How to Dogfight in Space 

How much of this video was inspired by watching Alasdair play Wing Commander on the stream?

Space is very big and space ships are very small. What it comes down to you can't have a space battle unless both parties agree to it.

For point 2 if you break away from a head to head does that not give more opportunity to get behind you rather than the other way round.

rob kemp That would invite heavy ECM and jamming trying to get the hostile drones to loose signal. Otherwise it would be similar to online-games... for a ~40ms lag you'd be limited to a range of 6000 km by signal lag alone not even taking the time for your systems to translate it into human-readible images.

rob Kemp that's smart and could work, in fact they pretty much did that in GOTG2 lol it was cool as hell there too

good point. the computer calculating the right distance, speed and trajectory, so that the course of the shot and the enemy ship meet.

Most fighters don’t have gimbaling guns. Usually the “lock on” feature just means the radar is tracking and providing HUD symbology to aid in aiming the craft and hence, the guns. At least that’s how it works IRL; and it seems it’s the same in most SciFi franchises. But if craft did have gimbaled guns, convergence wouldn’t matter. The guns just have to point in the right direction.

Ayyyyye yeah i made a comment trying to explain this though i know this video is pretty old now, i just rewatched it and re found my comment and i think its still very relevant: 4:59 i feel like with these types of videos people try to put real life physics or other universes physics into the StarWars universe when its just simply not how it works in SW but that's a different subject, in this situation i just want to point out that blasters are able to converge onto a target somewhat and even lock on to it and aim outside of the straight line so really what your seeing is a cone of influence in front of the fighter so spreading them out on the edges of the wings (like the X-Wing for example) would help that cone of influence, do u remember the death star run when Vader was messing with buttons to lock onto Luke that wasn't just to launch missiles (which the fighter does not have) he was locking on with his blasters.

Elite Dangerous is the big one, but there's a few other games where it's extremely helpful as well. The I-War duology springs to mind as a big example, since your default ship in both games is a *corvette*. Learning when to turn and how is essential to keeping yourself alive.

Good to see another Elite player. o7!

also when runnign away, heck i do quite well doing corkscrews in my cutter to avoid fixed fire form FDL and the like. if i am in my combat anaconda and trying to escape i will retract hardpoints and start piloting to buy time and force opponent to maneuver as well, minimizing time on target

you misunderstood the whole purpose of the video... it was supposed to not really be relevant don't you dare find usefull stuff in it!

I tend to fight players with FA off. Main reason is because I fly the Cutter (2nd largest ship), while it's turning speed is shit, it's speed and shields make up for it. Flying with flight assist off and boosting around tents to keep the enemy in my line of sight even if I'm vsing a FDL, Krait, FedGunship ect (smaller more maneuverable ships). When it comes to running I just keeping boosting and turning into the enemy until my FSD is ready to go then I boost away and jump.

until you get drafted into the Space Corps and have to go up against alien saucer ships.....then some of this will be like maybe Spacedock was on to something lolz

The Scryve Empire is coming and the Earth Defence Force fighter corps need *YOU!*

But you will use it in the not-too-distant future

If the Galactic Empire came to Earth, I'd join them.

Here I thought the Imperial navy was recruiting, I’d anything to fly a TIE hunter/defender/phantom

That honestly puts a smile on my face , wholesome

Even know

Yeah the video was OK up to that point then he just goes off on a rant about how much the tie fighter sucks and it's glorious,

I was really underwhelmed overall by this video... and then he dropped that bomb on me and I just couldn't stop laughing. I think he realized that he needed a little something extra to make this video resonate with his audience, and threw that gem in... gotta say... it definitely worked.

I enjoyed the fact that I felt he was about to burst into laughter during that tirade because it was honestly hilarious

lancer737 lancer737 No, the TIE fighter does have a terrible field of view, it does have two massive slabs of metal welded to the side that is easy to hit, it isn't shielded to compensate and was shot down by a heavier, but infantry carried weapon in Rogue One. Just look at when a TIE pursues the Falcon in episode V and tries to slip into the same crack as the Falcon. It gets *screwed* because it is so wide that the slit a passenger-freight ship can slip through a TIE cannot. It is wider than the Falcon is tall. That is atrocious design.

