Video není dostupné.
Omlouváme se.
Can A Mediterranean USAF Strike Beat A Russian Carrier Group? (Naval 43) | DCS
Vložit
- čas přidán 15. 08. 2024
- 0:00 Intro
1:34 Details
7:36 FIGHT!
Sheet: docs.google.co...
Playlist: • Naval Battles
SPONSORS
Winwing: www.wwsimstore...
Winwing USA: fox2.wwsimstor...
Sponsor Reviews: • Sponsor Reviews
USEFUL LINKS
GRIM REAPERS(CZcams): / @grimreapers
GRIM REAPERS 2(CZcams): / @grimreapers2
GRIM REAPERS(Odysee): odysee.com/$/i...
GR PODCASTS: anchor.fm/grim...
DCS TUTORIALS: / @grimreapers
DCS BUYERS GUIDE: • DCS World Module Quick...
DCS OFFICIAL SITE: www.digitalcom...
ONE TO ONE LESSONS: grimreapers.ne...
DONATE/SUPPORT GRIM REAPERS
MERCHANDISE: www.redbubble....
PATREON monthly donations: / grimreapers
PAYPAL one-off donations: www.paypal.me/...
SOCIAL MEDIA
WEBSITE: grimreapers.net/
STREAM(Cap): / grimreaperscap
STREAMS(Other Members): grimreapers.ne...
FACEBOOK: / grimreapersgroup
TWITTER: / grimreapers_
DISCORD(DCS & IL-2): / discord (16+ age limit)
DISCORD(TFA Arma): discordapp.com... (16+ age limit)
OTHER
CAP'S X-56 HOTAS MAPS: drive.google.c...
CAP'S WINWING HOTAS MAPS: drive.google.c...
THANK YOU TO: Mission Makers, Admin, Staff, Helpers, Donators & Viewers(without which, this could not happen) xx
#DCSQuestioned #GRNavalBattle #DCSNavalBattle #GR #DCSWorld #Aviation #AviationGaming #FlightSimulators #Military
Hey cap you should make a vid on how to formation fly because i would live to know
czcams.com/video/S9CqDPmI3bc/video.html
@@grimreapers remake maybe ?
@@grimreapers can you fight for once anywhere but the strait? I'm tired of the Dolphin
You know it's a simulation when kuznetsov is up and running....
🤣😂😅
This comment aged like fine wine
Or that the missile cruiser Moskva is not doing "special operations" at the bottom of the Black Sea.
So true 🤣😭
Wow, nice 👍
Pretty cool seeing Moskva on screen when it’s resting on the bottom of the Black Sea today.
Just a little AI criticism but it seems somewhat ill-sighted that a fighter wing would knowingly push into a SAM net when they had already secured engagement distance for their bombers. Very cool videos I just wish the AI was a little more fleshed out as far as tactics go.
Agree I was scratching my head at that as well.
Yes, the fighters would not mindlessly push into a SAM WEZ without suppression. A few HARMs would shut them up pretty fast.
@@DragNetJoe The lack of HARM and EW file this sim run under "what happens when you go in stupid..." Needs to be tuned up a bit with a complete strike package. In all fairness, cap did say he was going to let the shorter range attack planes go in...
The only reason I'd see to go into the SAM net was to participate in swamping the SAM defenses.
So the fighters go in to the sam zone around the same time as the missiles.
@@noidontthinksolol "Game" but a single module costs $80
Only assuming that the Russian Carrier isn't ALREADY on fire.
Most underrated comment lmfao
Haters will hate 🤣. But us knows very well that aircraft carrier can without any planes can sink us warships
FoRrEsTaLl
kek
The Admiral Kuznetsov never leaves the harbor without being accompanied by a tug boat. Include one of those in the next sim.
13:37 Aircraft accidents aren't inaccurate. Accidents will happen in an operational environment, even when bullets and missiles aren't flying. During combat operations, the rate of accidents can be even higher due to higher operational tempo, stress, fatigue, distractions, etc. During the later stages of the Pacific War, the US Navy was losing more aircraft to accidents than to the Japanese. I forgot what the context was, but I recall an author citing something like a 13% aircraft attrition rate from accidents at some point (I don't remember if it was in a month, in six months, or whatnot).
