radar scan distance.

[Frostie]

The art of fighting without fighting.

AWAX on, AWAX off.

FC 2 is all about being in touch with oneself.

More tea vicker? :hehe:

[RIPTIDE]

At least one guy with sense for humor :D

 

@RIPTIDE: just give it up ;) ...hehe

[GGTharos]

Try applying quotes that are in context, and then I might buy that you understand anything about war doctrines of any sort.

 

And if context is in the hands of the writer, than you have definitely failed to read between the lines yourself. I call either hypocrisy, or you don't actually know anything about war tactics, the art of fighting, or martial arts or the art of war or any important meanings between the lines. ;)

 

This is that kind of BS which you dont understand.

It is to deep for you.

If you actually would understand anything about war tactics, war philosphy, art of fighting, or martial arts or at least have read "Art of War" by Sun Tzu or at least modern war doctrines, you would have seen the important meanings between the lines and you would have understood.

It is the same BS what gets you downed if you cross my airspace in your beloved "real pilots want" simulator :smilewink:

 

(thx you for being very rude as moderator while advocating opposite)

[GGTharos]

Look in the mirror ... and your past posts ;)

 

Lack of interpretation-skills, lack of admiting in doing so, in desperation firing back is what i call that. Get over it and enjoy your day.....you dont have to understand everything ;) nor judge ...its not to you, never was.

 

And who please gives you the right of offend and ridicule members in this forum? Over and over and over again=?..vs many guys ...i dont wanna call you that...but that is something what we call "gobshite".

 

Peace

[asparagin]

If you actually would understand anything about war tactics, war philosphy, art of fighting, or martial arts or at least have read "Art of War" by Sun Tzu

 

When putting this in a modern context, I think one has to consider:

 

1. Sun Tzu was written at a time when technological advances were going slow, two opposing armies were at more or less the same level (maybe except size).

2. Overall mentality at that time is not comparable with the contemporary, we live in a time where for e.g. what one might call honor died in WW2.

[asparagin]

but those teachings are still used in millitary today. They are even elementry parts.

 

This is true. But what do you think: how many Sun Tzu teachings are used in the "war on terror"? I'm sure the "terrorists" use more than the "coalition of the willing".

[159th_Viper]

....but honestly

i have NEVER seen any great practical achievements from you flyingwise. There are already jokes hovering .....think about it.

 

Please pray tell what an individual's Virtual Flying Skill has to do with the discussion at hand?

 

I do know how it comes across as, ie as a thinly-veiled deliberate attempt at personal provocation/incitement, but I'm sure that was not your intention now, was it ;)

[JLZ]

When putting this in a modern context, I think one has to consider:

 

1. Sun Tzu was written at a time when technological advances were going slow, two opposing armies were at more or less the same level (maybe except size).

2. Overall mentality at that time is not comparable with the contemporary, we live in a time where for e.g. what one might call honor died in WW2.

 

You haven't read it? Do it now!

 

It doesn't matter if it's 2k years old. It is still studied on military academies, even on West Point. It doesn't matter if your job won't be to lead armies in war either.

 

The Art of War is almost certainly the most famous study of strategy ever written and has had an extraordinary influence on the history of warfare. The principles Sun Tzu expounded were utilized brilliantly by such great Asian war leaders as Mao Tse-tung, Giap, and Yamamoto. First translated two hundred years ago by a French missionary, Sun Tzu’s Art of War has been credited with influencing Napoleon, the German General Staff, and even the planning for Desert Storm. Many Japanese companies make this book required reading for their key executives. And increasingly, Western business people and others are turning to the Art of War for inspiration and advice on how to succeed in competitive situations of all kinds.Why has a two-thousand-year-old text proven so valuable in today’s world? Because the Art of War embodies an Eastern tradition of strategy that emphasizes outwitting an opponent through speed, stealth, flexibility, and a minimum of effort. And these time-tested principles work. They have been proven on the battlefield and in the marketplace...

 

Also, more on Wikipedia

[nomdeplume]

Lack of interpretation-skills

 

A.S., please consider that if someone fails to understand you, then it is you who has failed to communicate.

