Eh, I think it's unrealistic to assume that the Kuznetsov would be capable of A.) Launching an recovering aircraft, and B.) actually capable of sailing out of port.
Phoenix was really designed to shoot down Bear bombers with nuke cruise missiles, not primarily for anti-fighter use, probably why so many missed fighters.
Yesterday the Houthi terrorists in Yemen shot down a US drone and the USS Eisenhower CSG is set to pass right by Yemen on its way to the Persian Gulf. It would be interesting to a scenario where the Houthis try and attack the carrier.. the CSG consists of 1 Nimitz carrier, 1 Ticonderoga, and 3 Arleigh Burkes, no F-35s that im aware of just FA-18s.. as far as the weapons the Houthis have I know they have medium range ballistic missiles, land attack cruise missiles and anti ship missiles (probably subsonic) im not sure if the ballistic missiles can target ships but maybe someone else will know that information
A lot of people commenting about the AIM-54 performance being bad. In real life it wasn't exactly a wonder weapon either. Although Iran claims good overall success with it. There are only 3 confirmed uses by US F-14s and all 3 missed. According to Wiki, on 2 of those 3, the missile's rocket motors failed. Real life as so many other variables such as general reliability and human error to contend with. I'd say the in game performance was not beyond the realms of possibility against a jamming, manoeuvring enemy.
A big difference between the Harpoon and the Neptune is that the Neptune was sea-skimming, so couldn't be detected at a great distance, especially in choppy conditions.
Russia had no carrier based AEW so detecting targets and guiding anti-ship missiles would have been much harder, required TU95 bear patrolling probably but that was always a drawback; Russian planes would also be carrying limited payload (no catapult)
I understand why you added it, but it really ruins the accuracy of this when you give the Russians an AWACS. This is one of the biggest advantages of having a "supercarrier": full sized AEW and ECM planes. The Russians only ever had a handful of A-50 planes that could have supported if close to land, but that would require coordination and likely wouldn't provide 24/7 coverage. Bear recon planes could provide surface search but not air search. Long-winded post to ask for another version where Russians have no AWACS support. It likely results in a US beatdown, but it would be "realistic". (Need DCS to add electronic warfare and realistic submarine warfare to get an actual realistic result, but that would be clubbing baby seals...) Edited out typos...
I mean realistic means 1 Slava class and no Kuznetsof. Bears did recon, but mainly for the Soviet union, not really for Russia. So yeah it would be a beat down.
I'm not sure AWACS really made much difference. None of these planes can fire missile on datalink . I think the aircraft also could have been vectored by the ship's radars?
@grimreapers The ships couldn't have launched their SSMs until they were either right on top of the US ships, or more likely a helicopter got within range for its radar. Either way the US side has a major advantage and can patiently take out all the fighters first, then concentrate all their airpower on an overwhelming strike. Also, if the Russian ships are driving around with radars on they are advertising their positions. Again, you aren't simulating a scenario where the two fleets have to search for each other, but if you did, the AWACS difference would have virtually guaranteed the US found Russia without being found, which would give them a major advantage. All that said... what I REALLY wish DCS could provide is the ECM situation. An actual strike would have Prowlers leading with jamming, and a time-on-target attack with HARMs followed minutes later by Harpoons. I still very much enjoy the videos!
@@tomyochum When our AWACS found the Russian carrier they would have been aware of it--but that's not good enough to launch their anti-ship missiles. Their planes would have run into our entire air wing armed for air-to-air, once the air war was over they would back and load up the Harpoons and sink the Russian fleet that was trying to get away. The Russian approach of putting your strike missiles on the ships means the missiles can be far more potent than anything a carrier based aircraft could carry, but it denies flexibility and is a major liability if those missiles are still there when the Harpoons come in.
As per usual some pretty mathematically perfect missle evasion from the su 27's🤔Also..... other than a first standoff shot keep the Phoenix shots to 20 or less to make them effective against fighters
Aim54's are comically easy to dodge, especially when TWS'd. Iirc the IRIAF said that during the war with Iraq they exclusively used their aim54's as Fox1's due to the abysmal PK when fired as Fox3's.
Having served in VF-142 Ghostriders F-14 squadron in the 80's and 90's I can tell you your simulation is mostly right except that the F-14 was an awesome dog fighter and usually came out on top. The Phoenix was designed to attack bombers so performance didn't have to be great except if it was still under power then it was pretty formidable.
@@nathanfain6394the f-14 was a better fleet defense craft but the f-18 was smaller, more reliable, can still hold its own in A2A very well, cheaper, and able to perform multiple different duties like fleet defense, ground attack, electronic warfare and had better electronics.
@@nathanfain6394 I was stationed on the USS Theodore Roosevelt CVN-71. The F14 was just and A2A, a one trick pony. So big (10 aircraft and was always in maintenance). Needs two people to be effective. F18 only needs one person to be effective.
From my time as an Aviation Ordnance tech on the Theodore Roosevelt I was directly involved with the missile loadouts on all the aircraft that carried missiles. In peacetime you were absolutely right Cap, a Tom would never patrol with 4 Phoenix. The standard L/O was 2-3-2. Or 2-1-4 if they were configured for ACM. But always just 2 -54-C's (all Mk47 types. I never seen a Mk60 motor in my career) The only time a Tom would have 4 -54C's would be in hot shooting war with inbound hostiles confirmed. So, your scenario is spot on.