This is completely true, back when my grandfather was flying for the Navy they lost three times the amount of aircraft to peace time accidents during a 3 month cruise than an 8th month combat tour.
Proportionally as more aircraft and aircraft carriers are put into the navy the more aircraft are going to have accidents.
I know is very exagerated but, imagine losing a carrier due to an accidental chain reaction.
I mean it happened a couple months ago the USS Bonhomme Richard was lost due to a fire in the kitchen.
That's true. There's this saying that NATO crashed and wrecked more of their own aircraft than the (former) Warsaw Pact ever dreamed of shooting down :-)
@@lordofstraw4323 ya but does the frequency increase or total number increase - sounds like what he read refers to frequency as gross loss wouldn't really be a story
Thank you for annunciating "valued viewers", For the first 100 vids or so, I thought it was "valley viewers"
lol
Me too lol
I think, Cap should change it to that and the many fandom only know the real meaning, coining the phrase!
Won't lie I've thought the same thing. I always thought it gave the commentary more flair 😂
Same here !
My dad did a tour of duty at Incirlik in the early 1980s he says they were just starting to build the hardened hangars when he was there but otherwise the base in game looks very much like he remembers it.
thx
@@grimreapers What do you do with all the spare time you have now that you didn't take the time to type the letters "an"?
@@Mister_Belvidere salt
@@Mister_Belvidere You savage!!🤣🤣🤣
I really love the Grim Reapers content. Entertaining. Educational. Fun game. And I don't watch anyone play games but this is more cerebral. Real, no, not even close. But really fun.
I really hope ED adds in the AGM-158 LRASM for the B-1B, it would give so much more capability for NATO Anti Shipping
^
Or the jassm-er has an abilty to attack shipping aswell but the lrasm would b good but it's only just starting production and not fully finished testing from memory
New tomahawk would be cool too becasue of the massive range and amount carried.
Agreed, there's probably only about 100 currently in the inventory, but they change the 'game' literally and figuratively.
Russian Carrier Group
1 - Carrier
1 - Repair Ship
1 - Supply Ship
3 - Tug boats to tow the fleet to it's destination.
Stationary and Russian Flank Speed are one in the same.
Those Flankers can only get airborne with a partial fuel load and very limited weapons load from that carrier. You gave them a massive advantage.
He did they don't have the fuel ranger to be able to fight for along period of time the us airforce would have the advantage over the Russian su's.
A crash on the deck is pretty damn accurate for a game. The design for the Russian carrier is so flawed I’m surprised they still use it.
A bit like seal clubbing, British humor is so spot on.
I think in real life the USAF would neutralize the air threat and then stay outside the sam range. Probably be a lot of jamming and decoys along with the harpoons.
But, never underestimate the Russians
Yeah, this is really the main thing about all of these air battles that bothers me. The fighters would not blindly fly into a death zone with no way to defend.
In the real life there are Russian S-400, coastal P-800 anti-ship missiles and Kalibr cruise missiles in Syria, so any airbase and bombers in Eastern Mediterranean would be dealt with without a single aircraft taking off from Kuznetzov or any airfield in the area 😀 So thirst you need to take care of those, before even starting to think of large scale operation against Russian Navy there.
@@Struktualnyj Not in the 1980s that this simulation was based on.
I really would like to see a live fire combat test of the Russian systems operated by Russians in Syria with the gloves taken off but people would die so that'd be a bad idea.
@@Struktualnyj This was a simulation based on 1980s tech. US Airforce has several bases over in that area as well, and we don't really know about the US next gen weapons. Army and Marines have been upgrading to Hypersonic status and have some new neat toys if they are TRUE. US navy also did a test shooting down one of our ICBMS using a SM-3 Block IIA from one of our Destroyers and the missile hit its target. Test was successful.
"It sounds like a them problem." Most truest statement.
Hey Cap, love your videos, please never stop :-) Would you maybe add a 1980's US Carrier group vs Modern US Carrier Group to the list?
US vs US?