lancer737 1. No, you're completely wrong on the point of them having 360-degree vision. In no Canon or Legends source has it ever been stated that the TIE pilot can do that. 2. ECM is also not mentioned a single time in any of the cross sections of the ship. 3. The handheld weapon in question was based off a bowcaster except weaker, which is a kinetic weapon, aka, it fires an actual projectile. Projectiles don't have different energy settings. 4. The reason weapons on A-wings and B-wings are more powerful is because they have a power source that feeds them that power. The larger the reactor, the larger the damage they can do. 5. The TIE interceptor flew through gases that weren't volatile until shot at, we were told that directly within the episode, so that's not impressive. Nebulae are in a realistic scenario, completely harmless swirls of gas that are as dangerous as your own atmosphere. The TIE interceptor close to the forming star exploded in *6 seconds* whereas the other one lasted about 11 before it had to break off, whereas the Ghost, a ship that was shielded as well as its two Y-wings survived for a *full minute* with the Ghost taking substantial damage but still being capable of flight. The Y-wings showed zero negative effects from the star. The only TIE that managed to survive even close to that long was the Defender that was present, a *shielded* variant that is highly advanced. 6. I'll concede on that point, they did collide with each other, but a clever pilot in that situation would've flown over the obstacle in question, not into it. HOWEVER. The reason why that collision between a USN submarine and a Japanese fishing boat happened was that the personnel in the said ship were not who should've been in there, they were supplementary. The sonar operator was unqualified to stand watch. There were also civilians aboard that distracted the personnel further. Standard procedure wasn't followed either. (Edit here) To add onto that once more, the submarine was performing an emergency surfacing action, which is *impossible to stop once it's commenced.* The submarine rises so quickly that it flies out of the water slightly from the sheer force. A small, agile, fast fighter craft is *not an enormous, sluggish and emergency diving submarine.* (Edit ends) None of those things is true about the pilots in that collision. They drove into a tight space in a formation that was far too close and crashed with each other. That just means that TIE fighter pilots are undertrained and shouldn't be put in the seat of anything. (Another edit) So what I know is that a TIE fighter will explode from heat like that in less than 6-11 seconds seeing as its armour is weaker (That a Y-wing survived in for over a minute) any claims you have on ECM and 360-degree vision I can't find *any proof for,* plus that it is a massive target. (WOO EDITS) "The design choices of the TIE/Ln could arguably be explained by Imperial military philosophy, which viewed the starfighters and their pilots as an expendable asset. Though Imperial pilots were of an elite stock, they were also expected to consider themselves expendable, in accordance with their ideological training. Other Imperial pilots considered TIE Fighter pilots to be suicidal due to how expendable the starfighters were." When the pilots of your *own army call TIE pilots suicidal* it's hard to defend the craft in *any way.* (God damn there's so much editing) To add EVEN FURTHER, the Canon TIE/mg had intentionally removed 4 of the panels on the front which gave them less speed and firepower but *"increased visibility".* If you have 360-degree vision, what the hell would you need increased visibility for?

Learned quite the opposite in the X-Wing series. When the enemy has weaker guns, weaker hull, better speed, better maneuverability, an AI that has unironically laser perfect aim, and numbers on its side to boot, you actually take less damage by going for a head to head pass and taking out an enemy fighter before the dogfight begins.

Depends on the ship myself and the enemy have, but I often go head to head in Wing Commander. Put it on full guns, fire at max range, than as soon as my shields start taking hits break off and try to get behind them. It helps for my style as in a turn fight I often over lead my target and end up hitting near the front of their ship, where their shields are already weakened from the first pass.

Yeah, you can get away with a joust one-on-one against most Kilrathi fighters as you generally have more shields and often more powerful guns. Don't try it with a Jalthi, though, you're gonna have a bad time.

You can get away with it if you have a rapid fire gun and start shooting as soon as the opponent is the size of a dot. I think it is probably a bug in the code. Fun game.

@@Ryvaken Yes, excellent observation. However, the counter to that maneuver is to rotate one's craft without acceleration, effectively flying in reverse relative to the pursuing hostile.

I immediately thought of War Thunder when Daniel mentioned jousting...

Ditto

What do you mean I shouldn't fly head on at an enemy in my Zero?!?

Mmm...delicious idiot...

This made me remember WT too

in WW2 and in air combat and at these speeds ..... this makes sense. in space at higher speeds and vastly greater distances this gets irrelevant.