Cap, it would be interesting to see a 1989 scenario. Soviet's lose a Slava-class and the Kuznetsof but gain land based anti-ship bombers. The US is essentially unchanged except the F/A18's have Aim7's instead of AMRAAM's.
The AGM84 also spurred on problems and questions if there was enough of them to deal damage in a fight like this way back in the 90s. I still remember that debate as someone had gone through the reports and found a massive discrepancy between missiles produced and missiles fielded, meaning there was a Harpoon missile shortage and they were being shuffled around between the US fleets to cover it up. A lot of interesting debates on this subject in the late 90s to early 2000s amongst "wargamers" Of course at that time the great equalizer was the TASM or Tomahawk Anti Ship Missile, but that one required a ship or submarine to be deployed.
@@CAL1MBO Super Hornet was the best choice over continuing to upgrade Tomcat. no argument. the F-14D's were much better, better engines, better radar, fly-by-wire avionics all the way around, some of the shortfalls of the original Tomcat were addressed. Some secret stuff. it was ALOT better by any metric than F-14A's still in use at the time. I was there for the rollout.
One thing that is missing from these scenarios to make it more realistic is to add in some UFO/UAPs. Cap can you add them like easter eggs without telling your boys?
Is it possible y'all can do fictional battles with fictional assets? Like Caps ideal stealth fighter vs Simba's ideal stealth or Grim reaper conflict? Each member is a fictional country and you can battle each others countries 👀.
Hey Cap! On the performance of AI planes, it's been a while since i've done these AI VS AI battles, and you can never be sure with ED constant changes to AI scripting (often not included in patch notes), but the last time i looked, setting the AI to ace didn't always result in best actual in game performance. It's highly dependent on platform, and required some trial and error. In the case of the F-14, F-18, Su-27 and the like, veteran used to work better then ace, while the MiG-15, MiG-21, F-16 worked better on ace. Phoenix specific, from my experience, the AI used to work best if you set the script to fire halfway between max and optimal range. Might be worth experimenting if these settings are still valid though. I may do some sanitized tests this weekend if get the chance and will write to you of the results. Cheers and keep up with the good work. Always loved these cold war scenarios much better then the ultra-modern stuff. EDIT: the 4x2x2x2 loadout for the F-14 in fleet defense role, isn't unrealistic at all. In fact, at least according to manuals, it's exactly what it's called. Fleet defense load :D
If Simba wants to live out his Top Gun dreams let Simba live out his Top Gun dreams. Never mind the fact it’s an antique (but way better looking) plane than the F-18. lol
I don't know if it's a bug or how the Phoenix worked in real life, but if you lose TWS lock very early on into the phoenixe's launch, when it's still pointing up, it just gives up trying to track and flies into a straight line to the moon.
It just goes to show what a major asset the Moskva was. Old though it was. I had listened to the 'black sea fleet has had a kicking' comments with a pinch of salt, but perhaps those neptunes and drones have really affected the balance of power at sea in 2022/23
Maybe same simulation with the VMF being supported by their main arm Tu-22 with anti ship missiles and Su-24s with anti radiation missile to make the threat against USN bigger
That order of battle is highly unrealistic. In the 90's you had either 1 or 2 F-14 squadron airwings. A two F-14 squadron airwing is 20-22 F-14s. 2 F-18 squadrons, about the same (22-24). You also have 6 EA=6B and either an A-6 squadron (12-16) or more FA-18s (another 12 minimum). Other airwings with one F-14 squadron was a single "super" squadron of 16 Tomcats and 4 FA-18 squadrons. The most you can realistically get airborne is about 75% of that. There is NO WAY the Russians could get anywhere close to 24 SU-33s airborne. Maybe 10.
One thing I personally have seen in 2.9, is (Core game) R-27ER Alamos behaving as Fox-3s. Even with the launching (AI) aircraft turning 180 degrees away, it tracks and hits. Not sure what that's all about.
@@92HazelMocha No, no jammer. Do AI HOJ play by different rules than player launched ones? As a player it seems you need to lock the jam signal before launch to get HOJ.
@@SneakyFishy It depends on the missile. This was actually discussed in the ED forums, apparently the R27 can switch to HOJ in flight if it becomes jammed, however it can't switch back to SARH mode after switching to HOJ. In other words you should be able to spoof the missile by cycling your jammer (based on noise jamming, but unfortunately those are the only type of jammer we have in the sim)
The other issue is that the US group will have their own Anti ship missle capabilities that would also launch also, but the aircraft will deplete the Russian defensive capabilities.
I don't think you should give the F-14s an unrealistic loadout just to be "competitive". The US already got more than 2x as many aircraft as Russia in this scenario, so there isn't a need for faux equivalence. If both sides should always be equal to each other regardless of realism, Russia would have needed more planes too.
Has Super-C ever tried unjamming a catapult by jumping into the offending plane from a game master slot? You can take over AI planes if they are human-flyable, at least in SP.
@@grimreapers in single player its possible to take control of unit by RAlt+J if mission settings allowed, so 4example you can jump in your AI wingman plane after sudden death in mission 🤔 maybe just not correct settings are checked in editor, we guessing.
Hey cap! A interesting video idea would be to take a typically land based ground to air missle and strapping it to like a b-52 and seeing what insane ranges. Puld be therorehtically pulled off, such as strapping a patriot to said b-52 or strapping sa-10s to a tu-160 for the hell of it! Thanks for your time and efforts!
