PDA

View Full Version : Dicta Boelcke - applicable in WW2?



general_kalle
02-17-2010, 06:50 AM
so im flying Rise of Flight aswell and there's this bible of a fighter pilot written by german ace Boelcke called the Dicta Boelcke

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dicta_Boelcke http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dicta_Boelcke

it was wondering if you guys think it applies for world war 2 aswell or if it is outdated by 1940?

general_kalle
02-17-2010, 06:50 AM
so im flying Rise of Flight aswell and there's this bible of a fighter pilot written by german ace Boelcke called the Dicta Boelcke

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dicta_Boelcke http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dicta_Boelcke

it was wondering if you guys think it applies for world war 2 aswell or if it is outdated by 1940?

LEBillfish
02-17-2010, 06:55 AM
It's still applicable and taught today....Common sense has no era.

Try those lessons online here...You'll improve your number of kills yet more so RTB's. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

K2

Stiletto-
02-17-2010, 08:55 AM
Agreed, these were the building blocks for the original fighter tactics and are still the first steps today.

The first real dog fighting sim I got as a kid in the early 90's was Red Baron. It came with a great manual and of course, Dicta Boelcke! I owe Oswald my ability for being competent in combat sims, everything has built upon what I learned in that manual from Red Baron.

M_Gunz
02-17-2010, 09:29 AM
+1

Perhaps Boelcke was the Father of Formalized Aerial Combat, I know of no earlier and the Dicta
certainly stands today.

You want strange, a lot of that was supposedly invented only during WWII according to a number
of pilots not only from WWII but later on. That is going by comments from pilots and historians
on the History-As-We-Would-Have-It Channel.

JtD
02-17-2010, 12:06 PM
As a guideline, following these rules is very advantageous in WW2 air combat. However, hit and run somewhat goes against the second rule and still is a good tactic.

M_Gunz
02-17-2010, 12:46 PM
There are always exceptions to any in-general rule as circumstances will shape.

Hit and run: Marseille, Hartmann, Chennault and the AVG, the Russians that Chennault
observed and learned from before the AVG formed...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Rookie pilots would start a fight, but instinct (fear) would convince them to break it off and run. This inevitably presented the rookie's tail to his opponent's guns, making the rookie an easy victory for his enemy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

AFAIK they all worked out exit strategies as part of the hit and run. So Dicta Boelcke does not always apply!
I hold Hartmann in high esteem for instance because his exit strategy (gotten from Marseille?) put him behind the
target, turning away and accelerating at the same time. IMO, superior to what the AVG did.

Nowadays with the missiles, turning tail is maybe worse than even during WWI.

EDIT: Holy Cow! The censor didn't screw up Marseille's name! Whoooo-hoooo! Can they get rid of NAFTA and the WTO?

horseback
02-17-2010, 12:47 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">You want strange, a lot of that was supposedly invented only during WWII according to a number of pilots not only from WWII but later on. That is going by comments from pilots and historians on the History-As-We-Would-Have-It Channel. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>History is full of examples of people and organizations who think that they have ‘advanced’ beyond the lessons of the past and were institutionally ignorant of them…remember the ‘Hey! We’ve got guided missiles now—who needs guns on fighters now?’ doctrine that led to the Phantom II being much less effective over Vietnam?<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">As a guideline, following these rules is very advantageous in WW2 air combat. However, hit and run somewhat goes against the second rule and still is a good tactic. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>In WWI, you could not obtain a near instant position beyond the practical range of an enemy’s guns. In WWII, the aircraft were flying at much greater speeds and using essentially the same sort of armament; you could attack an enemy aircraft with a much greater speed advantage, and if you missed, use that speed to get out of range of retaliation. In WWI, the speeds were not only much slower, but they were all much more closely matched.

A speed advantage of 100kph puts you 300m away in 11 seconds, barely enough time for an undamaged opponent to locate and maybe line up a snap shot as you continue to pull away; a 30kph speed advantage puts you 300m away in 36 seconds, more than enough time for an opponent you missed locate and aim at you, while accelerating up to nearly your speed.

