4 ms·

That is true of America (Gulf War, not WW2), which has enjoyed air superiority in nearly all of its conflicts in the last few decades.[0] But here’s a video of

That is true of America (Gulf War, not WW2), which has enjoyed air superiority in nearly all of its conflicts in the last few decades.[0] But here’s a video of a dogfight between Russia and Ukraine fighters: https://eurasiantimes.com/ukrainian-su-27-flanker-dogfighting-a-russian-fighter-jet/ https://eurasiantimes.com/ukrainian-su-27-flanker-dogfightin... [0] https://www.sandboxx.us/blog/are-the-days-of-dogfights-over-an-in-depth-air-combat-analysis/ https://www.sandboxx.us/blog/are-the-days-of-dogfights-over-...

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
n4r9 4y ago
That article itself seems to throw doubt on whether that was really a "dogfight": >EurAsian Times reached out to Aviation Analyst Prashant Prabhakar, who sounded a more skeptical note. >According to Prabhakar, “Dogfights – a term used to describe close-quarter aerial combat between fighter jets has been a major component of aerial wars at least until the early 90s. Modern terminology for the same is air combat maneuvering (ACM). >As significant as they are, such maneuvers are hardly routine in modern air combat, much less seen by civilians on the ground. >From what is reported, a Ukrainian Air Force Su-27 Flanker fighter is said to be deploying infrared flares to spoof an infrared-guided air-to-air missile, or AAM, fired by a Russian fighter jet, which again isn’t clearly shown in the video. >As fascinating as it looks, I’d still be more interested in a more, perhaps clear video of the said “dogfight” for a better conclusion. Dogfights in the 21st century? Sounds too good to be true? Perhaps it is. or maybe not”.
- mc32 4y ago
  I'd agree with his take. Dogfights, as the term alludes to, is close-quarters and scrappy, on top of each other. This appears to be more of taking evasive manoeuvers and ACM is more appropriate.
  - lelandfe 4y ago
    Do you think what the OP article describes is likewise not a dogfight?
    - mc32 4y ago
      Yes, I agree, that's interception.
dncornholio 4y ago
Nothing concrete in the evidence. The so called Ukrainian fighter was never in the picture.
- lelandfe 4y ago
  I nominally agree, although a WSJ military reporter saying this does add credence.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

n4r9 4y ago

That article itself seems to throw doubt on whether that was really a "dogfight": >EurAsian Times reached out to Aviation Analyst Prashant Prabhakar, who sounded a more skeptical note. >According to Prabhakar, “Dogfights – a term used to describe close-quarter aerial combat between fighter jets has been a major component of aerial wars at least until the early 90s. Modern terminology for the same is air combat maneuvering (ACM). >As significant as they are, such maneuvers are hardly routine in modern air combat, much less seen by civilians on the ground. >From what is reported, a Ukrainian Air Force Su-27 Flanker fighter is said to be deploying infrared flares to spoof an infrared-guided air-to-air missile, or AAM, fired by a Russian fighter jet, which again isn’t clearly shown in the video. >As fascinating as it looks, I’d still be more interested in a more, perhaps clear video of the said “dogfight” for a better conclusion. Dogfights in the 21st century? Sounds too good to be true? Perhaps it is. or maybe not”.

mc32 4y ago
I'd agree with his take. Dogfights, as the term alludes to, is close-quarters and scrappy, on top of each other. This appears to be more of taking evasive manoeuvers and ACM is more appropriate.
- lelandfe 4y ago
  Do you think what the OP article describes is likewise not a dogfight?
  - mc32 4y ago
    Yes, I agree, that's interception.

dncornholio 4y ago

Nothing concrete in the evidence. The so called Ukrainian fighter was never in the picture.

lelandfe 4y ago
I nominally agree, although a WSJ military reporter saying this does add credence.