"Modern Aircraft Dog Fight Question?" Topic

We were watching Top Gun the other night and noticed that even with missiles, attacking aircraft seem to exhibit the same attacking patterns as in previous wars with trying to get on the 6:00 position of enemy aircraft.

I understand…it's a movie, but that aside with todays technology do pilots still need to fire their heat seeking missiles generally at rear of the target aircraft, or can they just let the missiles fly from any direction.

Appreciate your input as I'm just not that educated on modern day firing platforms & technology.

-Skip
LIT

Modern AAMs are all aspect but a rear shot is still preferred because the better IR signature helps the missile beat the countermeasures.

Also reduces the enemy's escape options.

With all aspect missiles and off-boresight capabilities, some aircraft can fire missiles from pretty much anywhere and expect some level of success. However, missiles have a finite range, and the missile still needs the optimum chance to angle on to the target and then hit it before it runs out of fuel.

While technically an Aim 9x can be fired by a modern fighter at a crazy oblique angle while passing one another, the odds of that missile being able to turn around and guide on the target before the missile runs out of fuel is far from a given.

Keep in mind that this is for within visual range shots. Beyond visual range missile ranges are much greater than the Vietnam War or Top Gun portray. With modern IRST and IFF technology, it's quite possible to get kills from 20 or 30 miles away with reliability. That's a whole other type of combat.

Getting the missile to lock from odd angles is a problem. Radars take a while to lock and their search cones are narrower than you'd think. In a head-on pass, say after coming around out a circle, there may not be time to lock. IR seekers have fairly limited ranges, especially when the body of the target aircraft is partially blocking the hot exhaust plume. Again, there may not be time to lock in a head on pass.

Depending on how "modern" you're talking about, you may not have a helmet mounted sight (HMS), so you can't look at the target to get the IR seeker to point at the target. Most IR seekers have fields of view of 2.5 to 5 degree. If you're coming in from the side of the target, you have to pull the nose around to get the seeker pointing at the target. Most IR missiles can be cued by radar (told where to point their seeker), but you still have to lock the radar.

On, and the Sparrow's fire control computer originally needed about 15 seconds to generate a firing solution. That's a lot of time in a twisting, turning dogfight.

Gentlemen, I appreciate the Intel. Very Helpful.

The "how modern" are we talking about is a good statement from 'Ad Astra News'.

I did't think of it in the original question.

Generally speaking I would say Modern to me is with in the last 15 years or so.

Yep, all of the above are valid points.

I'd say the US Aim-9L Sidewinder was the first, really effective all-aspect, I/R missile.

The British used it with very telling effect back in 1982.

Those produced after 2000, are theoretically, considerably better, though the Aim-9L was superb, with a very high kill rate.

Also, from the front, if the pilot is good, due to the high-speed, and angle of closure, he can make a last-minute jink to evade an inbound weapon. Very few, if any will be able to sustain the Gs required to follow such an evading target.

When attacking from the rear, things are much more favorable for attackers.

There was a reason that the USAF and USN put guns back on their fighters.

While the RN got kills with AIM-9L during the Falklands, all their kills were within the engagement envelope of the AIM-9G.