We all know that up close dogfights are cool. But how did they get that way? And while we are at it, let’s dissect the tactics commonly used
World War One
World War One was where Air Combat Maneuvering aka Dogfighting was conceptualized, but in the initial years, airplanes didn’t actually do much. The early triplanes were initially used only for reconnaissance wherein they flew over enemy trenches. Pilots from opposing sides would even wave at each other, considering them not as adversaries but as fellow brothers in the brotherhood of fliers. Even while flying on recon, pilots couldn’t act as forward observers because radio technology hadn’t advanced to that level yet. That all changed when pilots got the bright idea to lob grenades into enemy trenches - thereby becoming the first ground attack aircraft. Pilots were now sent up with machine gunners to shoot these attackers down, and then the “bombers” started flying with “fighter” escorts.
The earliest dogfights resembled very high speed versions of naval ships trading broadside cannon volleys, as the copilot-gunners could only strafe to the side. Firing into the propellers would end very badly, and so would firing at their own tail. These strafing battles often ended inconclusively as just gunning the engine, diving and/or climbing was enough to avoid enemy fire. That all changed with an ingenious invention by a Dutch note engineer named Fokker.
Fokker invented an ingenious contraption that synchronized the chamber - load - fire cycle of a machine gun with the rotation of a propeller to ensure that a gun could fire its bullets through the rotating blades without ever risking a bullet damaging the propeller. This allowed the pilot to fire forward of the aircraft instead of strafing from the sides. It gave the pilot additional tactical advantages - the pilot could now aim better by just pointing the airplane’s nose at the target, and he could also retain aerodynamic energy (more on that below) by not having to turn his airplane to bring its guns to bear. Pretty soon, the Germans gained a huge advantage in air combat, and worked on refining air combat tactics even further. The pioneer of dogfight tactics was German fighter pilot Max Immelmann. Immelmann pioneered the axioms of dogfighting that are followed to this day.
Attack from the Rear: The rear of a fighter plane is a blind spot for its pilot and thereby it gives the attacker a chance to catch the pilot off guard and get a few shots in before his target can maneuver away. The typical frontal assault or flanking attack won’t be as effective because of a fighter's high maneuverability. The very purpose of a dogfight is to get to your opponent’s rear while he is actively trying to get behind you. It resembles two dogs chasing each others’ tails.
Fire only when your bullets will hit: Because a fighter plane is maneuverable enough to actually be capable of evading bullets fired at it, a pilot needs to have fire discipline to ensure that he doesn’t waste all his ammunition. A fighter's onboard ammunition stores must be limited because additional carry weight burns more fuel and lowers the fighter's operational range. Therefore using up all your ammunition means that the fighter isn’t just out of combat, it is also a vulnerable target.
Use the Sun: While a fighter’s rear or six o’clock in pilot slang is a very effective position from which to attack, the sun is another very effective “blind spot” to utilize - be it for escaping from an attacker, or attacking from. Flying into the sun means your pursuer will lose sight of you in the brightness, allowing you to surreptitiously maneuver yourself into an offensive position. Similarly, attacking from where the sun is apparently positioned in the sky gives an attacker the same opportunity to catch his opponent off guard, because no pilot is going to stare into the sun. Allied forces realized this propensity and codified it into a warning for their own pilots - “Beware the Hun In the Sun”
The Immelmann Maneuver - Immelmann also pioneered the eponymous maneuver to help an attacking fighter achieve a better offensive position over his opponent. The maneuver involves pitching up, climbing, rolling your wings and diving back down again. The objective of this maneuver is to slow your own fighter down so that you won’t overshoot your target, but you also have an altitude advantage and thereby an energy advantage over him.
Turning fight vs Energy fight
In the Genteel Interbellum Setting, fighter tactics were based solely on the concept of aerodynamic energy which was actually a measure of potential for aerodynamic lift. An airplane at higher attitude has higher potential energy owing to that altitude - it just needs to dive to gain velocity. Consequently, an aircraft with a high airspeed can use that speed to generate lift and climb. An airplane that can easily climb away or dive, can easily fly away from an attacker.
