. Robin Olds took over his wing and cleaned up their act. It took others a bit longer. At least in the Navy and Marine Corps, the kill ratio of the Navy's last gunfighter, the F-8 was, as I recall 8-1. The F-4, before 1968 was between 2-1 and 4-1. The Navy had CAPT Ault look into it. The Ault Report resulted in the establishment of the Navy Fighter Weapons School, aka Top Gun. The guys trained in ACM went north in 1972 and had a 12-1 kill ratio in the F-4s. If the F-22 has an internal gun, I stand corrected. The F-35 does not. For the Air Force, the F-15 was the result of the experience of VN. It was and is a terrific fighter. Wait until the ROE requires VID, as it did during much of VN, or the system goes down. Good luck with the F-22, which is the fighter equivalent of a 747. The F-4's turn rate was shit. The North Vietnamese Mig-17s and Mig-19s could turn well inside it's circle and eat it alive. In fact, the Mig-19 could out accelerate an F-4 to a little past supersonic. Only when the Topgun guys started teaching how to use initial speed advantages, distance for missiles, and the vertical climb rate advantages did the kill ratios improve. The F-15 was designed to outclass the Mig-25. Which our analysts had vastly overestimated in regards to it's performance. Only with the defection of a Mig-25 to Japan was the "Super Mig" myth busted. |
|
Quoted:
If the F-22 has an internal gun, I stand corrected. The F-35 does not. Quoted:
If the F-22 has an internal gun, I stand corrected. The F-35 does not. ...the F-35 has a gun as well. Quoted:
Wait until the ROE requires VID, as it did during much of VN, or the system goes down. Good luck with the F-22, which is the fighter equivalent of a 747. The F-22 will do just fine. |
|
T Quoted:
I believe you have it backwards. They may have been trying to dog fight, but too many of them didn't know how. Robin Olds took over his wing and cleaned up their act. It took others a bit longer. At least in the Navy and Marine Corps, the kill ratio of the Navy's last gunfighter, the F-8 was, as I recall 8-1. The F-4, before 1968 was between 2-1 and 4-1. The Navy had CAPT Ault look into it. The Ault Report resulted in the establishment of the Navy Fighter Weapons School, aka Top Gun. The guys trained in ACM went north in 1972 and had a 12-1 kill ratio in the F-4s. If the F-22 has an internal gun, I stand corrected. The F-35 does not. For the Air Force, the F-15 was the result of the experience of VN. It was and is a terrific fighter. Wait until the ROE requires VID, as it did during much of VN, or the system goes down. Good luck with the F-22, which is the fighter equivalent of a 747. Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
After Korea we somehow got the idea that henceforth and forever, air to air would be technology, I.e., missiles. Then we got into Viet Nam. How did that limitation work out. That is why the F-15 and successors have visibility, turn capability and a gun. Now the F-22 doesn't have a gun. Didn't anyone learn anything? ...and the kill ratios in Vietnam were horrible, until we learned to stop dogfighting. The F-22 has a gun. I believe you have it backwards. They may have been trying to dog fight, but too many of them didn't know how. Robin Olds took over his wing and cleaned up their act. It took others a bit longer. At least in the Navy and Marine Corps, the kill ratio of the Navy's last gunfighter, the F-8 was, as I recall 8-1. The F-4, before 1968 was between 2-1 and 4-1. The Navy had CAPT Ault look into it. The Ault Report resulted in the establishment of the Navy Fighter Weapons School, aka Top Gun. The guys trained in ACM went north in 1972 and had a 12-1 kill ratio in the F-4s. If the F-22 has an internal gun, I stand corrected. The F-35 does not. For the Air Force, the F-15 was the result of the experience of VN. It was and is a terrific fighter. Wait until the ROE requires VID, as it did during much of VN, or the system goes down. Good luck with the F-22, which is the fighter equivalent of a 747. F-22 is the fighter equivalent of a 747? You on crack bro? |
|
Quoted:
If F-16s fly their BFM like ours, then yes it is a mostly horizontal fight. Quoted:
Quoted:
Interesting video. I was surprised by how much maneuvering was done in a (mostly) horizontal plane. I think I saw a couple of split-S type pulls along with a couple of oblique turns. Was it scripted as such or did it just work out that way? If F-16s fly their BFM like ours, then yes it is a mostly horizontal fight. Do you even out of plane bro? What do you fly? |
|
Quoted:
Based on the fact that he thought the F-22 and F-35 didn't have an internal gun...I would say yes. Nice...well played. Quoted:
