Dogfighting in the F-15C.

Hi everyone. I have a few questions related to dogfighting in the F-15 that came about from a couple of different sources and I could use some guidance here. If you don't care to read the entire thing (it is a bit lengthy), you can just jump to my highlighted questions in bold. Thank you for your time.

Let me preface this by saying that I'm pretty new to A2A combat in general. My understanding is that the F-15 is ok in a turning dogfight but was not really made for it and I should try to exploit its advantages in BVR. As a consequence, I've been focusing on the BVR side of things though would like to get decent in a turning fight in case it came to it.

Even though I own FC2, I never really played it. Life got in the way and I just never got around to it. Ended up purchasing FC3 and I finally got to playing it. While browsing through the FC2 mission folders today I noticed a folder called F-15 DACT. In there are some very basic missions for BVR, heat seeker only, and guns only skirmishes in one-on-one and XvX setups. In the guns only variants, the missions can be flown vs a MiG-23, a MiG-29S and an Su-27.

Silly question but, in the Eagle, is it harder to do a turning fight against a MiG-29 or Su-27? My (probably flawed) understanding is that, while the Su-27 gets all the glory, the 29 is actually the better turning plane out of the two as it is more like the F-16 (a nimble close-in fighter) than the F-15.

In my quest to attempt to answer this question on my own, I went to the interwebs and started digging around. I eventually came across this article in simHQ http://www.simhq.com/_air/air_097d.html. Immediately a few things baffled me about it:

1. The article talks about corner velocity as being a sustained velocity and accompanied rate of turn. It lists the F-15 as having a corner of 620Km/h. I thought corner velocity was unsustainable since it is instantaneous and that for the Eagle, that speed is closer to 830Km/h (~450knots). Is corner velocity instantaneous or sustainable?

2. The article then compares the turning circle of four aircraft and the F-15 is only second to the Su-27 and ahead of the MiG-29 and Su-33. Assuming that the article is mistaking sustained for instantaneous turning velocity, does the F-15 have a better sustained turning velocity than the MiG-29 and Su-33 but not as good as the Su-27 at sea level?

3. Tying what is explained in this article with the aforementioned F-15 DACT missions, if you had to rate the following aircraft from easiest to hardest to take on in a guns-only head-on duel from the cockpit of an F-15, in what order would you put them? The planes are MiG-23, MiG-29, Su-27 and Su-33.

4. A lot of the performance charts out there are always based on sea level altitude. I'm trying to dig up performance numbers at varying altitudes for the fighter aircraft I would normally encounter in this sim. My understanding is that, in general, the Russian planes are better performing at low altitudes while the F-15 wants to stay at high altitudes. Other than for BVR shots, does the Eagle want to stay high because it has a hard time competing down below or because its thrust actually gives it a turning advantage (or at least lessen the gap) at high altitudes? If it actually performs better than its rivals at altitude, how high are we talking here? If it doesn't perform better than its rivals at altitude, does that mean BVR is all it has going for it?

5. Most of the performance charts I'm digging up always refer to performance at sea level. I generally want to avoid flying next to the trees. Is there anywhere I can find performance numbers (top speed, rate of turn, turn radius, etc) at varying altitudes for the aircraft modelled in this sim?

this reminded me of something i read once - had to google it

found it...

Beware the lessons of a fighter pilot who would rather fly a slide rule than kick your ass!

just get out there and fly

heh!

; )

The F-15 is perfectly capable of WVR. It should have better climb performance than the Su-27, but it's all load dependent. The 29 and 27 are probably close enough in performance that whoever is flying them makes more of a difference. However they both have the R-73 which is better than the AIM-9M.

On corner velocity, it's the point where you have the maximum degrees per second when turning. This is the lowest speed where you can hit your g or stall limit. Whether you can sustain it or not depends on your thrust (altitude).

I don't know how the rates of turn compare precisely, but the graphs you're reading are outdated.