@@grimreapers yep, crazy idea? Maybe ;)
40:37 Mr. Dam-Suck, "IAM A HARPOON"
🤣👍 Your one BADASS pilot
>click randomly on the tl
>"why are you called damp sock?"
>"want me to show you?"
>"No Not Really."
😂
Thanks Cap, another great vid ! I do need to mention though, (I know it's not in DCS ) the new JASSM-ER when equipped with a weapons data link can correct course after launch, enabling it to hit moving targets on land or at sea, meaning it can be used for anti-ship role. With a thumping 950 lb warhead, it's stealthy low observable and has a range of approximately 600 miles. At least according to the Centre for Strategic and International Studies Missile Defence Project. A B-52 H can carry up to 20 JASSM-ER on 8 wing pylons and 12 in the bay. Imagine this, with 20 B-52Hs, or less than half the active fleet of 58, the US Air Force could deliver some 400 JASSM-ER missiles against targets either on land or at sea from a maximum stand-off distance of 600 miles. Dead Ruskie strike group.
When I was a kid the game harpoon had an editor, after much experimentation the easiest way to kill a Russian carrier or surface action group is either us navy assets or submarines. That statement makes me feel old….
These sure are fun! I appreciate all of the hard work. Thank you guys, for a hugely entertaining series. I was surprised at the ending after the opposite was done to the us, but I do think if it were gamed all the way out the B-52's would eventually rock that lobster.
My head: "it's late let's go to sleep"
*GR proceeds to post a video*
Me: "well u got me there, let's see some dead dinosauriers being burnt at a very high rate"
Why would an airstrike fly into a carrier group's AA envelope if they weren't carrying antiship missiles?! This scenario needs some work. You'd have a fighter group fly a screen, Run EM birds to jam as much radar tracking as possible, and sneak your strike package within missile range...which is likely out of AA coverage anyway. There is no reason to attempt air superiority directly over the enemy carrier group. Stupid move IMO.
New to the channel, and totally hooked BTW.
There are a billion problems with this if you strictly think this is really a scenario for information. Its just for fun, not meant to be accurate.
I'm sure some of us valued viewers have already pointed out that both the F16 and F/A 18 can be equipped with agm 84 harpoon racks.
I can't find it for the life of me, but I remember seeing a video that was something like "US air force vs Chinese fleet". It was a very old DCS video that showed a number of B-52's just dumping LRASM's into the fleet and wiping it out from extreme range. Intermixed with Harpoons from small aircraft and possibly HARM's to create a ton of distractions for the LRASM's to get through.
Wish I could find it, but it might have been Japanese so searching keywords doesn't work so well.
yes BUT remember those cruise missiles can only hit ships when they are not moving, so not much use here.
This is what happens when you believe what the Soviets tell you their gear can do and program it as such. At this point they were hopelessly behind NATO in technology, and their carrier is so reliable it has an assigned tug boat so it can be taken back to port. I read somewhere in its 30 years of duty it does 15 days a year at sea on average. The flagship of the black sea fleet was just sunk by a drone and a couple of Ukrainian made missiles.
I have no real experience, but I would venture to say that the attack would probably be MALDS going out first from B-52s, followed by long range missiles from B-52s, Harpoons ER from B1Bs, F-22s and AWACS for front line defense and F-18 low with Harms. That’d surely be a definite way to end the Russian Navy but it’s a lot of assets in one place, may give the Russians advance warning.
There is a definite way: submarines.
I don't know about the US Air Force, however the US Navy is able to launch 3 plains @ 1 time and will always have 2 plains in the air with an awax and a tanker when on mission. The russians don't carry tankers with them when there carrier was active. So they have to ensure they have enough gas to get back to the carrier. Rumor was if the pilot ran out of gas and had to ditch, they might stay with there plain because they will be shot for loosing there plain for being stupid, by running out of gas...
Hell, we hope so
attack wave (30 planes), drone line (100), attack wave (30 planes), bombers (4)
The US air force just announced it's been testing hitting ships with JDAMs and JSOS by using an F-15EX/F-35's new radar to constantly update the bomb in flight to change its course and a moving ship. I wonder how long it will take to get this function into DCS though?
Hopefully not too long.
