"Far range" is not visible to the naked eye, and that's what most aerial battles look like: Something shows up on a computer, a jet fires a missile at seemingly nothing and then, a few minutes later, something blows up somewhere that you cannot see. It's less like "high-stakes plane jockeying" and more like "filing a request for death" that another department, miles away, might or might not grant.
While current military organizations possess the technology to accurately target things over the horizon or out of visual range (most noticeably in the case of missiles and even in the case of snipers), most advanced civilizations have lost the secret. Those that do manage to retain the secret tend to develop the technology to the point of roboteching.
Although not exclusively, this presents a particular problem for armed spacegoing vessels, where the loss of this rather useful bit of technology invariably leads to confrontations and battles against other vessels at near-point-blank range. And God help you if your opponent is packing an Invisibility Cloak. This has also led to a common starship design configuration where most of the ship's weaponry is placed broadside-style along the flanks of the ship's superstructure. It has also brought about the need for super-advanced, highly technological warlike civilizations to engage in Old School Dogfighting.
Named after the supposed famous quote of Col. William Prescott in the battle of Bunker Hill: "Don't fire 'til you see the whites of their eyes!" This was justified at the time because they were using notoriously inaccurate 18th-century muskets and they had almost no ammunition, so every bullet had to count. In reality, the command was routinely given to soldiers in many battles: no army had very accurate guns or unlimited ball and powder — or arrows, for that matter. The saying is famed, and associated with Bunker Hill, by Americans because it was the first battle of the nascent American nation.
Not to be confused with Eye Lights Out or By the Lights of Their Eyes, for literal eye lights.
There are four discernible reasons for this phenomenon:
The trope is often a function of practical visual cheats by filmmakers rather than a mistake. Star Trek often refers to a vessel being "300,000 kilometers away and gaining" but still presenting a real threat to the Enterprise. A representation of this actual distance is near impossible without some sort of visual trickery. Television is also a visual medium that emphasizes "Show, Don't Tell". In order to get a sense of the size of the two or more spacecraft they need to somehow be next to each other. The cheat may be required to get around logistical problems in portraying a situation accurately: in the case of Star Wars, special effect technological innovations during the time of the original trilogy hadn't reached the point where one could plausibly represent the flight path of missiles through a vacuum other than in the most rudimentary way.
Many filmmakers hearken back to naval or submarine combat as the closest metaphor for space combat available, and consequently use visual devices and images consistent with the representation of eighteenth-century seagoing vessels shooting at each other to place space battles on film. Of course, they might do that just because they know Space Is an Ocean. As it is, naval vessels have had the capacity to engage with guns at ranges of tens of thousands of meters since the late nineteenth century, albeit it took a while for fire control to make firing at said ranges accurate rather than spray and pray. Even torpedoes, relatively slow and short-ranged weapons, have had 10-20 kilometer ranges since at least the 1940s. Nowadays guided/homing missiles give the capacity to engage targets at hundreds of kilometers.
Averting this trope probably isn't much fun to watch, as a battle between starships where the enemy ship isn't blown up right before your eyes can be a bit dull. In the Star Trek: The Next Generation episode "The Wounded", two ships fire at each other at a range of over 100,000 kilometers. The characters watch the exchange on a screen with little symbols representing the ships and the shots. The fight is, needless to say, quite boring. Andromeda uses this and gets around it somewhat by showing the eventual collision of the missiles with the ship (sometimes. Other times, the dot representing the other ship just disappears), or just showing the battle if they're close enough for Anti-Proton blasts (less than 5 light seconds away, usually).