Boelcke had the right ideas for the time and the right spirit regardless of era.

cheers

horseback

JtD
02-17-2010, 01:03 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Boelcke had the right ideas for the time and the right spirit regardless of era. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Yes, and the question of the topic is if they were applicable in WW2.

M_Gunz
02-17-2010, 02:34 PM
There is no one-size-fits-all-situations rule.

LEBillfish
02-17-2010, 03:08 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M_Gunz:
There are always exceptions to any in-general rule as circumstances will shape.

Hit and run: Marseille, Hartmann, Chennault and the AVG, the Russians that Chennault
observed and learned from before the AVG formed...

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Rookie pilots would start a fight, but instinct (fear) would convince them to break it off and run. This inevitably presented the rookie's tail to his opponent's guns, making the rookie an easy victory for his enemy. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

AFAIK they all worked out exit strategies as part of the hit and run. <span class="ev_code_YELLOW">So Dicta Boelcke does not always apply!</span> I hold Hartmann in high esteem for instance because his exit strategy (gotten from Marseille?) put him behind the target, turning away and accelerating at the same time. IMO, superior to what the AVG did.
</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Uh sorry, disagree...

7. When over the enemy's lines, never forget your own line of retreat.

Now you can read that verbetim or as intended as an aspect to never forget....If your aircraft cannot match your opponents in a turn, then PLAN your path so after your strike you have clear egress.

In kind, pressing the attack does NOT have to mean it always turning into a swirlling dog fight....Read all the rules, then consider that like it most often turns out they are actually designed for slashing attacks, not turn fights. Attacks that with one burst sends your enemy who never knows you are there down instantly....and if not you have considered how to re-set up for another run, or how to stay in the clear.

The rules apply to ALL forms of aerial combat.

K2

horseback
02-17-2010, 03:17 PM
Not all of Boelcke's axioms apply to WWII or modern era air combat; however, he wrote his rules right at the time air combat was invented, and some concepts we now take for granted were technologically impossible at the time. Hit and run tactics don't work as well in a 80-90mph Fokker Eindekker as they do with a Bf 109F/G.

Thus, he gets bonus points for all the stuff he did get right. He invented many of the tactics and concepts we have built upon to this day.

cheers

horseback

Bremspropeller
02-17-2010, 03:56 PM
The essentials are still aplicable today.
Though some conditions have changed, it's still all about shooting the other guy down without being shot down yourself.

Even with the sophisticated tools of present time, there still lies truth in Boelcke's original rules.

http://img.fotocommunity.com/Bearbeitungs-Techniken/HDRI-TM/Jubilaeums-Tornado-50-Jahre-Jagdbombergeschwader-31B-a19138501.jpg

And he makes a cool theme for a paintshop.
...makes even the Tornado look cool - well, kinda http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/59.gif
This year, JaboG 31 "Boelcke" will exchange their "Klappdrachen" for Eurofighters - the spirit lives on.

TinyTim
02-17-2010, 04:06 PM
I never pursued the enemy once they had eluded me. Better to break off and set up again for a new assault.
~ Erich Hartmann

This could be in a slight contradiction with the second rule of Dicta Boelcke in some scenarios. Apart from that, Dicta Boelcke rules apply 100% in WW2 scenarios in my opinion.

M_Gunz
02-17-2010, 04:51 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by TinyTim:
I never pursued the enemy once they had eluded me. Better to break off and set up again for a new assault.
~ Erich Hartmann

This could be in a slight contradiction with the second rule of Dicta Boelcke in some scenarios. Apart from that, Dicta Boelcke rules apply 100% in WW2 scenarios in my opinion. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Consider the why, how and what of Boelcke's 2nd rule I think that when the enemy eludes you then you can extend
or exit safely. Compare that to staying in a turn fight with a better turning enemy, 109 vs Yak-7 or Yak-1B and
already he is inside your ability to lead and you are slowing down. Me I go into the vertical, extend upward and
see if I can slash down but my life is not on the line. He made over 350 shoot-downs IIRC.