A few issues with this simulation. I'm not sure if it is just the limitations in the software, but the US Carrier should have several more aircraft types on it. Also, the CSG is missing a Oliver Hazard Perry Frigate, and the first Arleigh Burke flight IIA destroyer wasnt commissioned until 2000.
a 90s CBG would be still older cruisers (a pair of CGNs if its a CVN)a early Tico class, a Leahy or Belknap CG a couple of ASW ships Spruances, Knox class and a couple of Perrys
Great content and good to have you back, i think I've broke YT only get 7 yo stuff i put in watch later now :(.. Only problem with scenario is there was no CIS vessels moving mid 90's unless they were being sold under the table.. Pretty sure Kirov was in the dock for most of 90's? Always loved that one..
They’ve changed something recently. It’s showing me 4-7yo stuff I put to watch later and ignores a lot of blocked content and tries to show via different users. Check by subs now hence found this latest
I have used the E7 Wedgetail mod in a practice mission and it works just as well as a E2D or E3 Sentry....you can find the mod on dcs user files can't recall who made it
Why didn't the US ships ever fire their Tomahawk missiles? They have a range of over 500 miles, and even if none got through, they would have drained the Russian SAMs. But I have to say, that this is probably the most realistic depiction of Phoenix missiles I've seen in DCS. They were intended for shooting down non-maneuvering bombers, not fighters. And the only time in my career I was involved in a Phoenix shoot, it just dropped into the sea and never even ignited.
Don’t really know much about aircraft (more of a tanker tbh) but I’m considering going into weapons development/maintenance in the future (I’m 15 atm) but I’m going to assume the reason jets could carry loads of missiles was in order to carry air to ground payloads as well, but obviously for air defence bombs and rockets are unnecessary therefore the pylons are left empty?
I'm not sure the prolonged battle would be in favour of the americans, as the Russian carrier group would stay in range of the TU-22 bombers, and possibly land based flankers
In 1990 probably not a long beach class, USS long beach was an Atlantic based ship. USS Truxtun was CGN out of San Diego, but was just a slightly larger and nuclear powered Belknap class CG. Other than adding the threat of Tomahawks for anti ship and 60 more anti air missles with her 3 x 20 drum missle magazines, not much help.
The reason why the AIM-54 Phoenix weren't as great as they were supposed to be ,was because some of the money ...well a lot was used down the street at the Brookhaven Labs Project Phoenix .
in single player I can still get decent long range 54 kills against Mig29s and Flankers but you have to be at 40k and Mach1+, I like to do a pair of TWS shots and crank to gimble limits to maintain lock. Kills often depend on what mood the AI is in !
There is no data on the SM-2's ability to shoot down supersonic anti-ship missiles maneuvering at an altitude of 100 feet, and only a few aircraft were able to survive taking off from an aircraft carrier..
I'd argue that core DCS and DCS as a whole, due to its horrible crap AI and bugs, creates a whole layer of added difficulty for the US compared to Russia. Russia/Soviet naval doctorine is basically setup, deploy, and hit a button, as the ships fire their offensive missiles, their terrible ramp carrier appears to work on DCS but not in the real world, and their defensive SAMs are also automated to defend the group. Meanwhile, for the US attack to work, they need a flawless carrier plus intelligent flying and teamwork both offensively and defensively. For example, I'd personally take a mix of F-14 and F-18 working together in air-to-air over the RU jets, but that's when its human vs. human with intelligent play. In addition, for those Harpoons to work, you'd need the USN jets to effectively play wild weasel before the ASMs are launched to adequately drain the RU SAMs. There's just a lot more built-in complexity for the US side to work based on doctorine, which also makes sense as the USN relies on their forces being very well trained and competent.
Yes J, it's annoying I know. FYI I did do the mass ToT F-18 AShp strike off camera. ALL 96 Harpoons went for the same ship... thought I best not show that on camera.
The russian navy group is wrong. There is not going to be two Slavas together with Kirov. in the escort screen. I would set the escort screen as 1 Kirov (or one Slava). 1- 2 Sovriemienny, 1-2 Udaloy 1 or II. 1-2 Krivak I or II (don't know which are in game but something like that would be more realistic). So you would have one giant area defense platform in the form of Kirov, 2-3 anti shippers (Kirov and Sov) and the rest on ASW duty. Similarly for US you are not going to have six AEGIS platforms with the CVN in the 90s. I would substitute one Burke for a Spruance and another one for OHP frigate. Maybe another one for Kidd. Kidd being area defense capable but not AEGIS, OHP being weak area defense and Spruance only local. Also you could substitute one of Ticos for a California or Virginia.
Sorry to be an arse but you had the U.S. Aircraft make up and numbers also wrong strike force make up; which is what you set up not a fleet. You also have a numeral ops on the Russa's fleet and A/C make up.. And you had to blow up half of one of the F/A-18 squadrons.. I know the difficulties with DCS programing and I am horrible at it. The game doesn't have the corp. planies, Like the A-6E, S-3, Hawkeye, EA-6B's, etc... All 90's AC in the US.. I'm not as familiar with the missiles however the talks I've had with fighter pilots talked about how impossible to lock and shoot down.. Mostly because of the mechanical radars. Maneuvering will cause failure with lock and other issues.. Russian's had similar problem with there radars.. Though there radars are more stout and very pwr'ful (tx pwr) but have to fly a little nicer if your relying on your rdr for a fight.. They use to jam with sharp turns. That's from guys I talked to from another navy on one of my cruises. The US tends to put more accurate information to there public then the dictatorial/ Communist minded government does to there people.. Mostly because they just don't want or even able to contemplate working with the world to make the world better instead of worst.. Anyway I'm a fan of your channels.. GL old boy...