Staying high in the F-15 is about maximizing acceleration and missile range. If you do get into a dogfight there's a good chance you may up going down low and the F-15 has no problem fighting there. For all fighters, the ability to turn becomes better at lower altitude.

For specific performance data, look at the F-15C manual. It is separate from the FC3 manual. You can download it from the downloads section.

Honestly, you dont need charts at other heights, as you'll never dogfight at 50 000 feets. BUT if you really want it, see the image and look into the manual as excocet said. Keep in mind that the su27 is going to receive PFM, so its flight characteristicks will change ( wich is great as 50% of them will stall doing the cobra XD). As for dogfight list, this is variable as mig23s arent online so you have to judge the AI... Personnally : 23, 29 (i'll run out of fuel as long as you can extend a bit), 33, 27.

this reminded me of something i read once - had to google it

 

found it...

 

 

 

 

 

just get out there and fly

 

heh!

; )

I know where you are coming from but I would still like some basic guidance on WVR combat both with and without seeker missiles before I just try doing stuff at random and develop bad habits. I feel there's plenty of theory out there on BVR that I was able to put together some basic missions to practice with and noticeably improve over the course of a few hours of playing them and analyzing them in Tacview. Don't feel quite the same about WVR combat.

For example, there's much more to BVR then sprinting, climbing, shooting and cranking but at least those terms and general sequence gave me a starting point to research and practice. This led to firing and anticipating spoiler shots. Dealing with shots fired at you led to notching, jinking, dragging and beaming+orthogonal rolls as possible options each with their own pros, cons and risks. Then came use of countermeasures/ECM and their impact on ability to fire first. Then came HOJ. And the list goes on. It's like every step leads to another layer or dimension of complexity to include and practice. And this is all one-on-one. Haven't even gotten to having an allied wingman and dealing with an enemy wingman.

With WVR, all I know is that there are two types of merges: one-circle and two-circle fights, which apparently have completely different outcomes and consequences depending on whether or not you or your opponents have missiles but no one seems to elaborate on what those consequences are or where to go from there. Oh, and pull towards your opponent and "use the vertical" (whatever that means outside of a high yo-yo).

I realize that even my newbie understanding of what to keep track of in BVR is pathetically limited but I'd rather have a basic list of things to do/watch for than none at all. But I'll tank it out with Tacview if that is what it comes down to.

I figured I'd start with basic performance data across allied and enemy planes to start putting together some conclusions/ideas myself which is why I'm asking these specific questions in my original post. Still curious about what other people think/know. Instead of focusing on specific maneuvers, I'd like to know what general conditions (speed, altitude) and overall approach to WVR combat favor the F-15 when dealing with other non-F-15 planes so that I can start putting together a picture/game plan in my head.

The F-15 is perfectly capable of WVR. It should have better climb performance than the Su-27, but it's all load dependent. The 29 and 27 are probably close enough in performance that whoever is flying them makes more of a difference. However they both have the R-73 which is better than the AIM-9M.

 

On corner velocity, it's the point where you have the maximum degrees per second when turning. This is the lowest speed where you can hit your g or stall limit. Whether you can sustain it or not depends on your thrust (altitude).

 

I don't know how the rates of turn compare precisely, but the graphs you're reading are outdated.

 

Staying high in the F-15 is about maximizing acceleration and missile range. If you do get into a dogfight there's a good chance you may up going down low and the F-15 has no problem fighting there. For all fighters, the ability to turn becomes better at lower altitude.

 

For specific performance data, look at the F-15C manual. It is separate from the FC3 manual. You can download it from the downloads section.

Thanks for the tip. I'll check out the F-15C manual for performance data. Too bad I have nothing to compare it against :cry:

Honestly, you dont need charts at other heights, as you'll never dogfight at 50 000 feets. BUT if you really want it, see the image and look into the manual as excocet said. Keep in mind that the su27 is going to receive PFM, so its flight characteristicks will change ( wich is great as 50% of them will stall doing the cobra XD). As for dogfight list, this is variable as mig23s arent online so you have to judge the AI... Personnally : 23, 29 (i'll run out of fuel as long as you can extend a bit), 33, 27.