But, just climbing and diving isn’t enough to win a dogfight. Because your opponent can also climb and dive to keep up with you. So, the only thing you can do to truly evade him, is turn! Unfortunately, aggressively turning the airplane transforms the wing from a lift generating airfoil into a drag generating spoiler. This causes the aircraft to lose speed. So, when it emerges from the turn, the aircraft will have lost some capacity to generate lift - they have lost aerodynamic energy. Airplanes can execute coordinated turns in which they don’t lose airspeed, but such turns are easy for an aggressive opponent to pursue.
From World War One onwards, the typical dogfight played out with flight paths resembling Figure 8s. Two aircraft would fly towards each other, cross each other, then turn hard towards each other to get on the opponent’s six. If one aircraft’s turn was smaller than the other’s, he could then easily maneuver into an advantageous position. If both aircraft’s turns were equally small, both would end up flying head on again - then turning into each other again.
Therefore, in order to win a dogfight, it is imperative for your aircraft to have more aerodynamic energy when finishing a turn, than your opponent. Aircraft designers focused on turning performance - the ability to retain as much aerodynamic energy during a hard aggressive turn. Since triplanes and biplanes were replaced by monoplanes, fighter aircraft became planes that were nimbler and easier to turn. Before World War II began, most fighters had similar turning performance.
With one notable exception - US Navy carrier based fighters.
Because American carriers expected to spend more time at sea compared to carriers of other navies, with the exception of Japan, the aircraft they carried had to be designed to withstand long hours in a corrosive saltwater environment. Their hulls had to be built a little thicker to avoid getting corroded. Furthermore, American carriers had steel flight decks and carrier landings were by design, rough, so the aircraft needed everything from the landing gear, tailhook, undercarriage, airframe and tail to be very sturdy. A well built sturdy aircraft then needed a larger, more powerful engine to power it. Therefore, US Navy fighters were heavier, better armored but not as nimble compared to other fighters.
Which presented a problem when they had to take on the more nimble Japanese navy fighters.
Japan wanted an overseas empire of its own and correctly fathomed that they’d need a navy to achieve it. Which included carriers since naval treaties of that time restricted the number of battleships they could have. But Japan was also facing an oil and steel shortage due to the economic embargoes imposed upon the nation for conquering other East Asian nations. Therefore they had to build their carriers with wooden flight decks note . But wooden flight decks allowed for lighter, nimbler more maneuverable fighters, which could also be fuel efficient. So, combined with well trained fighter pilots steeped in Bushido ideals, their naval air power would be unbeatable. After all, their fighters could easily outturn and shoot down those behemoths flying off American carriers.
Until American pilots realized that the powerful engines in their fighters gave them an unexpected advantage. The engine’s power could allow a fighter that had lost too much aerodynamic energy to throttle up, accelerate, regain airspeed and then maneuver away. It also allowed the plane to execute large turns at high speed, thereby allowing them to execute a large turn at least as fast as, if not faster than a more nimble fighter executing its tighter turn. And still have the ability to accelerate further if need be.
US Navy fighter pilots thereby turned turning fights where the objective was to execute smaller turns than your opponent, into energy fights where the objective was to end a turn with more aerodynamic energy than your opponent. This way, you can maneuver and expend energy while he cannot. And becomes easy pickings. Heavier fighters often executed larger turns than lighter fighters, but they executed those turns faster, and still had more than enough energy to continue maneuvers. This also gave them enough energy to execute non-standard moves such as skids and slips.
This emphasis on building high energy heavy fighters would continue in the US Navy for four more decades.
The Beam Rider Missiles
In 1943, Nazi Germany which was facing a scourge of bombing raids by the USAAF during the day and the RAF at night, wanted a weapon that could be used to take down bombers, but it could be fired farther out from the bomber than the bomber’s bombs, cannons or fighter aircraft could reach. They came up with the Ruhrstahl X-4, a wire guided missile that attempted to let the operator guide it towards a radar signature. Although this missile was stuck in Development Hell throughout the war, its design inspired the victorious Allies to begin their own research into similar concepts.
