Originally Posted by
monkey416
No such limitation would exist in combat and I don't think there is any air force out there that practices forward quarter gunnery in the air to air environment.
Anyone with any time in fighters understands that there's a serious risk associated with ahead of 135 gun employment, with near zero training payoff. Theres a very good reason why its not done in training. You'd literally lose more aircraft in accidents than enemy you would take out with that added marginal skillset in combat.
This simulation was the equivalent of combat and the human pilot was unprepared for it. If the head on attack is too risky to be trained in real life, perhaps it should at least be done in a simulator.
That might avoid embarrassing results such as we just saw, a 'top gun' surprised by a tactic he never expected before it happened in real life.
The 'near zero training payoff' clearly applies only if the eventual opponent has the same opinion about this tactic.
It does seem the rules of engagement need to be rethought here, the training fails to reflect reality.