RAF Air-Air Combat
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Floatin' on th' Black Pig, Yarr!
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF Air-Air Combat
There has been plenty of stuff over the years that I have read about the SHAR combats in the South Atlantic but does anyone have a clue when was the last RAF air-air combat?
Not a FAR troll, a genuine question.
Not a FAR troll, a genuine question.
Depends ...
If you mean by an RAF pilot in an RAF-owned plane then you can either choose the Confrontation with Indonesia (Jackonicko has alluded before now to some evidence to suggest that an Indonesian aircraft was shot down by, I think, a Javelin). Failing that, WW2.
If you mean by an RAF pilot, then I think the Falklands, when RAF bods on loan to the SHAR force did rather well. Also a number of victories gained by RAF pilots in Korea on exchange with F-86 outfits and, I believe, with 77 Squadron RAAF.
And stand by for the umpteenth airing of comments about the accidental shoot-down of the Jag by the Phantom...
Edit - oops. Forgot about the little fracas with the Israelis and the Egyptians in 1948. Couple of losses and a couple of victories there. Also, a Canberra was shot down during the Suez crisis, and a Valiant detected the emissions of something - probably an EAF Meteor NF - stuggling to try and reach it (it didn't).
If you mean by an RAF pilot in an RAF-owned plane then you can either choose the Confrontation with Indonesia (Jackonicko has alluded before now to some evidence to suggest that an Indonesian aircraft was shot down by, I think, a Javelin). Failing that, WW2.
If you mean by an RAF pilot, then I think the Falklands, when RAF bods on loan to the SHAR force did rather well. Also a number of victories gained by RAF pilots in Korea on exchange with F-86 outfits and, I believe, with 77 Squadron RAAF.
And stand by for the umpteenth airing of comments about the accidental shoot-down of the Jag by the Phantom...
Edit - oops. Forgot about the little fracas with the Israelis and the Egyptians in 1948. Couple of losses and a couple of victories there. Also, a Canberra was shot down during the Suez crisis, and a Valiant detected the emissions of something - probably an EAF Meteor NF - stuggling to try and reach it (it didn't).
Chippy63 - yes, he was awarded the DFC, but not for air-air work. He was CO of 1(F), and although the GR3s were wired for carriage of AIM-9 so they could fill in for lost/shot-down SHARs, the attrition rate for the SHAR was lower than predicted. The GR3s stuck to ground attack work instead.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: lONDON
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was working with a Brown Job who was spouting questions that seemed to be along the lines of:
When was there last an 'Ace' in the RAF? Think he said an Ace was 3 Air - Air kills.
When was the last Air - Air kill? Not counting blue on blue.
These were his arguements for not having Air to Air Combat capability. I'm NOT saying I agree - I just wondered on the accuracy of his arguement and this would be the forum.
THIS IS NOT TALKING RADALT - BUT HE WAS LOGGED IN AND IT SAVED ME LOGGING IN - silly boy - ah - internet cabins in the desert. Mr C Hinecap.
When was there last an 'Ace' in the RAF? Think he said an Ace was 3 Air - Air kills.
When was the last Air - Air kill? Not counting blue on blue.
These were his arguements for not having Air to Air Combat capability. I'm NOT saying I agree - I just wondered on the accuracy of his arguement and this would be the forum.
THIS IS NOT TALKING RADALT - BUT HE WAS LOGGED IN AND IT SAVED ME LOGGING IN - silly boy - ah - internet cabins in the desert. Mr C Hinecap.
C.Hinecap:
1. When was there last an 'Ace' in the RAF?
Never - the RAF (and RFC before it) never officially recognised 'ace' status. Last one was WW2 if you apply the criteria below, though.
2. Think he said an Ace was 3 Air - Air kills.
No - the generally accepted level is five. However, applying his standard, the answer is 1982 - Dave Morgan (on loan to the FAA) scored 3 (as did 'Sharkey' Ward).
3. When was the last Air - Air kill? Not counting blue on blue.
Presume you mean generally, and involving US/UK/ NATO forces? If so, Kosovo 1999. I have a suspicion that there may have been some air-air subsequently over Ethiopia, and possibly Yemen, but would need to check.
4. These were his arguements for not having Air to Air Combat capability.
This is an interesting phenomenon that's taking on worrying proportions. Because the bad guys usually take the view ' If we fly, we'll die' and stay out of the way, there are now siren voices arguing that air-air capability is pointless.