Quoted:
F-22 is the fighter equivalent of a 747? You on crack bro? Based on the fact that he thought the F-22 and F-35 didn't have an internal gun...I would say yes. Quoted:
Do you even out of plane bro? Nice...well played. Not having a gun hardly means you're a 747 WVR. Anyways, all F-35A will have a gun... the fact that the B and C don't have an internal gun is a shame, yeah, but that doesn't mean they won't be extremely lethal WVR. |
|
Quoted:
T F-22 is the fighter equivalent of a 747? You on crack bro? Quoted:
T Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
After Korea we somehow got the idea that henceforth and forever, air to air would be technology, I.e., missiles. Then we got into Viet Nam. How did that limitation work out. That is why the F-15 and successors have visibility, turn capability and a gun. Now the F-22 doesn't have a gun. Didn't anyone learn anything? ...and the kill ratios in Vietnam were horrible, until we learned to stop dogfighting. The F-22 has a gun. I believe you have it backwards. They may have been trying to dog fight, but too many of them didn't know how. Robin Olds took over his wing and cleaned up their act. It took others a bit longer. At least in the Navy and Marine Corps, the kill ratio of the Navy's last gunfighter, the F-8 was, as I recall 8-1. The F-4, before 1968 was between 2-1 and 4-1. The Navy had CAPT Ault look into it. The Ault Report resulted in the establishment of the Navy Fighter Weapons School, aka Top Gun. The guys trained in ACM went north in 1972 and had a 12-1 kill ratio in the F-4s. If the F-22 has an internal gun, I stand corrected. The F-35 does not. For the Air Force, the F-15 was the result of the experience of VN. It was and is a terrific fighter. Wait until the ROE requires VID, as it did during much of VN, or the system goes down. Good luck with the F-22, which is the fighter equivalent of a 747. F-22 is the fighter equivalent of a 747? You on crack bro? The F-22 turns just fine. It is so big you will never get anyone to loose sight. |
|
Quoted:
Not having a gun hardly means you're a 747 WVR. Anyways, all F-35A will have a gun... the fact that the B and C don't have an internal gun is a shame, yeah, but that doesn't mean they won't be extremely lethal WVR. Quoted:
Not having a gun hardly means you're a 747 WVR. Anyways, all F-35A will have a gun... the fact that the B and C don't have an internal gun is a shame, yeah, but that doesn't mean they won't be extremely lethal WVR. I was agreeing with you. My yes response was to your comment about him doing crack. Quoted:
The F-22 turns just fine. It is so big you will never get anyone to loose sight. Great...so the enemy will be tally when they're getting the shit gunned out of them. |
|
Quoted:
I was agreeing with you. My yes response was to your comment about him doing crack. Quoted:
Quoted:
Not having a gun hardly means you're a 747 WVR. Anyways, all F-35A will have a gun... the fact that the B and C don't have an internal gun is a shame, yeah, but that doesn't mean they won't be extremely lethal WVR. I was agreeing with you. My yes response was to your comment about him doing crack. Rog |
|
Quoted:
Do you even out of plane bro? Quoted:
Do you even out of plane bro? Haha! Well done good sir <golf clap>. Like I mentioned there are certain times will I will use the vertical exclusively (talking DBFM in particular since that's what the video is), but don't really feel the need to get into an in-depth discussion on that. Originally Poted by ClemY:
The F-22 turns just fine. It is so big you will never get anyone to loose sight. Have you ever been tally a Raptor? I feel like this thread is going off track, and potentially into an area where we don't want it to (i.e. internet d!ck measuring contest)... that being said, I'm really REALLY interested in seeing what the next gold nugget of SA is going to be. |
|
Quoted:
I was agreeing with you. My yes response was to your comment about him doing crack. Great...so the enemy will be tally when they're getting the shit gunned out of them. Quoted:
Quoted:
Not having a gun hardly means you're a 747 WVR. Anyways, all F-35A will have a gun... the fact that the B and C don't have an internal gun is a shame, yeah, but that doesn't mean they won't be extremely lethal WVR. I was agreeing with you. My yes response was to your comment about him doing crack. Quoted:
The F-22 turns just fine. It is so big you will never get anyone to loose sight. Great...so the enemy will be tally when they're getting the shit gunned out of them. Since this is not a solitary game, everyone else in their F-5 size a/c will also see you for many miles. |