The trope may also have a tactical justification as follows, as drawn from Mass Effect: most ships aren't going to start shooting each other in deep space for no reason; they'll start shooting at each other because one ship stands between the other ship and something it wants. For the ship on defense to actually defend its charge, it can't go anywhere. By contrast, space battles where the combating ships are the only factors will usually take place at extreme ranges. Some examples on this page fit this situation; notice that in the Babylon 5 instance of aversion, the objective of the aggressors is to destroy the ships. Of course, this is still an imperfect explanation when the setting features FTL independent of fixed nodes, which Mass Effect has in the form of Mass Relays. The example of aversion in Star Wars regarding the ion cannon below illustrates this problem, where the Star Destroyer comes out of lightspeed anywhere it damn-well pleased, but the Star Destroyers or other ships in freeform-FTL settings still approach the target very closely instead of firing on the defending ships from afar. Similarly, because space is so huge, no weapons that don't approach the speed of light would actually hit the enemy within a reasonable amount of time, assuming there isn't any countermeasures that can be deployed in the 15 minutes between being fired upon by a sublight missile and actually being hit. And even at the speed of light it is still about 8 minutes to get to the sun and several hours to exit the solar system. Space is big.
At the same time, it's still a rather blatant anachronism. World War II tanks were often able to hit targets multiple kilometers away in combat just relying on their primitive gun sights. And most modern gun sights aren't radar based.
Minovsky Particles interfere with all electro-magnetic phenomenon. In MS Igloo it was finally demonstrated that even visual sensors are impaired at great range.
Averted for the most part in Toward the Terra. Several space battles are shown to be taking place at such distances that the opposing sides can't even see each other; at one point when preparing to attack a planet, the attacking force parks its superweapon behind a gas giant in the same solar system to keep it from being detected, and simply fires it from there when they're ready. The real reason close mobile suit battle happens is because most mobile suits seem at least somewhat capable of dodging cannon fire.
Averted largely in Starship Operators where the trainee crew who mans the ship for the majority of the show stress the ranges involved in combat early on. Several of the enemies ships play with this concept, running in stealth mode (drifting into a "no miss" range and attack angle, featuring extremely advanced stealth), a remote drone Hyperjumping all over the place like a bunny on steroids (thus avoiding the return fire by not being there when it is ready), or just plain running in (featuring a nigh invincible bow designed specifically for ramming other ships).
The Star Trek films, where most ship-to-ship combat took place with the captains of each vessel within spitting distance of one another. The inherent superiority of visual targeting is illustrated perfectly in Star Trek: Generations where a Klingon warship locks onto the Enterprise by using what looks a lot like a periscope.
Star Wars, where it seems impossible to target a Star Destroyer with a superstructure one mile long unless you are able to see it out the window. Missiles are restricted to fighter-sized starships, are deployed only at visual range, and tend to operate in a Cool, but Inefficient manner. Advanced missile weapons (such as proton torpedoes) have insufficient targeting accuracy to hit anything more agile than a freighter (unaided).
This is generally hand waved in the books as a result of having much better ECM than targeting systems. Missiles are tricky because they only carry so much fuel, and if they go ballistic are trivial to intercept with counterfire. Missiles don't tend to be carried on capital ships because heavy turbolasers pack a similar punch, can't be shot down, and don't have to worry about ammo.
Except for one occasion: in The Empire Strikes Back, a ground-based ion battery fires very effectively on a Star Destroyer in orbit above Hoth. And the writer got around the fact of a Star Destroyer's ability to target ground-based installations by indicating that a planetary energy shield prevented anything but a direct ground assault to dig the Rebels out.
The trope is justified a few times as well, such as in Revenge of the Sith where the attacking force was attempting to invade the planet (see "tactical justification" above) and in Return of the Jedi where the objective was to obtain protection from the Wave Motion Gun obliterating their ships. The battle in Attack of the Clones, with the two armies no more than a few hundred meters apart and charging at each other, however, is right out.
Also, in Empire Strikes Back, Darth Vader's apparent tactic was to attack the Rebels from outside their sensor range, so they couldn't raise the shield (which is why he was pissed when Ozzel came out of hyperspace too close). They also display incredible accuracy in the EU, where a Super Star Destroyer fires on a worldship from outside the solar system.
