Can someone explain how the French trained pilots are so superior to their Soviet trained counterparts?
In many countries which purchased Soviet made equipment, found the Soviet Union did not have good training programs. The statement I made in a previous posting about the Soviet trained pilots not performing well, I first heard about from one of the two F-14 pilots after the 1981 F-14/Su-22 incident. (Do you remember, after that incident the aircrews were flown back to the USA within a day and did press conferences? The first one was televised and I watched it, on the program "Nightline!") After the press conference in January 1989 incident -of which I also watched, AW&ST had a news brief with an interview with a Navy pilot, from another squadron on that carrier who expressed the same views. He was the one who stated more specifically the quality differences between Libyan pilots... their basic flying skills and more difficult to intercept.
The French instructors teach their student pilots to fly combat and meet NATO minimum standards for NATO pilots. Money is provided by the particular air force for a good program and, the program keeps the pilots at peak proficiency.
Also look at the results of pilots who use Soviet equipt, other than India which used a training regiment similar to the USAF's, what country that used the Soviet requirements that did well in combat? Libya, Syria, Egypt, etc., the pilots were not combat effective mainly due to their training. They did not get much air time 50-hr/yr.
Search to find out what happened when the East German AF merged with the Luftwaffe, about a third of the pilots did not make it through the evaluation on minimum pilot proficiency for NATO pilots to remain in the AF. About 20% could not adjust to the NATO culture of combat, to act independently and not depend on GCI for everything. Less than three dozen East German pilots made the successful transition to the Luftwaffe.
Egyptian pilots complained bitterly about the training they received in the Soviet Union and Eastern European countries, they were treated as though they were in basic flying school and, no lessons on tactics.
Is it a difference in the theories behind the training? Or are the French instructor so rare that they only send their best pilots to receive this training? Both?
Yes, there were different theories on what was required in successful aerial combat. The Soviet pilots mainly trained for high altitude intercepts as did the USAF/USN before TOP GUN.
Capt. Steve Ritchie the only USAF 'pilot' ace during the Viet Nam War said in an interview, before he went to Viet Nam on his first tour, he had flown the F-4 Phantom for two years. After his second tour, he came home as an ace... he started hearing about maneuvers the pilots of 'old' used. He started reading about rolling scissors, barrel roll attacks, the high yo-yo, etc. and he stated that not only did he not know what these maneuvers were but, he had never heard the terms previously! Red Flag provided him with his first DACT training!! He had become an ace using just his instincts.
Investigate the Israeli AF dogfight against the Egyptian MiG-21's on 07/30/70, five Soviet pilots were shot down that afternoon! Read the opinions of the Israeli pilots about the five Russian 'instructor' pilots experience level. There are many 'hits' on this topic. One source is located at URL;
http://www.acig.org/artman/publish/article_262.shtml
And once a pilot is trained by a French instructor, he can also share his knowledge and even train his fellow pilots himself, not? They had time for that by the way.
Evidently, they operated and were treated as separate communities and, are not integrated even for training purposes. You have to remember that, other than Israel, few of the Arab countries wanted a highly efficient air force! Many coups started with the incumbent leader having his palace bombed by the air force of his country, the air force generals were with the challenger for the leadership of the country. So, having an air force that looked good on paper or parades was all that was really desired.
How many things done by other militaries, countries or, cultures don't make sense to us Americans? Reality doesn't have to make sense to us!
