Bear with me on this: and there will be others with more inside knowledge. Please criticise any facts. This is one a basic review of the program.
I was watching a Nat Geo documentary on fighter dog-fights. The period under review was from end WW2 to end Vietnam and was about USAF pilots and techniques. After the many victories towards the end of WW2 and in Korea, plus others, it was accepted that the ground victories were because the skies were owned by USAF & allies. The greater skill in dog-fighting, plus better training & armaments was the winner. This was achieved with Mk.1 eyeball use of guns. I can't remember if it was the Korean conflict, but the kill/loss ratio was 750/75. Then came missile technology and the ability to kill at medium range without dog-fighting. 'The powers that were' declared that missile technology no longer required pilots to be taught close counter dog-fighting tactics and it was removed from fighter pilot training.
The reaction from the 'old farts' was predicable, and the quote from one senior pilot was that the decisions had been made by people who had outlived their usefulness or had been promoted above their capabilities. Easy to say, I know.
The F4 was introduced without guns; only missiles & bombs in dual roles. It's performance was astonishing from previous jet fighters, but it's opposition in Vietnam were Migs, with missiles & guns. After a few years in Vietnam USAF did not have ownership of the skies as they wished, and they wondered why they had fired huge number of missiles for few kills. They needed to get closer to the enemy a/c, but if they were too close they couldn't fire the missiles. They needed guns & dog-fight skills. The USAF were flying with one kind of strategy, but the enemy was using another. This due to the weapons & skills.
It was then deemed necessary to reintroduce basic dog-flight skills and Top Gun was born. The pilot was reduced in the very basics of manual aerial combat and became less reliant on the long range automatic lock-on electronic/radar missile kill tactic. They had to be able to do both. Once again, in conflicts USAF regained ownership of the skies. Back to Basics. Have guns returned, or another close encounter weapon?
Watching this it sounded familiar to what many of us have been discussing about the demise of the modern commercial MPA piloting skills. The Powers That Be have allowed automatics to replace basic skills; not enough education about the automatic systems, and not enough skill to take over when necessary. It seems, perhaps history is being repeated, but what will be the motivation to reverse it? Accident statistics are the driving force in the civil world. Risk/Cost equations.
I appreciate it may be considered apples & oranges by some, but IMHO the comparison might be more oranges & tangerines.