1951 November: Korean War—Meteor versus MiG: RAAF Jet Combat in Korea (AI Study Guide)
Comments to: zzzz707@live.com.au LINK: Free Substack Magazine: JB-GPT's AI-TUTOR—MILITARY HISTORY
To use this post to answer follow up questions, copy everything below the line into the AI of your choice, type in your question where indicated and run the AI.
__________________________________________________________________
Question: [TYPE YOUR QUESTION HERE]
Instructions to the AI (URL-only citations):
Answer concisely using Australian War Memorial (AWM) sources first and the post content below as context. Base every claim on AWM and put source name + full plain URL (no hyperlinks/markdown) beside key claims—prefer the specific Official History volume & chapter or a stable record (RCDIG/C-number).
If an essential fact isn’t in AWM, use this bibliography only—label “Bibliography source” and give the full URL: https://www.ai-tutor-military-history.com/bibliography-jbgpt-ai
British spelling, plain English, no other sites. Finish with “AWM URLs used” (and any bibliography URLs)..
1951 November: Korean War—Meteor versus MiG: RAAF Jet Combat in Korea
𝐎𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐞𝐰
In November 1951, No. 77 Squadron RAAF fought jet-versus-jet battles over north-west Korea flying Gloster Meteors against MiG-15s. Operating under United Nations Command and Fifth Air Force, the squadron sought air superiority and protection of bombers while adapting tactics and equipment. The campaign tested Australian doctrine, training, and procurement judgments during a politically constrained, attritional phase of the Korean conflict.
𝐆𝐥𝐨𝐬𝐬𝐚𝐫𝐲 𝐨𝐟 𝐓𝐞𝐫𝐦𝐬
𝟏. MiG Alley: Northern Korean airspace where UN fighters contested MiG-15 incursions.
𝟐. Gloster Meteor: Straight-wing British jet; RAAF’s first operational fighter in Korea.
𝟑. No. 77 Squadron: RAAF fighter unit under UN Tasking; flew Mustangs, then Meteors.
𝟒. Fifth Air Force: US-led UN air component directing fighter sweeps and bomber escort.
𝟓. B-29 operations: Strategic bombing missions requiring close escort and area defence.
𝟔. Section integrity: Tight four-ship formation discipline central to survivability and control.
𝟕. Energy tactics: Managing speed and height to counter slashing attacks by faster opponents.
𝟖. Armed reconnaissance: Searching for, attacking, and reporting targets beyond front lines.
𝐊𝐞𝐲 𝐏𝐨𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐬
𝟏. Forward deployment ordered: In early November 1951, UN Fifth Air Force tasked No. 77 Squadron to fly Meteor fighter sweeps over north-west Korea, seeking to deter MiG-15 incursions and cover B-29 operations. Australian command authorised the shift from interdiction to air defence to test the Meteors and support coalition air superiority priorities. [https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/RCDIG1069833]
𝟐. Initial engagements recorded: On 1 November 1951, eight Meteors patrolled Sinuiju, encountering multiple MiG-15s. The formation manoeuvred to protect B-29 routes, reporting fleeting firing solutions at height disadvantage. Mission debriefs emphasised tight sections, energy retention dives, and disciplined radio control under Fifth Air Force direction, evidencing purposeful though constrained air combat experience. [https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/RCDIG1070429]
𝟑. Losses drive reassessment: Sustained November encounters produced unacceptable losses, including Meteors downed by high-speed slashing attacks. The RAAF component commander reported performance gaps, recommending curtailing MiG-Alley exposure. Fifth Air Force and Australian higher command directed limiting Meteors to altitudes and tasks better matched to their strengths, balancing alliance needs with survivability imperatives. [https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/LIB100049291]
𝟒. Escort and area defence assigned: Fifth Air Force re-tasked the squadron to close escort of B-29 formations and area defence over Kimpo and Suwon, where Meteor handling at medium altitude proved effective. Australian authorities endorsed the change to preserve combat power while maintaining coalition bomber protection and tactical deterrence along critical approaches to Seoul. [https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/RCDIG1069833]