Looking at this you have similar tactics for each fleet. However is it possible to set the Russians into a line formation to release their missiles? They would then go into a defensive formation. it's extremely interesting. SM2 was the mainstay of Americans and the Seawolf the Brits. In each case the missile wasn't the issue, it was the radar seeking the targets. Hence why the missiles with upgrades are still used today.
No, we can't believe a modernized Kirov if returning to service this decade... the duration of modernisation of big russian ships takes around 10-15y these days, and was sometimes even worse... Includes ocassional fires on board, or floating dock sinking...
Eh, I think it's unrealistic to assume that the Kuznetsov would be capable of A.) Launching an recovering aircraft, and B.) actually capable of sailing out of port.
That’s why it was affectionately named ‘Old Smokey’ or my personal favourite ‘Old Tugger’ 😂
I have to contest your second assumption.
Russia had loads of tugs.
in the 1990s, Kuznetsov was not yet in such a state as in 2016, there is no need to wishful thinking. It was a completely new ship.
The kuznetsov is only so terrible because of a lack of maintenance and running its engines when docked, when it was new it was a very modern ship
When it was apart of the USSR and technically Ukraine. The Kuznetsov didn't have the problems it has now due to it being new.
90s carriers had way more varied aircraft with more mission sets that would have helped a lot. An EA6B for example would have a huge effect.
DCS doesn;t simulate area jamming so they'd do nothing.
@darthkarl99 I know. Just saying as an example for the real scenario. There are many others.
One thing I noticed is the harpoons were not sea skimming, making them much easier to hit.
Yeh annoyingly we cant control the missiles when AI fire them.
The Harpoons may have been fired at maximum range, so to conserve fuel they automatically increase altitude and optimize fuel use
Phoenix was really designed to shoot down Bear bombers with nuke cruise missiles, not primarily for anti-fighter use, probably why so many missed fighters.
Yup, it was meant to hit sitting ducks at very long range, it simply doesn't have the maneuverability to hit stuff that evades well.
Yesterday the Houthi terrorists in Yemen shot down a US drone and the USS Eisenhower CSG is set to pass right by Yemen on its way to the Persian Gulf. It would be interesting to a scenario where the Houthis try and attack the carrier.. the CSG consists of 1 Nimitz carrier, 1 Ticonderoga, and 3 Arleigh Burkes, no F-35s that im aware of just FA-18s.. as far as the weapons the Houthis have I know they have medium range ballistic missiles, land attack cruise missiles and anti ship missiles (probably subsonic) im not sure if the ballistic missiles can target ships but maybe someone else will know that information
We’re all going to die
@@user-nl6pj1bf7zagreed
They do that, and their tunnels could reach to the center of the earth and still not protect them from the hell that will follow.
@@RisenTheDon't think that they would consider that before shooting ....
The Americans responded with 2 old F 15s.....and struck a few targets.
Extremely excited to see you guys back on planet earth for scenarios! Keep up the good work.
A lot of people commenting about the AIM-54 performance being bad. In real life it wasn't exactly a wonder weapon either. Although Iran claims good overall success with it. There are only 3 confirmed uses by US F-14s and all 3 missed. According to Wiki, on 2 of those 3, the missile's rocket motors failed. Real life as so many other variables such as general reliability and human error to contend with. I'd say the in game performance was not beyond the realms of possibility against a jamming, manoeuvring enemy.
It should be noted that Iran only employed them in SARH mode and at short range which probably contributed greatly to their success with them.
A big difference between the Harpoon and the Neptune is that the Neptune was sea-skimming, so couldn't be detected at a great distance, especially in choppy conditions.
@@desolatesurvivalgaming8412 The Harpoon was also sea skimming till the final stage where it did a pop-up maneuver to come in on top of the ship.
Roger noted.
Well done Cap and boys - always love realistic battles! 😊
F-14 on the thumbnail = like before I even press play.
Russia had no carrier based AEW so detecting targets and guiding anti-ship missiles would have been much harder, required TU95 bear patrolling probably but that was always a drawback; Russian planes would also be carrying limited payload (no catapult)
There were sattelite networks that could designate target’s for those asm
A Soviet tactic was for the Bear to use its Big Bulge radar for over the horizon targeting support for both sub and surface launched cruise missiles.
@@michaeljohnson4258hence the flight of the vampire chapter in red storm rising
Suggestion:
2x Russian 1990s carrier group vs 1x 2020s UK CSG (with Type 26).
90's carrier groups*
Kuznetsof wasn't even operational until the 90's.
@@92HazelMochaThere’s the Kiev, but the Yak38 complement isn’t in game yet
@@92HazelMocha Thanks for pointing it out, I've changed it.
Legend has it, some of those Phoenix missiles are still orbiting the earth today.
