mjt@mcnc.org (Michael Tighe) (10/20/89)
From: Michael Tighe <amdcad!mjt@mcnc.org> >From: amdcad!tanner@dssmv1.mpr.ca (Tim Tanner) In sci.military Fri, 15 Sep, 1989, article 2173 miket@brspyrl.brs.com (Mike Trout) writes: >>80% of all airplanes that are shot down by other airplanes never detect >>their attackers. This 80%-20% ratio has held fairly constant from World War >>I up to the present. >I am curious where this statistic came from. It seems likely that it is >true (it is much easier to shoot down an unsuspecting victim). However I >doubt that it is as true today as it was in WW1 and WW2. With all the >fancy equipment on planes today, the least you can hope for is to detect >your attacker. I tend to discount it also. It is diffcult to prove, since the person you would like to ask is usually deceased. Perhaps it was true at sometime. I would think that most pilots know they are under attack, even if they cannot do anything to get out of it, and even if they only have a few seconds warning. Looking at the most recent engagements the US has had, all of the Libyan pilots knew they were being attacked. They were not surprised. Although poor tactics on their part ensured a quick splash, they knew it was coming. I cannot recall any statistics for Falklands, and in the Bekaa Valley, several of the kills the Israelis recorded were done without firing a shot. The enemy punched out as soon as he knew he was being locked on by radar. So they knew they were under atack also. ------------- Michael Tighe Internet: mjt@ncsc.org
dyson@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (mark l dyson) (10/24/89)
From: dyson@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu (mark l dyson) In article <10409@cbnews.ATT.COM> amdcad!mjt@mcnc.org (Michael Tighe) writes: >I tend to discount it also. It is diffcult to prove, since the person you >would like to ask is usually deceased. Perhaps it was true at sometime. I >would think that most pilots know they are under attack, even if they >cannot do anything to get out of it, and even if they only have a few >seconds warning. Another reason to doubt the 80/20% in modern times (at least for US targets) is the policy to require visual recognition before committing weapons. Some new technology (like the image-magnifying camera in the F-14) is trying to mitigate this disadvantage, but by and large US pilots aren't totally free to use the BVR technology that's on their planes. Just gives the target more time to figure out what's up. -Mark-
aws@itivax.iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) (10/24/89)
From: aws@itivax.iti.org (Allen W. Sherzer) In article <10409@cbnews.ATT.COM> amdcad!mjt@mcnc.org (Michael Tighe) writes: >Looking at the most recent engagements the US has had, all of the Libyan >pilots knew they were being attacked. They were not surprised. That's not what is ment by suprise. In a large fight, everybody knows that somebody out there wants to kill them. The problem is when you are in a firball kowing that *AT THIS MOMENT* you are under attack. You may have seen the cartoon of the fish about to eat a smaller fish unaware that it is aobut to be eaten itself by a bigger fish. That happens. You are about to launch a missile against a bandit when you note tracers from behind you. Read "One Day in a Long War" for some good examples of this. Allen ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- | Allen Sherzer | DETROIT: | | aws@iti.org | Where the weak are killed and eaten | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
msmiller@gonzoville.East.Sun.COM (Mark Miller - Sun BOS Contractor) (10/24/89)
From: msmiller@gonzoville.East.Sun.COM (Mark Miller - Sun BOS Contractor) || Newsgroups: sci.military || Subject: 80:20 ratio || Message-ID: <10409@cbnews.ATT.COM> || Date: 20 Oct 89 01:42:08 GMT || Sender: military@cbnews.ATT.COM || Lines: 34 || Approved: military@att.att.com || || || || >From: Michael Tighe <amdcad!mjt@mcnc.org> || >From: amdcad!tanner@dssmv1.mpr.ca (Tim Tanner) || In sci.military Fri, 15 Sep, 1989, article 2173 || miket@brspyrl.brs.com (Mike Trout) writes: || || >>80% of all airplanes that are shot down by other airplanes never detect || >>their attackers. This 80%-20% ratio has held fairly constant from World War || >>I up to the present. || || >I am curious where this statistic came from. It seems likely that it is || >true (it is much easier to shoot down an unsuspecting victim). However I || >doubt that it is as true today as it was in WW1 and WW2. With all the || >fancy equipment on planes today, the least you can hope for is to detect || >your attacker. || || I tend to discount it also. It is diffcult to prove, since the person you || would like to ask is usually deceased. Perhaps it was true at sometime. I || would think that most pilots know they are under attack, even if they || cannot do anything to get out of it, and even if they only have a few || seconds warning. The 80:20 law is pretty close to accurate. I've read many memoirs from fighter pilots of the day and it seems that very few of their kills came in the assumed manner of dogfighting. In fact, there are many accounts of these guys going right through a formation and dusting them from the rear-most to the front. The wingmen of the victims, not to mention the victims themselves, never saw what was coming. In the heat of a dogfight, folks generally got it not from the guy being fought, but from one of his buddies who slipped in while he was preoccupied. This is why fighters fly in teams - the wingman keeps the tail clear and prevents these little interuptions. || Looking at the most recent engagements the US has had, all of the Libyan || pilots knew they were being attacked. They were not surprised. Although || poor tactics on their part ensured a quick splash, they knew it was coming. || I cannot recall any statistics for Falklands, and in the Bekaa Valley, || several of the kills the Israelis recorded were done without firing a shot. || The enemy punched out as soon as he knew he was being locked on by radar. || So they knew they were under atack also. || || ------------- || Michael Tighe || Internet: mjt@ncsc.org || || If I recall one of the Libyan encounters, the Navy pair split and attacked at different vectors. The Libyan's were tracking one guy, but lost the Navy wingman who then swung in and waxed one of them. They knew they were being attacked, but I doubt the second Libyan jet knew where the missile came from. I recently saw some cockpit video a friend of mine had. He was involved in a 2.vs.2 F15 engagement and was allowed to take the non-classified parts of the tape home. A few things were interesting in light of this dialog. For one thing, very little happened until visual contact was made. Both teams were ducking in and out of clouds and bopping around near the deck. Even with on-board radar and ground control, it was still tough to get vectored properly. Once sighting was made, things started to happen damn quick. I also learned that the on-board radar has certain limitations. For instance, if the bogey is going straight up, he may not create enough of a change in horizontal motion to get picked up. It would not be all that impossible to slip in behind someone during a battle and loose a Sidewinder up close. By that time, it's too late. Whether the target knows he's got a launch at his 6 is irrelevent at that point. He never saw it coming. -MSM