 

Your post appeared to be in reply to someone stating that they've focused more on the F-15 because they find it easier to fly and can therefore concentrate more on the actual fighting than the mechanisation of flight and radar controls.

 

You seemed to agree with this ("Playing out the differences given with the different platforms") and yet at the same time seem to be belittling the poster for not choosing to fly an aircraft they find more difficult to be effective with, suggesting that making things unnecessarily difficult for yourself is somehow more realistic.

 

Then, as if we weren't already confused enough by what you're trying to communicate, you dump in a poorly-translated quotation about the value of "not losing" compared to "winning" which is well and good in a discussion on strategic and perhaps tactical thinking, but how it applies to this thread, or even to FC2 in general given the setup of most missions, is questionable at best.

 

So, unless your goal was to give you the opportunity to believe you're smarter and deeper than everyone else, then you completely failed to communicate anything useful and simply derailed the thread.

[EtherealN]

This silly discussion about who comes across how ends right now.

 

Seriously. Back on the topic.

[vanir]

Hatsumi is kobudosoke at the head of a number of surviving mediaeval ryuha, soke = father of tradition (roughly, grandmaster), kobudo = old martial art (traditional, unchanged, historically sound); in addition he is the figurehead of a number of commercial franchises within the scope of those traditions (bujinkan dojos and budo taijutsu), and hold an honourary degree in sociology I think, from the department of history University of Japan. I've trained with a number of these franchises (wound up with Takamatsu Ryuha offshoot because of internal politics between the operators and practitioners, it's like the warring states all over again up in there, half the shidoeshi call all the other ones fakes, very competitive, a lot of jerks involved).

 

However the context of his statements referenced are for historical perspective understanding the cultural and political environment in which the historical families not directly aligned with daimyo or the shogunate lived throughout the mediaeval period in Japan. How they got by, the kind of thinking they had.

 

It's not really relevant to air combat doctrine or tactical training directly. Generalised as these statements are they may have some resemblence to strategic planning but again it isn't really the case within context. It's about historical perspectives on a personal level, given in sweeping generalisations.

 

Like I said I trained with these schools at length and I'd still take everything I could find published by experienced combat aviators over all of it, in a plane. My training will mostly help me with breathing exercises and other meditative techniques in the pit for increasing SA and G-resistance wherever possible using psychological methods, but where tactical applications are concerned I'll be dead if I try to get too creative by disregarding subject specific combat training for ambiguous mediaeval philosophies.

 

You might argue a discipline involving deep historical studies of warfare, such as kobudo traditions (which include elements of shugenja mikkyo or mediaeval religion, which is noteworthy if applying to reality today), may increase the scope of the contemporary mind to become innovative and instinctive in both strategic and tactical terms. Might provide some good foundations.

But it is not at all like picking up a book and trying to put a line on a page into practise. That's not how martial arts training works. Like sciences the conclusions are amorphous and falsifiable, statements made by soke are commentary of events transpired, they're a record. They're not meant to be a doctrine and are predictive only in terms of possible insights regarding likelihoods.

 

For example if Hatsumisoke says one should give in to gain the advantage, this only means something if you're familiar with gogyo budo taijutsu as far as generic training goes, here one may apply it as a simple observation of the water element forms. It is to be represented both psychologically and physically to be effective, an important distinction since budo taijutsu seeks only to enhance the inherent combat capability of any primate. A whole lot of it is about tactical roleplay. See, not entirely relevant to aviation combat.

 

Specifically Hatsumisoke is probably referring to some of the philosophy of the Shinden Fudo Ryu (of which he is the current grandmaster among other traditions), the founder of Judo studied with this school once, and many combat techniques begin from a natural posture and work with movement efficiency so that attackers would wear themselves more than you do trying to be impressive and intimidating. The core philosophy is "the immovable spirit"

 

 

 

Let me put it this way, I'm still a beginner in LOMAC and I get much more survivability finding out how to beam and notch and that doppler radars can be fooled like that than I do trying to anthropomorphise jetfighter combat. I'm more familiar with IL2 say, and here again there is much more value learning the smart thing to do is turn into a diving enemy attack if you want to survive because he can't pull the same turning circle you can due to relative speeds, and that's an advantage you can us. That's much more valuable to a pilot than a very ambiguous parable about letting the enemy think he's winning and tiger extends its claw to reveal the vulnerable elbow or whatever else.

