MajorKong

IIRC - Soviet doctrine for missiles like the AA-3 and AA-6 was to fire at 2/3 maximum range. The missiles would be fired in pairs, with the heat-seeking version fired first so that it wouldn't try to lock on to its radar-guided partner.

Things you don't want to hear your EWO say - "Pilot, I've got missile guidance!"

We could do a "pilot visual" bomb in the B-52 but it was a last-ditch procedure. This only works from low altitude with a high-drag (retarded) bomb. 1. Line up on the target at around 500 feet altitude. 2. Your airspeed should be around 360 knots indicated (390 was the limit). 3. About 10 seconds out, open your bomb-bay doors. 4. Looking out the pilot's window, as the target goes under the nose, release your bomb(s). Dropping a whole "stick" would give you a better chance of hitting something. In reality the pilot would count down "5,4,3,2,1 Hack!" and the Radar-Navigator would drop the bombs. The B-52 pilot has no bomb release.

Interesting. An improved MiG-21 with Western electronics, AMRAAMs and Sidewinders would actually be pretty awesome. Plus the air refueling capability would help extend its range, which was always a handicap for this aircraft.

In response to the earlier discussion: The B-52 had (and probably still has) a very impressive ECM suite. We had four very large electrical generators so we could pump out a lot of jamming. We also had a dedicated Electronic Warfare Officer to run the whole mess, while a fighter usually just has a pod that they turn on and hope it works. Finally we had so much chaff and flares on board that we could pump them out all day long. We didn't fear the MiG-25 all that much. If we were down low, which was our preferred tactic back when I flew them, the Foxbat's radar probably wouldn't pick us out of the ground clutter. Even a MiG-29 pilot who had defected, when asked if he thought he could intercept a B-52 flying 300 feet at night in terrain answered "No effing way".

The Luftwaffe night fighters frequently found themselves being hunted by RAF night fighters, usually Mosquitos or Beaufighters. It wasn't as one-sided as you might think.

Very nicely done. I don't know if it's possible, but I'd love to see someone do a Mirage IV.

B-52 gunners claimed two MiG kills during the Vietnam War. If a guy was trying to line up a shot with something like a rear-aspect only AA-2 it wasn't that hard to suck him into your "gun box". Even as late I as the Gulf War, I still liked having the guns back there because it kept people away from their best missile shots. It wasn't our main defense, which was flying very low at night, but it was still nice having something to shoot back with.

I can't speak for the Russians, but the rear turret on a B-52 was extremely accurate. Anybody dumb enough to get within a mile of your wing-line was dead.

The F-106 originally didn't have a gun. It was added in 1972 (inside the weapons bay) along with a new canopy that improved visibility. It was still stuck with the Falcon missiles, and since the missiles were carried internally there was no way to equip it with a better missile. The plane had great performance but suffered from the classic problem of a pure delta wing - it gave you one awesome turn but bled off all its airspeed in the process.

I met a few guys from the Niagara Falls Air National Guard that had flown the F-101. The rule of thumb they used was 1 G for every 100 knots of airspeed. So even at 400 knots indicated they wouldn't pull more than 4 G's in a turn. Keep in mind that the F-101 was more of an interceptor than a fighter. It was really meant to shoot down bombers, not dogfight enemy fighters. I was told that it had great acceleration because it carried its missiles internally.