# When was the last time the US Navy or Air Force was in a real dogfight? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [May 29, 2007, 2:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855 "2007-05-29T02:51:03Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2007, 6:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/21 "2007-05-29T18:01:28Z")
[QUOTE=Spartydog] Now I’m thinking, wait a minute. When was the last time any of these highly trained pilots with all of this expensive equipment, flying off of an incredibly costly aircraft carrier was actually involved in an arial dogfight? We keep these guys trained an primed. We’re in a war. **What enemy are they ready to engage**. You fill in the blanks and 'splain this to me. [/QUOTE] The problem is that you can’t pull a bazillion dollar fighter or trained pilots out of your ass when you need them. You need to maintain them even when they are not needed. There are other countries out there that have fighters and pilots. We are not currently in conflict with them but do you completely trust Iran or North Korea? I don’t trust what Putin is doing in Russia and I don’t trust China. Maybe you feel better about the world than I do. ---
**Author:** ![dropzone](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dropzone/32/7515_2.png) [@dropzone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dropzone)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2007, 6:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/22 "2007-05-29T18:13:41Z")
[QUOTE=LSLGuy] Finally, note that Discovery Channel excels at gee-whiz factoids that are simple enough to explain in a sound bite & show in a simplistic 10 second graphic or vid clip. [/QUOTE] They need to be good at it because that’s all the time they have between commecial blocks. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [May 29, 2007, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/23 "2007-05-29T21:16:32Z")
[QUOTE=Tristan] **LSLGuy** , if I may pick your brain: Do you feel that the superior outcome of US Air assest in Gulf War 1 were a result of better training, or better equipment? Obviously, the guys had guts on both sides, but we clearly had an edge in air-to-air confrontations. [/QUOTE] I think that the Coalition forces launched a very effective first/surprise strike that disrupted the Iraqi radar net, communications and control net. This left the Iraqi fighters (those that got airborne) with very poor (or no) info on which direction the enemy is at or coming from. The Coalition air command and control infrastructure remained untouched, and were able to vector the fighter aircraft to advantageous approach vectors almost every time. Coordination of air assests makes a huge difference when only one side has it. ---
**Author:** ![Sam\_Stone](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/ecccb3/32.png) [@Sam\_Stone](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sam_Stone)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2007, 4:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/24 "2007-05-30T04:21:07Z")
Better training is certainly part of it. But a modern air battle that pits individual airplanes against an entire system consisting of fighters, AWACS planes, sophisticated radars and missiles, ground attack aircraft hitting enemy radars, and computer systems to manage it all, is going to be very one-sided against the individuals, no matter how good the individual pilots might be. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2007, 6:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/25 "2007-05-30T06:22:43Z")
[QUOTE=Pushkin] Speaking of that Dogfights show, they had a show about the Israeli airforce, did they score the first kills with Phantoms? [/QUOTE] I think the Israeli air force’s first kills were flying German (or, more likely, Czech), Messerschmitt Bf-109s. (If a -109 did not get the first kill, it certainly got many subsequent kills and whatever got the first kill was a WWII era fighter. There were no Phantom IIs in 1948. (The FH-1 Phantom was flying in 1948, but all 50-60 of them were owned by the U.S. Navy.) ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2007, 6:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/26 "2007-05-30T06:24:18Z")
I’m sorry. I misread your question. I do not know whether Israeli Phantom IIs preceded US Navy Phantom IIs in scoring the very first kill by that plane. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2007, 6:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/27 "2007-05-30T06:37:06Z")