If the US/UK/NATO get rid of a credible air-air capability, you can bet that the opposition will be sending out wave after wave of upgraded cheap and cheeful fighters with BVR capability (AMRAAMski, Archer, Derby, etc) hunting for HVAs. They'll also start mixing it with friendly a/c providing CAS and the like, as well as making life uncomfortable for land component types.
The Iraqis attempted air-air in GW1 (one F/A-18 was shot down by a MiG-25); the Serbs tried it in 1999; you can guarantee that the Iranians, who still have a (limited ?) capability with F-14 and Phoenix (and HAWK SAM converted for the A-A role!!) would have a bash at it, and so would the North Koreans. Air-air capability is important still, even if it is only to say to the opposition 'Come on, have a go if you think you're hard enough' so as to put them off flying.
Let me end with two quotes, which although from WW2 remain valid, since they talk about allowing your opponent to control the air:
“It is necessary to win the air battle before embarking on the land battle. If this is not done, then operations on land will be conducted at a great disadvantage.” Monty, 1944
"Anyone who has to fight, even with the most modern weapons, against an enemy in complete command of the air, fights like a savage against modern European troops, under the same handicaps and with the same chances of success."
Rommel, 1944. The quote may be a little un-PC these days, but the point remains the same.
1. When was there last an 'Ace' in the RAF?
Never - the RAF (and RFC before it) never officially recognised 'ace' status. Last one was WW2 if you apply the criteria below, though.
2. Think he said an Ace was 3 Air - Air kills.
No - the generally accepted level is five. However, applying his standard, the answer is 1982 - Dave Morgan (on loan to the FAA) scored 3 (as did 'Sharkey' Ward).
3. When was the last Air - Air kill? Not counting blue on blue.
Presume you mean generally, and involving US/UK/ NATO forces? If so, Kosovo 1999. I have a suspicion that there may have been some air-air subsequently over Ethiopia, and possibly Yemen, but would need to check.
4. These were his arguements for not having Air to Air Combat capability.
This is an interesting phenomenon that's taking on worrying proportions. Because the bad guys usually take the view ' If we fly, we'll die' and stay out of the way, there are now siren voices arguing that air-air capability is pointless.
If the US/UK/NATO get rid of a credible air-air capability, you can bet that the opposition will be sending out wave after wave of upgraded cheap and cheeful fighters with BVR capability (AMRAAMski, Archer, Derby, etc) hunting for HVAs. They'll also start mixing it with friendly a/c providing CAS and the like, as well as making life uncomfortable for land component types.
The Iraqis attempted air-air in GW1 (one F/A-18 was shot down by a MiG-25); the Serbs tried it in 1999; you can guarantee that the Iranians, who still have a (limited ?) capability with F-14 and Phoenix (and HAWK SAM converted for the A-A role!!) would have a bash at it, and so would the North Koreans. Air-air capability is important still, even if it is only to say to the opposition 'Come on, have a go if you think you're hard enough' so as to put them off flying.
Let me end with two quotes, which although from WW2 remain valid, since they talk about allowing your opponent to control the air:
“It is necessary to win the air battle before embarking on the land battle. If this is not done, then operations on land will be conducted at a great disadvantage.” Monty, 1944
"Anyone who has to fight, even with the most modern weapons, against an enemy in complete command of the air, fights like a savage against modern European troops, under the same handicaps and with the same chances of success."
Rommel, 1944. The quote may be a little un-PC these days, but the point remains the same.
Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Floatin' on th' Black Pig, Yarr!
Posts: 187
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indonesia? Interesting. I know that Korea was a definate for RAF Air-Air action.
It seems a perfect advert for keeping an Air-Air capability at a decent strength, make it not worth their while to get out of bed.
It seems a perfect advert for keeping an Air-Air capability at a decent strength, make it not worth their while to get out of bed.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some interesting points being made here and it is good to see that prune contributors are not seduced by the arguments in favour of spending all our defence money on offensive capabilities. As Archimedes says, if one abandons one's air defence capabilities one allows the aggressor a cheap option to attack high value targets with impunity. In any case, without a secure base there can be no sustained offensive action and without air superiority or at least a favourable air situation there can be no offensive air action without heavy losses.
The foremost requirement of air power is to achieve and maintain air superiority and only when this is achieved can offensive air action be sustained.
It is also perhaps worth considering the political situation post Gulf War 2. Although in this conflict the political will to mount offensive action was there from the beginning, it might be a long time before we see the leader of a UK socialist government prepared to do this again even if WMD are eventually found in Iraq. It is generally the case that the politicians are reluctant to take offensive action until after they are attacked. In these circumstances it makes no sense at all to allocate any money to offensive capabilities until a sensible air defence capability is afforded.
