Air Combat Maneuvering 2 vs 2 Tournament (Heaters Aim-9P)
-
The following Teams are participating in the 2 v 2 Fall Leagues
East Dragons (B3RNO & Slide)
DEULALITY (AS & 104th Stuge)
Pukin Dogs (Squidbait & unleashedcode)
The Dirty Fingernails (Centermass & Gus)
Desert Eagles (SOF & Nitzane)
Deuces Wild (Jaws & SW)
Cazadores (Poison & Tirador)
The Haters (Zordon & Hollywoodvillan)ACM 2vs2 Heaters Tournament Duelality vs East_Dragons (Week 1)
sorry for the bad voice quality…Links to event sites:
http://falcon-online.org/forum/index.php?board=69.0
https://scheduler.leaguelobster.com/de/259932/falcon-online-2-v-2/fall-2017/#PS: I opened a new thread here as noone did so far. Please to the other teams add your videos (if you make them) below! S!
-
Someone asked an interesting question… under our 2v2 match video. He asked: “Why are you flying at 700 kts all the time? Just wondering….”
A good question!As far as i am able to explain it, it is because, ACM is about:
-
Spacial geometry, meaning tactical “isolation” or “trapping” of one bandit into a 2v1 situation and the denial for the 2nd bandit to support within his WEZ for time being (a BVR mindset rather than a BFM mindset)
-
Weapon engagement zones. Due to those the flights are more expanded in speed and space (turning-rooms))
-
CLOSURE (“access time” for support-ability and effective weapons ranges rear aspect). Also entry and weapons geometry aswell, if fired.
-
“Flight Patch Deconfliction”, meaning never getting commited in a fight ( i.e 2-cricles or scissors) as long there is a 2nd threat-axis (bandit with missiles) out there.
Example, 4 bandits fighting in close proximity (airspace) WITH missiles = a mess = hard to maintain SA = hard to execute “mutal support contract” = death -
ACM is where the term “speed is life” comes from. Not from BFM (1v1 dogfights)
That´s why.
-
-
When combined situational awareness becomes faster, staying supersonic most of the time will no longer be required unless chasing down the target, or because the bandit’s are approaching supersonic.
Most of the time supersonic ACM engages occur is because the combined situational awareness of the element is too low, and builds too slowly. The answer is to stay as fast as possible to allow a slower SA building element to try and figure out how to isolate a bandit. When an element builds SA slowly, speed compensates for that. It buys safety and time while the element tries to create tactical solutions.
Speed is not only for life, but also a “cushion for sloppiness” -anonymous
Tactical intercepts of a multitude of bandit formations is quite difficult and obviously requires much practice and study, being one of the reasons I was never proficient with ACM.
-
That was me asking the question.
Disclaimer: by no means am I an expert, so the old topgear motto very much applies here in my post: ambitious but rubbish.But just some of my observations from the video and the acmi. I’ll use the term fighters for the focus F-16’s in the video and bandits for the guys they are fighting.
-
First in every fight in the video both fighters are running out of gas in a matter of minutes. This seems rather inefficient.
-
Speed is life, that is very true. But what is meant by that, I believe, is that you stay around corner/maneuvering speed (perhaps slightly above to hold some energy in reserve) until you have a decisive advantage and can pull for a valid shot. If you stay at 700 kts, your turn circle becomes far too big. This was pointed out recently in another dogfighting thread by a guy with a fighter background (I think). He was commenting on some video’s and mentioned that people were too fast and would be easily outturned by guys that were turning at corner speed. However, I cannot find the thread at the moment, was it deleted?
Have a look at this video of 2 F-16N’s merging with F-14’s at topgun. They enter the fight around 450 kts (the top end of the cornering plateau for the F-16) and at no time are they at 700 kts:
-
BFM is the basis for ACM. The F-16 v5 manual explains in the 2v1 section “The engaged fighter needs to perform his best one versus one BFM”, so just because a fight is ACM, doesn’t mean that BFM isn’t valid anymore.