Hmm, your chart tells me exactly the opposite. There are massive performance differences every 10k feet. Knowing how the performance of F-15 stacks against the other planes at those same intervals could prove useful.

Let me preface this by saying that I'm pretty new to A2A combat in general. My understanding is that the F-15 is ok in a turning dogfight but was not really made for it and I should try to exploit its advantages in BVR. As a consequence, I've been focusing on the BVR side of things though would like to get decent in a turning fight in case it came to it.

The F-15 was definitely made for a turning dogfight. While it compromises some stuff, it's pretty dangerous.

Silly question but, in the Eagle, is it harder to do a turning fight against a MiG-29 or Su-27? My (probably flawed) understanding is that, while the Su-27 gets all the glory, the 29 is actually the better turning plane out of the two as it is more like the F-16 (a nimble close-in fighter) than the F-15.

The MiG-29 and Su-27 do turn better than the F-15, but that performance is transient and most effective at low altitude. As long as the F-15 doesn't get sucked into a slow turning fight, it can hold it's own. Really, BFM performance DEPENDS. On a lot of things.

1. The article talks about corner velocity as being a sustained velocity and accompanied rate of turn. It lists the F-15 as having a corner of 620Km/h. I thought corner velocity was unsustainable since it is instantaneous and that for the Eagle, that speed is closer to 830Km/h (~450knots). Is corner velocity instantaneous or sustainable?

Corner velocity is the speed at which you have the highest turn rate combined with the tightest turning radius. As you can imagine, it doesn't matter is it's STR or ITR (usually it will be ITR), but the exact speed will again depend on various factors like weight, altitude, etc.

2. The article then compares the turning circle of four aircraft and the F-15 is only second to the Su-27 and ahead of the MiG-29 and Su-33. Assuming that the article is mistaking sustained for instantaneous turning velocity, does the F-15 have a better sustained turning velocity than the MiG-29 and Su-33 but not as good as the Su-27 at sea level?

No, and it's a very old chart so you can ignore it. The meaning you're trying to extract actually doesn't make sense. Sustained g has to be compared at the same speed/mach number, and you're very likely to see some planes are better at only some range of speeds, others at other speeds.

3. Tying what is explained in this article with the aforementioned F-15 DACT missions, if you had to rate the following aircraft from easiest to hardest to take on in a guns-only head-on duel from the cockpit of an F-15, in what order would you put them? The planes are MiG-23, MiG-29, Su-27 and Su-33.

I would rate the last three about the same. There are some important differences but they will come out mostly when the Su-27 gets a PFM.

4. A lot of the performance charts out there are always based on sea level altitude. I'm trying to dig up performance numbers at varying altitudes for the fighter aircraft I would normally encounter in this sim. My understanding is that, in general, the Russian planes are better performing at low altitudes while the F-15 wants to stay at high altitudes. Other than for BVR shots, does the Eagle want to stay high because it has a hard time competing down below or because its thrust actually gives it a turning advantage (or at least lessen the gap) at high altitudes? If it actually performs better than its rivals at altitude, how high are we talking here? If it doesn't perform better than its rivals at altitude, does that mean BVR is all it has going for it?

The eagle has a serious thrust advantage at corner and medium to high altitudes, so it likes being higher - this is because of the intake ramps recovering higher pressure air for the engines. It will perform at low altitude as well - however because it's more of an energy fighter than the other planes usually, it's harder to BFM with it. The energy fight is more difficult.

5. Most of the performance charts I'm digging up always refer to performance at sea level. I generally want to avoid flying next to the trees. Is there anywhere I can find performance numbers (top speed, rate of turn, turn radius, etc) at varying altitudes for the aircraft modelled in this sim?

You want to dig up the F-15 -1 manual. It will give you a lot of information, though it is by no means complete.