I heard that one hit a balloon 😂
I understand why you added it, but it really ruins the accuracy of this when you give the Russians an AWACS. This is one of the biggest advantages of having a "supercarrier": full sized AEW and ECM planes. The Russians only ever had a handful of A-50 planes that could have supported if close to land, but that would require coordination and likely wouldn't provide 24/7 coverage. Bear recon planes could provide surface search but not air search.
Long-winded post to ask for another version where Russians have no AWACS support. It likely results in a US beatdown, but it would be "realistic". (Need DCS to add electronic warfare and realistic submarine warfare to get an actual realistic result, but that would be clubbing baby seals...)
Edited out typos...
I mean realistic means 1 Slava class and no Kuznetsof. Bears did recon, but mainly for the Soviet union, not really for Russia. So yeah it would be a beat down.
I'm not sure AWACS really made much difference. None of these planes can fire missile on datalink . I think the aircraft also could have been vectored by the ship's radars?
@grimreapers The ships couldn't have launched their SSMs until they were either right on top of the US ships, or more likely a helicopter got within range for its radar. Either way the US side has a major advantage and can patiently take out all the fighters first, then concentrate all their airpower on an overwhelming strike. Also, if the Russian ships are driving around with radars on they are advertising their positions. Again, you aren't simulating a scenario where the two fleets have to search for each other, but if you did, the AWACS difference would have virtually guaranteed the US found Russia without being found, which would give them a major advantage.
All that said... what I REALLY wish DCS could provide is the ECM situation. An actual strike would have Prowlers leading with jamming, and a time-on-target attack with HARMs followed minutes later by Harpoons.
I still very much enjoy the videos!
@@tomyochum When our AWACS found the Russian carrier they would have been aware of it--but that's not good enough to launch their anti-ship missiles. Their planes would have run into our entire air wing armed for air-to-air, once the air war was over they would back and load up the Harpoons and sink the Russian fleet that was trying to get away.
The Russian approach of putting your strike missiles on the ships means the missiles can be far more potent than anything a carrier based aircraft could carry, but it denies flexibility and is a major liability if those missiles are still there when the Harpoons come in.
As per usual some pretty mathematically perfect missle evasion from the su 27's🤔Also..... other than a first standoff shot keep the Phoenix shots to 20 or less to make them effective against fighters
I suspect Soviet Iceman and Soviet Merlin are flying all of these SU27s. Just a guess.
Aim54's are comically easy to dodge, especially when TWS'd. Iirc the IRIAF said that during the war with Iraq they exclusively used their aim54's as Fox1's due to the abysmal PK when fired as Fox3's.
Yeh what terrible performance from 54's today.
The Tomcat is still the most sexy. It just is.
Having served in VF-142 Ghostriders F-14 squadron in the 80's and 90's I can tell you your simulation is mostly right except that the F-14 was an awesome dog fighter and usually came out on top. The Phoenix was designed to attack bombers so performance didn't have to be great except if it was still under power then it was pretty formidable.
I have seen people say that the F-14 was a better plane then the F-18 but was more expensive to maintain. What do you think?
@@nathanfain6394the f-14 was a better fleet defense craft but the f-18 was smaller, more reliable, can still hold its own in A2A very well, cheaper, and able to perform multiple different duties like fleet defense, ground attack, electronic warfare and had better electronics.
@@nathanfain6394 I was stationed on the USS Theodore Roosevelt CVN-71. The F14 was just and A2A, a one trick pony. So big (10 aircraft and was always in maintenance). Needs two people to be effective. F18 only needs one person to be effective.
From my time as an Aviation Ordnance tech on the Theodore Roosevelt I was directly involved with the missile loadouts on all the aircraft that carried missiles. In peacetime you were absolutely right Cap, a Tom would never patrol with 4 Phoenix. The standard L/O was 2-3-2. Or 2-1-4 if they were configured for ACM. But always just 2 -54-C's (all Mk47 types. I never seen a Mk60 motor in my career) The only time a Tom would have 4 -54C's would be in hot shooting war with inbound hostiles confirmed. So, your scenario is spot on.
Ahhh...this was MY time. I was on CG-67 in the 90s.
Nice
Cap, it would be interesting to see a 1989 scenario. Soviet's lose a Slava-class and the Kuznetsof but gain land based anti-ship bombers. The US is essentially unchanged except the F/A18's have Aim7's instead of AMRAAM's.
LOL we are so similar. Literally what we are doing today :)
@@grimreapers great minds think alike!
The AGM84 also spurred on problems and questions if there was enough of them to deal damage in a fight like this way back in the 90s.
I still remember that debate as someone had gone through the reports and found a massive discrepancy between missiles produced and missiles fielded, meaning there was a Harpoon missile shortage and they were being shuffled around between the US fleets to cover it up.
A lot of interesting debates on this subject in the late 90s to early 2000s amongst "wargamers"
Of course at that time the great equalizer was the TASM or Tomahawk Anti Ship Missile, but that one required a ship or submarine to be deployed.
I would like to see F-14D simulated, there weren't that many of them, but it was a significant upgrade for the squadrons that got them.
Someday🤞#irst.....I think the number of D's was around 50
Nah. It's a marginal improvement at best. Overhyped. Much better things to have.
@@CAL1MBO Super Hornet was the best choice over continuing to upgrade Tomcat. no argument. the F-14D's were much better, better engines, better radar, fly-by-wire avionics all the way around, some of the shortfalls of the original Tomcat were addressed. Some secret stuff. it was ALOT better by any metric than F-14A's still in use at the time. I was there for the rollout.
