Aces High Bulletin Board
Help and Support Forums => Help and Training => Topic started by: troon on November 22, 2006, 12:09:59 AM
-
Recently, I partcipated in a bomber strike mission. I was in the p51 crusing at 30k. This was the first time being that high in the main arena. Fighters then attacked our bomber group. Within 30 seconds of my first shot, my engine was shot out and i was drifting down to earth.
So two questions,
Is there any adjustments you need to make for fights that high?
Are all the super good players all up there at high alts?
-
at that altitude you have much less E to play with. Your plane shows two "speeds"....the white needle shows "indicated air speed" and the red marker shows "true air speed"....
Now at 30k your pony may be moving at 400+ MPH....but your white needle will show an airspeed of just over 200....this is important since it reflects the actual movement of air over your wing by density....in effect your wing is generating only "200something" mph worth of lift. The plane is much more sluggish and will stall once that white needle hits stall speed....even though you might be going 300+mph....
Fighting at high alt is a totally different experience that takes time to learn....
-
as Humble Said "Fighting at high alt is a totally different experience that takes time to learn...."
theres only a few planes that work good at the 30+k alt and even those take time to learn ... up there its best to fight in the horizontal ,extend alot , and keep your E up as much as possiable ... its alot slower type fight and you wont be reversing at 1k but extending to 2.5 or more at times .
-
The trick I've found at hi alt is to pull as many low G manouvers as possible, learn the minimum speed for roll for your particular aircraft. Learn to watch your G meter when doing anything up high.
-
Originally posted by humble
at that altitude you have much less E to play with
Actually, at high altitude you have a lot more energy to work with, it's just harder to work with it because maneuvering is harder. This is due to the effect which you have explained. Generally speaking, energy fighters are better than maneuverable aircraft up high, because it's harder to maneuver and energy fighting is more effective.
The "Big Three" Unites States Army Air Force fighters are allegedly better up high, although in real life it was only the P-51 that was specifically designed for high altitude fighting. The P-38 was best at low altitude.
-
Benny your actually wrong here. From an engineering perspective "energy" is really the combination of the various force vectors. The lift vector decreases significantly while the planes speed increases marginally so "total force" is significantly less at 3ok then 20k....this is readily apparent by looking at any lanes "doghouse chart"....some planes handle it better then others....but no plane has its optimal performance at that alt.
The F4U-4 has better climb and speed (mil) at 30k then the P51...the 38 outclimbs the pony at mil power as well....
-
Fighting up high is all about E fighting. Because of the much more narrow flight envelope it is much easier to make a tiny mistake that costs you alot of E. Unlike down low it is very hard to recover lost E. Once someone gets "On top of you" E-state wise, you are usually in serious trouble.
Because of the greater restrictions on manueverability up high snap shots and crossing shots are probably as good as you are going to get, so marksmanship and gun lethality plays a bigger role, you are not often going to get the opportunity to manuever 'into the saddle' in a high alt fight.
Zazen
-
so in aces high, what is the best high alt fighter?
-
the P-47 is the best 25K+ fighter in AH and in RL...if you dont believe me go look at the charts...at around 23 24K the p47 will rulle over the 51 and 38...
-
Originally posted by 1epic1
the P-47 is the best 25K+ fighter in AH and in RL...if you dont believe me go look at the charts...at around 23 24K the p47 will rulle over the 51 and 38...
But at 30k the P-51/P-38/F4U-4 all out perform the P-47N
-
Originally posted by humble
But at 30k the P-51/P-38/F4U-4 all out perform the P-47N
AH charts are for 100% fuel load if I'm not mistaken. You know what it means for the 550 gallons P47N...
-
Dont forget the SMk14 at high alts.....
-
Originally posted by Schatzi
Dont forget the SMk14 at high alts.....
WOW....
I had no idea the spitXIV was a monster up there (then again I dont go up there).....looking at the gonzo charts it dominates (47N a bit faster with wep) the 38/51/47 at 30k......no wonder its a perked bird:)
-
Originally posted by humble
Benny your actually wrong here. From an engineering perspective "energy" is really the combination of the various force vectors. The lift vector decreases significantly while the planes speed increases marginally so "total force" is significantly less at 3ok then 20k....this is readily apparent by looking at any lanes "doghouse chart"....some planes handle it better then others....but no plane has its optimal performance at that alt.
From an engineering perspective, Benny is right :) Energy is a factor of speed and alt only. What is important is the relative energy between two fighters at high altitude. Outside of that, what Humble right on. The indicated speeds are much lower, so you have less energy to play with to keep an energy advantage. Energy management is more critical at high altitude.
