Description
This study explores the evolution of technology and the aerial dogfight. It looks at how technology has tried unsuccessfully to eliminate the need for aircraft to engage in close-in aerial combat know as “aerial dogfights” to achieve air superiority or just defend themselves and survive from hostile aircraft. To show this, the study looks at four different conflicts: the United States in Vietnam, the Israelis in both the Yom Kippur War and Operation Peace for Galilee, and the British in the Falklands War. Four factors examined which vary in prominence in each of these conflicts are: financial restrictions, limitations of technology, rules of engagement, and the “fog of war.” The study concludes that technology as we know it today or in the foreseeable future will not be able to totally eliminate the aerial dogfight in a major conflict. As technology improves the effectiveness of weapons, it also improves the counters to these weapons. Financial restrictions in the form of budget constraints during times of peace have been a limiting factor to a country’s technological advances prior to a conflict, and directly influence how a country will be able to fight at the start of any conflict. Rules of engagement and the “fog of war” further limit technology from being employed in its optimum designed application during a conflict.