Y'know if you catch my drift, I think that's a reasonable point. Also being fairly well trained in various kobudo I can tell you the couple of times I've flicked through Sun Tzu I'd basically discount everything written for actual application. Like I said it doesn't work that way, it's just an observation of what already happened, a possible insight under specific conditions, but never a dictum, where dicta can work for you in technological environments because physics is quite absolute.

 

ie. Jeet Kune Do or a more complete martial arts philosophy/tradition can't make you beat any opponent under any given circumstances, but correctly using basic air combat doctrines can under given circumstances and it becomes a game of who makes the first, and their last mistake. This is because the capabilities of aircraft and the laws of physics they rely upon for motion are quite finite. Aircraft are like a predictable physical opponent, who actually tries to let your techniques work on him, hence the psychological aspect to physical combat, you don't need this in aircraft because there's nothing the plane can do either way but what its physics demands of the moment, it can't flinch or be only partially commited, or feint or use subterfuge masking.

 

Agree that you might anthropomorphise some aspects of aerial combat though A.S. and for this much I applaud you. But that's a level largely irrelevant for most pilots, really just an academic exercise.

Edited July 5, 2010 by vanir

[vanir]

Yeah I thought so when you quoted Hatsumisoke (he does have some insightfully brilliant quotes, particularly his esteem for humility and good humour as much as skill).

 

The thing with the kobudo however is much as what was mentioned as an angle on Sun Tzu, sure in a philosophical sense timeless but for specific combat strategy it should be little more than inspiration to rational thinking.

 

Kobudo, or historically accurate mediaeval martial traditions have a very important distinction about them for which modern martial arts are largely exempt. Where a school-franchise of Aikido for example might advocate Buddhism and celebrate the religion in practise, the Kobudo are based directly, physically in mediaeval science-philosophy, it takes religion to the extreme level of pseudoscientific establishment.

 

That's a really important distinction so I'm going to repeat it for prosperity. The systems kobudo rely upon are scientifically inaccurate, but they believed them to be accurate back in the 12th century and so naturally assumed that any fighting system and other martial arts based on these "scientific truths" would inherently be divine in nature (hence the names of all the schools are things like Immovable Gods, Jewel Tigers, Hidden Doors, etc.).

 

Strictly speaking their comprehensive nature and apparent effectiveness are probably more related to a very elaborate, largely mechanical system being used as a base (shugenja mikkyo, the nature of which varies between ryu), rather than being the "correct" or "most effective" or "superior" system. Just being a very elaborate system, one evolved on centuries of battlefield experience gives it great kudos, but doesn't make the basic premise hold water.

 

You could judge the kobudo in exactly the same light you do religious extremists, biblical literalists, folks like that dumbo westborough church, it basically asserts the same kind of things. The statements of belief however are muted by their representation in a physical system of training and application. Contemporary franchise in the martial arts community is certainly not practised in the religious sense, most practitioners would hardly be aware of it and think about their belt ranks and so on.

 

The other side is more about ninpo, or the surviving spirit of ages, the strategum, where the kobudo are taken out of the academic martial arts dojo to form the basis of life philosophies and complete militant evolution are inevitably based on these mediaeval religious views of how the universe works physically. The gogyo setsu, gotonpo, inyodo and so on are the rudimentary application of what originated in ancient Greece, suspended in time and substituted for modern theoretical astrophysics. A pseudoscience.

And I should mention as such it can walk some questionable lines in terms of clarity and rationale if adopted in the modern environment.

 

What they should do, what they are designed to do is to inspire rational modern thought. What you might do is try to apply physics to combat, the same way kobudo applies ancient science-philosophy thought to be real physics at the time, to combat. Modernising, updating, correcting it along the way.

 

And an excellent natural example of this by default, is the way air combat doctrines have evolved, using hard, actual physics in combination with combat action and materiel to provide an effective tactical superiority.

Bringing air combat doctrines back to Sun Tzu might very well be more devolution than evolution. Chances are any insights have already been explored and practised, even if the wheel did get reinvented through the process over the last century.