Gunner
-
the 47n was a top dog at 36k but after it lost "super cruise" it fell outta use . it still has "Secrets" though and will perform with the rest up there if setup correctly. the 2x's fuel burn just doesnt do it justice. when you can trim a 152 to cruise for hours up there.
-
Originally posted by GunnerCAF
From an engineering perspective, Benny is right :) Energy is a factor of speed and alt only. What is important is the relative energy between two fighters at high altitude. Outside of that, what Humble right on. The indicated speeds are much lower, so you have less energy to play with to keep an energy advantage. Energy management is more critical at high altitude.
Gunner
But from an engineering perspective isnt lift the variable in question. Basically its what powers flight. Raw speed is just a component of lift, which is the true controlling variable. The physics of high alt flight limit total lift and therefor max AOA as well as control surface forces. In effect an airplane at high alt has less total lift to utilize so its "net energy" is less....
-
Originally posted by humble
But from an engineering perspective isnt lift the variable in question.
Not when you are talking about energy.
Basically its what powers flight.
Lift doesn't power flight, the engine does.
Raw speed is just a component of lift, which is the true controlling variable.
It's the other way around.
The physics of high alt flight limit total lift and therefor max AOA as well as control surface forces. In effect an airplane at high alt has less total lift to utilize so its "net energy" is less....
You can't say that the net energy is less because there is less lift, although it might happen to be true, that isn't the way to think about it. I'm going to explain how to think about energy and maneuverability in a post below this one, it should help to clarify the concept.
Badboy
-
Here is my very basic explanation of energy maneuverability. The idea is important though, so it is worth getting a firm grasp of it.
Energy is a concept used to describe the condition of objects. It can sometimes make life very much easier to describe and understand why things happen if we refer to energy instead of the things that cause it to have the energy in the first place. Energy is a very broad notion, we say that an object has energy for various reasons, because it is moving, because it is high, or because it is hot or will burn well. Those are very different types of energy, and so they can to be broken down and named, you are probably already familiar with several types. It can sound very technical to refer to something like thermal or electromagnetic energy, if you are not technically minded, those descriptions can be daunting. The important thing to remember is that they are just labels, nothing more than names. So when a pilot talks about energy, he is talking about two things, Kinetic and Potential energy. Kinetic energy is the name given to the energy possessed by an object in motion. An aircraft that has some speed is said to posses some Kinetic energy. It’s as simple as that! The faster the aircraft travels, the more energy it is said to possess. Potential energy is the name used to describe stored energy. One way of storing energy is to raise an object above the ground. When the object is lifted, energy is required to raise it. When the object falls, it gains speed and the energy is recovered. while it was in its high position it had the potential to fall, it had potential energy. Similarly an aircraft that has altitude is said to possess potential energy. The higher the aircraft is, the more energy it is said to possess, because it will be able to gain more speed when it falls. At this point you may be thinking that things have hardly become any simpler. Initially we had speed and altitude, and now we have simply replaced them with two types of energy. However thinking in terms of energy allows us to perform a trick that does simplify things a great deal.
Normally If you want to add quantities together it is important to ensure that they have the same units. However two apples plus two oranges makes sense, only if you consider using a new system of units called fruits, when the answer can then be four fruits. In the same way, adding speed and altitude together is fine, providing you think in terms of the energy. That this is a reasonable thing to do can easily be demonstrated. For example, if you hold an apple 6ft above the ground it will have potential energy because of its altitude, but it will have no kinetic energy because it is stationary. However when you drop it, it will lose altitude and gain speed. As it falls lower, it will become faster as it converts potential energy to kinetic energy on the way. The moment before it reaches the ground, all of the potential energy will have been converted to kinetic energy. However the amount of energy that existed in the beginning as potential energy will be the same as the amount remaining at the end in the form of kinetic energy or speed. Originally it was high, and then became faster as it fell, however the total energy was always the same. If you consider the energy when the object is half way down, it will have gained some kinetic energy and lost some potential energy, and you can now add the kinetic energy due to the speed, to the potential energy due to the height and obtain a figure that represents the combination of speed and altitude. What we have done is added the speed and altitude together in terms of the amount of energy in each. What we have done is forged a link between speed and altitude using a tool called energy. We have discovered that two seemingly separate quantities, are infact intimately related. The ways in which this relationship is so vital in air combat can now be considered.