What we need is a sound defensive capability and sufficient offensive potential to deter the strongest potential aggressor. I doubt at the moment that we have sufficient air defence forces in UK to protect ourselves against even the French - don't scoff, intentions change overnight, capabilities take longer.
The foremost requirement of air power is to achieve and maintain air superiority and only when this is achieved can offensive air action be sustained.
It is also perhaps worth considering the political situation post Gulf War 2. Although in this conflict the political will to mount offensive action was there from the beginning, it might be a long time before we see the leader of a UK socialist government prepared to do this again even if WMD are eventually found in Iraq. It is generally the case that the politicians are reluctant to take offensive action until after they are attacked. In these circumstances it makes no sense at all to allocate any money to offensive capabilities until a sensible air defence capability is afforded.
What we need is a sound defensive capability and sufficient offensive potential to deter the strongest potential aggressor. I doubt at the moment that we have sufficient air defence forces in UK to protect ourselves against even the French - don't scoff, intentions change overnight, capabilities take longer.
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: City of Culture
Posts: 218
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone remember the late 90's early 2000 when everyone thought the future was bright and rosy without the threat of nuclear war hanging over our heads. Then 11/9 happened but it was soon followed by Afghanstan so we all thought things would get back to normal with a bright future. But then one and a half years later Iraq happened and things were not so bright, in fact things look quite bad
Considering that it took a year and a half for Iraq to happen whats going to happen in another year? how many more of our allies and going to be neutrals or perhaps even enemies?
If as Soddim suggests we wont help out the US with its next Axis of Evil tick will it be time for our embassy in this rogue country to get an "accidential" visit from a USAF dropped precission guided bomb
With the US turning on everyone left right and centre the future doesnt look to bright to me so hell yes I think we should start buying every fighter we can make cause I havent a clue who are allies are anymore.
Considering that it took a year and a half for Iraq to happen whats going to happen in another year? how many more of our allies and going to be neutrals or perhaps even enemies?If as Soddim suggests we wont help out the US with its next Axis of Evil tick will it be time for our embassy in this rogue country to get an "accidential" visit from a USAF dropped precission guided bomb
With the US turning on everyone left right and centre the future doesnt look to bright to me so hell yes I think we should start buying every fighter we can make cause I havent a clue who are allies are anymore.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: in my combat underpants
Age: 53
Posts: 1,065
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chaps - esp Archie.
Many thanks for the wise words. I had wondered on teh truth behind what I had been told and lo, it came to pass that PPRUNE would come up with the goods!
A word of warning. This thread is in danger of not sinking to purile lows. It may become a point of sanity.
RAF chaps have got bigger wi!!ys than the rest of you put together!
There - saved the day.
Again - thanks.
Mr C H.
Many thanks for the wise words. I had wondered on teh truth behind what I had been told and lo, it came to pass that PPRUNE would come up with the goods!
A word of warning. This thread is in danger of not sinking to purile lows. It may become a point of sanity.
RAF chaps have got bigger wi!!ys than the rest of you put together!
There - saved the day.
Again - thanks.
Mr C H.
Soddem,
If you think we currently have a Socialist Government you have a very limited political outlook!
I find your opinions on UK AD quaintly out of date and simply not relevant to the world we currently inhabit.
There is NO current air threat to the UK, there is a threat but that's a different matter. That threat is from suicide bombers, car bombers, aerosol sprays and the like and I dont care how many shiny AD assets you have they cannot defend against that threat. I also fail to see how an AD capability, no matter how extensive, can cope with a highjacked airliner veering of course whilst on approach to LHR over central London.
Now there is a need for a deployable Air superiority capability, and we don't exactly sit at the top table there with the F3 do we?That need will be admirably filled by Typhoon. Typhoon outfits, both AD and dual roled, will also give us a more credible AD capability in the UK than we have had for many a year.
The world has changed, we no longer face a threat from formed Armed Forces as such. The threat that is out there can best be dealt with politically by tackling the root cause and by having deployable flexible forces.
Me? I'd spend the whole lot on throbbing tandem rotor jobbies, SF, OS, AAR and Int.
If you think we currently have a Socialist Government you have a very limited political outlook!
I find your opinions on UK AD quaintly out of date and simply not relevant to the world we currently inhabit.