-
You mention maintaining SA, but at the merge of the first fight both fighters are seperated by 10 miles. There’s no way the fighters can keep visual contact when they are seperated by that much distance. As it says in the F-16 vol5 “the supporting fighter must maintain visual contact”. Throughout the video both fighters lose SA several times.
-
You mention you don’t want to end up in a turning fight as long as there is a 2nd bandit around. Fair enough, but in several fights I see the bandit(s) turn right on the fighter’s 6 o’clock after the merge and the wingman is far away and in no position to support the lead fighter.
Again, I’m not claiming to be an expert. These are just some observations I made. I don’t mean to claim they are valid, just my thoughts. It’s always interesting to see different approaches in the way people fly and watch their video’s and acmi’s. And 2v2 is very difficult and very hard to maintain SA. That is very true.
Cheers!
-
-
@A.S:
Someone asked an interesting question… under our 2v2 match video. He asked: “Why are you flying at 700 kts all the time? Just wondering….”
A good question!As far as i am able to explain it, it is because, ACM is about:
-
Spacial geometry, meaning tactical “isolation” or “trapping” of one bandit into a 2v1 situation and the denial for the 2nd bandit to support within his WEZ for time being (a BVR mindset rather than a BFM mindset)
-
Weapon engagement zones. Due to those the flights are more expanded in speed and space (turning-rooms))
-
CLOSURE (“access time” for support-ability and effective weapons ranges rear aspect). Also entry and weapons geometry aswell, if fired.
-
“Flight Patch Deconfliction”, meaning never getting commited in a fight ( i.e 2-cricles or scissors) as long there is a 2nd threat-axis (bandit with missiles) out there.
Example, 4 bandits fighting in close proximity (airspace) WITH missiles = a mess = hard to maintain SA = hard to execute “mutal support contract” = death -
ACM is where the term “speed is life” comes from. Not from BFM (1v1 dogfights)
That´s why.
Okay, I really wish I was in this tournament now……
You’re right on the first point to a degree, but not at the ranges that are shown in the vid. The fight is much closer and much quicker. The whole point is the minimize your TTK to the greatest extent possible, so yes some of those tactics include presenting a lethal choice for the bandit, where either option he picks is going to leave him with an ever dwindling survival time, provided your wingman is flying rock solid mutual support.
WEZ I would say is not the deciding factor in airspeed. You fly the same BFM principles during 1v1, so airspeeds wont change much, you still stick to the game plan. The piece that is added on top is the contracts of the engaged, supporting or defensive fighter. In order for the SF to effectivley provide mutual support to the EF, he must be in general not much further than about 3 miles. Within this bubble, the SF is actually the most busy, because not only does he have to maintain visual at all times, but also attempt to gain tally to look for opportunities for a role change (entry) or a shot of opportunity (SOO). On top of that he’s also scanning the airspace around the fight for pop-up threats, fuel status, fight progression, and if need be is the one who directs the bugout, since he has the greatest SA.
Keeping 700 knots for closure also isn’t necessary if the EF is effectively flying offensive BFM with the SF ready for a role change or SOO. You DO in fact want to get into a 2v1 turning fight with the bandit, as this sets up your SF for that entry call or SOO, without the EF getting anchored with the bandit, you will continue to have high speed, high aspect merges that take up more time and fuel than just getting settled with him in the first place so that either YOU fly the best offensive BFM with a very short TTK, or your SF gets it done even faster with an SOO or entry.
Here’s a few examples I posted on another thread and how quickly you can get a kill using ACM tactics to their maximum. These are actual images of ACM training from our VFW, with 2v1 FvF. You can see very clearly the lethal option presented to the bandit, with me as the EF flying my best BFM while the SF easily skates in on the six o’ clock for a fast and easy kill. As you can see from the time stamps, these tactics produced on a live human target a 17 second time to kill [04:14:35 - 04:14:18]
I’d also like to hit on that flight path deconfliction does not refer to the fighters and the bandits, in fact you don’t want to deconflict flight paths with a bandit, you actually want to get right on with his What flight path deconfliction refers to is the contract of who deconflicts from who during ACM. Really a simple break down, the SF will deconflict from the EF and DF (if one exists), the EF will deconflict from the DF (if one exists), and the DF has no deconfliction responsibility, his only job is to fly the best defensive BFM, increasing survival time as long as possible to either get the fight to neutral, to an offensive status or give enough time for an EF or SF to make a kill and save your tail.