Another possible colab with Comrade Binkov some day ? He just did a nice vid about this very thing. czcams.com/video/5w5sMTI_aX4/video.html
It would certainly turn the tide, since a JDAM costs only 1/20th that of a Harpoon and the US already has tens of thousands of gravity bombs in stock ready for a bolt-on guidance upgrade.
@@doujinflip and the JDAM would provide as much boom as the Russian ASMs. The Harpoon was designed more with escorts in mind than capital ships.
It shows the power of their tactical play when they first send sacrifices to eat all the missles.
Actually Raptors would be fair. They are in production and been in service for years. The Felon is still at a prototype stage.
no idk where you get your info but they are not in production and are in service like 70 of them i am a former USN Pilot
@@lucashebbe3335 You are right about them no longer being in production, but you are way off with your figure of 70 in service. The actual number put into service was 187.
Roger, I was un-aware of this.
@@grimreapers Just making sure
4 Felons produced, think one is still flying. I’ll take 1vs 40ish, let alone, 1 vs a full F22 fleet 😬
lol i love the 'question mark?' shit, i've been doing the same for years. thought i was the only one
Hello brother
hey cap I would love it if you could start a french vs british campaign. It would be fun to see all mods and battles over the channel, I love the content that you do and the videos that you make. :)
I have been thinking of exactly that....
Interesting scenario. I tried this in 20+ year old Harpoon. Pretty much the same setup; actually my CBG was stronger, 3x Sovremenny's instead. To do a "sinkx" of the entire 7 ship Carrier Group in "one" BUFF strike, it took 260 Harpoons overwhelm/over-saturate all the defenses. Meaning I kept having to add more B-52's. (Corrected harpoon quantity.)
Didn’t the Buffs carry the TASM in harpoon? I thought I remembered using that?
I wish they'd remake the old Harpoon Classic game from the 1990s. I'd love to see such scenario play out in that game.
30:00 Makes sense to me that 96 threats from the same direction would be more difficult to defend. Spread around the dial, individuals would be more easily targeted. All en masse, individuals would be lost in the group. There would be many individuals drawing multiple shots, while other individuals would be overlooked.
The flankers crashing on the flight deck is very accurate to a real combat situation. Murphy's law in full effect during combat ops. And it's accurate that it would take the carrier partially out of commission.
Ah, the Grim Reapers. Used to see them all the time as they went to the bombing range at Holbeach.
You're incorrect. The USAF just proved that they can use JDAMS and JSAMS against moving ships. That carried out successful attacks in the Gulf of Mexico by dropping JDAMS on retired FFG's. The key here is that each F15E can carry 20 SDB with JDAM devices. Now, imagine 12 AC strike package with each carrying 20 SDB's each...on a 180 deg arc...with glider bombs...that's 240 bombs inbound...Binkoff's Battleground channel had an excellent video on this. They Chinese have to be crapping their pants thinking about 4 strike packages attacking their 2 CV battle groups...
Thanks! Wish we could do it in game :(
So you assume these carrier groups have 0 jamming and EW?
Oh yes just turn off all the defensive systems of the chinese. LOL
The Russians have one ‘carrier’.
It is held together with duct tape, the toilets do not work and it plumes smoke on a ship that can carry 40 aircraft maximum …. Oh, and it needs a tug boat everywhere it sails.
Nimitz?
I wont even bother …
I’m a retired S-3 Viking Sensor operator who trained B-52 crews out of Barksdale back in the late 90s. They would not attack like this. ;-)
Forget about Russian or Chinese carriers deploying aircraft anywhere near the efficiency of the U.S. carriers.
thx
The flankers are overloaded for a ramp take off.
Exactly. None of the Russian fighters can launch with a full load from a carrier.
39:32 Cap: "Why do they call you Damp Sock?"
Damp Sock: "Want me to show you baby ?!"
🤣🤣🤣
One thing I found interesting is that Kirov Class don’t use all his defensive systems when they are under attack.
They do use their S-300F/FM, but that’s about all.
Peter the Great also have 64 gauntlet and 6 Kasthan, all missiles that fire independently with their own fire controls radar, when the Harpoon start to get close they would be able to fire a huge amount of Gountlet and Kasthan missile, and not only using the guns on the Kasthan.