Psych Olocke It doesn't. You hust have to set your guns for the expected engagement distance.

Wedge says the same thing in one of the X-Wing series of books (I forget which)

Id Think the X-wing has some sort of Computer system that slightly changes the alignment of the quad lasers to focus on what is in-front of the ship based on the distance.

You can manually set the gun convergence in some planes. No reason why you shouldn't be able to do this with advanced space fighters.

The top WWII American Flying Ace, Richard Bong (credited with 40 kills), flew the P-38 in the Pacific. He stated that he had poor aim, and as a result, would engage most planes straight on (in a joust attack). Thanks to the P-38's nose mounted weapons and the weak armor of the Japanese A6M Zeros he was facing, he quickly racked up a lot of kills. One time he got so close to a Zero that he crashed into it, his P-38 survived, but the Zero did not!

He was talking about piloting one, not being one.

@@JackVermicelli Though it doesn't change the fact that if you are a sentient Tie Fighter. Pray that the force itself is on the side of your pilot.

@@alonelyperson6031 fun fact: sentient TIE fighters were a thing in Legends. Their existence was equally horrible, if not more so, compared to a pilot of a more ordinary TIE.

@@nickmalachai2227 Huh. Wait, you mean it in the droid sense or the spiritualy alive but dead logically.

@@alonelyperson6031 in the "lobotomised skilled pilots and put their brain inside customized TIE fighters controlled through the dark side" way.

That is because they are actually WWII fighters in space, carrying out WWII dogfights and attack runs.

Yeah, the movies and games all support this. The guns are always on gimbals that always make sure the guns fire at the center of the reticle.

I played that game and that was only a problem for me in the first couple of hours when I was getting a feel for the controls

Inertia dampening magic? Have you never heard of gravity (in Star Wars it's called repulsor tech)? I'm pretty sure that's not magic.

Allen Helmer even in void warfare, you would still receive g-force when sudden change of speed, inertia dampening magic better have a g- dispersor or everyone inside is space slime.

wich means you can't accelerate faster than 100m/s^2 unless you want to pass out, heck that's 10G and even that is extreme and probably makes anyone unable to function as a human being like aim, or drive the spacevessel... let me rewrite: 10G will knock out anyone not fit for piloting, and will knock out some of the fit for piloting guys as well...

In space there can be NO sci-fi Star Wars like WW2-style dogfight. Think more like "Asteroids". Spacecraft can freely rotate around all axes x,y,z and always keep weapons on target no matter what direction they are moving. Engagement distances can be over 100s or even 1000s of kilometers, kinetic weapons have unlimited range (no friction) although the projectilres fired would be abysmally slow to reliably hit anything far out while energy weapons (laser beams?) score instant hits since laser photon particles travel at the speed of light. Dogfighting-esque Air Combat Maneuvers would only take place within atmospheres or ultra-dense gas clouds (which do not exist), and in such a setting spacecraft would most likely resemble warplanes as they would need wing like structures to provide lift, counterbalance gravity, and provide control surfaces such as ailerons, rudders and flaps.

Fuck TIE fighters

@@alejandroelluxray5298 All my homies hate TIE fighters.

Survivors* of tie fighters.

Raving Nutter Never a good idea to really head on anything with more guns than you

WWII fighters with wide mounted guns usually were set to converge at a specific range. This was done on the ground. With advanced spacecraft a gimbled system with a constantly adjusting range would be more likely. If you could fly though it through the X-wings weapons spread that was most likely bad programming because of them not knowing how guns were used IRL.

Can't really speak about the programmers knowledge, but at least some of the book writers for the X-Wing book series knew about the convergence point of the weapons. There are a few times when adjusting the focal distance is mentioned, including when Wedge is discussing the adjustments made prior to the attack on the first Death Star. (They were adjusted for a higher range than usual so they could hit surface targets from a safer distance. Which might also explain why only a few TIE fighters were taken out on screen...) It's possible that the X-Wings don't have gimbals on their weapons, given the integration of the weapon mounts into the S-Foils of the ship.

"Unless you're in a TIE Defender. Then go head to head all you want."

Wide-apart weapons only miss small target if the shooter's aim is perfectly on your center. Human player's aim would wiggle slightly, so the guns on one side would hit you.