There is NO current air threat to the UK, there is a threat but that's a different matter. That threat is from suicide bombers, car bombers, aerosol sprays and the like and I dont care how many shiny AD assets you have they cannot defend against that threat. I also fail to see how an AD capability, no matter how extensive, can cope with a highjacked airliner veering of course whilst on approach to LHR over central London.
Now there is a need for a deployable Air superiority capability, and we don't exactly sit at the top table there with the F3 do we?That need will be admirably filled by Typhoon. Typhoon outfits, both AD and dual roled, will also give us a more credible AD capability in the UK than we have had for many a year.
The world has changed, we no longer face a threat from formed Armed Forces as such. The threat that is out there can best be dealt with politically by tackling the root cause and by having deployable flexible forces.
Me? I'd spend the whole lot on throbbing tandem rotor jobbies, SF, OS, AAR and Int.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: A PC!
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know the question asked "no blue on blue" - but wasn't the last RAF Air-to-Air kill the Bruggen Jag that came off second best to the Wildenrathe F4?
That was post Falklands, after all, and I don't recall any kills in the FRY or Iraq (first edition or sequel).
That was post Falklands, after all, and I don't recall any kills in the FRY or Iraq (first edition or sequel).
Bluew****r,
Slight difference betwen me and Helen Clark, I would leave the RAF with a fully operational fleet of 7 Typhon squadrons, 3 Harrier GR7 squadrons and 7 Tornado GR4 squadrons.
Now whose the moron?
Slight difference betwen me and Helen Clark, I would leave the RAF with a fully operational fleet of 7 Typhon squadrons, 3 Harrier GR7 squadrons and 7 Tornado GR4 squadrons.
Now whose the moron?
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pr00ne – what we actually have is a government with socialists in it that depends upon socialists for funding. If you think Tony Bliar is the government, think on.
You might be right about the threat today but can you be sure that it is also the threat in, say, 10 years’ time or even next year? My AD views might be more traditional than yours but if you cannot defend your home base then sooner or later someone who does not like you or what you do will take a pot at it. AD aircraft are but one part of that defence but I thought that was the bit we were discussing.
There is a current air threat to UK and it is currently addressed by AD forces. Whilst terrorism is difficult to combat with conventional military force, that is no reason to ignore the threat.
Yes, the Typhoon should give us a better AD capability if it works as it should and if we deploy enough – two very big ifs. If in the meantime we get carried away with an all offensive policy then our AD force will be further depleted.
As for the tandem rotor jobbies, throbbing or not, you must have had your tongue in your cheek!
You might be right about the threat today but can you be sure that it is also the threat in, say, 10 years’ time or even next year? My AD views might be more traditional than yours but if you cannot defend your home base then sooner or later someone who does not like you or what you do will take a pot at it. AD aircraft are but one part of that defence but I thought that was the bit we were discussing.
There is a current air threat to UK and it is currently addressed by AD forces. Whilst terrorism is difficult to combat with conventional military force, that is no reason to ignore the threat.
Yes, the Typhoon should give us a better AD capability if it works as it should and if we deploy enough – two very big ifs. If in the meantime we get carried away with an all offensive policy then our AD force will be further depleted.
As for the tandem rotor jobbies, throbbing or not, you must have had your tongue in your cheek!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RAF Air to Air Combat
Assuming that the Indonesian incident never occured and ignoring the famous F4 v Jag incident in Germany, I don't think there has been an occasion since WW2 when an RAF pilot in an RAF plane has shot another 'enemy' plane down in air-to-air combat.
However, there have been two instances since WW2 when RAF aircraft have been shot down in air-to-air combat. The first was on 7 Jan 49 when 3 Spitfire FR18's of 208 Sqn were lost in air-to-air combat with two Israel Spitfire IX's (flown incidently by an American ex-Bell X1 test pilot and a Canadian who had been decorated by the RAF in WW2). Later that same day a Tempest of 213 Sqn was also shot down in an air-to-air engagement with another Israeli Spitfire IX.
The most recent ocassion an RAF aircraft has been shot down in an air-to-air engagement was on 6 Nov 56 when a Canberra PR7 was shot down by a Syrian MiG-15.
www.spyflight.co.uk
However, there have been two instances since WW2 when RAF aircraft have been shot down in air-to-air combat. The first was on 7 Jan 49 when 3 Spitfire FR18's of 208 Sqn were lost in air-to-air combat with two Israel Spitfire IX's (flown incidently by an American ex-Bell X1 test pilot and a Canadian who had been decorated by the RAF in WW2). Later that same day a Tempest of 213 Sqn was also shot down in an air-to-air engagement with another Israeli Spitfire IX.