Averted partially in Tyrants Test, specifically the Battle of ILC-905, where missiles are used, and barrages do manage to allow a few to penetrate the flack. Justified over normal tactics due to the enemy ships being very resistant to standard weapons.
The missiles used only against Star Destroyers is justified in many novels: missiles are much more expensive than lasers (which use a little fuel), have a huge firepower, and a typical fighter only carries a dozen, so it's ridiculous to use them against fighters, except aces.
Starship Troopers, where futuristic humanity, in possession of portable small-yield nuclear weapons, prefers to send footsoldiers en masse into battle with weaponry largely incapable of hitting a target other than at point blank or very short range. On the other hand, this is only to be expected when you're employing the Redshirt Army, all of whom are equipped with Cool, but Inefficient weaponry.
Completely subverted in the original book: Narrator states that the Navy can blow the planet into smithereens, but they need M.I. (Mobile Infantry) to make precision strikes against certain targets, an example being the main character (and narrator) a part of Scare them into cooperation battle in the beginning of the book and the main battle near the end of the book has Capturing enemy commander as it's only real purpose (it's clearly stated that they didn't even have to fight for this planet this way - they could just blow up the rest of the bugs using mass destruction weapons). Another thing is the fact that the book is a sort of manifest against Redshirt Army.
Indeed. The book explicitly says there's more effective ways to kill an enemy, but sending in the MI sends a message: We can and will just walk right up to your face and kick your ass, and there's nothing you can do to stop us. And that's just with our foot soldiers.
To be fair, we see Infantry operations on four occasions: First, as a show of strength against Bug opponents that the humans had completely underestimated; second, to clear out entrenched Bugs from sub-surface fortifications after most of them had been wiped out with airstrikes; third, on a search-and-rescue mission through what was supposed to be secured territory; and fourth, on a retrieval mission which required the location, identification and capture of a specific bug. Aside from the initial screw-up, none of the missions could have been easily accomplished remotely.
Independence Day, where advanced alien shielding technology is not matched by a comparable technology providing the ability to target and destroy enemy fighters outside visual range. On the other hand, your advanced technology is probably Cool, but Inefficient anyway if it can be hacked by a TV repairman using Apple OS.
Transformers (movie version), and in particular the Decepticon known as Starscream. Whilst primitive Raptor aircraft employed by the US Air Force were designed with the capability to lock and fire at ground-based targets outside visual range, this advanced alien warrior apparently is unable to target and hit the Hoover Dam's power station unless he's stationary and in robot mode. On the other hand, he's Starscream. He may have just wanted to add a personal touch.
His mission is to retrieve the MacGuffin AND to free Megatron. He might've figured it's better to announce his arrival when he's close enough to cover for Megatron's escape.
Spaceballs, where the crew of the Eagle Five successfully jam Spaceball One's radar by visually locking onto, and firing a giant raspberry jam jar at, the capital ship's radar dish. Having said that, this somewhat backfired given Dark Helmet was able to ascertain the jammers' identity from their choice of weapon: "There's only one man in the universe who'd DARE give ME the RASPBERRY ... LOOONNNNE STARRRRRRR—*clunk*
Justified in the case of Spaceball One itself by the sheer ineptitude of its gunners. (That Eagle Five wasn't even spotted before making its "attack" run also doesn't say much for their sensors. Again, Rule of Funny definitely applies here.)
In the Culture series of sf novels by Iain M. Banks, this trope is deliberately Subverted and played with in that the titular Culture, one of the most progressive and advanced interstellar societies, totally avoids the use of ground combat and traditional soldiery, and instead prefers to go to war with starships that are essentially big engines with weapon nodules at both ends, and which are capable of causing stars hundreds of light years away to go nova. This strongly informs the outcomes of several of the novels, especially the first, Consider Phlebas, due to the fact that aggressor societies tend to trip all over themselves in attempting to fight the Culture on conventional terms, using starships as methods of conveyance of troops towards Culture habitats, while the Culture merely evacuates their population to a safe distance and either commandeers or detonates the enemy ships on approach.