Stiletto-
02-18-2010, 12:08 AM
Slightly OT,

I think it is often overlooked at what a great pilot he was in WWI, because he died so early in the aerial war. The man had 40 kills before his death when his wingman collided into him, and this was in October of 1916. Many ace pilots that flew throughout the war never got as many kills as Boelcke did in half the time, the US wasn't even in the war yet.

I think if he did not have that mishap in the fall of 1916, there would be no Red Baron video game, no Red Baron pizza, no Red Baron movie and no Snoopy vs The Red Baron!

I would be going to my groceries freezer isle and picking up a nice "Oswald's Pepperoni Pizza".

LEBillfish
02-18-2010, 08:13 AM
Still disagree with many here pertaining to the points of the dicta being outdated by WWII even to now.

Quite frankly, any of the rules I can apply to any aerial combat situation.....and I'm willing to back it up. Select an a rule you feel is outdated and pick an era be it WWII to today and I'll more then gladly give a reasonable and conservative hypothetical example.

K2

JtD
02-18-2010, 08:36 AM
Try the "Always continue with an attack you have begun".

Argue for the always, if you can. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

M_Gunz
02-18-2010, 08:56 AM
I guess it depends on how you interpret the rule but I feel that the AVG were well trained in when to cut and run
and that served them well. Ditto for Hartmann and those he taught or influenced.

Sorry BF but doesn't showing examples where breaking that rule at least show it's not mandatory for success?

MikkOwl
02-18-2010, 08:57 AM
"never take your eyes off the enemy" (the one you're chasing that is). I think that one might cause some situational awareness (and death) problems if rigidly adhered to.

---

Also isn't there one about always turning to bring guns on the enemy even if he's diving from above? That one could perhaps be problematic too.

M_Gunz
02-18-2010, 09:47 AM
Lose sight, lose the fight -- isn't that Top Gun?

Turning into an attack is not obsolete. Turning away is definitely bad unless you are sure you can
get away without being shot, like you start out out with a 300kph speed advantage but who would run
away then? Well if you're out of ammo and so much faster, then would be a good time wouldn't it?

You have to be careful of taking interpretations to literal extremes.

Sillius_Sodus
02-18-2010, 10:20 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JtD:
Try the "Always continue with an attack you have begun".

Argue for the always, if you can. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

When I begin a pass, I don't break it off while there is still a chance for a shot. If not, I will try to reposition for another pass. I haven't stopped attacking yet, just winding up for another punch.

I've found that if I am setting up for a shot, then go 'oh look, that guy over there looks like an easier kill', and switch targets, I miss more often than not.

LEBillfish
02-18-2010, 11:16 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by JtD:
Try the "Always continue with an attack you have begun". Argue for the always, if you can. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

In a combat flight you're only doing three things....Hunting for the enemy, attacking the enemy, defending from the enemy.

I think it's obvious if you're hunting for them you haven't seen them (which if they see you first you're in big trouble, YET there is a solution)...It also obvious if defending you're in big trouble, there also a solution to that.

The solution for each if unable to run to attack (goes back to turning into an attacker), yet once you see the enemy you should be either running or attacking, and if attacking you just brought yourself closer, and hence can be attacked........The trick is to keep him defending, and you don't accomplish that by running as that makes him the attacker.

So, once you commit to a fight (hence closing the gap), follow through with it as you just put him in a position to do the same (and if he is following the rules he should be attacking, so it is a battle to force the other to defend).....Now, that does not mean you have to lock on his tail and stick there to be attacking. I can zoom and boom all day and it doesn't matter if I missed my pass as he evaded, as if I'm using my speed to climb or extend the goal is still to set up for another pass to attack.