The toughest fight will always be the 27. Simply because it's the most forgiving of all aircraft in WVR. It pretty much has the highest G-load at low speed allowing it's driver to pull for far far longer without stalling or losing too much turnrate than any other plane. This is what makes it very potent even in the hands of a bad pilot.

I'm not sure where it's coming from that the 27 and the 29 are similar in turn performance. In DCS, the 29 is not even close to the flanker. Even the F-15 will probably outturn it in nearly every case. Especially now with the PFM. The only real chance for a 29 is to stay at corner and even there it's not as good as the F-15. Below corner, especially at slow speed it's just a brick.

Real life (from video's I've seen from Russian pilot that flies on airshows) the Su-27 has some 2sec advantage in turning a full circle compared to the F-15. In game it is also the best fighter for slow turning fights close to the deck. The MiG-29 I am sure is much better in real life than what we have in game (I hope when it gets PFM it will show this) but if you really want to learn how each flies (or just want to be good in one) just fly it... with time you should get the feel for what it can do, and use it where it's good to your advantage.

When the Su-27 gets AFM it will be interesting ( ͡º ͜ʖ ͡º)

I agree with Blaze and Kuky here.

Su-27 is easily the best, in the hands of any pilot (not just a bad one:P), because the forgivingness Blaze is talking about means 1) vertical dogfight with dynamic airspeed changes is much better 2) there's a lot of "leverage" to convert airspeed into nose position, to take that killer gun shot. Su-33 is similar handling but a bit heavier..

The Mig feels like a bus in dogfight right now, maybe someone knows what I'm doing wrong? :) Flaps helps a little but still...

The F-15 strikes the middle, having kick-ass turn capability but requires careful airspeed management. Too fast --> blackout. Too slow --> turn capability suffers greatly and also stall/spin it baby! :D

I dont get why ED has made the MiG-29's FM to turn so slow. I feel like with the time i need to make a 360 turn in MiG-29 , i can make 2 in the Su-27. In RL the MiG and the Su have the same turn rate (both 23 deg/sec i think.) In DCS the last time i did a 360 turn in the Su-27 , i completed it in 13 sec while in MiG-29 in 19 i think. (Unreal) !

MiG-29 in game is pretty much a brick for either BVR or WVR. It does turn tighter, but that's it, bleeds speed very quick, accelerates poorly, as speed gets lower it's roll rate gets sluggish etc. And although turn circle itself is tight, it feels like turn rate is rather slow in game, though I'm not that sure of this one, it's just a gut feeling :).

I'm quite sure it should be a better performer in real life, but, I'd still doubt it would out perform Su-27 or a well flown F-15 in a dogfight. The MiG has a surprisingly high wingload, and while it's double engined too, it's total thrust is significantly less than either of bigger boys. Combine this with tiny fuel load it has, which for one to use afterburner rather sparingly in MiG, I'd say both of big boys would most likely be rather significantly better for sustained maneuvring than Fulcrum. Big boys both have more lifting surfaces and more thrust. Advantage of being lighter helps the MiG but not sure just how much (and we can't say MiG-29 is super lightweight either). Don't get me wrong, I'd imagine under most conditions it would outturn F-15, at least if we think about instantaneous turn rates, but I believe F-15 would have other options to force MiG to his terms, and if the fight drags on I'd imagine big guys will have more options available to them. The advantage MiG had for dogfights was mainly Schlem HMS + R-73 in it's day, now that most fighters that may oppose it have JHMCS + AIM-9X which trumps that one too.

Although, unlike many people I don't believe a few real world confrontations necessarily mean statistically significant results for air combat capability comparison, I still think it is worth mentioning that MiG-29 met both Su-27 and F-15 in combat as adversary in real life, and been on the losing side on both occurences, and both at visual range (Eritrea-Ethiopia War for Su-27, and Gulf War for F-15).