The first ever prototype radar guided missile was the AIM-A1 Firebird. This would later be supplanted by the AIM-4 Falcon developed by Hughes Aircraft Company. The Falcon would become the standard issue missile for USAF aircraft. Problem was, the Falcon was conceptualized and designed as an anti-fighter missile used by bombers. It used the bomber’s radar waves to guide it towards its target. A heat seeker version was later developed, which would use engine heat to guide itself to its target. Unfortunately, this missile’s effectiveness at actually hitting targets that were aggressively maneuvering to avoid it, was really really bad. This prompted the US Navy to develop its own missiles, the Sidewinder and the Sparrow. Eventually, the Soviets acquired these designs and made their own knockoffs - the Atoll, Apex, Aphid and Alamo.
The US Navy, in conjunction with the development of the famous F-14 Tomcat, developed the then revolutionary AIM-54 Phoenix missile. This missile was a very heavy missile containing a large extremely long range (100 miles) rocket motor and its own onboard radar. This allowed the missile to use its own radar to guide itself to its target, instead of using its airplane’s radar. The Phoenix was created to shoot down bombers. The Soviets would, surprise surprise, make a knockoff called the Amos.
Air to air missiles thereby fall into the following categories
SARH Semi-Active Radar Homing: These missiles relied on their carrier aircraft’s radar to guide them to their target. The aircraft’s radar locks on to an enemy aircraft, thereby tracking its movement. Radar wave returns from the target aircraft guide the missile towards its target. If there is any interruption of a steady radar signal from the target aircraft, the missile loses radar lock and becomes essentially an unguided bottle rocket. Aircraft had RWR Radar Warning Receivers that warned it when an enemy aircraft’s radar had locked onto them, at which point, the pilot would start jinking his aircraft really aggressively to break radar lock. He would also start deploying metallic chaff to spoof the opponent’s radar into locking on to it instead. Newer aircraft would have ECM - Electronic Countermeasures that would generate more powerful radio signals that would jam enemy radars by flooding them with noisy signals. Some missiles then upgraded themselves to then have a Home on Jam mode in which the missile would guide itself based on the jamming signal instead of radar returns.
Heat Seekers: These missiles locked on to an enemy aircraft’s infrared signature, which would be strongest at its engine exhaust pipes. Most of them would emit a growl in the cockpit which would become more high pitched as the signature got stronger. Their range was much smaller than radar guided missiles. They could be slaved to the aircraft’s radar and fired at a radar locked target. Or they could be fired un-slaved. The latter could result in friendly kills since the heat seeker cannot distinguish between the exhaust of a friendly or enemy aircraft. One way to avoid that was to lock on your wingman, but leave your heat seeker missiles un-slaved to the radar. This way, you could safely fire if your missile was growling at you, but your wingman wasn’t directly ahead of you, or in your “bore sight”. If an enemy aircraft fired a heat seeker at you, your RWR would scream at you, at which point, you would turn really hard and fire off flares. And hope that the missile chasing you would get fooled by your flares’ heat signatures and chase them.
Active Radar Homing: These were radar guided fire and forget missiles. You needed to obtain radar lock only once and fire these missiles at them. The missile would then lock on to the target with its own radar, and use it to guide itself to its target. Since just aggressive jinking alone won’t be effective in breaking the radar lock the missile has on you, your only hope at this point is either a very effective artful dodge at near supersonic speeds or causing the missile to chase you into terrain.