According to [Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PHANTOM_II), the first Phantom II victory was in Vietnam on 10 July, 1965. The first Israeli victory (in an Israeli named _Kurnass_), did not occur until 11 November, 1969. (This sounds about right. As late as the 1967 War, Israel was primarily using French _Mirage_ fighters for air superiority.) ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2007, 6:41am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/28 "2007-05-30T06:41:25Z")
> [@Pushkin](#): > > Speaking of that Dogfights show, they had a show about the Israeli airforce, did they score the first kills with Phantoms? [QUOTE=tomndebb] I’m sorry. I misread your question. I do not know whether Israeli Phantom IIs preceded US Navy Phantom IIs in scoring the very first kill by that plane. [/QUOTE] Hmm. May I practice my google-fu? Wiki says ( [McDonnell Douglas F-4 Phantom II - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-4_Phantom_II) ) > [@](#): > > By the time of the Tonkin Gulf incident, 13 of 31 deployable Navy squadrons were armed with the type. F-4Bs from Constellation made the first Phantom combat sortie of the Vietnam War on 5 August 1964, flying bomber escort in Operation Pierce Arrow. The first Phantom air-to-air victory of the war took place on 9 April 1965 when an F-4B from VF-96 Fighting Falcons piloted by Lt JG Terence M. Murphy shot down a Chinese MiG-17 ‘Fresco’. The Phantom was then shot down, apparently by an AIM-7 Sparrow from one of its wingmen.[6] On 17 June 1965, an F-4B from VF-21 Freelancers piloted by Cdr Thomas C. Page and Lt John C. Smith shot down the first North Vietnamese MiG of the war. > [@](#): > > USAF F-4Cs scored their first victory against a North Vietnamese MiG-17 on 10 July 1965 using AIM-9 Sidewinder air-to-air missiles. On 24 July 1965, a Phantom from the 47th Tactical Fighter Squadron on temporary assignment in Vietnam became the first American aircraft to be downed by an enemy SAM, and on 5 October 1966 an 8th Tactical Fighter Wing F-4C became the first U.S. jet lost to an air-to-air missile, fired by a MiG-21. > [@](#): > > The Israeli Air Force has been the largest foreign user of the Phantom, flying both newly built and ex-USAF aircraft, as well as several one-off special reconnaissance variants. The first F-4Es, nicknamed Kurnass (Heavy hammer), and RF-4Es, nicknamed Orev (Raven), were delivered in 1969 under the Peace Echo I program. Additional Phantoms arrived during the 1970s under Peace Echo II through Peace Echo V and Nickel Grass programs. Israeli Phantoms saw extensive combat during Arab-Israeli conflicts, first seeing action during the War of Attrition. The first Kurnass air-to-air victory came on 11 November 1969 against an Egyptian MiG-21 ‘Fishbed’. The first air combat loss, also to a MiG-21, happened on 2 April 1970. Over the course of the conflicts, IDF claimed 116 air victories to 56 losses, mostly to ground fire.[12] Wiki is backed up by this site: [http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/f4.html](http://home.att.net/~jbaugher1/f4.html) ---
**Author:** ![Declan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecae2f/32.png) [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2007, 6:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/29 "2007-05-30T06:52:47Z")
[QUOTE=Sam Stone] Iraq lost 38 aircraft to air-to-air engagements in the first Gulf War. [/QUOTE] Air to Air was a little stretched during desert storm, concidering that one of the kills was a laser guided bomb dropped on a moving Helicopter. Declan ---
**Author:** ![Declan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/ecae2f/32.png) [@Declan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Declan)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2007, 6:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/30 "2007-05-30T06:55:39Z")
[QUOTE=LSLGuy] Former USAF fighter pilot … USAF fighters shot down several Iraqi AF tactical (fighter / attack) aircraft during Gulf War I in 1991. I believe they have shot down several more since then during the extended no-fly enforcement effort prior to Gulf War II. [/QUOTE] If I remember correctly the USAF shot down some serbian A/C during the kososvo campaign . Declan ---
**Author:** ![Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/46a35a/32.png) [@Tim\_T-Bonham.net](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tim_T-Bonham.net)\ **Post date:** [May 30, 2007, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/31 "2007-05-30T23:56:35Z")
[QUOTE=Declan] the USAF shot down some serbian A/C [/QUOTE] Huh? What did they have against Air Conditioning? Because I’m sure the Serbs didn’t have any Aircraft Carriers. The other possibilities Google brings up are Alarm Clocks and Access Control software – I doubt the USAF really shoots them down much, either. Could you clarify what you mean by “A/C” here? ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2007, 12:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/32 "2007-05-31T00:29:43Z")