Then we also have to remember that They have a dual AK-130 naval artillery gun, they have the same range as Gauntlet and Kinshal missiles and they have anti air craft shells, and during the time that Harpoon are closing in they would be able to fire lots of 130mm shells, that is 60 r/m, a wall of shrapnel.
Russian ships do not use an AEGIS type of combat system, one that guid them all, Russia have separate fire control radars for every single system, so should be able to launch way more missiles.
Aegis can fire multiple SM2s at once. It can track 100 targets
The crazy part is the Boeing 747 is a better platform for cruise missiles and can carry more. Than the B52.
That Navy blue splinter camo is sexy
Good effort Simba. Amazing dodging Damp, well done!
Thank you! :D
Can you guys do a 1980s style feet defence with F 14 As fighting off a Russian air attack. I would love to see the tomcats let loose with their Phoenix missiles and do what they did best back in the day. Thanks.
Tried but AI tomcat not firing phoenix missiles properly at momoent :(
@@grimreapers That’s unfortunate. Still love your videos!
Entertaining video, as always. There's only 2 issues I see from a "realism" standpoint, and one of those I don't think you can control. IIRC, the B-52 H can carry 12 Harpoons, not 8. That's a game thing, not your fault, but I think increasing the number of missiles in the air by 50% would make a significant difference. The other issue is where you guys have to balance realism against making things equal. I'm fairly certain that a Russian (and possibly Chinese) carrier group would not have an AWACS aloft. I don't recall the Russians having any carrier based AWACS, and I believe the Chinese are developing one, but haven't deployed it yet. But, I understand that you can't make everyone happy. If you left it out, the Russophiles would cuss a blue streak.
thx
you might have noticed the conflict being right near russian hmeimim base where AWACS operate out of daily, so you're wrong
The only thing I see as a major flaw is the game does not take into account that a vast majority of Russian assets are in lets say less than pristine condition. Look at the reports on the RU Carriers in the news over the last 5 years, constant refit and repair and still operating at low levels. UK reports from Oct said the Russian carriers were barely able to launch aircraft.
Kuznetsov is technically a battle cruiser rather than an aircraft carrier right, so makes sense it doesn't launch at the same rate. Damn those Flankers look slow coming off the end of the ramp though, half expected the first one to just drop into the water.
Simba did a great job by leading the fighters back away from the US Bombers. At the end of 1994 the US and our Allies have purchased 7000 harpoons. If the USA took 6000 of them you just fired 1/60 of our entire supply in 5 minutes.
Super entertaining videos! Love them! That said, American doctrine would NEVER allow for their aircraft to get into Grumble range and they’d clear the air before allowing the B-52’s to launch at max distance.
Also. AWACS have their own CAP. No aircraft would be allowed near it at all cost.
As I’ve said before, yes it’s a simulator, but if it can’t be accurate it isn’t really a “simulator”. It’s just a game.
For example: No EW aircraft, which we’d never go into a battle like this without, and no hovering backup. We had an EA-6B with every flight of this nature. At a minimum. Also. There would be an EB-52 with the BUFFS.
Last: we’d never attack a countering fleet with B-52’s and Harpoons. That would be a fools gambit. I know the game has restrictions and you’re playing within them, so it would be nice if they would update with LRASM’s etc.. In reality, a B-52 could carry about a hundred Harpoons per bird (exaggeration of course). We’d also use the B-1B for speed to meet the TOT and keep our fighters alive.
Keep it up though! My son loves these!
Based on the teaser, I assumed Simba had acquired a new capability, but it was actually Damp and his Sea Eagle mk 1 with its three 600 gallon warheads.
lols
Napalm?
@@randlebrowne2048 Jet fool melts carrier dex. It has been scientifically proven that in DCS universe, the more gas you have in the plane, the bigger the boom when you smash into things. Any other stores need to be released before impact to have an effect.
@@voradfils I didn't realize that that was actually modeled.
B-52's on the deck, w ecm and chaff pods
That was some damn fine flying from Damp Sok. Pretty close run for Simba(sp?), as well.