Jack Ryan: With a relatively few exceptions, neither protagonists nor antagonists go for this trope where it's possible to avoid it, preferring to engage the opposition as far away as possible while not sacrificing accuracy. Even bombing, traditionally requiring one to be somewhere near the target, is done from the maximum distance possible thanks to guided bombs, like those used in Clear and Present Danger or in The Bear and the Dragon, where American fighter-bombers launch specially designed bombs from almost a hundred kilometers away, using satellite imagery and AWACS to guide them in the rest of the way. Since AA and SAMs don't have the same range, the enemy doesn't even have a chance to know the attack is coming, much less defend against it.
Averted in Joe Haldeman's The Forever War. The battles take place across entire star-systems at good fractions of light-speed (and even then it can take days or weeks for a single battle to finish), and while ships do have lasers for last-ditch defense, most of the action uses drones (big missiles), with a backup of 'fighters' (though these are probably closer to motor-torpedo boats in that they require 3 crew, and can fit up to 12).
The Honor Harrington series averts this consistently and without mercy. Starship engagements take place almost entirely at ranges that need to have the commanders looking at the little glowing maps with little explosion icons popping up for a hit. Probably a byproduct of the fact that this sci-fi writer is trying to demonstrate he has a sense of scale just fine, thanks. As the series progresses, new technologies that extend the range of ship weapons make the Kingdom of Manticore Navy one of the most dangerous navies in the region.
Justified in the Vorkosigan Saga. The ever-escalating race between space weapons and the defenses to stop them has resulted in extremely short ranged weaponry. This is explained in a brief narrative Infodump towards the end of "The Warrior's Apprentice" and more or less never comes up again; despite being ostensibly military sci-fi, the books usually focus on people, not pulse lasers.
John Carter of Mars. Despite the incredible range of Martian rifles everyone still carries and uses swords/spears. An honor code exists that specifies that a Martian must, when challenged, use an equivalent or inferior weapon (if someone charges you with a long sword you can fight him with your short sword, but you can't go the Indiana Jones route and just shoot him.) It's also considered unsporting to kill an unsuspecting target without issuing a challenge first... the Green Martians near the start of the series do fire upon Red Martians from ambush, but as the Red Martians they're firing at are in a flying battleship it's not as unfair as it sounds.
Averted in The Lords of Creation series where it's pointed out that such as system as above wouldn't work, as "the cheaters would win too often."
In the second Artemis Fowl book, while watching goblins approached, Butler asks, "Do we wait until we see the whites of their eyes?" Commander Root responds, "Goblin eyes don't have whites."
In the Ciaphas Cain book Death or Glory, this is averted. As Cain notes:
Contrary to what you might see in an episode of Attack Run, starships in combat seldom approach to within point blank range of one another, exchanging fire at distances of hundreds, if not thousands, of kilometres.
Also averted in CS Friedman's In Conquest Born, where the idea of getting close enough to an enemy ship to be able to attempt to capture it was considered insane. Which made it all the more stunning when they pulled it off.
Largely averted in the Lensman series, where "beams" are used for long-range combat and ships have "tractor beams" to pull the enemy in close so that physical missiles don't take forever to get there (even so, it's still described as taking quite a while for the missiles to cross the gap, and only the fact that the other ship can't move allow them to actually hit it). Smith was also fully aware that space has three dimensions. Fairly early on, the enemy develops "tractor shears" that allow them to cut a tractor beam and get away from heavier and more powerful but slower ships; the response is a technique called "englobement", where you surround them in three dimensions and use pressor beams from multiple ships to hold them in the center while you temporarily turn said center into the heart of a star.
Completely averted in Larry Niven's Known Space novel "Protector", in which Elroy Truesdale and the Brennan-Monster fight a battle against a small fleet of Pak scout ships, and the distances are so great that Truesdale and Brennan don't find out they've won for close to a month.