So for a fighter pilot, the concept of kinetic and potential energy, allow him to describe the combined effect of speed and altitude together. When you fly your aircraft the overall energy status is the sum of its kinetic and potential energy and that will depend upon its speed and altitude. Just like the apple in the example, an aircraft can trade altitude for speed by diving. The higher it is, the more potential energy it can convert to kinetic energy and the more speed it can gain. If the pilot climbs he will lose speed but gain altitude, which can be converted back to speed by diving once again.
The way in which speed and altitude are converted back and forth in this way is called “Energy Management”. The combination of an aircraft’s speed and altitude is referred to as its “Energy Status”. It is possible for two aircraft to have the same energy status even though their speed and altitude may be different.
For example, an aircraft at 6000ft and 350mph has exactly the same total energy as another at 8000ft and 250mph, they are at different altitudes and speeds but their total energy status is the same. They are said to be Co E. Being Co E means that in this example if we ignore drag for a moment, if the low fighter climbed to 8000ft his speed would bleed to 250mph and if the high fighter dived to 6000ft his speed would increase to 350mph. That means that they have the same amount of total energy.
Now you will begin to see the advantage of talking in terms of energy instead of speed and altitude. In this example, comparing two aircraft would require both the speed and altitude for each aircraft, that is four quantities, and it would in any case be difficult to interpret. However by combing those quantities and thinking in terms of the energy, it was easy to see that the two aircraft were infact identical in that respect.
So, we have arrived at a way of describing speed and altitude in terms of a new quantity called energy. That allows us to combine the speed and altitude together into a single quantity that expresses the sum of both, quite a neat trick. But what does that energy tell us about the manoeuvrability of an aircraft? Well total energy is not yet the end of the story because two aircraft at the same altitude and speed won’t necessarily have the same total energy, because that depends on their weight. That this is true can be seen if you consider the amount of work you would need to do to stop two objects moving at the same altitude and speed, but one much heavier than the other. You will appreciate that the heavier object would be much more difficult to stop, it would require more energy. So for example a 150 ton B-2 at 20,000ft and 400kts would have a great deal more energy than a 12 ton F-16 at the same altitude and speed, but the B-2 would be a good deal less manoeuvrable.
So the heavier aircraft in this example has more energy, yet is less manoeuvrable. The reason for this is that if you apply the same aerodynamic force to two aircraft, the heavy one will accelerate less than the light one. We need to take another important step. Instead of considering the total energy, we need to look at the specific energy for an aircraft. That is just the aircraft’s total energy divided by its weight. That provides a measure of the energy per pound and is much more useful because it removes the effect of weight or inertia that caused the problem with the B-2 and F-16 comparison. The B-2 had a much lower specific energy, that’s why it was less manoeuvrable. The F-16 had a high specific energy because it was much lighter, that explains its greater manoeuvrability. Specific energy is called Es (pronounced “Ease”) by fighter pilots who can refer to charts for comparison.
So in terms of being able to climb to a greater altitude, or to the same altitude at a higher speed, more Es can already be seen to endow a fighter with more manoeuvrability. You might say that an aircraft with more Es has more options for converting between its potential and kinetic energy. It will be able to trade airspeed to altitude more readily, you might say that it was more energy manoeuvrable. The concept of energy manoeuvrability is an important one that can be applied at all altitudes. For similar aircraft an Es advantage would also translate to manoeuvrability in the sense of turning ability and that can be explained by taking the next step and combining the idea of energy manoeuvrability and angular manoeuvrability… But that’s another story.
Hope that helps...
Badboy
-
Originally posted by humble
But from an engineering perspective isnt lift the variable in question. Basically its what powers flight. Raw speed is just a component of lift, which is the true controlling variable. The physics of high alt flight limit total lift and therefor max AOA as well as control surface forces. In effect an airplane at high alt has less total lift to utilize so its "net energy" is less....
To be brief, The total energy is the sum of the potential energy (from altitude) and kenetic energy (from speed). At 30K, you have lots of potential energy. So the 30K plane has about as much total energy a WW2 prop aircraft can have. I know this isn't as technical as Badboy's explanation, but... I am an Engineer :)
Not to stray to far from Troon's post, he was escorting bombers. Hard turns that bleed off energy and altitude is not a good option if he wanted to protect the buffs. To maintain this altitude, you need to conserve as much energy as possible. The fighter that can burn less energy then the other will keep a relative energy advantage. Energy fighting isn't about having the most energy, it's about burning less energy then your enemy.