Of course speed is life, but with too much speed you’ll have a hard time completing all of the things I have outlined here.
-
-
and figure out how to isolate a bandit.
Exactly that includes the answer and the problematic aswell, and that is being “how much time do you have, until second (isolated) bandit is close-by to support again?”
In order to solve this spacial “isolation” one must consider the “support access time/range” of a 2nd threat axis (his max. speed or should i better say “closure-ability”) after being “slung out” AND the “weapons reach” (WEZ) aswell - considering weapons used. The fight expands spacially from guns, short range missiles to long range missiles - in THAT order.
Basic Employement Manual F-16C Volume 5.
4.7 Air Combat Maneuvers. ACM involves coordinated maneuvering between two or more
fighters employing basic fighter maneuver (BFM) to kill, defend, or separate from bandits. The
priorities for an element as they enter a merge should be (1) Survival, (2) Lethality, and (3) Mutual
Support.In THAT order.
Golden Rules of ACM (only 2 of the “no no´s”, but in context to the discussed)
Extract of non-public “DFY Manual” as addition to usual published ACM based documents.
-
NEVER get fully committed into a situation with one bandit (slow and low 2-cricles or scissors i.e) where a safe exist out of bandits WEZ is not possible - AS LONG there is a 2nd threat-axis (or bandit) out there. Reason being is, the support fighter might not be able to chase that second bandit down and splash him BEFORE he reaches the committed (engaged) wingman and shoots him down in a pass with missiles instead.
-
NEVER create flight-situations, in which all bandits and fighters are in close proximity (airspace), because the fast flow of the situation in addition with horizontal and vertical displacements complicate the situational awarness delivery and rapid SWITCHES are uncontrolable. The mutual support contract will and can not work geometrically IN TIME - again considering missiles used.
ACM is no subject to “preference” or “sloppiness”… it is purely a matter of geometrical mathematics following the priorities.
-
-
That was me asking the question.
- First in every fight in the video both fighters are running out of gas in a matter of minutes. This seems rather inefficient.
That is indeed a problem to deal with, but is primarily based on the fact, that we use the dogfight-module for this “warm-up” ACM tournament for time being.
Later we might use something similar like this here: https://www.benchmarksims.org/forum/showthread.php?31080-Aerial-Combat-Tournament-League-TEs which creates a
much more realistic scenario, including station-time, time over target and RTB - and 2 bags of fuel.You have two concepts working against eachother here - namely
1) Kill one bandit as soon as possible !
vs
2) Don´t loose any airframe as long as possible! Once a team looses the first airframe, the game is pretty much over for them (2v1)
Remember, bandits will try to do their best aswell. Survivability is paramount.
Have a look at this video of 2 F-16N’s merging with F-14’s at topgun. They enter the fight around 450 kts (the top end of the cornering plateau for the F-16) and at no time are they at 700 kts:
Yes, but please do not confuse pre-planed, specifically pre-set trainings hops with real war situations.
- BFM is the basis for ACM. The F-16 v5 manual explains in the 2v1 section “The engaged fighter needs to perform his best one versus one BFM”, so just because a fight is ACM, doesn’t mean that BFM isn’t valid anymore.
ONCE it comes down to a 2v1 situation (not 2v2 anymore) some principles change - correct.
- You mention maintaining SA, but at the merge of the first fight both fighters are seperated by 10 miles. There’s no way the fighters can keep visual contact when they are seperated by that much distance.
Visual is not your only SA reference !! VERY important. How do you think, BVR SA is built up and delivered? Descriptive COMS and (if available) instruments assistance.
If you spotted mistakes in our flying, we really appriciate that and will reconsider. But just to let you know, that was only our 3rd time flying vs humans (good pilots too) and we are no where close to being “perfect” yet.
