Aim-9 only air superiority/cap realistic?
-
In an 80s scenario where the f-16 has no bvr capabilities is it realistic to fly barcap and or fighter sweeps or would thos be exclusively the territory of f-15s with the viper only being used as a strike platform and a2a as a secondary priority.
If a heater only f-16 is realistic to fly a2a sorties how would one get around the range limitation in the most practical way
-
In an 80s scenario where the f-16 has no bvr capabilities is it realistic to fly barcap and or fighter sweeps or would thos be exclusively the territory of f-15s with the viper only being used as a strike platform and a2a as a secondary priority.
If a heater only f-16 is realistic to fly a2a sorties how would one get around the range limitation in the most practical way
First out of mind answer, Ambushcap.
-
F-16A was still primary air for most countries. Israeli F-16s (82) claimed more than the F-15s.
Pakistani F-16s also flew caps near the Astan border during Soviet occupation - and some of the US F-16s flew CAPs before the Storm fully kicked off and in 1991.
To summarise - intelligent use of better EW capabilities gci / awacs gave them a big advantage despite no bvr capability or Interogator.
-
So the standard approach would be radar off following awacs or gci and try to maneuver around the enemy and get to his blind spots or force him into a wvr engagement? How do you approach that if the enemies are less easily isolated and flanked? Approach from below I’d presume?
-
Ambushcap are by essence approach from below.
-
Wouldn’t ambushcap by its nature be almost exclusively defensive? What is a good way to perform a fighter sweep with such limitations since depending on opponent you cannot necessarily face them head to head. Approaching from low alt would seem to be too dangerous because of the risk of Sam’s and manpads
-
This was suitable for CAP, yes.
-
Going to be much easier with teamwork/mutual support. If you can use a couple elements, have them attack from multiple axes, force the opponents to commit to one threat who drag, while the second element press. In this fashion, you can defend when locked, and press otherwise. At some point, depending how rapidly the enemy react to having multiple threats, you will get aircraft into visual range.
Note that if the enemy have launch and leave capability, this becomes much more hazardous.
-
In an 80s scenario where the f-16 has no bvr capabilities is it realistic to fly barcap and or fighter sweeps or would thos be exclusively the territory of f-15s with the viper only being used as a strike platform and a2a as a secondary priority.
If a heater only f-16 is realistic to fly a2a sorties how would one get around the range limitation in the most practical way
The answer to that question really depends on the operator and context. Assuming an early 1980s Cold War scenario, the USAF in PACAF or Europe (USAFE) had in-theater F-15A and F-4E units available to provide BVR-capable CAP.
However, NATO countries such as the Netherlands, Denmark, Norway and Belgium only had F-16As available and used AIM-9 equipped Vipers for QRA and CAP missions as well, so yes it certainly would have been realistic in that scenario.
In the early years of NATO F-16A operations, they would have operated alongside their aging F-104G, J-35, NF-5A and Mirage 5 counterparts and as much as I dearly love any of these classics, I would definitely have preferred to fly the F-16A into combat!
-
F-16A was still primary air for most countries. Israeli F-16s (82) claimed more than the F-15s.
Pakistani F-16s also flew caps near the Astan border during Soviet occupation - and some of the US F-16s flew CAPs before the Storm fully kicked off and in 1991.
To summarise - intelligent use of better EW capabilities gci / awacs gave them a big advantage despite no bvr capability or Interogator.
Yes because were more F-16 available than F-15.
Also it is very interesting the performance of F-15A vs B.
From 25 F-15s only 2 were B and the other 23 were A variant. From 31 F-15 kills 7 were achieved by F-15B (22%) while only 7% of the fleet were two seater. It is very hard to imagine big difference in sortie rate of different airframes but maybe the impact of WSO was bigger that most of ppl think. The only three kill sortie was achieved by F-15B.
-
The answer to that question really depends on the operator and context.
Just looking back to a post by one of the vets that used to frequent combatace who had been a USAF Block 15 driver to 1989:
…as a guy that flew A model Vipers in the 80s I have a different POV than your assertion the F-16 was a secondary fighter. I was also what was called an Electronic Combat Pilot (poor man’s EWO) in my sqdn. There was nothing in our mind set or training about waiting for the Eagles to clear the skies of bad guys for us. Oh, indeed that would be the preferred option. But we planned/trained to be self sufficient.
Interesting comment because I doubt A-A training was more than 50% although suspect you wouldn’t have had a choice in that scenario even if on a Ground to Air Mission.
There were clearly ways around the primitive radars and AIM-7s on the F-4/F-15 back then even in a not advised head on joust and they did develop various tactics for this slight problem.
For BVR detecting aircraft especially on the deck was likely a major problem for some of the radar sets in the 80s - let alone identifying it in a way to avoid fratricide. Also an interesting example of how effective ECM might have been - the USN getting close in the many Libyan encounters of the mid 80s.