What you are saying is right. At 30K, you options for turning around become limited. Since the air is thin, there is not much lift. Pointing the lift vector any direction but up and you will drop like a rock. A high AOA will put you at the edge of a stall. I know you know what you are talking about. I would prefer you to be on my side anyday in a fight :)
Gunner
-
I'm approaching from the perspective of air combat. At 30k the flight envelope is restricted by the limited lift the wing can generate. Yes you can trade alt for E so the total energy is at its highest. However the available E for utilization is lower in any plane as altitude increases. Obviously as a non engineer I'm not properly articulating the variables....but from a practical perspective the pilot has fewer options since he has less available lift. This is the true force we are discussing (IMO) whenever we talk about "E fighting"
Badboy I want comparing energy state between planes....simply stating that at high alt all planes suffer from a significant degradation of the flight enevope. I certainly am not going to try and argue the engineering aspects with either of you....I agree completely with what your both saying.
What I was trying to due in "laymans" terms was explain to troon the practical impact he experienced. You simply cant fly your plane at 30k like you can at 15k. When you tell someone they have "more E" I feel they view that in terms or more potential options. Yet all 3 of us know that one hard yank on the stick at 30k may send your pony spinning out of control....and with less lift and control surface authority recovery is tougher. I've seen many pony actually pop the wings since speeds are so high....once the control surfaces "bite" the airframe is immediatly overstressed due to the high control inputs (very similiar to real life with recreational pilots).....
-
Originally posted by troon
Are all the super good players all up there at high alts?
yes
-
Originally posted by Booz
yes
And even if not, they are always on their way there :)
Badboy
-
Im always below 15 K..... :confused:
-
The only time I'm at 30,000 is when I'm following some one else there. The high alt fight can be tough if you dont keep you indicated speed up. For good practice go up with a buddy and try to get on each others six. :D
-
Keep the speed up, avoid stalls & think wider.
Also your description doesnt sound like the usual MA engagement, so i guess the other guys were coming from way above you, teaming up and maybe Finns. All of that is not a good sign.
-
Originally posted by Badboy
So the heavier aircraft in this example has more energy, yet is less manoeuvrable. The reason for this is that if you apply the same aerodynamic force to two aircraft, the heavy one will accelerate less than the light one. We need to take another important step. Instead of considering the total energy, we need to look at the specific energy for an aircraft. That is just the aircraft’s total energy divided by its weight. That provides a measure of the energy per pound and is much more useful because it removes the effect of weight or inertia that caused the problem with the B-2 and F-16 comparison. The B-2 had a much lower specific energy, that’s why it was less manoeuvrable. The F-16 had a high specific energy because it was much lighter, that explains its greater manoeuvrability. Specific energy is called Es (pronounced “Ease”) by fighter pilots who can refer to charts for comparison.
Badboy
While you touched on it here you failed to mention that, in this situation aerodynamics play a significant role in manouverability. A plane with a bigger wing will likely have more lift and thus more manuoverability than the same plane with a smaller wing. There's much more to this than simple e-states although you did a great job explaining E. As an example, I went to intercept somone in a 163 the other night. It turned out it was a P51 and he was at 40K. As I hit ~37-38K my 163 started to shudder and at 39K I lost control of it and was plummeting toward the deck. This happened even though I was GAINING on the P51 all the way up until I lost control. I had an e-advantage all the way but, I had an aerodynamic disadvantage. BTW, I immediately cut throttle and finally re-gained control of my 163 at ~10K. It was a nervous ride down.
-
Originally posted by humble
But at 30k the P-51/P-38/F4U-4 all out perform the P-47N
A typical P-47N with 50% or less internal fuel is untouchable at 30k... It can engage and disengage at will due to its massive speed and excellent climb.
476 mph (25% fuel, 474 mph with 50%)... Best rate of climb at 30k too (2,450 fpm).
P-38s don't fare real well at 30k, because pushing the nose over even a little bit results in buffeting. At 30k, everything but the Jugs and Ta 152H are on the back side of their performance curves.
Inasmuch as the P-47N can pull 72" of MAP at 30k, it has its full 2,800 hp available. Its acceleration is simply the fastest of all at 30,000 feet.
I've played with some buddies in P-51s at 30k and the P-47N simply dominates the Mustang up that high.
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by humble
Badboy I wasnt comparing energy state between planes....simply stating that at high alt all planes suffer from a significant degradation of the flight enevope....
What I was trying to due in "laymans" terms was explain to troon the practical impact he experienced. You simply cant fly your plane at 30k like you can at 15k. When you tell someone they have "more E" I feel they view that in terms or more potential options.