-
@A.S:
Yes, but please do not confuse pre-planed, specifically pre-set trainings hops with real war situations.
No way bro… train like you fight… they may be canned setups for the start of the fight, but they simulate combat completely. The only difference is you’re limited in your merge distance to 500 ft for safety, shot parameters are very defined to make the training valid, ect otherwise it’s pretty much full speed and what you can expect to see in the real thing.
-
Okay, I really wish I was in this tournament now……
You’re right on the first point to a degree,…
3 things only
- CLOSURE
- WEAPONS REACH (range)
- 2v1 is not 2v2 (your pics)
think…
reading and replicating (& quoting) books dogmatically - and - being able to understand, think further AND APPLYING it in a very dynamic environment … not the same thing at all.
-
No way bro… train like you fight… they may be canned setups for the start of the fight, but they simulate combat completely. The only difference is you’re limited in your merge distance to 500 ft for safety, shot parameters are very defined to make the training valid, ect otherwise it’s pretty much full speed and what you can expect to see in the real thing.
Hm. Well.
Only one way. Find a wingman, train and participate in next one.
Eager to see and to learn - anytime.
As i said before … we are no where close to being “perfect” yet. The better the opponents, the better our reference and learning-curve.
-
I’d love to, I wanted to get in on this one, but we have been flying 4 times a week at the VFW, so it has been a lot, but I’ll try and make the next one in 8 weeks or so with a wingman. Wish there was a late entrant option on this one…
I also want to dull this a little bit by saying what you are getting at is not incorrect in and of itself, but I think you’re over emphasizing some variables at the expense of some more important ones like placing the SF where he needs to be to help you minimize the TTK, getting a bandit to commit to you so you can get that fast TTK with your the EF/SF roles and contracts. Not saying don’t pay attention to the other guy’s SF who may have a WEZ and SOO on you, but at the same time you’re committed in an ACM fight with the adversary, it’s war, you’re going to have to break the egg to make that omlette, you gotta get in there and tussle with em hoss
Faster you kill the first guy, the faster the second guy dies. If you can get it 30 seconds or less with your SF after the merge, then you wont have to focus so much on survival, just lethality and mutual support.
@A.S:
reading and replicating (& quoting) books dogmatically - and - being able to understand, think further AND APPLYING it in a very dynamic environment … not the same thing at all.
Yeah, great stuff, but I already showed you we are applying it with the ACMI screenshot there…… thought you saw that…
-
This post is deleted! -
Yeah i saw that Like it.
We are nowhere close “perfect” yet and could use additional trainings-partners (also outside of the tournament ofc).
In our video… the coms sounds nowhere near professional :nosep: haha … but trust me… we know exactly what we are doing and we know how to get out of “troublesome situations” or “reverse them” to our favour (as the acmi tape shows).So far we nailed down:
- COMS (in our own humble way, because “we don´t discuss it out” …“one word only” can imply role-changes and responsibilities automatically i.e). Ofc we use descriptive and directive coms too.
- ROLES and RESPONSIBILITIES
- GENERAL GOALS and TACTICAL PRINCIPLES
- THE NEVER DOs.
More advanced post- and pre-merge tactics are only on paper at this moment (whiteboard) but will come later. For us it was important to secure the basics first.
PS:
Good Bandits “never do what you want them to do”… the flow in 2v2 is always dynamic and new situations are created, which have to be recognized and solved. You can only do this, if yourself have tactical ! (ways to exploit bandits intentions) and mutual support principles.
-
@A.S:
PS. 2v1 is not 2v2 (your pics)
Come on bro, I thought we were cooling this pot off :lol:
The basics are still the same… the difference in 2v2 is that the SF may have to come off you to go deal with the other guy if he poses an immediate threat (split contracts), but otherwise he will support you in the same way for as long as he can or until the bandit is dead. So what I was showing there was that the execution and killing is all the same, he gets a SOO or the EF kills, then in the 2v2 case they immediately flow to the second guy as an element to go give him the same treatment.