I wonder how the battle would have turned out if the F-15/-16's used HARM's just before entering the Russian SAM envelope.
Any damage to the escorts SAM/CIWS sensors would have resulted in a LOT more Harpoons hitting.
It's probably not possible to try the scenario again - but I wonder if HARM's would have made a big difference.....
Harpoons targeting something instead of cruising by the fleet like tourists would make an impact as well.
@@ghoffmann821 LOL - _"make an impact...."_ Good one!
the F-16 would use harms to take out ship radars need to try that
HARM hits but radars not yet affected.
My guess as to why the Flankers are slow is the fact that they cannot carry a full fuel load with a significant weapon load and make a short ramp-aided takeoff. Fuel conservation is their Achille's heel...
How would it be unfair to have Raptors and not Felons? There are no operational Felons in the Russian inventory at this time. Last time I checked, we have wings of active Raptors.
Raptors defend Hawaiis, Guam and Alaska in real life.
@@andrewhomo2461 F-22's are also assigned to the 27th and 94th Fighter Squadrons of the 1st Fighter Wing stationed at Langley Air Force Base under Air Combat Command... they can and have been deployed.
* Citation needed.
1 Su-57 in service)
@@ImMoRTALk-nz4xo A year ago. The first SU57 entered service a whole year ago. That's what I don't get about using these wiki numbers with in service munitions and aircraft, they'll never be 100% accurate, and generally aren't up to date.
Cap, R27's are 83', but the Su33 was never modernized, only entering service in the late 90's when the Russian MOD was low on funding for that sort of thing. Currently it's slated for retirement with the Mig29K as a replacement, an aircraft already set up for the R77 family of fox 3 missiles.
R-77-1*
any idea when Mig-29K takes over?
@@grimreapers Unknown; it was supposed to have already replaced the Su-33. The Russian order for the Mig29's actually piggybacked off of the Indian Navy's order to save money so the planes are built and in service. However, the Russian navy is reportedly keeping a few Su-33's in service and giving them a modern air-to-ground avionics suite. Although you can take most of this with a grain of salt; Russian MOD is still tight on funds, and the Kuznetsof has almost been mothballed at least once in the last decade, so the future of its aircraft is questionable.
It's pronounced injirlik. The Turkish C is pronounced like the J in John or jam or jedi. Incir means fig. Incirlik means fig garden or orchard. Anyway, great video as always. Love these carrier battles. Keep 'em coming :)
I suspect that the aggressive AI was more a matter of fuel state than anything else. If you’ve got plenty of fuel to burn, engage far from home base.
For all the people watching this post Ukraine invasion, this is simulating 1980s USAF aircraft attacking a theoretical 1990s Russian fleet that has 100% of its war ships in it (they only have 1 aircraft carrier and 2 Maskvas total). It would not play out this way in real life with F-35s, F-22s, and even F-18s escorting modern B-52s. And obviously Russian missile defense has been greatly exaggerated by the kremlin.
Someone brought up a good point, Felons are not in service while Raptors have been in service for over 20 years. So why aren't we using them? what about the NSM?
Yup good point.
Love LOVE! carrier series!!! We gotta know what’s it take to sink Russian carrier group! 96 vampires OMG. Time to double the trouble.
Just wait, it'll sink itself. IF they ever manage to repair it. IF they even bother, it's antique and it's never worked properly.
@@TheInfamousMrFox well, half of Nimitz carriers are older than Kuznetsov, also we still have new ships(like Frigates project 22350 or Amphibious assault ship project 23900) but yes, we still have a lot of problems with our fleet, but US, UK and other contres with big fleet have same problems
@@Danissimo321 The Nimitz class that are being retired? That actually work properly? That have long, storied careers rather than a life as a malfunctioning joke? That have state of the art technology?
Those Nimitz class?
No, the UK & US Navies don't have the problems the Russian navy have;- That Russia is a 3rd world country with an economy worth less than New York city that's decades behind the west in tech.
Nor do their ships and submarines routinely catch fire through poor engineering, last century technology and even worse maintenance.
Not a year goes by without something Russian catching fire / sinking / irradiating it's crew / killing it's aircrew.