Anyways, this is mostly an opinion of mine, and I do think it may still better IRL than it's FC3 incarnation, even if still lesser capability than Flanker or Eagle. But currently in DCS, it certainly does feel almost unsuable against it's bigger brothers unless you surprise them or MiG pilot is significantly better than opposing pilot :)

Saying F-15 wasn't build for turning fights would be misleading. When it entered service in 1976, I believe it was one of the best turning supersonic fighter. May be only Mirages had better insta. turn performance, not sure. But any other fighter that could out turn the eagle in some flight regimes, like the MiG-29, Su-27, F-16 or F/A-18 were introduced a few years after the Eagle. Well actually in Flanker's case about a whole decade later.

Thanks for the advice everyone. GGTharos is right, I'm not asking the right questions. That means there are some basic fundamentals I haven't yet grasped (see what happens when you jump to conclusions without proper instruction :D). Maybe I'm too all over the place. Just want to try to get an inkling some of those "it depends" variables.

Maybe I'm thinking too much like a software developer but for any given problem there are always a small set of variables that, when solved or accounted for, get you half-way if not closer to a solution. As you layer in more variables and the true complexity of the problem is apparent, you find that each set of variables gets you a bit closer to the answer at the cost of considerably more complexity. At some point you draw the line as to how much complexity you are willing to deal with. This is both a function of mental capacity and experience. I don't need to know all of the variables. In these early stages of learning I can neither appreciate nor keep track of them in a fight. But I would like to know the primary variables that make up the core of the problem and factor those in my decisions.

I guess what I'm looking for is some structure to begin learning WVR combat. I felt like building a basic approach to BVR on which to build on was pretty straight forward.

Not saying I'm good at it, though. Being able to fairly consistently beat the AI in high/excellent is not much of an accomplishment but it beats always losing to it (which was what was happening to me before understanding the basics and developing an approach). While this approach probably does not cover all of the variables and is probably only marginally effective in MP (if at all), it gives me a foundation to work with and mold as I learn more. I feel I have no such foundation for WVR combat nor do I know where to begin setting up such a foundation.

Most of the times I lose against the AI are when I get WVR. This usually happens on fights where all of my radar missiles are decoyed or defeated (some crazy lofting on some of them) and I'm left with a pair of sidewinders and a million questions. We are still 8-12 miles apart. Sure I can go for a sidewinder shot but he has enough time to rate his nose on me even if he's low and cold at the time we get to WVR. This has often lead to mutual destruction as he gets a shot off moments before my missile impacts. At this point, have I lost and just not realized it? If my objective is to kill the other guy and this is what it's come to, did I lose? Is there nothing I can do at this point except pack my bags and go home? Or is there something basic in my approach leading up to WVR and/or execution of the sidewinder shot that I'm not considering which can make the difference between victory and mutual destruction?

Or should I just pack 8 120s and stay in BVR or become a mud torpedo?

When do most of you find yourselves WVR of you opponent? If the number one goal of every fighter pilot is to get the jump on unsuspecting enemies, assuming VID is not required, is WVR combat a function of two groups of enemies running into each other unexpectedly (since neither side detected the other at range and positioned themselves for a good BVR volley?). Or is there merit to sneaking up on a target WVR (I'm guessing maybe so you don't give yourself away via the opponents RWR)? Do you find BVR combat against an equally skilled pilot to transition to WVR as both of you expend your long and medium range missiles in the BVR dance? Or do you avoid that transition and altogether and try to exit the fight past a certain point if neither of you are getting any good shots in?

Um ... it depends? :D

What's your mission? Do you HAVE to shoot down the other plane? Can you run him out of fuel instead, or just not let him get near to where you are?

Most of the times I lose against the AI are when I get WVR. This usually happens on fights where all of my radar missiles are decoyed or defeated (some crazy lofting on some of them) and I'm left with a pair of sidewinders and a million questions. We are still 8-12 miles apart. Sure I can go for a sidewinder shot but he has enough time to rate his nose on me even if he's low and cold at the time we get to WVR. This has often lead to mutual destruction as he gets a shot off moments before my missile impacts. At this point, have I lost and just not realized it? If my objective is to kill the other guy and this is what it's come to, did I lose? Is there nothing I can do at this point except pack my bags and go home? Or is there something basic in my approach leading up to WVR and/or execution of the sidewinder shot that I'm not considering which can make the difference between victory and mutual destruction?