Rather than put it that way, I suggest the "laymen" need to understand a few things:
E state, is an observation of your total kinetic (speed) and potential (altitude) relative to other planes around you. As a practical matter, the plane with the most E, is the one that can zoom to the highest altitude at any given moment.
Indicated Air Speed (IAS) is the only speed that matters when considering if you are fast enough to do a maneuver. If your IAS says 150 MPH at 30K, then you effectively can not maneuver any better than if you were going 150 MPH at sea level. Your current IAS (kinetic) determines your available maneuvering options. You can change altitude (potential) to quickly adjust your IAS.
....simply stating that at high alt all planes suffer from a significant degradation of the flight enevope....
So again...E is a relative comparison between two or more planes. It's not "What maneuvers do I have available at this very instant" (that is determined by your IAS which is only one component of your E state). All planes have reduced maneuverability at high alt so the other planes have the same relative problems as you. It is instead "Will my Energy allow me to maneuver higher than the other guy is able? Or vice versa."
-
Great discussion all. So, I am at 30K escorting B17 bombers in my P51. I am about 5K above the bombers. Several enemy aircraft are closing at co-altitude, or slightly lower at the bombers rear. What is the best way to defend the bombers?
Gunner
-
As long as you have alt on them turn to get behind or at least over them and dive onto their six but don't let them drag you down. You were correct in that the best way to defend a bomber is from above him.
-
Originally posted by GunnerCAF
Great discussion all. So, I am at 30K escorting B17 bombers in my P51. I am about 5K above the bombers. Several enemy aircraft are closing at co-altitude, or slightly lower at the bombers rear. What is the best way to defend the bombers?
Gunner
The best way to protect the bombers is to engage the fighters when they are least able to defend... That is when they are climbing.
Intercept the interceptors...
In other words, the escort should range out ahead of the bombers (beyond icon range). Assuming you have the altitude advantage, bounce any fighters climbing out to attack the bombers. Simply forcing them to dive away to build some E will often be adequate. On the way back, hang behind the bombers and clear out potential attackers.
Close escort is generally useless as the enemy will often have enough speed to break through the escorts and get at the bombers.
Take at least 50% of the escorts out ahead and break up any attempts to reach the bombers. Position the balance of the escorts on the flanks and a couple following the formations to counter any that sneak in from behind.
One last point. If you are at 30k or higher and attacking lower fighters, watch your speed. Pull way back on the power and keep the airplane G loaded or you will quickly find yourself in compression. Pay close attention to the red TAS (True Air Speed) pointer on your air speed indicator...
My regards,
Widewing
-
Originally posted by BaldEagl
While you touched on it here you failed to mention that, in this situation aerodynamics play a significant role in manouverability.
Not really failed to mention... that's the next part of the story. The natural progression from Es, the specific energy, is specific excess power, or Ps, and then you can really get to grips with maneuvering potential, including all of the aircraft's aerodynamic characteristics, as embodied in the energy maneuverability diagrams that fighter pilots refer to as doghouse plots. At that stage you almost have a complete picture, the only exception being transient maneuverability. That's quite a path to walk in one stretch, which is why I stopped when I did.
It is a shame that 40k P-51 didn't drop over on you as you stalled out at 38k, it would have probably been the highest rope-a-dope on record :)
Badboy
-
Originally posted by Badboy
It is a shame that 40k P-51 didn't drop over on you as you stalled out at 38k, it would have probably been the highest rope-a-dope on record :)
Badboy
He tried but didn't have the manouverability to pull it off. In retrospect I'm nearly sure he was out hunting for exactly the opportunity I presented to him.
-
if its a high alt fight and you are escorting bombers, remember the only thing you really need to do is make the enemy NOT shoot the bombers down.
If you try to shoot the fighter down by any amount of turning, you will fall behind the bombers very very fast.
for the escort task, i mainly fly 5-10k above bombers and dive on any fighters trying to get close. Keeping my E up all the time. If the enemy is below the bombers, trying to climb to him, i don't care, once hes co alt, and getting close i dive on him, making him dive off.... job done.
-
Originally posted by GunnerCAF
Great discussion all. So, I am at 30K escorting B17 bombers in my P51. I am about 5K above the bombers. Several enemy aircraft are closing at co-altitude, or slightly lower at the bombers rear. What is the best way to defend the bombers?