With the exception that it just makes you more likely to get hit, unless you spin responsibly. Spinning is a hard art to master, you want to spin fast enough that it matters, and slow enough that you dont just end up getting hit more

that is why the Gunstar from the Last Starfighter is the PERFECT space combat vehicle

Turrets add weight and cost, if your ship can already turn on a dime with RCS why weigh it down with turrets? Maybe some gimballing for precise adjustments, but fully rotating turrets seem wasteful. If you need to hit someone chasing you, turn around and use thrust reversers. Anyone smart will break off, anyone dumb gets a face full of lead or plasma. (EDIT) I actually like your helicoper/gunship analogy, aimable guns and missles make more sense than either fixed or fully rotating turrets.

You need to have a crew of 2-3 for turrets. With the fact that a space dogfight is fully 3D with the pilot required to pull stupid Gs and fly the ship with both him and his target able to turn on the spot, you can't ask that pilot to do more than fly and shoot things in front of them. AI turrets would work, but then you've added something that can go wrong.

@@stephens7136 non-turreted craft would consume more fuel just to get their weapons on their target. Sure it can turn on a dime, but that doesn't mean it should do it all the time, considering that maneuver, if done incorrectly such as doing it too fast can disorient the pilot. Plus you also have to be mindful of your environment. You absolutely cannot turn on a dime in tunnels. Do a turn to shoot at the enemy chasing you and what happens when there's a sharp corner around? Turreted fighters also give them anti-missle/torpedo capability and made them multifunctional too. They can just hang around their ship to act as anti-torpedo role.

This is definitely the way to go. Bolt a CIWS to a star-fighter, slave it to a simple targeting computer, and you and your gunner (who just sits there telling the CIWS what to shoot) are the best dang team in the galaxy, at least if you're in most of these IPs.

That’s exactly what fighter pilots in WWII said about fighting in fur balls.

I'd put them on a turret like base with a little less than 45 degrees of rotation and a lock-on/AI system.

CybershamanX you are correct WW2 planes had thier guns angled towards a center point for maximum hits it did lower maximum range though. Some planes like the P-38 Lightning had a diffrent setup since it had two propellers so it had all it's guns in the nosecone so to say and that was a bit terrifying for the enemy pilots since the P-38 was able to open fire before you did.

CybershamanX I forget which book in the X-wing series, but they (X-wing’s cannons in this case) are set at a convergence and don’t make slight adjustments in flight. I believe for rouge squadron in this book it was 250 yards (or meters, don’t remember which really).

real world fighters would also have no crew and be computer aimed anyway, you could just as well use a sporadic guidance software to properly saturate a target with rounds. And hey iv everything else fails your expendable gun bot can always use the mass of its body to double as a missile

If the plane had its guns on the wings then yes, you could set the convergence distance to a set range but obviously not while in the air, thats why many fightesr like the BF109, P38 lightning and rhe soviet yaks had all orost of their guns in the nose, like the ties and naboo fighters

Well technically you would waste a life but not in the same way you're thinking. >:)

In CoaDE, 250km range is basically where jousting starts. All meaningful maneuver are done far beyond that.

Or just let the drone work without radio control. Jamming made useless. Also, good luck jamming anything thousands of km away.

I made a drone that had a railgun that shot mini nukes at mid-short range (only about 10 shots can be carried unfortunately) so the plan is you put your mothership in an eccentric orbit close to an interception, send out the drones and correct the course, thanks to the high interception speed, very few drones can be taken out, and you don't have the problems with missiles at high interception speeds where you cannot correct your course in time. As long as your vernier thrusters are good enough, you can always nuke your target multiple time! I also made a version with a conventional nuke firing gun which can launch heavier nukes at the cost of reload speed and mass of the gun itself.

Mostly avoid engaging head-ons unless you are in planes with more time that their opponents.

That's really unfair, the A6M had excellent visibility and was one of the first planes with a cockpit that gave the pilot such a wide field of view. It was a good plane, and just like its immediate predecessor (the A5M) was probably one the better planes out there at its inception... Unlike the TIE that's actively trying to get the pilot killed for no good reason and having accomplished nothing.