So the added dynamic really in 2v2 is: will the SF be forced to split from his EF to go fight the other bandit or can they minimize their TTK on the first guy, so they can get the fight to 2v1 ASAP.
-
So what I was showing there was that the execution and killing is all the same, he gets a SOO or the EF kills, then in the 2v2 case they immediately flow to the second guy as an element to go give him the same treatment.
That is an idealistic case, but as my mother used to say “son, your calculations at home dont work on the streets”
Thank you for your offer (really mean it). We are really looking forward for the training hops with you guys.
-
Speed is not only for life, but also a “cushion for sloppiness” -anonymous
btw. “Speed is the cushion of sloppiness.” is from Commander William P. ‘Willie’ Driscoll, USNR.
but the man to his side (left), said something interesting too
“Nothing is true in tactics.” – Commander Randy ‘Duke’ Cunningham, USN. “What” and “Why” was this wise man saying this?
Tactics can change and WILL always change due to the dynamic nature of combat. Thus “tactics” or an “intial gameplan” is “not true either”.
Other things instead - which i pointed towards earlier - are “true” and if people believe, we just “fly around” at supersonic speeds, and somehow magically get to shoot down bandits and get even out of troublesome situations… (i.e loosing SA or being both defensive at the same time) without loosing a single airframe to enemy fire, then those who “think” this way, haven´t watched the video or the tape with the attention or openeness they should have. Better for us i presume. -
He’s just talking about when a flight’s SA drops things “go to hell in a hand basket rather quickly”.
There’s a proper intercept for all different types of bandit compositions and formations.
The difficult part is having the knowledge, SA, and proficiency to execute the best way forward when hostilities begin.
Not easy at all, as we’ve been able to see from lots of ACM footage out there.
-
I think Redshift has already explained a lot in his excellent posts in this thread, but here’s my 2 cents.
@A.S:
Other things instead - which i pointed towards earlier - are “true” and if people believe, we just “fly around” at supersonic speeds, and somehow magically get to shoot down bandits and get even out of troublesome situations… (i.e loosing SA or being both defensive at the same time) without loosing a single airframe to enemy fire, then those who “think” this way, haven´t watched the video or the tape with the attention or openeness they should have. Better for us i presume.
You guys did shoot down the bandits and got out of situations, but IMHO, part of the reason for that was because the bandits were flying at the same speeds you were. If you were facing bandits that flew at corner speeds, they may have been able to turn inside your turn circle more easily and get a valid shot. It would’ve been interesting to see how it would turn out then. If instead of F-16’s you’d be fighting a jet with longer legs, they’d simply run you dry.
Anyway, I didn’t say you guys “just fly around”. I didn’t mean to attack your flying, so I hope you don’t take it as such. I just questioned some things that I thought could be done more efficiently. Like I said, I don’t claim that my points are more valid. Just wanted to give some pointers that I thought maybe can help.
You mentioned that you only just started with 2v2 and just practising, so it makes sense that it’s not perfect yet. Also there are things that you guys did right too as you addressed in your posts and I agree with that.
Visual is not your only SA reference !! VERY important. How do you think, BVR SA is built up and delivered? Descriptive COMS and (if available) instruments assistance.
True, but you’re not going to be able to see if a threat pops up behind your wingman, because he’s out of visual range.
Yes, but please do not confuse pre-planed, specifically pre-set trainings hops with real war situations.
Like Redshift said, you train like you fight. You don’t do things completely different all of a sudden because it’s a scripted training setup.
- Kill one bandit as soon as possible !
vs
- Don´t loose any airframe as long as possible! Once a team looses the first airframe, the game is pretty much over for them (2v1)
Willie Driscoll also said (like Redshift said in his post), “get the killing over with quickly”. Of course you want to prevent that you lose an airframe. But when you stay in a fight longer, the odds also turn against you. IE, there’s a risk that other bandits join the fight. Studies show that if a fight lasts longer than 60 seconds the odds actually turn against you, so you want to kill the bandits as quickly as possible. Another quote from Willie Driscoll is that often the first turn in a fight is decisive, so you better make that first turn a good one.