By your logic, if I started a DCS channel, it would probably be called "Bold Tigers. After the 391st fighter squadron, Mountain Home AFB!! Trust me, Cap, carrier accidents happen when you least expect it!!!
I don’t understand what your simulation rules are. They don’t sound current. B-1 bombers with 24 LRASMs carried in three bomb bays certainly are. They have recently flown in the Black Sea with the sea control mission in mind. Does this come as a surprise to you?
Dance of the vampires pt 2 the Americans strike back. (Red storm rising) by Tom Clancy.
Harpoon missiles on a B-52, 7-8? Don't they have wing pylons (4-6) that should be able to carry far more? But maybe not on the platform that you are using, but in real life? 🤔
I've said it before and I'll say it again, Damp is a badass.
I was stationed at RAF Lakenheath back when they had first brought in F-4's (all from SE ASIA). I was still there, when they transitioned to F-111's.
Nice!
thank you.
Simba must have got his ed Meds. "Im aggressive".
Go big or go home they say.
I can’t imagine attacking a Russian carrier fleet without a submarine or two.
Interesting knowing what we know now about how easy the Moskva sinks.
It was just this year that the USAF were conducting trials with JDAMS hitting moving ships in the Gulf of Mexico. What the upgrades are i wouldn't claim to know, but I believe the F15 used had the same radar system as the F35 fitted, which can track moving ground targets and also relay that information to other assests.
Are you suggesting dropping bombs on a ship. You do understand the year is 2021 not 1945 don't you? Ships that can shoot you down from 70 miles away. Unless the bombs can be dropped for 70+ miles from the ships, that would be a very, very bad idea.
@@t74guard78 I'm not suggesting anything! But there are a considerable number of ships in both the Russian and Chinese navies that have an anti air reach less than 10 miles. Yes granted these are smaller vessels but why use a $3m weapon on a small corvette or patrol ship when you can use a few guided simple bombs at 30k each? I think the USAF is looking at what they have and how best they can deploy that against potential threats. The US is also developing hypersonic missiles, presumably to deal with larger surface threats. It should be noted that these cheaper guided bombs would also be useful against moving armour on land, while potentially being at less risk and higher usefulness than using a laser designator. Laser designators are very vulnerable to cloud cover smoke ect, where the sorts of radars used aren't.
@@Decrepit_biker Well I am pretty sure I was referring to an aircraft carrier group not corvettes. I agree against them it makes sense to use. But not against an carrier group. Even a Russian or Chinese one. Yes they would work nicely against armor and stuff like that. I know for a little package, they do pack a bunch. The US says it is developing hypersonic missiles. A little news for you. They already have them and in fact, have had them for a little while now. I will bet anything what they are letting the public know now are most likely upgraded versions of them. Hell they had a hypersonic aircraft, X-15, way back in 1960. Having a hypersonic aircraft is a hell of a lot harder thing to do then a missile. I talked to an Air Force pilot a long time ago and he said the SR71 could reach mach 5. They just didn't let the public know about it and still don't admit to it going that fast. Yes lasers do have problems with clouds and smoke. I am not sure if that can be overcome some day. Even the stronger ones used for defense still have that problem.
IRL, JDAM will hit 100% of the time. So it doesn't matter if they are moving or not. So make em stationary.
rgr
While I was watching your video, and an actual F15 of the USAF flow over my house 😂.
(I live in Ghedi where there is an Italian airforce base, and probably there is some NATO exercise going on)
cool
I am the harpoon! LOL
24:57 Gold Squadron at work here.
Great video, as usual :-)
Need more Iowa class BBs... especially in the 1980s cofiguration!
I think that the 630 is a better CIWS than the Phalanx.. definitely, when you look at the specs, much better.. and it's on literally every russian boat.. twice the fire rate, further range, 30mm vs 20mm self exploding shells and those 30mms can deal a lot of shrapnel damage especially if there are 10.000 shells per minute
I think I agree however it's not enough to turn the tide of battle
The collision on the carrier deck seems realistic. Stuff goes wrong when you put people under a lot of pressure.
Given the real carriers only attempt to operate fighters resulted in several dead aircrew, yes.
