Why did the F-86 absolutely shit on the MiG-15 when they were so similar in capabilities on paper?
What advantage was so tremendous that they could pull off a 10-to-1 or even 11-to-1 kill ratio in Korea?
If the planes are close the equals then the only factor is the pilot, for which US pilots had superior training.
>>29238100
Pilot training? There was a YouTube video that compiled the top ten best planes of all time or some shit that actually explained it, but I can't be arsed atm.
Pilot training.
To this day Russian fighters have similar capabilities to our own, however our pilots put in more flight training hours per week than slavs put in an entire year.
Of course that's to be expected when your nation's currency got sanctioned into a 250% drop and you couldn't spend more on defense if the sky rained gold and oil.
>>29238121
>>29238128
>>29238144
Huh.
Why would you intentionally throw quite advanced and expensive aircraft away with untrained pilots in them?
>>29238100
>the F-86 absolutely shit on the MiG-15
The appearance of the MiG-15 Soviet fighter over the Korean peninsula in November 1950 was initially thought to have placed United Nations aircraft, especially the USAF F-86, at a disadvantage. In a dogfight, the MiG-15 outperformed the F-86 Sabre at higher initial acceleration and could outdistance it in a dive, even though the Sabre had higher terminal velocity. The MiG was also more maneuverable above 10,000 m (30,000 ft), although the F-86 was more maneuverable below that altitude. The MiG-15 was also armed with a heavy 37mm cannon that could down USAF bombers. United States military planners at the Strategic Air Command (SAC) were aware of the cannon but knew little more about the technical aspects of the aircraft, including flight performance. By the end of the war, U.N. air forces had gained ascendancy over the MiGs due to superior tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs), better-trained pilots, upgraded Sabres, and especially due to the withdrawal of Soviet pilots from the conflict.
>>29238100
This is bait right? There was no 12-1 KD in Korea. It's propaganda. It was more than likely 4-1 or 5-1 in favor of the F-86, probably because of pilot training and the MiG's mismatched armament means it takes skill to fly. Norks and Russian training pilots don't have that skill.
>>29238154
Noobs gonna noob. Korea, 6 day war, Iraq war - the list goes on. Not many nations have expert pilots. Even the quality of US pilots wasn't anything great until the Top Gun school established post Vietnam. Check out the Mig-21 kills of USAF aircraft in Vietnam for proof of that.
Israeli pilots kicked the living shit out of a;; the Arab air forces that attacked them. Whilst the F-15 was marketed henceforth as the most successful dogfighter as a result, pilot training was probably the most important factor in that situation.
>>29238169
I don't understand what the reaction image is for.
>>29238154
Desperation. You don't have the time or the money to make the pilots better and the planes are needed on the front NOW NOW NOW.
So you vow to get them better trained before the next war but being a shitty socialist fuck-muffin you forget for the ummpteenth time and do it again the next time around.
>>29238100
Depends on the pilots, obviously.
>>29238154
Well it wasn't necessarily the slaughter than the raw statistics may make it seem like. The high kill ratios achieved in Korea take into account the WW2-era North Korean Air Force that got its shit slapped early on in the war.
The MiG-15 did have a huge impact, and it forced a doctrinal shift away from daylight bomber raids. Of course, they were likely suffering higher losses than their foes, but IIRC the kill ratios between MiG-15s and F-86s were actually fairly close (still in favor of the Americans, however).
>>29238181
Turns out Mig shat on Sabre, that's what it for.
>>29238181
>and especially due to the withdrawal of Soviet pilots from the conflict
>>29238179
>Check out the Mig-21 kills of USAF aircraft in Vietnam for proof of that
Hit and runs against F-105's, mostly. USAF pilots were forbidden to pursue across the border until Nixon took over and escalated things to a proper war instead of a half-assed police action.
>>29238250
Being a Thud pilot sounds pretty scary, actually. Stories?
>>29238100
tactics and experience. The air war on the east front was radically different than the one in the west.
