Tom_Waarne
I think someone said “I told you so”.
I think someone said “I told you so”.
In many cases, it is not the plane, it is the pilot. Even in the modern era, both in actual combat and in exercises, older less capable aircraft piloted by experienced and capable pilots come out on top over more capable planes with less capable pilots. I am not dismissing the J-10’s capabilities, but we must also consider the training and competence of the pilots.
It was not a dogfight. Possibly a long range missile intercept. Crappy clickbait article.
This was not a dogfight so there was no 1v1 action. It was a BVR (beyond visual range) engagement, so most likely the aircraft never even saw each other visually. There were a number of missiles launched and some connected according to Pakistani reports. While there was no actual dogfighting taking place, the BVR fight was more of a test of radar and missile technology than aircraft dogfighting capabilities or pilot skills. Had the aircraft closed to dogfighting conditions, the outcome may have been different. The Indian Air Force has sparred with U.S. F-22s and F/A-18s in various exercises and came out well, so their pilots appear to be well trained. Mig-29s, SU-30s and Rafales are excellent dogfighters, so in a close-in knife fight, pilot skills may have made a big difference.
This was an artillery exchange using aircraft as a site. It would have been much cheaper to use ground to air missiles if the air forces were not in Great War 1918 mode. Not much glory of course. Why are we still thinking dog fight?