You get to WVR from BVR by denying a BVR shot at you. Usually you do it by shooting your missiles at the enemy which he has to defeat one by one (and keep his nose away from you) while you are getting closer. If you are 8-12nm apart and only have sidewinders left it takes skill and good luck to get to the merge alive with this method. If you absolutely have to shoot down your enemy even if you might get shot down in the process you need to try to get to the merge right from the beginning before you run out of BVR missiles as that's the only way to get a missile or gun shot that he won't defeat. In MP usually both get an initial missile shot at each other and usually the the one who gets the second shot first forces the other to run away or eat a missile. If he decides to fight and has luck you get into a dogfight having the upper hand if you played your cards right.

Other typical way that gets you in the merge is flying over a crest at low altitude and running into an enemy at the other side or enemy pops up from behind a hill. In these cases the winner is usually the guy who has his eyes open (or luck puts the enemy right in front of him) and sees the other guy first.

Forcing a merge is surprisingly easy, because every pilot's situational awareness is limited, especially in a multi-threat environment, and going from 10nm(a range you could still escape a BVR shot from) to 0 nm doesn't take many seconds. The opponent is not required to cooperate.

Once the range becomes very close (less than 5nm), medium range missiles start to become easier to dodge because they are still in the acceleration phase when they reach you. Mutual destruction can be avoided by: using terrain for cover, chaff, flares, and high G(whether you see the missile coming or not). Having afterburner off and pointing the nose straight at the incoming missile can help with your flares' effectiveness in spoofing head-on shots of IR missiles. Sometimes it may be beneficial to concentrate fully on avoiding the other guy's shots, instead of taking the shot yourself.

And once the merge is complete, it's showtime :D

You get to WVR from BVR by denying a BVR shot at you. Usually you do it by shooting your missiles at the enemy which he has to defeat one by one (and keep his nose away from you) while you are getting closer. If you are 8-12nm apart and only have sidewinders left it takes skill and good luck to get to the merge alive with this method. If you absolutely have to shoot down your enemy even if you might get shot down in the process you need to try to get to the merge right from the beginning before you run out of BVR missiles as that's the only way to get a missile or gun shot that he won't defeat. In MP usually both get an initial missile shot at each other and usually the the one who gets the second shot first forces the other to run away or eat a missile. If he decides to fight and has luck you get into a dogfight having the upper hand if you played your cards right.

 

Other typical way that gets you in the merge is flying over a crest at low altitude and running into an enemy at the other side or enemy pops up from behind a hill. In these cases the winner is usually the guy who has his eyes open (or luck puts the enemy right in front of him) and sees the other guy first.

Thank you. A million times thank you. So now I know that being stuck with only heaters against an opponent 8-10 miles out is a sticky proposition, even if he's low and cold but aware. It is as risky as my experience has indicated.

I can now trace my mistake back to the beginning of the engagement where I need to decide if I'm willing to press to the merge as part of the BVR dance or not. If I am, I need to make sure I get there as part of the engagement. If I'm not willing to commit to the merge, I need to draw the line where I bail if things are not going my way in BVR.

Will this apply to all scenarios? No. But it gives me something to work with.

Probably a silly noobish question, but since the thread is opened already : I tried to dogfight a friend of mine in his Su27 with my F15 several times (spawn head on, guns only) and I always pretty much get my ass kicked. He always wins about 2:1. I checked the fights afterwards in tacview where I can see that even when I'm trying to stay at my corner he's just able to pull much tighter turns and is always able to get behind my back more easily (and he's by no means an ace pilot either:-)) I don't quite understand what to do in such situation. What other option then turning fight I have (other than run away) ? I read somewhere (probably here:)) that F15 is an "energy fighter" - how does that work ?