Live Action TV
Used and averted in Andromeda, where on the bridge, they call out the distances and mention distances measured in light seconds, and have unexciting displays where symbols fire at each other. However, the CGI battles are usually done up close and personal.
Averted once in Babylon 5. When the Narn fleet was ambushed by a team of Shadow Vessels, the initial salvos of the battle took place very far from each other. The shots were cleverly edited together to maintain the necessary sense of danger. By the end, they had closed to spitting distance, but a lot of Narn vessels didn't make it that far. JMS does explicitly state in the DVD commentaries that he and the production team knew that space combat between large ships would realistically occur at extreme range but that they had to make some concessions to having an exciting TV show rather than a physics documentary.
In Battlestar Galactica, they heavily rely on Old School Dogfights, and ships often fire at relatively close distances, even despite homing missiles. Even nuclear weapons are deployed at this sort of range.
May be somewhat justified in that Cylon ECM is usually enough to make any kind of guided Colonial munition worthless, necessitating a close-in gun battle.
Also Justified by the presence of FTL that cannot be jammed or traced. As demonstrated by the Colonial fleet surviving multiple Cylon attacks by the simple but effective tactic of jumping away every time the Cylons show up. In such a situation the only realistic option for an attacker is to jump in practically on top of their target, so they can hit them before they jump away. Since both sides rely heavily (but not exclusively) on fighters which must be launched and then get close to the target (presumably since their own guns have unspectacular muzzle velocity) this means positioning your capital ships very close indeed. Of course all of this assumes your target will want to run away (and you want to prevent him), but if he thinks he can fight back you may want to reconsider your attack anyway.
Star Trek uses and averts this a lot (particularly the latter in the Original Series). However, in many battles (especially big ones), a lot of fighting is done at extreme close range. As mentioned in the "The Wounded" example above, rendering an accurate battle in a visual medium that is in some way exciting can be difficult.
Star Fleet Battles, the tactical tabletop adaptation of ship-to-ship combat in the Star Trek Original Series universe, regularly uses this trope. Well, they don't make hexsheets in "square lightyear" sizes, do they?)
Hexes are 10,000 kilometers wide (the earth takes up a three-hex diameter sphere), no ramming allowed and practical combat range is under 20 hexes (one planet at a time on the map).
Actually, the earth takes up the center hex, the others are atmosphere (1 hex of planet, 6 of atmo), which is even more stupid, since the Earth's atmosphere is under 200km "deep", not 10,000.
Earth plus atmosphere is a single hex. Maybe you were thinking of the small gas giant?
More like Acceptable Breaks from Reality. The designers know this (and that ships don't 'orbit' at light speed and that moons are normally more than 10k km from the planetary surface...)
Is 10,000 km as point blank range really the "The Whites of Their Eyes"?
"Adjacent hexes" probably counts, no matter how big the hexes themselves are.
In Warhammer 40,000, even the biggest artillery units have a maximum range which is, to scale, several hundred meters.
By contrast, in Battlefleet Gothic, a space combat game set in the same universe, the main batteries of larger ships have ranges of several Earth diameters. Needless to say, model and "ground" scale differ!
Yes and no. The game often featured multiple planets on the (2 dimensional) field of play, so presumably the distances were in light minutes. Depictions in text have them fighting at much smaller ranges. Occasionally, less than one kilometer.
On the other hand, in Gaunt's Ghosts: Sabbat Martyr a space battle takes place using massive distances. It even has a crewman reflect upon how close a particular (huge) enemy ship must be since he can see it as a gleaming dot in space
Gameplay and Story Segregation. In order to actually use most of the infantry weapons in the setting beyond the hand-to-hand combat ones, the tabletop would need to be several meters across. To use the artillery would need dozens of meters... It's depicted reasonably accurately in most of the fluff and the accompanying novels.