>>29238100
A number of reasons. But before that, the actual KD ratio for F-86s depended primarily on who was flying the MiG-15s in MiG alley. When the Soviet pilots first entered, the ratio was close to 1:1. This climbed relatively quickly to 3:1 in favor of the F-86 as that US pilots accustomed themselves to Soviet pilot tactics and some of the best trained Soviets pilots were killed or rotated back (the first units sent represented most of the elite pilots which Russia could afford to release from point defense/CAP over their own territory). Now, as for reasons:
>US pilots generally received far more flight and training hours, and at the time still had much of the institutional and individual pilot experience advantage from WWII (the Soviet air force in WWII was impressive, but the vast majority of the overall Luftwaffe and the best pilots and airframes were downed over Germany and on the Western front by GB and the US)
>F-86 pilots wore the earliest combat examples of G-suits, and so could pull harder Gs for longer than their counterparts in MiGs. This went a long way to neutralizing any paper maneuverability advantage MiGs represented.
>F-86s were possessed of radar gun sights as well as armament more suited to air combat against fighters. While the MiG armament looks beefier on paper, rate of fire was far more important in tight firing windows against fighters. IIRC there was also a significant issue with the focal point range of the MiG weapons which meant that either only the 37mm was on target in a close dogfight or the 23mm guns.
>finally, the MiGs, with the lower rate of fire, only carried 200 total rounds for all three guns. The F-86, with 6 .50cals, carried 1,800 rounds. The much higher payload capability of the F-86 also allowed it to potentially enter the furball with more fuel. This all translates to more staying power.
>>29238100
Early Mig 15 > Early Sabre
Late Mig 15 < Late Sabre
>>29238319
But before that, the actual KD ratio for F-86s depended primarily on who was flying the MiG-15s in MiG alley. When the Soviet pilots first entered, the ratio was close to 1:1. This climbed relatively quickly to 3:1 in favor of the F-86 as that US pilots accustomed themselves to Soviet pilot tactics and some of the best trained Soviets pilots were killed or rotated back (the first units sent represented most of the elite pilots which Russia could afford to release from point defense/CAP over their own territory).
Forgot to add that the US produced far, far higher KD ratios against Chinese or North Korean flown MiG-15s.
The US lost 104 F-86s to A2A combat in Korea. 184 total on combat sorties (including 40 to non-enemy action related causes). 224 total lost in Korea over all.
The Soviets themselves lost 319 MiG-15s in combat in Korea, 335 overall. The Chinese lost 224, and the Norks lost an unconfirmed ballpark 100, as per a defector in 1953. Overall, somewhere close to 533 MiG-15s were lost in Korea.
So the overall KD between the F-86 and MiG-15 for all operators in Korea was 5.835:1 in favor of the F-86.
The only MiG-15 units which exhibited semi-close KD parity with US F-86s were the crack Soviet 303rd and 324th IADs, which achieved a 1.4-1 ratio for the entire conflict in favor of the F-86. But early in the war when the 324th was flying the MiG-15 baseline, their losses were at about 8:1 against the F-86. This dropped to 1.2:1 once the MiG-15BIS was fielded in that unit.
>>29238100
1) Training of American aviators.
2) Lack of training for Chinese and North Korean pilots.
3) Questionable Russian training and tactics.
>>29238416
>The only MiG-15 units which exhibited semi-close KD parity with US F-86s were the crack Soviet 303rd and 324th IADs, which achieved a 1.4-1 ratio for the entire conflict in favor of the F-86.
It should be further noted that these units were literally the best trained combat pilots in the USSR, with a large portion of those units being WWII veteran pilots, flying against baseline trained US pilots. This should go to illustrate the overall level of training and institutional experience in the US air forces at that time.
>>29238416
>The US lost 104 F-86s to A2A combat in Korea. 184 total on combat sorties (including 40 to non-enemy action related causes). 224 total lost in Korea over all.
Goddamnit. Fucked that up. Should read:
>Of the 224 F-86s lost, 40 were in non-operation accidents, 61 to non-enemy causes during operation sorties, 18 to AAA and one to an enemy bombing (night Po-2) attack. This leaves a maximum of 104 lost as a result of aerial combat.
>>29238100
>What advantage was so tremendous that they could pull off a 10-to-1 or even 11-to-1 kill ratio in Korea?
Mig-15 purpose was to hunt down B-29s. F-86 purpose to hunt down Migs. Kapish?