Initially, most of these missiles were notoriously unreliable. This was particularly evident during The Vietnam War. Firing one missile would mostly end in an Epic Fail, so tactics slowly morphed into where you fired your SARH missile first to get your opponent jinking to shake your missile off. But while he is doing that, sneak up on his six and send a heat seeker up his exhaust pipe(s). But pilots became so reliant on missiles, that they completely eschewed guns. So, once a pilot had fired all his missiles, he became a highly vulnerable target who couldn’t fight back if attacked. Russian made aircraft however, did not make this mistake. And they resorted to hit and run tactics where they’d zoom in, fire at bombers or bomb laden ground attack aircraft, then get outta dodge before the fighters could engage. Dogfights therefore steadily moved from visual range “knife fight” range (<2 miles) to “speck in the sky” range of about 5-7 miles and eventually to Beyond Visual Range where you are aiming at a radar signature and not an actual aircraft. Tactics now had to change.
Beyond Visual Range Engagement
Initially an engagement between two aircraft with SARH Missiles such as the AIM-7 Sparrow or the Russian made AA-10 Alamo resembled a Game of Chicken. Because both aircraft needed to maintain radar lock on their opponent for the entire duration of the missile’s flight.
Aircraft F achieves radar lock Aircraft M. Aircraft M also achieves radar lock on Aircraft F. Because both are in each other’s bore sight, flying towards each other.
Aircraft F fires Missile 1 at Aircraft M. Missile 1 tracks toward Aircraft M for as long as Aircraft F maintains radar lock on Aircraft M. Aircraft M fires Missile 2 at Aircraft F. Missile 2 tracks towards Aircraft F for as long as Aircraft M maintains radar lock on Aircraft F. So, both airplanes have fired and have been fired at.
If Missile 1 has a greater range than Missile 2, Aircraft M will be destroyed by Missile 1 long before Missile 2 gets anywhere near Aircraft F. Because Aircraft M is destroyed, Missile 2 loses radar guidance from its parent aircraft and becomes an easy to avoid unguided rocket. Aircraft F is now safe. The converse is true if Missile 2 has a greater range than Missile 1.
But when both Missile 1 and Missile 2 have the same range, it does become a game of Who Blinks First with a Mutual Kill occurring if no one blinks. If Aircraft F “blinks” and starts jinking to evade Missile 1, Missile 1 loses radar lock on Aircraft M. Aircraft M can now completely ignore Missile 1 and can start maneuvering to maintain radar lock on Aircraft F. Eventually, Missile 2 kills Aircraft F. If instead, Aircraft M blinks and starts jinking, Aircraft F can now ignore the unguided Missile 2, maneuver to maintain radar lock on Aircraft M and eventually Missile 1 kills Aircraft M. So, if you jink to avoid a missile fired at you, you lose. Even if you somehow shake that Missile off, your enemy aircraft can get into an even better opposition position - such as on your six.
If both aircraft break radar lock and jink, both missiles lose guidance and both aircraft survive. If no aircraft jinks away, both missiles hit both aircraft. Mutual Kill indeed!
Thereby, their decision matrix resembles the Game of Chicken.
However, the invention of the Advanced Medium Range Air to Air Missile or the AIM-120 AMRAAM changed this whole dynamic. As did imitators such as the French Mica or the Russian AA-12 Adder “Amraamski”. Because these missiles are Fire and Forget Active Radar Homing missiles. Therefore, although Aircraft F only needs to achieve a momentary radar lock to fire Missile 3 at Aircraft M, F need not maintain radar lock on Aircraft M as Missile 3 will use its own onboard radar to guide itself to Aircraft M. But more disturbingly, should Aircraft M achieve a momentary lock on F and fire a similar Missile 4 at it, now both F and M will have very aggressive very persistent missiles chasing after them. The chances of a Mutual Kill are high now.
Therefore BVR engagements now become somewhat similar to the tactics of close air combat, played out over a long range. The goal is to fire an AMRAAM at the enemy either from their flank or their rear, from range, before they outflank you and fire an Amraamski at you. Also, this leads to a Lensman Arms Race between Missile and ECM Countermeasures.
