MIL Can someone tell me how the USAF had an almost even ratio with the NVA until the end?

Discussion in 'On Topic' started by Sammo, Jun 12, 2008.

  1. Sammo

    Sammo New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    Messages:
    43,376
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Canada
    My understanding is that the USAF/Navy had an almost even ratio of success with the NVA in terms of jet fighters in the Vietnam War until near the end, when the TOPGUN program began to show success.

    My question is - how did they achieve such success? I know the USSR supplied the NVA with MiG-17s and later MiG-21s, but how were they able to match the pilot skill and combat capability of the F-4 Phantoms?
     
  2. NEp8ntballer

    NEp8ntballer New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 22, 2006
    Messages:
    2,347
    Likes Received:
    0
    the F-4 wasn't designed with a gun which made it a shitty dogfighter. the first generation missiles were easily tricked into flying toward the sun or by ground heat. the missiles couldn't be fired from a certain angle because they couldn't turn through the G forces. Once they attached a gun it got better. Usually the Migs wouldn't want to tangle unless they had an advantage. Mig 21s would only come up, shoot their missiles and run away to fight again another day.

    They had an ECM pod that would make the 21s radar think that the fighter bombers were really an f-4. Somebody got the bright idea to do it different and have that same pod rigged up to broadcast the signal from a fighter bomber when it really was an F-4. That particular operation was very successful and they shot down a handful of mig 21s.
     
  3. Ranger-AO

    Ranger-AO I'm here for the Taliban party. Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Messages:
    34,660
    Likes Received:
    150
    Location:
    the places in between
    The F4 was created with the expectation that dogfights were a thing of the past. It was never intended to be involved in a dogfight and it's a tribute to the skill and determination of the pilots that flew it that they were able to do what they did with what they had to work with.
     
  4. Sammo

    Sammo New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    Messages:
    43,376
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Canada
    Yeah, Operation Bolo. I was reading about that too.

    Why wasn't the F-4 designed with a machine gun?
     
  5. Ranger-AO

    Ranger-AO I'm here for the Taliban party. Moderator

    Joined:
    Nov 23, 2004
    Messages:
    34,660
    Likes Received:
    150
    Location:
    the places in between
  6. Sammo

    Sammo New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2005
    Messages:
    43,376
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Southern Canada
  7. mikdavi84

    mikdavi84 OT Supporter

    Joined:
    Nov 13, 2003
    Messages:
    55,927
    Likes Received:
    2
    Location:
    Kandahar, Afghanistan
    missle technology
     
  8. nsxrebel

    nsxrebel New Member

    Joined:
    May 22, 2006
    Messages:
    3,272
    Likes Received:
    0
    :werd: they thought missiles was all they needed to take down the enemy. They were proven wrong. Just like how the Airforce thought/thinks they can win wars with strategical bombing.
     
  9. ElCidKid

    ElCidKid New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 4, 2005
    Messages:
    23,971
    Likes Received:
    0
    Alsothe Soviets were sending some of its best pilots to fly for the NVA
     
  10. Burrito10

    Burrito10 New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2004
    Messages:
    5,784
    Likes Received:
    0
    Location:
    Arizona
    My new boss flew F-4's in Vietnam, he retired at 23 years. Pretty cool dude, always giving advice and encouragement. I guess he was a good officer, from how he treats his workers.
     

Share This Page