@@harmen2456 There is two advantages the tie has that everyone over looks. Those huge wings all but disappear in the top and rear profile leaving only the cockpit as any target. More importantly though ties in addition to lacking shields also have no life support, so the pilot is flying in an eva suit, making it possible to survive if the craft is lost. Unlike the pressurized cockpit of other fighters, where the pilot is in an open faced helmet. Not sure if it is canon, but every tie toy even going back to the original ‘77 tie depicts them having ejection seats.

Isn't the Tie interceptor's turbo lasers can also be outfitted at the chin of the ball?

@@CosmicIceBerry some have both but i imagine the wing blasters are inverted slightly inward.

TIE Fighter pilots are suicidal. TIE Defender pilots are bloodthirsty. TIE Interceptor pilots are suicidal AND bloodthirsty.

As far as i remember, when flying a Tie Interceptor ot Advanced/Avenger, it was recommended to set the fire controls to quad fire, slower rate of fire, yes, but larger chances to hit and good chance of hitting a target at least three times with a single shoot. It was also recommended that when flying a tie fighter, never go on a fight alone, allways try to have at least two Ties on a single target, always check on the targeting indicator that warns you of an enemy fighter locking on you and meneuver out of it asap.

@@spiceracksargent0014 That's part of the imperial doctrine, rookie pilots get cheap-expendable tie fighters, if they are still alive after a few combat missions, then let them fly bombers, then interceptos, if the pilot insists on being alive, then probably is skilled enough to be a valuable asset and so move on to play with the expensive shielded fighters.

Actually, even in Star Wars, where shields are heavily "evolved" compare to other Sci-Fi universes, Missiles are still used, like concussion missiles. Even if shields were very powerful, you could either have a EMP missile (basically a mini-nuke) to take it down or simply fire more missile. It doesn't really take a advance AI to lock onto a target from km away and fire a missile, in fact, it would be easier because you don't have to account for drag and turning radius. Point Defense guns aren't typically found on fighters or bombers, while the Point Defense on the larger ships would be more oriented towards targeting ship busting Missiles/Torpedoes instead of the small, anti-fighter missiles since the larger missiles/Torpedoes will be more of a threat to the ship then the fighter missiles.

But you loose because you are not a cool ace dog fighting pilot, which is much better than actually trying to survive or win a battle in space.

Electonics can be hardened against EM bursts.

You've never seen a swarm of drones massace a ship in eve, have you?

@@SirAroace Poor AI actually facilitates the use of missiles, since good PD requires really good targeting computers.

The thing is that head on's are pretty good if you have the weapon superiority, like a spitfire vs a quad 7.62 109, you can dish out more damage without risking giving the enemy your side, just make sure to pull out of the joust when under 200m

Colonel Frontline most use the ww2 style because it’s more stylish and cinematic. George Lucas watched actual ww2 footage to base his dogfights on.

@@luckynumber1059 Well that was awesome back then, but now it's getting too annoying. A bit of realism wouldn't have hurt.

It's relatable by everyone and you don't have to explain anything. That's why they always go to the WWII Dogfight. On the other hand, if you think your universe through, you get something like the Expanse or the so-callen 'Honorverse' with exiting space battles that look unique. Not like Star Trek: Discovery with ships that fly around without any visible sense or tactic making 'pewpewpew'.

@@grayscribe1342 also the expanse has starship designs which actually make some kind of sense, no sheilds, no magic artificial gravity and apart from the epstein drive the majority of the technology is stuff we can build or have primitive versions of already which helps give the universe a good grounding for veiwers

They're more emulating WW1 dogfights. WW2 aircraft battles were a lot faster than what we see in films.

Babylon 5 did it first, and is also one hell of a space opera.

The Expanse :D

Babylon 5.

nothing I have seen in film or television. but Elite Dangerous has interesting space combat with realistic physics.

there was when the Roci took on that Amun-Ra-class stealth ship.

Nope, definitely was NOT in XWA. You're actually close, though. XWA and XVT (if I'm remembering correctly) both had this mechanic where, if you had your crosshair lined up for a shot, your projectiles would *automatically* converge at the right range for the target. In other words, they'd be set to converge closer for a nearer target and farther away for a far-off target. I was absolutely *fascinated* by that shit back in the 90s. I did, however, find a source that stated that the original X-Wing and TIE Fighter games did NOT have that feature, so it could be that's what you're thinking of? Annnnnd I seem to recall there being a keybind to deactivate automatic convergence, so that could also be it.