What counts?

[Zazen13]

No need to split the hair. You know what I meant.

"An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject."

The preceding sentence contained my argument where I addressed the subject directly.

...The level of awareness required to fight a single enemy with zero chance of any other mitigating factor entering your sphere is a lot different quantitatively if not substantively than the level of awareness required when involved in a complex multi-plane engagement containing a vast array of mitigating factors and elements demanding your active attentiveness...

[Zazen13]

1 v. 1 enviroment is completely different then furball. There are times in a furball when I'm sitting 400 yards from a kill and have to break to survive. In a furball I almost never been able to stay on someone's tail for more then 30 seconds without not having to take evasive manuever.

You've got that straight Yenny. Having all day to single-mindedly work a lone dude at your liesure has so little in common with having fleeting seconds to dispatch someone before being forced to break off or killed by other bandits you have to constantly be aware of it's really not even the same animal at all.

[Anaxogoras]

"An ad hominem argument, also known as argumentum ad hominem (Latin: "argument to the man", "argument against the man") consists of replying to an argument or factual claim by attacking or appealing to a characteristic or belief of the person making the argument or claim, rather than by addressing the substance of the argument or producing evidence against the claim. The process of proving or disproving the claim is thereby subverted, and the argumentum ad hominem works to change the subject."

The day we start holding AH bbs users accountable for the use of informal fallacies is the day 90% of you will have nothing to say.

[Zazen13]

The day we start holding AH bbs users accountable for the use of informal fallacies is the day 90% of you will have nothing to say.

  It wouldn't matter if I said the sky is blue. These guys would argue it with me until they stroked out and became worm dirt.

AKAK has personal history with me and has hated me since long before AH even existed, I thought he had grown out of that adolescent fuedalism but I guess I was mistaken. Bighorn is apparently a mystery man of many faces and the dueling King of AH. But, he almost never flies the MA, so he always tries to argue that 1 vs 1 duels are the end all be all to fighterdom existence and somehow magically contain within their context every factor the chaotic MA environment encompasses and more...lol

[2bighorn]

Generalizing in that way in very convenient when trying to fit something under a very restricted contextual umbrella. But, it does not change the fact that awareness of a single enemy in complete isolation is far less complex than awareness of an entire area containing multiple threats and friends. It's not just a matter of plurality, it's a matter of different things being much more important and to very different degrees.

Nobody claimed that.

Furthermore, some things absolutely required in expansive SA have absolutely no relevance in TA.

Don't know why you've mentioned TA. In AH, SA is not arena limited.

For example, there is absolutely no use for judging the relative E states and intentions of friendly and enemy cons you are not directly involved with in close proximity when dueling a single foe in isolation. Instantaneously judging the E states and intentions of multiple cons and maintaining that level of cognizance is an incredibly fundamental part of SA and very hard to maintain while engaged with another bandit. Truly gifted furballers have mastered this art, it's what makes them great at it. This art is not applicable to a 1 vs 1 isolated duel at all, but it is the single most important part of SA in complex multi-plane engagements.

You're always bringing up DA and TA. I really don't know how is that relevant when comparing 1vs1 and many vs many. Or is that just you implying that me spending most of my time in DA and TA, have no clue about furballing and as such I shouldn't speak of SA?

To be complete pilot you need good SA (incl knowing your enemy, his tools and capabilities), decent set of skills (ACM [includes tactics] + gunnery), and be trained in those so you don't have to make conscious decisions (for the most part ie muscle memory) when in combat.
He who has all of the above will excel in any type of combat.

I have never seen skilled stick having problem in DA duels, and for the most part, skilled duelers are good furballers.

Having only to focus on a single bandit at close range where single-minded observation is simple, with no worry of outside factors, is so trivial by comparison it is laughable.

Maybe laughable to you, to me it's just different and definitely not trivial.

Anyways, we can test your claims. We can wing for a week or two and furball in MA (and I mean furball, not cherry pick), and another week or two having some 1vs1 in DA.
After that we can again discuss the differences. Deal?

[Murdr]

Gross generalization in that way is a very convenient method of trying to fit something under a very restricted contextual umbrella.

It is not a convenient generalization.  Your argument is akin to saying a car on the highway requires licencing, and a safety inspection.  A beater that is driven around in the sand dunes does not.  Therefore we can strip the body panels and windshield off of the car and call it a dune buggy.  Thats fine, but is still a damn car!  You can peel off unneeded layers of SA, but you will still be left addressing SA.

[2bighorn]

Bighorn is apparently a mystery man of many faces and the dueling King of AH. But, he almost never flies the MA, so he always tries to argue that 1 vs 1 duels are the end all be all to fighterdom existence and somehow magically contain within their context every factor the chaotic MA environment encompasses and more...lol

Slight correction. I'm no king of any kind, especially not in DA, I do not claim to be expert at anything AH related, nor I contain myself to DA and TA.