**A** ir **C** raft ---
**Author:** ![R.P.McMurphy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/7993a0/32.png) [@R.P.McMurphy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/R.P.McMurphy)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2007, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/33 "2007-05-31T03:06:39Z")
[QUOTE=Loach] The problem is that you can’t pull a bazillion dollar fighter or trained pilots out of your ass when you need them. You need to maintain them even when they are not needed. There are other countries out there that have fighters and pilots. We are not currently in conflict with them but do you completely trust Iran or North Korea? I don’t trust what Putin is doing in Russia and I don’t trust China. Maybe you feel better about the world than I do. [/QUOTE] I know what you are saying but . . . As we’ve seen, war at any time is possible. We’re currently in a war where about 3-4 US soldiers are getting killed per day. There is a lot of controversy about lack of armor and ground based equipment getting worn out and not replaced fast enough. While war with Iran, N. Korea or China is a possiblity, what is liklihood that **aerial** dogfighting would even factor in the conflict? The F/A 18 sucks fuel so fast that its flight time is very restricted. It does some things exceedingly well but can those things be expected to realistically occur in a present day or forseeable conflict? Assuming that all resources are finite is it reasonable to think that absolute superiority in an aerial dogfight makes any difference in the equation of military superiority? To put it more bluntly, is the military maintaining a showpiece at the expense of what is really needed? Probably off to Great Debates but that wasn’t the intent of the OP. ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2007, 5:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/34 "2007-05-31T05:38:57Z")
[QUOTE=Spartydog] I know what you are saying but . . . As we’ve seen, war at any time is possible. We’re currently in a war where about 3-4 US soldiers are getting killed per day. There is a lot of controversy about lack of armor and ground based equipment getting worn out and not replaced fast enough. While war with Iran, N. Korea or China is a possiblity, what is liklihood that **aerial** dogfighting would even factor in the conflict? The F/A 18 sucks fuel so fast that its flight time is very restricted. It does some things exceedingly well but can those things be expected to realistically occur in a present day or forseeable conflict? Assuming that all resources are finite is it reasonable to think that absolute superiority in an aerial dogfight makes any difference in the equation of military superiority? To put it more bluntly, is the military maintaining a showpiece at the expense of what is really needed? Probably off to Great Debates but that wasn’t the intent of the OP. [/QUOTE] Iran? a factor but not a large one. [North Korea?](http://www.scramble.nl/kp.htm) About 500 fighters if I count correctly. Air power would play a huge role in any conflict with NK just like it did the last time. [Red China?](http://www.softwar.net/plaaf.html) according to the link RC has the largest military air force in the world. So I got $5 that says in a conflict with China air power would play a huge role. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2007, 5:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/35 "2007-05-31T05:51:00Z")
> [@](#): > > Assuming that all resources are finite is it reasonable to think that absolute superiority in an aerial dogfight makes any difference in the equation of military superiority? To put it more bluntly, is the military maintaining a showpiece at the expense of what is really needed? Air superiority/Air supremacy is critical. (Not the end-all-be-all, but one leg of a tripod.) You can conceivably win a ground battle when the enemy controls the air, but that is, in general, not the rule. If you _do_ win the ground fight, you will probably have suffered many more casualties than otherwise. (The NVA in Vietnam comes to mind here.) In Iraq, we can use a smaller patrol of infantry/armor to do the job assigned to them because they can be backed up by ground to air assets that are on call to bring the additional firepower and reconnoitering capability if and when needed. Without the air assets in theatre, we would need a _lot_ more soldiers in the area to ensure their safety or success if they get jumped by an insurgent force. I think the military is doing it right. The quality of the equipment, the training of the troops, and the overwhelming massing of firepower and tactics employed get the fight over as fast as possible, with as little loss of (friendly) troops as possible, given the chaotic nature of war. Do _you_ think all that is just for “show boating” for no good cause? ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2007, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/36 "2007-05-31T06:00:18Z")