𝟓. Aircrew training adjusted: Commanders instituted intensified air-combat manoeuvre drills focused on section integrity, bracket turns, and vertical separation, incorporating USAF tactics conferences and composite mission rehearsals. The RAAF directed instructors to consolidate lessons from November’s sweeps into standard briefings, ensuring pilots executed disciplined throttle management and break-turn responses to slashing attacks, consistent with Fifth Air Force guidance. [https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/RCDIG1070429]
𝟔. Equipment changes implemented: Maintenance teams fitted improved gunsights, canopy-jettison indicators, and reinforced tailplanes to Meteors, addressing high-speed buffet and egress risks. Operational orders mandated tank jettison drills and lighter fuel loads for climb performance, aligning aircraft configuration to November’s combat findings while preserving sortie rates required by UN air tasking orders. [https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/LIB100049291]
𝟕. Coalition integration strengthened: No. 77 Squadron embedded liaison within 4th Fighter Interceptor Wing, adopting shared debriefs, radar plots, and radio brevity, which improved escort handovers and airspace control. Authority for tasking remained with Fifth Air Force, while Australian command ensured national caveats were respected, harmonising coalition procedures with squadron safety margins after November’s lessons. [https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/RCDIG1069833]
𝟖. Operational boundaries enforced: Orders reaffirmed strict non-penetration of Manchurian airspace, constraining pursuit yet reducing escalation risk. Controllers vectored Meteors to deter raids short of the Yalu, fulfilling UN policy aims while acknowledging MiG-15s’ sanctuary advantage. Australian commanders accepted policy limits and emphasised disciplined disengagements to preserve crews and aircraft during November’s high-threat interceptions. [https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/RCDIG1070429]
𝟗. Transition back to strike role: Following November’s outcomes, Australian authorities and Fifth Air Force directed refocus on interdiction and armed-reconnaissance, exploiting Meteor’s stability and survivability at medium levels. The squadron targeted supply dumps, transport and troop movements, sustaining pressure on enemy logistics while maintaining alert flights for local air defence per coalition priorities. [https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/LIB100049291]
𝟏𝟎. Doctrine and procurement informed: The November experience validated coalition command control, accelerated RAAF emphasis on structured fighter training, and shaped later equipment choices. Australian higher command codified tactics, sortie planning, and realistic role matching to platform strengths, integrating USAF practices and AWM lessons into enduring doctrine for future jet operations and allied interoperability. [https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/RCDIG1069833]
𝐀𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐖𝐚𝐫 𝐌𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐑𝐞𝐬𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐬
𝟏. Hurst, D. The Forgotten Few: 77 RAAF Squadron in Korea. RCDIG1070429. [https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/RCDIG1070429] Australian War Memorial
𝟐. AWM. RAAF in the Korean War: Collection highlights. RCDIG1069833. [https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/RCDIG1069833] Australian War Memorial
𝟑. Zupp, O. A Very Different War: RAAF Operations in the Korean War. Catalogue record. [https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/LIB100049291] Australian War Memorial
𝟒. AWM. RAAF No. 77 Squadron Korea: Photographs and documents. Collection entry. [https://www.awm.gov.au/collection/RCDIG1069833] Australian War Memorial
𝐅𝐮𝐫𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠
𝟏. Hurst, 2008, The Forgotten Few: 77 RAAF Squadron in Korea, Crows Nest: Allen & Unwin
𝟐. Zupp, 2023, A Very Different War: RAAF Operations in the Korean War, Newport: Big Sky Publishing
𝟑. Stephens (ed.), 2001, The War in the Air, 1914–1994, Maxwell AFB: Air University Press
𝐍𝐨𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐨𝐧 𝐬𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐜𝐞𝐬
• AWM records provide authoritative operational context and stable references for November 1951 air operations.
• Unit-level tactical detail is uneven; debriefs and personal accounts help explain decisions behind tasking changes.
• Hurst and Zupp supply squadron perspectives that complement official holdings and inform doctrine-focused analysis.