Forcing a merge is surprisingly easy, because every pilot's situational awareness is limited, especially in a multi-threat environment, and going from 10nm(a range you could still escape a BVR shot from) to 0 nm doesn't take many seconds. The opponent is not required to cooperate.

 

Once the range becomes very close (less than 5nm), medium range missiles start to become easier to dodge because they are still in the acceleration phase when they reach you. Mutual destruction can be avoided by: using terrain for cover, chaff, flares, and high G(whether you see the missile coming or not). Having afterburner off and pointing the nose straight at the incoming missile can help with your flares' effectiveness in spoofing head-on shots of IR missiles. Sometimes it may be beneficial to concentrate fully on avoiding the other guy's shots, instead of taking the shot yourself.

 

And once the merge is complete, it's showtime :D

Thanks. A few more things to digest and factor into my approach. It's general information like this that I'm looking for to help me deal with my opponent and understand my own situation as the fight transitions from BVR to WVR to the merge.

Probably a silly noobish question, but since the thread is opened already : I tried to dogfight a friend of mine in his Su27 with my F15 several times (spawn head on, guns only) and I always pretty much get my ass kicked. He always wins about 2:1. I checked the fights afterwards in tacview where I can see that even when I'm trying to stay at my corner he's just able to pull much tighter turns and is always able to get behind my back more easily (and he's by no means an ace pilot either:-)) I don't quite understand what to do in such situation. What other option then turning fight I have (other than run away) ? I read somewhere (probably here:)) that F15 is an "energy fighter" - how does that work ?

Good question which I share as well. When I hear the Eagle is an energy fighter I think zoom and boom. Yet when I say zoom and boom I get told that WW2 fighter tactics don't apply to modern jets. So what are the general tactics/approach to dogfighting of an "energy fighter" like the F-15?

Um ... it depends? :D

 

What's your mission? Do you HAVE to shoot down the other plane? Can you run him out of fuel instead, or just not let him get near to where you are?

Yes. It's a 1v1 and he needs to go down because of an off-hand comment he made about my mom. There's no other way to resolve this than through a contrived simulated A2A duel.

I appreciate the help GG, but I feel details like "make him run out of fuel" belong in the realm of the details that separate great pilots from good pilots. I'm not even good yet. All I'm looking for is a basic framework to build off of. I feel like I have that for BVR but not for what comes after if it comes to that.

I heard that tuning the fight into a vertical fight was good, not sure how or if its true though...

Gamey stuff highlighted as things that are to be fixed. Inside 10nm, MRMs should almost always out-turn you, unless you've got them in Rmin. Rmin is pretty short, and if you fly to within 5nm of someone carrying a slammer or R-77 without having your own weapons in flight, you should be smokin' bbq. If the first one didn't nail you (because you notched successfully, and with difficulty) the next one should. Every time it doesn't, the game is just helping you out.

Once the range becomes very close (less than 5nm), medium range missiles start to become easier to dodge because they are still in the acceleration phase when they reach you. Mutual destruction can be avoided by: using terrain for cover, chaff, flares, and high G(whether you see the missile coming or not). Having afterburner off and pointing the nose straight at the incoming missile can help with your flares' effectiveness in spoofing head-on shots of IR missiles. Sometimes it may be beneficial to concentrate fully on avoiding the other guy's shots, instead of taking the shot yourself.

 

And once the merge is complete, it's showtime :D

Boom and zoom is an ambush tactic that uses excess energy and surprise (thus, ambush :) ). Energy fighting refers to knowing how to change the plane of your turn to alter your TC (as viewed from the bandit's turn plane) ... often this means using the vertical - a yo-yo is an example of energy fighting/management. Energy fighting is a very difficult subject, and I don't believe it is well covered in most literature.

Good question which I share as well. When I hear the Eagle is an energy fighter I think zoom and boom. Yet when I say zoom and boom I get told that WW2 fighter tactics don't apply to modern jets. So what are the general tactics/approach to dogfighting of an "energy fighter" like the F-15?