The second I move in close enough to attack (therefor having committed) if I suddenly change my mind and hesitate, vere off, loiter and reconsider whatever, I have just set myself up to be attacked (hence now defending), and that includes if I zip past and run as now he is the attacker, and I am the target.........So once you commit, follow through with it even if it will be a failed pass (as in halfway through the dive he spots you).....Better to miss your run yet his evading costing him E and then extending with speed then to hesitate and reconsider having brought yourself even closer, and then pause giving him time to attack you (and it only takes a second).

So follow through....By the time he is done evading you're either set up for another pass or so distanced he cannot attack.

That make sense? As you didn't give me an example to work with so had to speak in generalities.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M_Gunz:
Sorry BF but doesn't showing examples where breaking that rule at least show it's not mandatory for success? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

I don't believe so in that then you're talking luck or a unique chain of events that is not applicable to every situation....These rules are meant to be generalities and how you apply them dependant upon what aircraft are involved and the situation.....Yet they all, always apply is the point.

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by MikkOwl:
"never take your eyes off the enemy" (the one you're chasing that is). I think that one might cause some situational awareness (and death) problems if rigidly adhered to.

---

Also isn't there one about always turning to bring guns on the enemy even if he's diving from above? That one could perhaps be problematic too. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

SA is all about keeping your eyes on the enemy, even if 5 of them all about you.....So you find the enemy and keep track of them (part of which is knowing they're heading that way, trying to do X, etc..)...So keep track of them all. It doesn't mean fixate, yet also not to fixate for too long on another as that is when your immediate target can slip out of view.

As to turning into the enemy, MOST DEFFINITELY!

By turning into their attack you are now attacking. Granted he is too yet remember it is a battle to make the other defend that is what all that positioning is about, to make it so they can't attack......By turning into them he now has to worry about your guns, yet more so you now have a clear view of him and what he is doing, yet above all are now the one dictating the fight (remember his plan was to attack your 6, yours now to attack head on....So it is now YOUR plan you're fighting to, not his).

In kind, by you now being the aggressor you dictate how the fight is to go, and he must adjust throwing off his plan even more (see how in a couple seconds we're working him closer to making the jump to defending)...However, you now controlling the situation can do the following.....As he dives you climb toward him (shallow does not have to match his angle)...If neither change their path he will not get a firing solution as you'll pass under.....SO....He must compensate again by diving harder, and aircraft don't respond as well in a negative G adjustment they built to climb....However every second he must adjust more, and more just to keep you in his sights....You however can track him the entire time (keeping your eye on the enemy)...SO he must now change his plan even more and here are his options.......and don't be afraid to shallow out your climb to even slightly dive to force his hand even more and set him up (see, my attitude right off is not defending, it is setting him up to attack).

1. Keep pushing the negative G's...That's a losing battle he can never do it and get a line on you to fire....If he does he'll be in a hard core dive and YOU will now have the altitude advantage to either set up or roll over and pursue.
2. Try and roll and pull back to try and follow your path....He'll be going too fast to do that (come in behind you), so at best will loop under you at which point if you simply continue, turn hard to keep your eyes on him or at worst slow he'll come up in front of you....If he realizes this after the roll, you'll be above him and can dive to attack.
3. He can hesitate banking or leveling off to try and turn into you. At that point you're still climbing, so he just lost his altitude advantage and by the time he does turn you have already turned again into him easily yet now he does not have the advantage of E and you're now level or much closer to it.
4. He can break and run....Keep climbing, secure your position while turnign to attack...At worst he'll run off with you now in his old position of having all the advantage. At best he'll reconsider having hesitated, though now the shoe is on the other foot him at the disadvantage.
5. He can instantly break seeing he cannot do 1-4 wisely and climb continuing the attack to set up for a second pass and retain the advantage.