And for the record, it is you who always try to demote other arenas, not me.

[Zazen13]

Maybe laughable to you, to me it's just different and definitely not trivial.

There ya go, it's different, as in it's  not really the same thing in essence, you got there! Congratulations!

[Zazen13]

It is not a convenient generalization.  Your argument is akin to saying a car on the highway requires licencing, and a safety inspection.  A beater that is driven around in the sand dunes does not.  Therefore we can strip the body panels and windshield off of the car and call it a dune buggy.  Thats fine, but is still a damn car!  You can peel off unneeded layers of SA, but you will still be left addressing SA.

Yup, it sure is, in precisely the same way a rain drop is the ocean... But, can we then turn around and say the ocean is really just a rain drop? That's what you're trying to say in effect...In mathematical terms you are trying to stuff a set into one of its sub-sets. It would be like me saying something like, "Bears have fur, therefore anything with fur is a bear"...

[2bighorn]

There ya go, it's different, as in it's  not really the same thing in essence, you got there! Congratulations!

Again, nobody claimed it is not different. To use your ocean and raindrop analogy, we said ocean and raindrop are both water, whilst you originally claimed raindrop isn't.

[Murdr]

No.  The action sequences and multiple environmental cues are still there whether there is one or ten bogies around.  Have you ever augered in a 1 vs 1?  Departed controled flight?  Ran out of fuel unexpectedly?  Misjudge where your lift vector is pointed when not having the horizon in view?  All of those are break downs in SA, in a one vs one that have nothing to do with the immediate threat.  And tactical awareness covers all immediate threats, not just one specifically, and there are many of the same environmental factors that need to be considered regardless of how many immediate and non-immediate threats there are.  Your separation of SA to being defined as something else does not conform not only to air combat specifically, but SA in general.

[Zazen13]

Again, nobody claimed it is not different. To use your ocean and raindrop analogy, we said ocean and raindrop are both water, whilst you originally claimed raindrop isn't.

Yup, they are both a form of water, but the ocean has salt in it, fish swim in it, boats float on it and it's infinitely more vast. You find me a rain drop with a fish in it and I'll agree with you a rain drop is the ocean.

[2bighorn]

You find me a rain drop with a fish in it and I'll agree with you a rain drop is the ocean.

Known occurrences:
    * Cambridge, Maryland, 1828
    * Rahway, New Jersey, November 13, 1833
    * Aberdare, Glamorganshire, Wales, 1841
    * Singapore, February 22, 1861 [10]
    * Mountain Ash, Glamorganshire, Wales, February 9, 1859
    * Olneyville, Rhode Island, May 15, 1900
    * Tiller’s Ferry, South Carolina, June 1901 (catfish)
    * Marksville, Louisiana, October 23, 1947
    * Ranchi, India, July 1997
    * Great Yarmouth, Norfolk, August 8, 2000
    * Wiltshire, May 2001
    * Knighton, Powys, Wales, August 18, 2004
    * Murfreesboro, Tennessee, 2004
    * Paravur, Kerala, India May 2006
    * Peerumed, Kerala, India July 2006
    * Thaliparamba, Kerala, India, July 20 2006
    * Paracatu, Minas Gerais, Brazil, February 14, 2007
    * Honduras, Rain of Fishes, (supposedly taking place once or twice a year, every year for more than a century)

[Zazen13]

No.  The action sequences and multiple environmental cues are still there whether there is one or ten bogies around.  Have you ever augered in a 1 vs 1?  Departed controled flight?  Ran out of fuel unexpectedly?  Misjudge where your lift vector is pointed when not having the horizon in view?  All of those are break downs in SA, in a one vs one that have nothing to do with the immediate threat.  And tactical awareness covers all immediate threats, not just one specifically, and there are many of the same environmental factors that need to be considered regardless of how many immediate and non-immediate threats there are.  Your separation of SA to being defined as something else does not conform not only to air combat specifically, but SA in general.

All of those things are considered in complex engagements as well. But, there's also much, much more. Being aware of your plane's behavior is ubiquitous not unique to 1 vs 1's. It is not in any way an equivalent replacement of having to remain aware of 20 other bandits and friends, their E states, vectors and intentions while engaged with someone else. Those things are entirely unique to complex engagements only, not at all applicable to isolated 1 vs 1 encounters, but a fundamental concept of SA nonetheless. In a complex engagement you have to do all of those things IN ADDITION to remaining acutely aware of your plane's behavior and the one bandit you are engaged with at the time.

[2bighorn]

In a complex engagement you have to do all of those things IN ADDITION to remaining acutely aware of your plane's behavior and the one bandit you are engaged with at the time.

Yeah, but that's still 1vs1