Just seeing the Admiral Kuznetsov in this game, under it's own power made me laugh. If this was realistic, it'd be being pulled by a tug.
Unexpected that was, fun video :)
The map should show different colours for planes, missiles and ejected pilots.
agree
That last life of sock..... He basicly landed on that aircraft carrier,full burner, while the entire battle group was fireing at him....... I dont know but i think you just found your next carrier landing challenge lmfao
Would love to see a Sqn of Buccs surround a non AWACs supported carrier group. SNEB rockets for escorts and high drag bombs for carrier. Now that’s a mission for GR, sub Viggs for Buccs. Sqn about 16 planes 😀
*Nice video !!! Liked and Subscribed*
Welcome
Recent events prove that this was actually a best case scenario for the Russians.
Lol
What would love to see if yall got a server to handle it is a Russian naval and Air Force group vs the USAF and USN
Realistically any attack on Cyprus would also have to contend with the RAFs 903 Expeditionary Air Wing stationed there as well, which has 9 Typhoon FGR4s which could arm with Brimstone IIs which whilst not designed as an ASM do have anti ship capability and a much larger range than Mavericks more like 30-32 nmi compared to 8-12 nmi and a more effective anti armour payload. More importantly, Akrotiri is British Sovereign Territory within Greek territory, so an attack there would be an attack on 2 NATO members so (hopefully) you'd have other Mediterranean NATO counties, particularly Greece scrambling as well that have full on Anti Ship capabilities (I believe the Hellenic Air Force operate Exocets), so in theory it should be suicidal for a Russian fleet to do that provided NATO members all upheld their commitments.
Can helicopters be armed with anti shipping missiles, if so Strike a small flotilla of boats( boghammers), then scale up to larger ships. Helicopters only. Excellent work as always, keep up the good work 👍
yes, SH-60 takes Penguins.
And maybe do 100 bog hammers vs A10cs with only guns and hydra pods
@@welshdefenceforces I don't think it would work. Either the A10s would have to try and pick them off individually at long range by lofting the rockets and short bursts with the cannons, to the point where they would take too long to make it to the ships or that the A10s would get too close and get annihilated by the dshks.
@@rubiconnn they could still try it and dshks wouldn't be effective on a a10 that can take 27mm rounds
@@welshdefenceforces Dshks would absolutely shred an A-10, especially a bunch of them. Go fly over one in DCS without dodging and tell me how it goes.
Who needs another Top Gun movie with vids like these???
14:05 Sounds about right for the Russians. He is correct, that is certainly not the first time that their carrier has been on fire. That MF has a *tug boat* follow it around for *when* (not if) it breaks down.
There's a reason why the US Navy isn't really focusing on hypersonic stuff too much. Hypersonic = missile has to be massive, weighs a lot and takes up a lot of room. Has to fly higher in the atmosphere due to speed and friction. Meanwhile, our sub-sonic Harpoon missiles can sea-skim all the way to the target and they will little reaction time. Their hypersonics and C-RAMS can't intercept the waves of missiles fast enough before they hit.
Granted, the SM-3 missile has a max speed of Mach 16 - Mach 18. That's pretty damned fast and could intercept some fast missiles. It's made for it. Good track record, too. We even used it to knock a wayward US spy satellite out of low-earth orbit to avoid any toxic fuel tank issues. The missile worked just fine for it. First try. Keep in mind that the same principle works for Russia's air defense, S-300, S-400, etc. Saturate them. The USA has over 5,000 Tomahawks alone. A new version of Tomahawk is out now. Longer range and features, too. Those are a little over a million each. Russia's S-400 missiles? They're like $6 million each. Our Tomahawks alone could deplete Russia's entire inventory of anti-aircraft missiles. Our HARM missiles also do a good job at laying waste to them.
Not that it's in the near future but hypersonic missles will work on top of a gravity well. Of course only thing financially worth using them against would be missiles/planes.
For stationary targets or slow moving ones like ships just use a big chunk of metal at a measly 1500 or 2000 ft/sec
you should be using raptors because felons are not in service where raptors have been in service for almost 20 years
That's a very good point
Id love to see the quicksink munition in DCS. It would change the game for the USAF