5 is his ONLY option.....9x out of 10 he will do 1-3...this has been proven to me in 10's of thousands of online dogfights...Very, very few have the discipline to press the attack wisely (item 5)....and of the 1-3 most do, 80% of the time it is 1 or 2 the worst possible things they could do.....You simply by turning into them in a couple of seconds worked him into being the defender....You won.

All the talk of shifting the tempo/speed of the fight (now everything happening in half the time) a given, you with no advantage have just taken all of it by simply attacking vs. defending.

Do not take the rules literally, they were not written in specifics for that very reason....Yet they ALL, always apply. Doesn't matter if in tri-planes or Raptors.

K2

JtD
02-18-2010, 11:40 AM
LEBillfish, I read and understood what you wrote regarding my part. The general problem for this statement is that it is limited to 1 vs. 1 or few vs. few situations, which is how it was like in Boelckes days, but certainly wasn't in WW2. You've also limited yourself to a 1 vs. 1 situation. (And even there my rule of engagement is to disengage as long as I have the upper hand.) In a battle few vs. many or many vs. many to "always continue with an attack one has begun" is asking for trouble, if not death. It is not within the ability of a human to track 50 or so enemies at the same time, and thus engagements, where you attack with an advantage, and leave before you lost it, are the safest way to inflict damage to the enemy. And in these cases, it does not make sense to "continue with an attack you have begun", even if the opponent is still flying. Not in the sense Boelcke used it in, and only very limited in the sense you use it in.

LEBillfish
02-18-2010, 03:05 PM
Jtd, you're reading the rule too literally....What's more, if the situation is not conducive to victory (hence rules 1,5,8) then don't attack.....

The rule speaks to once you begin one don't hesitate, waiver or buckle..It doesn't say if the odds get bad, or you suddenly lose the advantage or whatever you can't break and run (rule 7)......What it is speaking about is committing to the attack, a single pass, and having the aggressiveness, confidence and focus to carry it out.

What it is NOT talking about is sitting there hammering it out till you have a wings off kill no matter what.

Again, don't read the rules so literally.

K2

Insuber
02-18-2010, 03:35 PM
Did anyone know the 20 Mannock's rules?

waffen-79
02-18-2010, 04:15 PM
I think Mannock's rules, elaborate on the Obvious, Boelke's pretty much cover the important stuff

But Mannocks rules imprinted this on the English pilots minds during ww2:

9. Pilots must practise quick turns, as this manoeuvre is more used than any other in a fight.
13.Pilots must keep turning in a dog fight and never fly straight except when firing.

ahh spitfire pilots http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif j/k

JtD
02-18-2010, 10:26 PM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by LEBillfish:
Jtd, you're reading the rule too literally....What's more, if the situation is not conducive to victory (hence rules 1,5,8) then don't attack.....

The rule speaks to once you begin one don't hesitate, waiver or buckle..It doesn't say if the odds get bad, or you suddenly lose the advantage or whatever you can't break and run (rule 7)......What it is speaking about is committing to the attack, a single pass, and having the aggressiveness, confidence and focus to carry it out.

What it is NOT talking about is sitting there hammering it out till you have a wings off kill no matter what.

Again, don't read the rules so literally.

K2 </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Well, the way I interpret the rule, and obviously wiki, too, is that you should stay and fight once you committed yourself. Which is something that was a good thing in early WW1. But you need to interpret it very loosely to make it work later on, which you do, and there are still exceptions from "always". Another one of my rules is "when you fly a maneuver, have a point", which is pretty much what you say in terms of attack runs here.
And yes, I'm sticking to the original rule rather literally, because with loose interpretations, you can make words mean the exact opposite from what they originally meant.

At any rate, you did a good job at applying a decent meaning to this rule, which would still be valid in WW2, so hats off to you.

AndyJWest
02-18-2010, 10:40 PM
Given my IL_2 on-line experience, I'd like to offer a further rule:

(a) Watch what I do.
(b) Don't. http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/53.gif

Actually, I think a lot of it comes down to being able to think on several timescales simultaneously. A long-term strategy to put yourself in an advantageous position is of little use if you can't then exploit this, even at the expense of later strategic disadvantage. Getting the trade-off right is what counts.

