Is it possible that dogfighting could make a comeback as the primary fighting style?

[Venomstick121]

Stealth technology allows for a pilot to remain undetected by enemy aircraft radar, or irst. If both pilots are invisible to each other via stealth (not on radar, can't pick up an ir signature) is it possible that dogfighting could make a comeback? Could it mean that we will get designated gun fighters with limited air to air missile capacity using its guns as the main weapon?

Open to criticism (whole idea sounds stupid but it randomly popped in my head today)

 

[SaparotRob]

I'm looking forward to the responses. There must be many Forum members here with thoughts on that topic.
Welcome to the Forum.

 

[GTX]

I doubt it

 

[Shortround6]

Stealth technology allows for a pilot to remain undetected by enemy aircraft radar, or irst. If both pilots are invisible to each other via stealth (not on radar, can't pick up an ir signature) is it possible that dogfighting could make a comeback? Could it mean that we will get designated gun fighters with limited air to air missile capacity using its guns as the main weapon?

Open to criticism (whole idea sounds stupid but it randomly popped in my head today)

Well, you are betting that you stay 'invisible' to radar/IR 10-20 years in future.
Both "sides" have been trading 'invisibility' for over 80 years or having greater or lesser invisibility margin in regards to their enemies.

Not saying that there won't be isolated incidents but swapping 100-200lbs of electronics for 100-200lbs of guns/ammo (or pick number) may mean that the "gun fighter" winds up being more visible to enemy fighters/AWACS than they are to him. He can't bring the guns to bear before being hit by missile/s.

Some airframes are on their 3rd or 4th generations of electronics (maybe more?) so expecting electronic 'invisibility' to last very long doesn't seem to be a good bet.

 

[Venomstick121]

Well, you are betting that you stay 'invisible' to radar/IR 10-20 years in future.
Both "sides" have been trading 'invisibility' for over 80 years or having greater or lesser invisibility margin in regards to their enemies.

Not saying that there won't be isolated incidents but swapping 100-200lbs of electronics for 100-200lbs of guns/ammo (or pick number) may mean that the "gun fighter" winds up being more visible to enemy fighters/AWACS than they are to him. He can't bring the guns to bear before being hit by missile/s.

Some airframes are on their 3rd or 4th generations of electronics (maybe more?) so expecting electronic 'invisibility' to last very long doesn't seem to be a good bet.

thanks for the information, I totally forgot AWACS was a thing lol.

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

1. Stealth technology does not make an aircraft invisible. It reduces its radar signature.

2. No. The days of true dogfighting are long gone. Most fights will occur at long range.

BiffF15 is a great source here. He is our resident F-15 driver.

 

[buffnut453]

BiffF15 is a great source here. He is our resident F-15 driver.

Every home should have one...just got to make sure they're house trained!

 

[Greyman]

One possibility is anti-missile laser technology advancing to a point where is becomes small and effective enough to force aircraft to get in close again -- or at least start a completely different measure/countermeasure 'battle'.

 

[Shortround6]

One possibility is anti-missile laser technology advancing to a point where is becomes small and effective enough to force aircraft to get in close again -- or at least start a completely different measure/countermeasure 'battle'.

Maybe I don't know enough about some (most?) of the electronics but if your sensors can detect a 6in to 15in diameter missile from nearly head on that is running in cruise/sustainer mode on it's rocket engine and be able to then direct laser fire at said target I would think that you could detect a manned fighter even with stealth technology further away?

A stealth aircraft is pretty much stealth only when it is not transmitting anything and is depending on receiving signals/input only.
If you can detect the 'hot nose cone' of an incoming missile how far away can you see the hot nose/wing leading edges etc of of a manned aircraft? Less heat due to slower speed but larger area?

 

[z42]

If you can detect the 'hot nose cone' of an incoming missile how far away can you see the hot nose/wing leading edges etc of of a manned aircraft? Less heat due to slower speed but larger area?

My understanding is that 'all-aspect' IR missiles (say, the AIM-9L (late 1970'ies?) and subsequent versions) can indeed home in on the leading edges.

This sort-of also answers the original question. The energy required to propel an aircraft at decent speed inevitably means a lot of energy is required, which can be detected by IR sensors. So even if we'd achieve perfect radar stealth (very unlikely), we still wouldn't be going back to guns.

 

[BiffF15]

Stealth technology allows for a pilot to remain undetected by enemy aircraft radar, or irst. If both pilots are invisible to each other via stealth (not on radar, can't pick up an ir signature) is it possible that dogfighting could make a comeback?

