Fighter Combat - Tactics and Maneuvering

ONE-VERSUS-ONE MANEUVERING, DISSIMILAR AIRCRAFT 1 79
these parameters but one aircraft will have a significant advantage in the
other. For instance, both aircraft may have similar T/W, while one fighter
has a significant wing-loading advantage; or both may have similar wing
loading, but there is T/W disparity. These are examples of "singledissimilarity"
conditions.
Low versus High Wing Loading with Similar T/W
In this situation the low-wing-loaded fighter should enjoy a considerable
instantaneous-turn-performance advantage, and also probably a significant
sustained-turn superiority. Therefore, the pilot of such a fighter
usually should base his tactics on this turn advantage and conduct an
angles fight. Although T/W parity makes this an easier fight than that
previously described for the low-T/W aircraft, it is not without danger. The
low-wing-loaded fighter pilot still must be conscious of energy and not
attempt to grab angles faster than his turn-performance advantage will
allow. More aggressiveness is allowable because of the T/W similarity, but
greed on the part of the angles fighter pilot will permit the opponent to use
energy-based countertactics effectively. A good rule of thumb for the
angles fighter pilot is to maintain at least vertical-maneuvering speed at
each pass as protection against the opponent's possible zoom. Lower
speeds are acceptable once the bogey has obviously bled its speed to
the point where it lacks any significant vertical potential. Verticalmaneuvering
speed for the low-wing-loaded fighter should be somewhat
slower than for the high-wing-loaded adversary.
On the other side of this coin, the pilot of the high-wing-loaded fighter
has a serious problem; namely, he has no performance advantage to exploit.
In this case he usually should choose energy tactics, since there is at
least parity in that area. He should recognize, however, that the opponent
possesses the superior dogfighter and should win a one-versus-one fight,
assuming the skills of the two pilots are equal. With this in mind, the
energy fighter pilot should engage with the intention of evaluating the
opponent's technique quickly, and then disengaging if he proves to be the
Red Baron.
Because of the T/W equivalence, the climbing extension/pitch-back
tactics described earlier generally are not viable. This method is based on
exploiting a climb-rate superiority, which does not exist in this scenario.
In order for the high-wing-loaded fighter pilot to gain an energy advantage
where one does not exist initially, he must either increase energy faster
than the opponent (which may be done by exploiting superior diving
acceleration and high-speed energy addition rate in a diving extension), or
induce the bogey to bleed energy at a faster rate (which may be accomplished
by sustained-turn techniques). The latter method allows evaluation
of the bogey's turn performance based on its known sustained capabilities
relative to those of the high-wing-loaded aircraft.
For instance, assume that at optimum speed the high-wing-loaded
fighter can sustain a 10°/sec turn rate, so that a 360° turn would require
about 36 seconds to complete. If the bogey can sustain ll°/sec at its
optimum speed (a 10 percent advantage, which would be considered sig-