One thing that is missing from these scenarios to make it more realistic is to add in some UFO/UAPs. Cap can you add them like easter eggs without telling your boys?
Unfortunately the harpoon being used was t the sea skimmer with pop up feature. AGM-84D would have been used
Loving how this is set up. Definitely smarter to move away from modern/future ones.
(I realise that might sound sarcastic, it isn't)
Is it possible y'all can do fictional battles with fictional assets? Like Caps ideal stealth fighter vs Simba's ideal stealth or Grim reaper conflict? Each member is a fictional country and you can battle each others countries 👀.
Anything is possible, it's just the time it takes to make and test the various assets.
So technically, there could be an Iowa class battleship in that carrier group too 😜
You forgotten the tow ships for the Russian carrier😂
Nothing will ever come close to the Tomcat in my book.
GR make things go Danger Zone...
as the song plays in my head
Hey Cap! On the performance of AI planes, it's been a while since i've done these AI VS AI battles, and you can never be sure with ED constant changes to AI scripting (often not included in patch notes), but the last time i looked, setting the AI to ace didn't always result in best actual in game performance. It's highly dependent on platform, and required some trial and error. In the case of the F-14, F-18, Su-27 and the like, veteran used to work better then ace, while the MiG-15, MiG-21, F-16 worked better on ace. Phoenix specific, from my experience, the AI used to work best if you set the script to fire halfway between max and optimal range. Might be worth experimenting if these settings are still valid though. I may do some sanitized tests this weekend if get the chance and will write to you of the results.
Cheers and keep up with the good work. Always loved these cold war scenarios much better then the ultra-modern stuff.
EDIT: the 4x2x2x2 loadout for the F-14 in fleet defense role, isn't unrealistic at all. In fact, at least according to manuals, it's exactly what it's called. Fleet defense load :D
If Simba wants to live out his Top Gun dreams let Simba live out his Top Gun dreams. Never mind the fact it’s an antique (but way better looking) plane than the F-18. lol
I'm a peacock Cap, you have to left me fly.🤣
@@simba1113 and jazz hands. Definitely gotta have jazz hands.
Slightly disappointed you didn't include the Kuznetsov's standard 2 tugboats in the Russian fleet. 😅😅😅😅
@CAP & GR. Could you think about using the S3 Viking in a battle with it's weapons?
rgr
I don't know if it's a bug or how the Phoenix worked in real life, but if you lose TWS lock very early on into the phoenixe's launch, when it's still pointing up, it just gives up trying to track and flies into a straight line to the moon.
90s cv would also have S-3s that can do anti-ship with harpoons. Missed the opportunity to show off the new model.
Ah yes keep forgetting this :(
A lot like the classic game Harpoon scenarios I made for myself. Nice.
It just goes to show what a major asset the Moskva was. Old though it was. I had listened to the 'black sea fleet has had a kicking' comments with a pinch of salt, but perhaps those neptunes and drones have really affected the balance of power at sea in 2022/23
Maybe same simulation with the VMF being supported by their main arm Tu-22 with anti ship missiles and Su-24s with anti radiation missile to make the threat against USN bigger
That order of battle is highly unrealistic. In the 90's you had either 1 or 2 F-14 squadron airwings. A two F-14 squadron airwing is 20-22 F-14s. 2 F-18 squadrons, about the same (22-24). You also have 6 EA=6B and either an A-6 squadron (12-16) or more FA-18s (another 12 minimum). Other airwings with one F-14 squadron was a single "super" squadron of 16 Tomcats and 4 FA-18 squadrons. The most you can realistically get airborne is about 75% of that. There is NO WAY the Russians could get anywhere close to 24 SU-33s airborne. Maybe 10.
F-18 on the deck after being swiss cheesed by 3 strafing runs...
"This is probably fine"
One thing I personally have seen in 2.9, is (Core game) R-27ER Alamos behaving as Fox-3s. Even with the launching (AI) aircraft turning 180 degrees away, it tracks and hits. Not sure what that's all about.
Are you jamming? R27R and ER have HOJ so if you have a jammer on they will track you.
@@92HazelMocha No, no jammer.
Do AI HOJ play by different rules than player launched ones? As a player it seems you need to lock the jam signal before launch to get HOJ.
@@SneakyFishy It depends on the missile. This was actually discussed in the ED forums, apparently the R27 can switch to HOJ in flight if it becomes jammed, however it can't switch back to SARH mode after switching to HOJ. In other words you should be able to spoof the missile by cycling your jammer (based on noise jamming, but unfortunately those are the only type of jammer we have in the sim)
@@92HazelMochano,wrong
The other issue is that the US group will have their own Anti ship missle capabilities that would also launch also, but the aircraft will deplete the Russian defensive capabilities.
17:43
Tomcat 12.8 G.
25:34
15.4 G (or 16.4)
OK
- I hear the crunching of the structure and the pilot's spine.
This is my version of watching a football game 😂
Same
LOVE THIS.
The sexy Tomcats....NICE. these old school battles....
Phoenix's are mainly designed for bomber intercepts? Not really great at shooting maneuvering targets. Let me know if this is incorrect.
No, that is correct. Aim54's are very bad at tracking maneuvering targets like fighters.
