Air Combat Maneuvering 2 vs 2 Tournament (Heaters Aim-9P)
-
@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.””
-
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.
Little OT. You know what is awesome
If you are behind the bandit (his wingman is dead already) - in his blind spot (little lower)… you dont quite have the rear aspect range to make the Aim-9P hit yet at that speed… you shoot anyways … the bandit doesnt see it… cant see it… cant know it … but starts instantly paniking and maneuvering like a moothafooka, because his UI tool “Player voice” just yalled at thim “FOX 2 INBOUND”…and you hit him, whereas if he would have continued flight straight, you would not have splashed him.
Now THAT is awesome. is it not
-
other ways than maximizing aggression and killing
everything comes at a cost… maximizing aggression = maximizing exposure (attitude, intentions, commitment, sacrifice) similar to “pulling too much” in BFM and loosing rating ability. (for others… you know that stuff already
) -
Yes, the AI callbacks are annoying. Should be a host/server controlled option.
-
@A.S:
Little OT. You know what is awesome
If you are behind the bandit (his wingman is dead already) - in his blind spot (little lower)… you dont quite have the rear aspect range to make the Aim-9P hit yet at that speed… you shoot anyways … the bandit doesnt see it… cant see it… cant know it … but starts instantly paniking and maneuvering like a moothafooka, because his UI tool “Player voice” just yalled at thim “FOX 2 INBOUND”…and you hit him, whereas if he would have continued flight straight, you would not have splashed him.
Now THAT is awesome. is it not
Big If statement there unless u talk for 2v2 or 1v2 scenarios and no other comms or support.
In real tactics are endless.
As said needs knowledge, SA and proficiency.sent from my mi5 using Tapatalk
HOT LIST
System Specs:
i7-2600K @ 4.8 Ghz WaterCooled / 16GB Ram. 128GB SSD/1TB SSD / GTX980Ti 6GB DDR5 / HOTAS COUGAR. TrackIR 4 / 3x24" Mon. (res:5760x1200) / Cougar MFD's / Wheel Pedals / Win 10 64 bit.
-
@A.S:
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
I wasn’t talking about the bandit, I was talking about your wingman. Your wingman got seperated by 10 miles. If at that point a bandit sneaks up behind him, you will not be able to see that, because you’re out of range.
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.
Not sure what you are trying to say here. You mean that fights in a real war are more spiced up than during training? Well, yes, sure. But you always hear fighter pilots say that when things get rough, they fall back on their training and credit their training for preparing them very well for the real thing. Do you really think that the adversaries at Topgun and the Nellis weapons school always play nice and predictable? The video was a real fight between Topgun students flying F-14’s and instructors flying F-16’s. Don’t you think they try to prepare these students for the real thing as much as possible?
EDIT: about the spiced up thing. Yes, an actual war always brings more stress, chaos and uncertainty with it. The other side of this however is that the adversaries at Topgun or Nellis are probably the best adversaries a fighter pilot will ever face. And an F-14 pilot called Hoser once said that the ACEVAL/AIMVAL exercise was the best flying he’s ever done. Because that was a tactics study where jets on both sides were flown by weapons instructors and the difference between AIMVAL and real combat was that in real combat your enemy dies. At AIMVAL your enemy learns from his mistakes so you had to keep adapting your tactics.
At 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.Again what are you trying to say? Paper tactician? actual situations? The image I posted was an actual fight flown during an actual war….
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”.Nobody does and I never said you must do everything as written. However, that doesn’t mean that what was written, isn’t true….
And if everybody executes perfectly and both sides fly the same airplane, nobody wins. On Tomcat Sunset website there was a perfect example of this. Two Navy pilots at Pt Mugu were so closely matched to each other, they decided they wouldn’t dogfight each other anymore. Because neither could gain an advantage over the other, every fight ended up in a rolling scissors close to the ground. They decided that this was too dangerous and risk of an accident too great.One philosphy may be “kill as fast as possible” …another might be “kill as safe and as easy as possible”
Sure, but if you have to walk home because you ran out of fuel in the process, it’s not very safe, is it?
-
I wasn’t talking about the bandit, I was talking about your wingman. Your wingman got seperated by 10 miles. If at that point a bandit sneaks up behind him, you will not be able to see that, because you’re out of range.
This is a non-argument since the whole idea is to have the other bandit in a place where he is not a threat. Whether he is continuously tracked visually or not is irrelevant - his approximate location is known, as is the fact that he is not an acute threat. Also, a 10 nm separation between wingmen is pretty good initially, since any unexpected switches by the bandits can be dealt with in a more controlled fashion. The distance can be closed rapidly, if needed.
Sure, but if you have to walk home because you ran out of fuel in the process, it’s not very safe, is it?
This is another non-argument. Disengaging and returning to base (in case of low fuel for example) is always easier when one is not committed into a turning fight. Once in a proper turning fight, bugging out may be impossible without getting shot. Regarding fuel efficiency…. our execution is still very much in experimental phase. Fuel efficiency will increase. Also, “normal” dogfights can become pretty extended, and leave participants out of fuel just as well. Nothing guarantees a quick kill (and especially not getting killed), you don’t always get what you want.
-
… Because that was a tactics study where jets on both sides were flown by weapons instructors and the difference between AIMVAL and real combat was that in real combat your enemy dies. …
Well we keep forgetting that real weapons are not that accurate and effective.
So in training u lock up and fire within envelop and exercise parameters and he is instantly called dead… This ISN’T the case in real.
Recent example the superhornet in Syria… had to fire 2 missiles that made the pilot change tactic and position… to shoot down an (actual nonexisting) enemy that was alone and without any A-A or G support… So if the enemy had the same mission and support (not a lonewolf) things would be way more different in the specific example.
I say actual nonexisting enemy cause the guys they fight they know they don’t have airplanes…HOT LIST
System Specs:
i7-2600K @ 4.8 Ghz WaterCooled / 16GB Ram. 128GB SSD/1TB SSD / GTX980Ti 6GB DDR5 / HOTAS COUGAR. TrackIR 4 / 3x24" Mon. (res:5760x1200) / Cougar MFD's / Wheel Pedals / Win 10 64 bit.