The most recent ocassion an RAF aircraft has been shot down in an air-to-air engagement was on 6 Nov 56 when a Canberra PR7 was shot down by a Syrian MiG-15.
www.spyflight.co.uk
Lupus Domesticus
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NZ
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NO current air threat to the UK pr00ne! Ooh look, it's stopped raining. Let's take the roof off and sell it, and use the money for something important, like a garden party. After all, it's never going to rain again, is it....and if it does, we can always borrow a tarp from the neighbours.
Quote: I also fail to see how an AD capability, no matter how extensive, can cope with a highjacked airliner veering of course whilst on approach to LHR over central London
Beg pardon? And just exactly what the hell else is meant to deal with such a situation? Also has it not occured to you that if the airliner in question has got as far as the final approach to Heathrow, perhaps ATC and the RAF are aware that it is highjacked and have done something about it already? (using, of necessity, an AD capability...)
F3 may not be the flashest kid on the block, but it works. "Typhon" as you so eloquently put it, has yet to enter service, let alone prove itself. In the meantime, you are going to deploy.....lots of helicopters? Hmm.
As to "whose" the moron, probably still mine, unless of course you are a New Zealander - or did you mean "who's"?
English spoken here, old chap. Just for future reference.
Quote: I also fail to see how an AD capability, no matter how extensive, can cope with a highjacked airliner veering of course whilst on approach to LHR over central London
Beg pardon? And just exactly what the hell else is meant to deal with such a situation? Also has it not occured to you that if the airliner in question has got as far as the final approach to Heathrow, perhaps ATC and the RAF are aware that it is highjacked and have done something about it already? (using, of necessity, an AD capability...)
F3 may not be the flashest kid on the block, but it works. "Typhon" as you so eloquently put it, has yet to enter service, let alone prove itself. In the meantime, you are going to deploy.....lots of helicopters? Hmm.
As to "whose" the moron, probably still mine, unless of course you are a New Zealander - or did you mean "who's"?
English spoken here, old chap. Just for future reference.
Matoman - the RAF has definitely scored air-air victories since WW2 (although admittedly not long afterwards), in the form of a couple of Egyptian AF Spitfires brought down in 1948.
Just to add to your comment about the last A-A loss, there was at least one other before that, when a Lincoln was shot down over Eastern Germany. IIRC, it had strayed over the border because of a nav error - a genuine one rather than a made up reason to cover an ELINT flight? - and was brought down by a couple of MiGs. Examination of the wreckage revealed that the Lincoln had fired its guns, but there's no evidence to suggest that it hit anything.
While I was checking up on the ref to the EAF Spitfires (to make sure I hadn't imagined it), I also discovered a reference to the fact that a Venom might (stress might) have given an EAF MiG-15 a battering (but not destroyed it) during the Suez campaign (I am referring to an alleged a-a engagement). As a matter of interest, does anyone know if that's accurate?
Just to add to your comment about the last A-A loss, there was at least one other before that, when a Lincoln was shot down over Eastern Germany. IIRC, it had strayed over the border because of a nav error - a genuine one rather than a made up reason to cover an ELINT flight? - and was brought down by a couple of MiGs. Examination of the wreckage revealed that the Lincoln had fired its guns, but there's no evidence to suggest that it hit anything.
While I was checking up on the ref to the EAF Spitfires (to make sure I hadn't imagined it), I also discovered a reference to the fact that a Venom might (stress might) have given an EAF MiG-15 a battering (but not destroyed it) during the Suez campaign (I am referring to an alleged a-a engagement). As a matter of interest, does anyone know if that's accurate?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Age: 84
Posts: 897
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was at Tengah 1965-66, and I vividly recall the very, very strong rumour of an Indonesian C130 being downed,after dropping a load of paratroops up near the Thailand border. It was equally strongly rumoured that a Javelin from 60 Sqn had done the deed. I've not seen any comment that supports that it actually happened.
Slightly tangential to the discussion here, I know, but does anyone here really belief an order could/would be given to shoot down a civilian airliner on approach to the Tower of London? Terrorists are hardly likely to be broadcasting the target when they leave the approach, so on what basis could an order be given to shoot it down?
Slightly tangential to the discussion here, I know, but does anyone here really belief an order could/would be given to shoot down a civilian airliner on approach to the Tower of London? Terrorists are hardly likely to be broadcasting the target when they leave the approach, so on what basis could an order be given to shoot it down?