There's an article somewhere that describes exactly how the scale changes as you increase the distance on the table. Melee range (two inches or less) is a couple meters; infantry weapon range (two feet) is a few hundred; and artillery range (up to six feet) is something like twenty kilometers.
So it's a logarithmic scale of distance?
That raises a bunch of follow-up questions. Like, if a unit has a speed of 6" and approaches an enemy 12" away, it travels faster in its first move phase than in its second. But, from the perspective of an observer in between the two starting points, it decelerates through the first move phase and then accelerates during the second. Chaos must be winning if the entire universe runs on such bizarre alien geometries!
Homeworld, the computer game, where your capital ships, whilst equipped with point defense weaponry, cannot target an enemy ship visible on radar tracking, which is out of visual range.
That said, distances in the battles are measured in tens to hundreds of kilometers. The Mothership itself is something like four to six kilometers on its longest side, for goodness' sake. So this might actually be an aversion - visual range is just a freaking long distance.
Not even close, hundreds of kilometers is nothing in space.
Supreme Commander: The few guns capable of shooting with semi realistic artillery ranges (up to 71 km) are so damn expensive as to not be worth building. And most of them are game enders if they are built. A completed Mavor will make your enemies weep. Most of the game's units have an effective range of a few hundred meters, despite the fact that even the smallest targets are robots taller then trees.
The prequel, Total Annihilation is much more forgiving about this sort of thing past the first tier, although tank battles still escalate to a mass of tangled metal if their respective armour is sturdy enough.
Actually, Supreme Commander was notable for avoiding this trope. Even the weakest weapons have a range of half a kilometer. Additionally, conventional artillery pieces have ranges exceeding one kilometer (for example, the UEF's Duke cannon has a minimum range of 3 km).
Command and Conquer 3 includes walking artillery units for the GDI that can fire the length of the map. However, for game balance purposes, they can only do this when a sniper is close enough to paint the target with a laser designator.
This is actually realistic, since real artillery requires SOMEONE to spot for them in order to correct the fire. While in Real Life, they could be able to fire at such range without a spotter, it would be a complete waste to fire at a position without a clue if your shots are hitting the spot they're supposed to.
Juggernauts could fire across half the map in their normal attack mode in the last mission of the NOD campaign. This was so they could pound the Threshold tower's defenses, but any juggernauts had this modified range (cue pounding of their ion cannon structure, which is another sidenote altogether...)
In EVE Online the range of ship weapons varies depending on the size and type of the weapon. Small ships usually have a max weapon range of few dozen kilometers for long range weapons and a few kilometers for short range ones. Large battleships can potentially hit targets from several hundred kilometers away (although their close range weapons still require getting very close, especially for such slow and hard to maneuver ships). Large scale space battles tend to consist out of two large groups of ships about 100 kilometers from each other, blowing up the other group by focusing fire to one ship at a time.
Star Control 2 has some spaceships that can hit enemies from the other side of the map (Earthling, Druuge), and a few who can only hit at what's effectively melee range (Zot-Dot-Pik, Ilwrath).
Sword of the Stars can go from BVR combat where the enemies are only visible through the sensor display to close-in fighting where ships maneuver around each other. According to Word of God, though, this is merely an abstraction for the players' convenience. Everything actually takes place at stellar ranges and even "knife fights" with small mount weapons don't actually take place in WVR. The sequel will further avert this as weapon ranges will now exceed sensor ranges, requiring the use of battle riders as scouts/spotters.
Certain weapons require the use of ships equipped with the Deep Scan section in order to target something BVR. These include plain old missiles and Rail Cannons, which fire amazingly precise extremely long-range cannonballs, which are not only powerful but their kinetic energy keeps the enemy ship from getting close to use the more powerful energy weapons.
Universal Combat is perhaps one of the best arguments for why this is a good thing to have. Behold!
Star Trek Online has a blanket maximum range of 10km for all space weapons, possibly due to technical limitations.