Randy Cunningham’s fights have been analysed in many books and documentaries, so a lot of information can be found on those. Here’s an image showing one of Cunningham’s fights:
https://media.sandiegoreader.com/img/photos/2017/03/29/cunningham-mig-dogfight.pngAs you can see he enters a turning fight with the Mig and speeds are listed throughout the fight.
-
I’ve had to significantly tone down my killer instinct to adopt these 2v2 tactics. I’m all for wasting a bandit within 10 secs of the merge… that is my basic “style”. But as it turns out, a maximum-aggression-level 2v2 gets messy really fast. And it turns out it is possible to solve this problem in other ways than maximizing aggression and killing one bandit ASAP… at least in this scenario where you only have gun and 2 aim-9ps, which means you are relatively protected during a high speed high aspect merge
-
If you were facing bandits that flew at corner speeds, they may have been able to turn inside your turn circle more easily and get a valid shot.
Consider time of turn, closure after that angles gain, flight path seperation at the merge and “rear aspect range” at a high speeds target of the Aim-9P
You mentioned that you only just started with 2v2 and just practising, so it makes sense that it’s not perfect yet.
Stuge and i - as team - yes. We are fresh as such.
Nevertheless Stuge himself is top-notch BFMer in BMS and unmatched multiple tournament winner in BFM (jets and ww2) in DCS. So he knows how to deal with single or multiple threats on his own. Just as team we need(ed) to find a common “frequency”.
Me, well… man no shall speak about himself, but let me just scratch it; ACM is no “new lands” for me at all. Two times Fortis European Champions ACM winning Squadron - and alot 2v2 in IL-2 in past. How does that compare with jets… some principles do very much.True, but you’re not going to be able to see if a threat pops up behind your wingman, because he’s out of visual range.
We “dont care”, if bandit is out of visual range as long he is in an airspace “we put him to” (left behind), and we know where he “will be” later (You can briefly hear it in the video as “Where is the other bandit?”…**** him for now…he is out"). I understand this sounds confusing, but as in BVR, not everything relies or depends on visual contact. Pilots who have the “visual” as main (or only reference) have a “weak link”, or are struggling to fly over “difficult terrain clutter”.
“Visual SA” and “spacial SA” is not necessarily the same thing. The latter comes with expirience. Imagine a “tacview running in your head” using all the sensors (self and jet AND coms) in order to construct the “bigger picture”. That is quiet difficult with “4 pigs on steroids wrestling in a tiny mud-hole”.Like Redshift said, you train like you fight. You don’t do things completely different all of a sudden because it’s a scripted training setup.
Partially true. Trainings are very good to learn and understand basics principles and concepts or(and) to test certain things like effective weapons deployment i.e, but real human fights are a little bit more “spiced up” and a different “animal”. Good bandits dont do things as studied or as expected or as planed.
Studies show that if a fight lasts longer than 60 seconds the odds actually turn against you, so you want to kill the bandits as quickly as possible
Demonstrate that versus available 2v2 teams without getting killed in that process. I would be glad to see how that works - so easily.
Randy Cunningham’s fights have been analysed in many books and documentaries, so a lot of information can be found on those. Here’s an image showing one of Cunningham’s fights:
https://media.sandiegoreader.com/img…g-dogfight.pngAt times i am a “paper tactician” myself too, but only if i can refer to actual situations and dynamics in flights.
Theory alone is as bad as “instinct” or “intuition” alone. Both must work in unity and in a fast flow.Let us consider everyone is learning by the same “books” and exectutes the lessons perfectly!
Then HOW do you create advantage points giving you an “egde” ? WHO says, one MUST do as it is written - dogmatically and precisely as suggested? Nah! There is still room for creativitiy and “spirit”.One philosphy may be “kill as fast as possible” …another might be “kill as safe and as easy as possible”
““Dominance dissolves into attitude. Superiortiy reveals intentions. Self-confident commitment is bondage. Truly a moment of truth. However, it is “Spirit” the choreograph of life and death. Majesty becomes weakness. Vulnerability becomes strength.””