>>29238548
exactly - roles play a huge part in combat statistics. When you've got crews optimized for interception and flying sorties as such, they're not going to perform as well against a force of comparable fighters manned by pilots trained for taking on other fighters.
>>29238283
There was an instance when a flight of F-4s pretended to be F-105s and ended up killing most of a squadron of MiGs when one chased them back across the border and took several out when one was shot down trying to land.
>>29238100
>10:1
IIRC, those like most airplane numbers are exaggerated and involve things like killing more planes than the Russians/Chinese had in theater at a given point
>>29239067
Yes, though it should be noted that designed role matters less overall when there are not dedicated aircraft to fulfill the relevant A2A fighter combat role, and the MiG-15s are in fact designated in this role, even though they are primarily designed to combat bombers.
>>29238202
>The MiG-15 did have a huge impact, and it forced a doctrinal shift away from daylight bomber raids.
a_literal_million_chinamen_watching_their_supply_convoy_being_strafed.gif
>>29239337
I was more saying that how an aircraft is employed plays a huge part in the statistical performance.
The training and flight profiles required for the interceptor duties the MiG-15 was flying would be significantly different than those of an F-86 flying CAP. Remember - MiG-15s have shorter legs, and are generally going to be following ground control's instructions to intercept whatever target pops up. Meanwhile, Sabres are going to be flying CAP with strike packages, allowing them to set themselves up in a better starting position for the coming engagement.
>>29241057
>The training and flight profiles required for the interceptor duties the MiG-15 was flying would be significantly different than those of an F-86 flying CAP. Remember - MiG-15s have shorter legs, and are generally going to be following ground control's instructions to intercept whatever target pops up. Meanwhile, Sabres are going to be flying CAP with strike packages, allowing them to set themselves up in a better starting position for the coming engagement.
I take your point, and mostly agree. However there were specific Soviet units trained almost exclusively for point intercept and A2A combat; these included but were not limited to the 303rd and 324th IADs. This doesn't invalidate your point, only suppliments with the caveat that there were specialist units and training regimes within the Soviet air forces - the training and continuing flight hours a MiG-15 pilot may receive was not homogenous.
>>29238100
Shit pilots
>>29241091
Oh yeah I'm not doubting that American pilots were likely far better trained. Hell, the fact that they can set themselves up better for an engagement itself implies better training.
>>29238169
>especially due to the withdrawal of Soviet pilots from the conflict.
yeah deffinetly, the elite russian pilots got bored of killing americans and decided to leave. You imbred vatnik have you been eating radioactive paintchips? They left because if anymore got downed it would be more evidence that the USSR was in the conflict, just like Ukraine
>>29241136
>can set themselves up better for an engagement itself implies better training.
Yes, though this is primarily a doctrine difference between ground controlled intercept and air controlled/lead ship pilot controlled combat flow. This even shows up as the aircraft grew more sophisticated in pilot workload/cockpit sensor considerations, as western pilots were generally provided with a better overall picture of the battlefield. This isn't to say GCI doesn't have strengths, but the combination of AWACS and western style combat flow have pretty much obviated them in modern air combat.
The planes were a fairly even match, however American pilots were generally far better trained, many had extensive air combat experience from WW2, and the radar controlled lead computing gunsight of the F-86 obviously helped get rounds on target.
Besides better pilot training there's other soft factors like better radios and windscreens that don't ice up so easily.
>>29241181
>the radar controlled lead computing gunsight of the F-86 obviously helped get rounds on target.
Fucking this. People seem to forget just how tricky aerial gunnery was prior to the proliferation of advanced gunsights. During WWII, nearly all the top aces adopted a policy of not opening fire until they were close enough to catch debris falling off their target. Only a tiny handful of pilots could perform deflection shooting effectively prior to the development of these gunsights.
>>29238100
>10 000-to-1 kill ratio
Somehow, I doubt we'll ever know the actual numbers.
I'm from Slovakia. I saw Mig-15 every day as it was on display on a pedestal in front of my elementary school that was built in the 60's.
I saw it flying few years ago at air show in Sliač. Was amazing to see it zipping in the sky. The little thing was insanely fast.
Soviets didn't have radar gunsights or G-suits.
>Veteran fighter pilots from WW2 vs a bunch of random koreans and chinese who flies a jet for the first time
Gee i wonder why