‘Winders and Guns
The United States based company Raytheon was the first to develop an effective heat seeking air to air missiles, with the AIM-9 Sidewinder. Since the exhaust of a fighter’s jet engine(s) is the hottest part of the aircraft, positioning yourself directly behind your opponent, facing forward, is necessary to gain missile lock. Fortunately, air combat tactics already emphasized getting on your opponent’s rear or “six o’clock” to get a gun kill, so no newer tactics needed to be developed. However, on the defensive side, a pilot now had to watch out for a missile shot from the rear and be ready to shake it off. Although newer iterations of heat seeking missiles are all aspect ie they don’t require the plane to be pointing right at the exhaust to get missile lock, being on your opponent’s six o’clock is still the optimum way to get a kill.
Because missiles have a longer range than guns (5 to 10 miles versus 2 miles for guns), it is now possible for even greater coordination between aircraft comprising 2, 4, 6 or 8 plane formations. And for pilots to be even more aware of what all enemy aircraft in the area are doing. And since these missiles can travel at supersonic speed and kill an aircraft faster than gunfire can, pilots must also react quickly to situations.
This led veteran fighter pilot USAF Colonel John Boyd to come up with the OODA loop strategy.
Observe: Scan the battle space and determine both the positions and intentions of all aircraft, friendly and enemy.
Orient: Position your aircraft so you are in a position to both attack enemy aircraft and defend your wingmen.
Decide: Choose an enemy to attack, and decide how to attack it.
Act: Execute your attack plan.
Then repeat until the battle ends. However, all four actions must be executed. If any of these actions are omitted, the following will happen
Orient, Decide and Act only : This pilot fixates on a single chosen target and completely misses the trap his opponent’s baited him into. A perfect example of this is how Maverick fixated on Viper and completely ignored Jester maneuvering to his six for the kill.
Observe, Decide and Act only : Orienting your aircraft is crucial for gaining a good firing solution. Failure to execute this task leaves a pilot Winchester ie without any ammunition. Whether he successfully disengages and escapes, or is shot down trying, he is effectively out of the fight. And his wingmen are vulnerable.
Observe, Orient and Act only : This pilot always reacts and never anticipates. He will end up outfoxed by a crafty sort.
Observe, Orient and Decide: This pilot will fall prey to Analysis Paralysis and will most likely be shot down before he decides on a course of action.
Dogfighting with 5th Gen Stealths
Ever since Lockheed pioneered the F-117 Stealth "fighter" (actually a ground attack aircraft), which used radar-absorbent paint to mask itself from enemy radars, most newer fighters have incorporated radar stealth as an important design characteristic. This means that the old tactics of Beyond Visual Range engagements may not work anymore, as it will become increasingly more difficult for AWACS, SAM and fighter radars to detect and lock onto enemy aircraft, or for radar-guided BVR missiles to successfully intercept enemy aircraft. Sure, the US and its Western allies have a techn\ological edge now, but it won’t be long before their adversaries achieve parity.
And this means that dogfighting tactics must regress again.
Because enemy electronic countermeasures can\ spoof IFF protocols better, Rules Of Engagement could very well require pilots to achieve visual contact before engaging. Because enemy countermeasures now render radar-guided missiles unreliable once again, pilots will have to resort to short-range heat seeker missiles and switch to guns if they use up their missiles. Or they may have to resort to guns earlier because ballistic rounds fired by visual aiming cannot be jammed or spoofed. So, if pilots forgot old-school dogfighting tactics, they will have to learn it all over again.
"Dogfighting" in Space!!!
Due to the prevalent trope of Space Is Air, dogfights IN SPACE! tend to be portrayed in the same turning style of dogfights in atmosphere and gravity. However, since there is no atmosphere in space causing aerodynamic lift and drag, and gravitational force is low enough to be negligible, spacecraft dynamics aren’t subject to the same constraints that aircraft have. They can therefore, while accounting for inertia and momentum, utilize all six degrees of freedom - roll, pitch, yaw, slide up, slide down, slide left, slide right, move forward and move back - to maneuver. The presence of omnidirectional sensors (necessary because targets can’t be visually acquired in the dark of space, but there is no atmosphere or terrain to interfere with radar or LIDAR) combined with near unrestricted movement means that the old axioms of dogfighting must be thrown out - and new tactics developed.