I wonder how the Tomcat would have performed with upgrades in the mid to late 90s. that would be an interesting "What If"
44:10 I mean next would be a rearm and doing anti-ship again with wild weaseling of the f14
There was ever only 2 Neustrashimy class frigates built.
I thought there was 7. May bad.
I don't think you should give the F-14s an unrealistic loadout just to be "competitive". The US already got more than 2x as many aircraft as Russia in this scenario, so there isn't a need for faux equivalence. If both sides should always be equal to each other regardless of realism, Russia would have needed more planes too.
Has Super-C ever tried unjamming a catapult by jumping into the offending plane from a game master slot? You can take over AI planes if they are human-flyable, at least in SP.
Sadly not poss. Planes in game are either AI or human, can;t be both.
@@grimreapers in single player its possible to take control of unit by RAlt+J if mission settings allowed, so 4example you can jump in your AI wingman plane after sudden death in mission 🤔 maybe just not correct settings are checked in editor, we guessing.
Hey cap! A interesting video idea would be to take a typically land based ground to air missle and strapping it to like a b-52 and seeing what insane ranges. Puld be therorehtically pulled off, such as strapping a patriot to said b-52 or strapping sa-10s to a tu-160 for the hell of it! Thanks for your time and efforts!
great vid , and not the result I expected.
A few issues with this simulation. I'm not sure if it is just the limitations in the software, but the US Carrier should have several more aircraft types on it. Also, the CSG is missing a Oliver Hazard Perry Frigate, and the first Arleigh Burke flight IIA destroyer wasnt commissioned until 2000.
a 90s CBG would be still older cruisers (a pair of CGNs if its a CVN)a early Tico class, a Leahy or Belknap CG a couple of ASW ships Spruances, Knox class and a couple of Perrys
Great content and good to have you back, i think I've broke YT only get 7 yo stuff i put in watch later now :(.. Only problem with scenario is there was no CIS vessels moving mid 90's unless they were being sold under the table.. Pretty sure Kirov was in the dock for most of 90's? Always loved that one..
Annoyingly you have to check the GR channel manually to see new vids :(
They’ve changed something recently. It’s showing me 4-7yo stuff I put to watch later and ignores a lot of blocked content and tries to show via different users. Check by subs now hence found this latest
That´s wierd i get your vids in my recommended every time@@grimreapers
17:41 Even AI Tomcat pulls 12G
Tht loadout on the tomcat is a real as it gets from carriers only thing is im pretty sure they dont fill them up all the way when loaded like tht
They didn't. Iirc Ward Carrol (who flew the F14 during the cold war) said the standard was 2-2-2, 2 aim9's, 2 aim7's and 2 aim54's.
Those AIM-54 missiles weighed a huge amount. Imagine the extra stress it puts on the frames lugging those around 24 hours per day.
This. but with bomber support on both sides.
Fleet Defender campaign here we come!
Why were the Harpoons flying so high? They are supposed to be sea skimming missiles.
In game they don't go low until 20 miles out from target.
@@grimreapers ah, ok. Renders them rather ineffective then...
Have You looked into doing the future battles wit E-7 sentry? Or are there DCS limitations, regarding range?
I have used the E7 Wedgetail mod in a practice mission and it works just as well as a E2D or E3 Sentry....you can find the mod on dcs user files can't recall who made it
The existing AWACS in game can see over 300 miles so not sure we really want to see further than that?
When Dcs updates does it screw up all the GR planes and missiles? seems like a lot of work but you do a great job sir.
Any anti ship strike would be supported by offensive ECM.
Why didn't the US ships ever fire their Tomahawk missiles? They have a range of over 500 miles, and even if none got through, they would have drained the Russian SAMs. But I have to say, that this is probably the most realistic depiction of Phoenix missiles I've seen in DCS. They were intended for shooting down non-maneuvering bombers, not fighters. And the only time in my career I was involved in a Phoenix shoot, it just dropped into the sea and never even ignited.
Tomahawks in 90's could not be used against ships.
90s Tomahawks did not have a search radar, they just followed the plotted course to the boom point. Thus they could only hit non-moving targets.
Can you do an Invincible class group against the kuznetzov group... maybe 2 Invincibles??
OK
I would actually prefer to see more cold war/Vietnam era stuff. Something about newer stuff feels less romantic like a Tesla.
Don’t really know much about aircraft (more of a tanker tbh) but I’m considering going into weapons development/maintenance in the future (I’m 15 atm) but I’m going to assume the reason jets could carry loads of missiles was in order to carry air to ground payloads as well, but obviously for air defence bombs and rockets are unnecessary therefore the pylons are left empty?
Phoenixs are doing weird job in DCS these days. They are worse than AMRAAM at 70nm+ range even in terms of kinematic aspect
I'm not sure the prolonged battle would be in favour of the americans, as the Russian carrier group would stay in range of the TU-22 bombers, and possibly land based flankers
for shoveling work, could you just place a vehicle with a 20mm cannon on the carrier?
or would that not work, or just not be fun? :)
He can’t put stuff on the deck
I would like a 2024 NATO vs BRIC full out deathmatch. Probably not doable?
So..what if we just used weather manipulation to disable the aegis arrays with hail
Wouldn’t there be a OHP frigate, with the USN fleet?
Yeah there would've been, also spruance class DDG and possibly a Long Beach CG.
