I'm with Beags.

On TLP I saw 3 sec guns tracking film on an F18 canopy by A GAF 104, could've sold tickets!

Nothing matters very much, most things don't matter at all.

Lots

Very

Yes, that too.

Once in close, the MiGs were lower wing-loaders than, say, the F4 and new skills were needed to take them on. That's how we ended up with the aggressor sqns.

In my F-15 days, the FCS simply backed-off the F-16's stick input as it got slower so that you couldn't over-alpha it. That was a good regime of flight to get them in because they stopped turning whereas we didn't.

Not sure about that, but I do recall this. I remember being told, though unsure if it's true, that the override was only added as a result of an aircraft loss.

Wiki: F-16 - Negative stability and fly-by-wire

.........Although each axis of movement is limited by the FLCC, flight testing revealed that "assaulting" multiple limiters at high AOA and low speed can result in an AOA far exceeding the 25° limit; colloquially referred to as "departing". This causes a deep stall; a near-freefall at 50° to 60° AOA, either upright or inverted. While at a very high AOA, the aircraft's attitude is stable but control surfaces are ineffective and the aircraft's pitch limiter locks the stabilators at an extreme pitch-up or pitch-down attempting to recover; the pitch-limiting can be overridden so the pilot can "rock" the nose via pitch control to recover............

I reckon that sounds about right, ORAC. Doesn't sound much fun, does it?

I love all these FBW systems that think they're smarter than pilots! ;)

The Airbus A320 crash comes spectacuarly to mind.

The CV-22 'logic' that will allow you to crash before allowing you to overtorque the engines comes to mind.

I believe first generation C-130J software wouldn't let you re-start the aircraft after shutdown if ANY limit had been exceeded until data was downloaded to maintenance computer (not useful for an aircraft that does occasionally land places you don't want to stay).

And others I can't think of just now...

Humans make mistakes. Computers only prevent mistakes their human programmers thought of.

A couple of thoughts from my little experience. The F-15 has on-board systems that allow it to ID the target at beyond visual ranges for ROE purposes.

Most fighter pilots have had very little time actually firing the gun on their aircraft in an air-to-air employment. The HUD display may or not may not truly represent the bullet path. Hitting a high-performance fighter with a gun is more difficult than most believe.

The new newest IR missiles such as the Russian R73M are highly maneuverable, can be launched very far off boresight, and are resistant to decoys.

Make sure your fighter has a helmet-mounted site/display for that visual fight to take advantage of your IR missile.