Dogfighting hasn't left the building. It's still trained and practiced but is now called Basic Fighter Maneuvers or BFM for short.

Even in the leaps of equipment and training of and in support of troops they are still taught hand to hand combat. Why, because time and experience has shown that plans go awry, unknown variables were not accounted for, or the enemy didn't cooperate. Aerial warfare is no different. We are taught 1 versus 1, 1 v 2, 2 v 2, 2 v 4, 4 v 4 and up. All sizes from small to large.

Getting into a turning fight is dangerous, however the mission might require an elevated risk posture (think defending something that can't move or hide (damaged ship, port full of troops and logistics).

Could it mean that we will get designated gun fighters with limited air to air missile capacity using its guns as the main weapon?

This is a limited use weapon when multi use has long been the standard.

Open to criticism (whole idea sounds stupid but it randomly popped in my head today)

If you have a question ask, most everyone will contribute.

Cheers,
Biff

 

[BiffF15]

My understanding is that 'all-aspect' IR missiles (say, the AIM-9L (late 1970'ies?) and subsequent versions) can indeed home in on the leading edges.

The AIM-9 can not do this. I've flown with or fought against Limas, Mikes and Xs. The X was a huge leap over the M and is pretty bad ass in my opinion. High off bore sight, much better range, and greater sensitivity.

 

[Venomstick121]

Thanks so much BiffF15. Keep our skies safe

 

[BiffF15]

Thanks so much BiffF15. Keep our skies safe

Thanks Venomstick,

I retired in 2017 after 29 years. My current gig is "Chem Trail Dispenser"…

Cheers,
Biff

 

[Admiral Beez]

The days of true dogfighting are long gone. Most fights will occur at long range.

I'm no pilot, but I expect few fighter pilots of today and into the 2030s would want to delete their guns. Isn't that the sort of missiles-suffice, long-range-only thinking that put the US fighters at a disadvantage over Vietnam? Do we trust the Chinese to have got it right?

China Built Its J-20 Stealth Fighter Without A Gun

Today most of the world's fighters possess a gun. The J-20 is the exception.

nationalinterest.org

 

[DerAdlerIstGelandet]

I'm no pilot, but I expect few fighter pilots of today and into the 2030s would want to delete their guns. Isn't that the sort of missiles-suffice, long-range-only thinking that put the US fighters at a disadvantage over Vietnam? Do we trust the Chinese to have got it right?

China Built Its J-20 Stealth Fighter Without A Gun

Today most of the world's fighters possess a gun. The J-20 is the exception.

nationalinterest.org

I did not say that guns will be deleted, or that there will never be dogfights. Both the F-22 and F-35 have rotary cannons as well.

But the days of true dogfighting like we imagine it are long gone. You are not going to see mass fur balls like back in WW2. Hence why I said Most fights will be at long distance.

 

[z42]

Isn't that the sort of missiles-suffice, long-range-only thinking that put the US fighters at a disadvantage over Vietnam?

Vietnam was 50 years ago. Missile sensors and semiconductor logic have improved dramatically since then. I would guess guns these days are more like a last ditch weapon in case you run out of missiles, or if you don't want to waste a missile on some easy target? Or for warning shots in some limited scenario?

From what I've understood from information released about wargaming scenarios, the expectation is that most air to air kills these days would happen at BVR.

 

[pbehn]

Was dogfighting ability ever the most important attribute for a fighter. As I understand it more speed in level flight dive and climb was always desired before roll and turn. All forces and pilots preferred a "bounce" over a dog fight. In the BoB the bigger the "fur ball" encounter the less decisive they were, pilots increasingly concerned with not being shot down and collisions/ friendly fire increasing.

 

[GTX]

Was dogfighting ability ever the most important attribute for a fighter. As I understand it more speed in level flight dive and climb was always desired before roll and turn. All forces and pilots preferred a "bounce" over a dog fight. In the BoB the bigger the "fur ball" encounter the less decisive they were, pilots increasingly concerned with not being shot down and collisions/ friendly fire increasing.

True - if you read the accounts of top aces you will see that they generally didn't get there by chivalrous duels of the air but by sneaking up behind the other guy and clubbing them over the back of the head. This is where something such as the F-35 excels.

 

[Shortround6]

True - if you read the accounts of top aces you will see that they generally didn't get there by chivalrous duels of the air but by sneaking up behind the other guy and clubbing them over the back of the head.

Only when the sword broke.