Gunner
Remember your relative E-states. If you're only able to maneuver marginally then you can assume your NME are in the same boat. Nobody's gonna pull a 6G turn at 30K in a WW2 aircraft. Its different up there.
Be in a good position to do something if the bad guys show up. By that I mean be above by about 5K and somewhere out ahead of the bombers. That way you can at least shake up any attacks inbound along the bomber's path before the bombers get there. Never be co alt with the bombers you're escorting. Never be behind them either.
If the bad guys are attacking from below and behind as you describe that's a good thing actually--for your side. Attacking formations of bombers that way lends itself to a relatively slow closing speed. This makes them easy targets for the bomber's guns. It also makes it easy for you to nudge them away as any turn they make to avoid a fighter attack will cost them either speed or alt or both and the bombers will get away.
If you're escorting stay focused on your mission. The idea is to keep the bombers safe so that they can drop their bombs. Everything else is BS--so stay focused! You only need give the bad guy a nudge in one direction or another to remove him as a threat to the bombers--which is why you're there. Getting him to break downward is best as any climbing at alt will put him behind the bomber formations due to lack of speed.
Don't get tunnel vision on getting a kill. Kills can come once the bombers have dropped and are safely away. You don't want to take yourself out of the play by following a bad guy down below the bombers alt. You can't escort from below the bombers as you can expect the real threats to come from co alt or above the bombers. Bad guys below the bombers are no immediate threat. Once any threat is removed let him go and scan for more baddies.
Getting eyes on the bad guy as early as posible is key. Anticipate his line of attack early on and slowly maneuver yourself into position to come in at a spot somewhere in behind him in your guns range and closing on him as he makes his attack. The timing is a lot different at alt. Things move a lot more slowly than at lower alts. Like ballet vs salsa. Anticipate. Remember a lot of planes (especially the P-38s) will compress at high alts too. So watch your dive angle.
At this point, if you've timed it right and are coming down on the NME's 6, one of two things will happen. Chances are he'll either be focused on taking out the bomber and not looking back--which gives you a golden oppurtunity to get a sneak kill, or you'll at least ping him up enough to make him break off his attack. Either of those outcomes is a success insofar as bomber escort goes.
After you've shooed this fly off the back of the bomber look around for more bad guys. Climb slowly and overtake the bombers and set up position above and ahead of them and keep looking.
Drano
-
Originally posted by Drano
Be in a good position to do something if the bad guys show up. By that I mean be above by about 5K and somewhere out ahead of the bombers. That way you can at least shake up any attacks inbound along the bomber's path before the bombers get there. Never be co alt with the bombers you're escorting. Never be behind them either.
Drano
One of the best times I had escorting bombers in a senerio, we were in P51s. We broke into wingman pairs and did criss crosses above and behind the bombers. We would alternate crosses with another wingman pair The criss crosses kept us at full speed, and we could regulate our speed relative to the bombers.
The problem with forward fighters in scenarios is no radar on the map, and limited distance icons. Once they are of sight makes it easy to get seperated. The forward fighters engage the first group of enemy, and they are no longer any help when the bombers encounter more fighters. Keeping over the buffs makes it possible to stay with them.
Keeping high to the rear lets you dive into anyplace in the formation. But the only trick to this is getting the bombers to fly a tight formation :) If they string out, there isn't any way for the fighters to defend.
-
good thread, liked ya posting Drano........
if the scenario mission is planned right, you would have 5 wings of fighters: a wing being 4 planes if possible
1st wing: out infront of the bombers right at dot/icon range
2nd Wing: directly above and behind the bombers 4 to 5k max ( any higher and you possible compress trying to drive bogies down )
3rd wing: behind the bombers at icon/dot range and slightly higher alt
4th & 5th wings: off to the left and right of the bombers respectively same icon/dot range distance.........speaking of scenarios ingeneral that is........
some times slot limitations will not allow as many for bomber escort, but most times it will!
maintaining good comms and SA is what it is all about, and following thru with the DIRECT ORDER given to you to perform, not varying 1 ioda......
and lets not forget the SCOUTS, the ones probing the skies for incoming threats ----- a good SCOUT is worth his weight in gold and then some.......
to finish my 2 cents--- one would be hard press to perform a manuever at 200/175/150 ias at 25K/30K the same as he would at 5K or sea Level (SL ) simply because the air is thinner----remember when high alt less gives you more and a maneuver at high alt will take nearly twice as long to execute than it takes at low alt ( ie...under 10K ) if you want to maintain/manage your E
edit: hmmm..should of read WW's post before posting ;) I just repeated his view of it as well...