The longest-ranged anticapital gun in the X3 trilogy fades out at 6.62 km. Factor in, that's only two to three times longer than the ship is, and that the effective range is often a kilometer or so shorter. Averted with missile frigates, however, whose Macross Missile Massacre can blow away targets from nearly 80 kilometers away (though effective range is closer to 30 km because of sensor range limitations, unless you have another ship acting as a spotter).
In Sins of a Solar Empire, highly-advanced ships must close to within spitting distance of one another to fight. This is further enforced by the fact that ships can only fight within the same gravity well, which doesn't go very far beyond planetary orbit. The only weapons that can go beyond that are considered superweapons and can only target planets.
Double Subverted in Mass Effect. The fluff describes an aversion, with dreadnoughts acting like self-propelled artillery in space: keeping well back from the engagement and firing at extreme range. However nobody apparently explained that to the VFX artists: every starship battle shown in the series plays the trope straight. The Battle of the Citadel at the climax of the first game has it justified by having to fight within the confines of the Citadel's arms, but the space battles in Mass Effect 3 all take place in clear space.
The tactics of the Reapers in Mass Effect 3 may make this a Justified Trope. The Reapers used their beam weapons, but they also liked to get up close and personal to crush opposing ships with their metallic tentacles. Besides that, in the case of both the Reapers and the Geth, the major battles took place in orbit; firing from a distance would increase the chances of missing the intended target and hitting the planet behind them (A Krogan fleet commander used the same tactic in the Krogan Rebellions, positioning himself between his opponents and the planet they were trying to take back). Since those mass effect accelerators can dispense more destructive power than the Hiroshima bomb, one stray shot could wipe out a whole city.
Maxim 22: If you can see the whites of their eyes, somebody's done something wrong.
Darthsand Droids pokes fun at this in one strip, where the transports are ordered to fly DIRECTLY at the Star Destroyers, because their weapons are calibrated to aim at targets at "ultra long range," not right next to the ship. Before they can readjust their weapons, the transport is gone.
Fights between superheroes and supervillains are, by definition, almost always close-range (if not hand-to-hand range) affairs. This was surprisingly averted in one Global Guardians story in which Corona, a super-heroine with light- and laser-generating powers, defeated the Big Bad by sniping him from low earth orbit, making use of the near-infinite range of her blasts, and the fact that she had hyperaccurate telescopic vision. He never had a chance to even respond because of the distances involved.
During The Vietnam War, American jets carries carried the Sparrow missile which was designed to shoot down Russian bombers beyond visual range. Unfortunately, due to a fear of friendly fire, commanders instructed fighter pilots to only fire on a hostile aircraft after visual identification , completely negating the technological advantage of the long range missile. The missiles were completely ill suited for tracking maneuvering targets in a dogfight and achieved a kill rate of under 10%.
As noted in the introduction, the Trope Namer was Col. William Prescott at the Battle of Bunker Hill, the real start of The American Revolution (although he probably didn't say those exact words). Prescott was concerned over the lack of ammunition in the Patriot fort, but such an order was justified anyway due to the poor accuracy and range of 18th century muskets. If you fired before you could see the whites of their eyes, you almost surely weren't going to hit anyone.
This was also the basis for 'thunder fire' tactics of XVII-century Swedish musketeers who preferred to fire at very close range but with three or even four ranks at once. With such firepower they were able to break even the charge of heavy cavalry.
During The Battle Off Samar (the most famous David Versus Goliath battle in the history of the United States Navy or any other navy for that matter), a Destroyer Escort by the name of Samuel B. Roberts, managed to maneuver in close enough to the Japanese heavy cruiser Chōkai so that the Japanese gunners couldn't shoot back because their guns were unable to aim so low, while the Americans fired into them with 5 inch guns and Anti-Air cannons. Samuel B. Roberts managed to cripple two Heavy Cruisers before being fatally wounded by the Japanese battleship Kōngo and would go on to be known as "The Destroyer Escort that fought like a Battleship."