In 1990 probably not a long beach class, USS long beach was an Atlantic based ship. USS Truxtun was CGN out of San Diego, but was just a slightly larger and nuclear powered Belknap class CG. Other than adding the threat of Tomahawks for anti ship and 60 more anti air missles with her 3 x 20 drum missle magazines, not much help.
I was just freaking out how AI doesn't use FOX-3 on F-14, instead GOING IN STUPID CLOSE QUARTERS FIGHT!!!
Love the Cold War whatifs/reenactments
The reason why the AIM-54 Phoenix weren't as great as they were supposed to be ,was because some of the money ...well a lot was used down the street at the Brookhaven Labs Project Phoenix .
Oh my beauiful Tomcats... 😢
in single player I can still get decent long range 54 kills against Mig29s and Flankers but you have to be at 40k and Mach1+, I like to do a pair of TWS shots and crank to gimble limits to maintain lock. Kills often depend on what mood the AI is in !
Wonder if they rearmed with the new ai
There is no data on the SM-2's ability to shoot down supersonic anti-ship missiles maneuvering at an altitude of 100 feet, and only a few aircraft were able to survive taking off from an aircraft carrier..
i think the reason the aim-54 where so bad early on ai where firing them at like 10000-12000 feet never got high
Yup
🔥🔥🔥 love the Su30 , more su34 mods please 🙏🏾
Cool Rim gapeing
Phoenix 2.9 is the new slowmobile
Yarp
You forgot the Russian tug for knutzev
it would have been 24 F14 and 36 F18.....12 to sqn
I'd argue that core DCS and DCS as a whole, due to its horrible crap AI and bugs, creates a whole layer of added difficulty for the US compared to Russia. Russia/Soviet naval doctorine is basically setup, deploy, and hit a button, as the ships fire their offensive missiles, their terrible ramp carrier appears to work on DCS but not in the real world, and their defensive SAMs are also automated to defend the group.
Meanwhile, for the US attack to work, they need a flawless carrier plus intelligent flying and teamwork both offensively and defensively. For example, I'd personally take a mix of F-14 and F-18 working together in air-to-air over the RU jets, but that's when its human vs. human with intelligent play. In addition, for those Harpoons to work, you'd need the USN jets to effectively play wild weasel before the ASMs are launched to adequately drain the RU SAMs.
There's just a lot more built-in complexity for the US side to work based on doctorine, which also makes sense as the USN relies on their forces being very well trained and competent.
Yes J, it's annoying I know. FYI I did do the mass ToT F-18 AShp strike off camera. ALL 96 Harpoons went for the same ship... thought I best not show that on camera.
Can you do a battle in bad weather?
The russian navy group is wrong. There is not going to be two Slavas together with Kirov. in the escort screen. I would set the escort screen as 1 Kirov (or one Slava). 1- 2 Sovriemienny, 1-2 Udaloy 1 or II. 1-2 Krivak I or II (don't know which are in game but something like that would be more realistic). So you would have one giant area defense platform in the form of Kirov, 2-3 anti shippers (Kirov and Sov) and the rest on ASW duty.
Similarly for US you are not going to have six AEGIS platforms with the CVN in the 90s. I would substitute one Burke for a Spruance and another one for OHP frigate. Maybe another one for Kidd. Kidd being area defense capable but not AEGIS, OHP being weak area defense and Spruance only local. Also you could substitute one of Ticos for a California or Virginia.
Can't believe most people don't listen to the briefing!
The F14 was an expensive aircraft that didn't deliver like the F15.
Sorry to be an arse but you had the U.S. Aircraft make up and numbers also wrong strike force make up; which is what you set up not a fleet. You also have a numeral ops on the Russa's fleet and A/C make up.. And you had to blow up half of one of the F/A-18 squadrons.. I know the difficulties with DCS programing and I am horrible at it. The game doesn't have the corp. planies, Like the A-6E, S-3, Hawkeye, EA-6B's, etc... All 90's AC in the US.. I'm not as familiar with the missiles however the talks I've had with fighter pilots talked about how impossible to lock and shoot down.. Mostly because of the mechanical radars. Maneuvering will cause failure with lock and other issues.. Russian's had similar problem with there radars.. Though there radars are more stout and very pwr'ful (tx pwr) but have to fly a little nicer if your relying on your rdr for a fight.. They use to jam with sharp turns. That's from guys I talked to from another navy on one of my cruises. The US tends to put more accurate information to there public then the dictatorial/ Communist minded government does to there people.. Mostly because they just don't want or even able to contemplate working with the world to make the world better instead of worst.. Anyway I'm a fan of your channels.. GL old boy...
Looking at this you have similar tactics for each fleet. However is it possible to set the Russians into a line formation to release their missiles? They would then go into a defensive formation.
it's extremely interesting. SM2 was the mainstay of Americans and the Seawolf the Brits. In each case the missile wasn't the issue, it was the radar seeking the targets. Hence why the missiles with upgrades are still used today.
No, we can't believe a modernized Kirov if returning to service this decade... the duration of modernisation of big russian ships takes around 10-15y these days, and was sometimes even worse... Includes ocassional fires on board, or floating dock sinking...
I suspect, however, America would have two carriers in the area if there was a real chance of a shooting war.
Ok, but, can you give USA Super Tomcats and try again? I know, it's silly...
Do the udaloy destroyer modernized
not sure if the tomcats could intercept the anti ship Russian missles