M_Gunz
02-19-2010, 12:30 AM
The highest scoring ace in WW2 made it a point to hit and run. Luck? He survived the war with over 350 kills.
It was not mandatory for him and he did not rely on luck except maybe the luck of finding targets.

Erkki_M
02-19-2010, 02:57 AM
M_Gunz, and he even mention dogfighting to be "waste of time". http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The safest and one of the most efficient(in kills/flight hours) is the hit & run against unsuspecting enemies or bandits at a severe disadvantage only. In both real life and in IL2 multiplayer. Never attack twice on the same enemy(or group of them) unless there are no other threats visible and you estimate you estimate to bring him down with a fairly good chance(and have 100% secure way out if something goes wrong). Dogfighting and other kinds of prolonged maneuvering only serve purpose when protecting something, be it friendly aircraft or ground targets, when you want to keep the enemy, interceptors, fighter escorts, air superiority squadrons, busy. What Hartmann and his squad faced in the East Front was inability to gain nothing but local air superiority due to the vast numerical superiority of the Soviets: it was best to account as much damage as possible with as little casualties as possible; a pair of 109s cant stop a 50-ship IL-2 assault squadron escorted by twice the amount of fighters.

BluesmanSF
02-19-2010, 05:02 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by M_Gunz:
The highest scoring ace in WW2 made it a point to hit and run. Luck? He survived the war with over 350 kills.
It was not mandatory for him and he did not rely on luck except maybe the luck of finding targets. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

While I don't wish to argue with you, but your post reminds me of the quote from a WWII pilot whose name for the love God, I can't remember.

"On any day, I'd rather be very lucky pilot than very skillful." (ok that's from a memory, someone can look the exact quote.. =P )

And can someone remind me of the ace (if memory serves me right, he was USAAF pilot..) who promised his wingmen that if they do excatly as he says, they will be able to fight another day, and indeed, he never lost a wingman. A skill which cannot be neglected.

6S_Blues

TinyTim
02-19-2010, 07:25 AM
Of all my accomplishments I may have achieved during the war, I am proudest of the fact that I never lost a wingman. ~ E. "Bubi" Hartmann

Manu-6S
02-19-2010, 07:30 AM
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Erkki_M:
M_Gunz, and he even mention dogfighting to be "waste of time". http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-wink.gif

The safest and one of the most efficient(in kills/flight hours) is the hit & run against unsuspecting enemies or bandits at a severe disadvantage only. In both real life and in IL2 multiplayer. Never attack twice on the same enemy(or group of them) unless there are no other threats visible and you estimate you estimate to bring him down with a fairly good chance(and have 100% secure way out if something goes wrong). Dogfighting and other kinds of prolonged maneuvering only serve purpose when protecting something, be it friendly aircraft or ground targets, when you want to keep the enemy, interceptors, fighter escorts, air superiority squadrons, busy. What Hartmann and his squad faced in the East Front was inability to gain nothing but local air superiority due to the vast numerical superiority of the Soviets: it was best to account as much damage as possible with as little casualties as possible; a pair of 109s cant stop a 50-ship IL-2 assault squadron escorted by twice the amount of fighters. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/11.gif

M_Gunz
02-19-2010, 07:45 AM
I had read translated passages from his writing. His exit was planned ahead to present tail to tail as he
crossed the path of the target behind the target and turning away still moving at greater speed than the
target. That is not leaving things to luck, it is making your own, looking both ways to make sure you are
clear before committing. The most dangerous part I saw was the chance of ramming the target, he turned
into it and fired from closer than I dare! Even his approach was calculated to not raise panic in the
target, he came in on the oblique and only turned into the target at the last moment, testament to his
skill.

Something like 75% or more of the fighters downed in WWII never saw their attacker, lost in the first pass.