[QUOTE=mlees] In Iraq, we can use a smaller patrol of infantry/armor to do the job assigned to them because they can be backed up by ground to air assets that … [/QUOTE] Bah! Make that Air to Ground. :smack: ---
**Author:** ![pilot141](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e0b2c6/32.png) [@pilot141](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pilot141)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2007, 7:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/37 "2007-05-31T07:53:43Z")
[QUOTE=Spartydog] Assuming that all resources are finite is it reasonable to think that absolute superiority in an aerial dogfight makes any difference in the equation of military superiority? To put it more bluntly, is the military maintaining a showpiece at the expense of what is really needed? [/QUOTE] The F/A-18 is not a showpiece. It is a tool that can be used to gain and maintain absolute control of the air in (hopefully) any theater that the US chooses to employ it. If you want to win a war, you must control the air. This is not an option - it must happen. It has been true since the emergence of air power in WWII. By continuing to develop air-superiority fighters (like the F-22) the US is fighting the air war on two fronts. The first is the obvious - a single F-22 can engage and destroy multiple aircraft at very long ranges. So if it comes to an actual shooting war, the F-22 will give the US almost immediate control of the air. The second part of the air war is deterrence: Have a few flights of F/A-18s and F-22s orbiting on the edge of some country’s airspace (like, say, North Korea) and they might never even get their fighters airborne. If they know they will be shot down, there is no point in launching them. And to nitpick: yes the F/A-18 is a fuel hog, but it can carry external fuel tanks to extend it’s range and time on station. In addition to that the US has this wonderful system of airborne tankers that can refuel planes and keep them airborne until the engines run out of oil or the pilot falls asleep. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [May 31, 2007, 1:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/38 "2007-05-31T13:20:06Z")
Another nitpick: the F/A-18 is multi-role. It can bomb ground or sea targets as easily as engage enemy aircraft. As such, it is simply more _likely_ to be used than a pure air-superiority plane like the F-22. The F-22 is higher tech and costs more – if you want to question the need for a sophisticated, expensive aircraft, start with the F-22. 🙂 I personally do not question the military need for air defense/air superiority, even high-tech, expensive air defense. If I were inclined to question the F-22 program, however, I’d focus on the issue of whether a piloted aircraft is needed for air superiority. Presumably pilotless fighters (which can turn at much higher G-forces without a squishy human inside) are coming some day – the question is, is that day here yet? Sailboat ---
**Author:** ![Quartz](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/quartz/32/267_2.png) [@Quartz](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Quartz)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2007, 11:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/39 "2007-06-02T11:45:09Z")
[QUOTE=pilot141] If you want to win a war, you must control the air. This is not an option - it must happen. It has been true since the emergence of air power in WWII. [/QUOTE] As has been mentioned, Vietnam gives the lie to this. And the Russian front of WW2 is also a counter-example, isn’t it? ---
**Author:** ![pilot141](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e0b2c6/32.png) [@pilot141](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/pilot141)\ **Post date:** [June 2, 2007, 2:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855/40 "2007-06-02T14:30:00Z")
Vietnam was lost because of many reasons; control of the air was not the primary one. Think of it this way: control of the air does not guarantee victory. However, control of the air is necessary for victory on any modern battlefield. I think the Russian front in WWII would count as being right on the cusp of “the emergence of air power in WWII” that I mentioned earlier. The line is hazy there so I was deliberately vague. 🆒 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/when-was-the-last-time-the-us-navy-or-air-force-was-in-a-real-dogfight/405855.md?page=3)