REALISTIC 1980s Soviet All-Out Strike vs 1980s US Carrier Group (Naval Battle Vid 52) | DCS
Vložit
- čas přidán 25. 07. 2024
- 0:00 Overview
1:08 Details
5:45 Predictions
8:49 FIGHT!
Sheet: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/...
Playlist: • Naval Battles
SPONSORS
Winwing: www.wwsimstore.com/STORE
Winwing USA: fox2.wwsimstore.com/STORE
Sponsor Reviews: • Sponsor Reviews
USEFUL LINKS
GRIM REAPERS(CZcams): / @grimreapers
GRIM REAPERS 2(CZcams): / @grimreapers2
GRIM REAPERS(Odysee): odysee.com/$/invite/@grimreap...
GR PODCASTS: anchor.fm/grim-reapers
DCS TUTORIALS: / @grimreapers
DCS BUYERS GUIDE: • DCS World Module Quick...
DCS OFFICIAL SITE: www.digitalcombatsimulator.co...
ONE TO ONE LESSONS: grimreapers.net/one-to-one-le...
DONATE/SUPPORT GRIM REAPERS
MERCHANDISE: www.redbubble.com/people/grme...
PATREON monthly donations: / grimreapers
PAYPAL one-off donations: www.paypal.me/GrimReapersDona...
SOCIAL MEDIA
WEBSITE: grimreapers.net/
STREAM(Cap): / grimreaperscap
STREAMS(Other Members): grimreapers.net/gr-twitch/
FACEBOOK: / grimreapersgroup
TWITTER: / grimreapers_
DISCORD(DCS & IL-2): / discord (16+ age limit)
DISCORD(TFA Arma): discordapp.com/invite/MSYJxbM (16+ age limit)
OTHER
CAP'S X-56 HOTAS MAPS: drive.google.com/open?id=1g7o...
CAP'S WINWING HOTAS MAPS: drive.google.com/drive/folder...
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 - Hry
Can we get a video on how Taiwan would react to a full-blown attack by China
There's a series on this already
Enjoy czcams.com/play/PL3kOAM2N1YJfr4Se4pdZHratFpDGjdyxq.html
Did you meant to say how Taiwan would react to a full-blown attack by West Taiwan?
with fighter escorts this time
ccp has entered the chat
This takes me back to the week I spent til 5AM every night reading Red Storm Rising.
Dance of the Vampires was the name of the chapter
I just clicked on the video to see if it was Dance of the Vampires...
I have that book in my to do list. But i need to finish the Hunt of the Red October first
Beat me to it!!!
I read this a while ago and remember 3 chapter names: Polar Glory, Dance of the Vampires, and The Frisbies of Dreamland. And I remember vaguely the description of the stealth fighter which was supposed to be the rounded and curvy and when the F-117 was revealed it looked like somebody dropped a block of ice.
Overwhelming the air defenses of a Carrier Group by 100 Tu22's would be great if the Soviets had 100 Tu22's in 1985 in the same place.
That many Backfires forward in Syria are practically an engraved invitation to the IAF and USAF Turkey.
USSR produced 311 Tu 22's since 1960 untill 1969
Actual number of platforms constructed and deployed arent matters of public record.
@@victoriaregina8344 Fair, but educated guess--timates can be made by cataloguing all verified sightings of deployed craft around the world and noting each craft's unique callsign / tail-number.
Yes, and they cant play games with said identifiers? Airman schmucktelliski, your sole job in life is to repaint every aircraft according to this schedule 😂
Old guy here! The Soviets had supercomputers in 1985 that could have done a simulation like this without the graphics. It might have taken a week but it was entirely possible!
cool
lol, they were called VAXes stolen through interesting means :)
@@cgilleybsw Also IBM 360 clones
@@cgilleybsw they had their own designs, many of them quite interesting.
Speaking of VAX, both of their widely used VAX/miniVAX "clones" (except they were not all clones) were better than the original and produced roughly at the same time.
Their PDP-11 compatibles were light-years ahead of the originals and a shitty Soviet home computer accidentally had more powerful CPU than the contemporary 286 powered IBM PC.
Their military grade computers were no slouches either.
@@miroslavszabo3783 legend has it that Soviet computers are still ahead of anything that the West can produce. Nah, I had one of the latest versions of a Soviet home computer based on PDP-11 called Elektronika BK-0011. It was barely even close to Spectrum 128k which became already obsolete to the day it was produced. IBM PCs were top-notch. Setting a comparison between Soviet home computers and IBM PC it's like comparing the Gemini spacecraft to the Space Shuttle.
War simulations are my favorite series, hands down, followed by GR members contests and Questioned. I've never seen this upload frequency and amount of dedication and knowledge in any other gaming channel. Thanks Cap
Pleasure Sir
I'd love to see Ward Carroll do an analysis of this video. He was an F-14 RIO in the 80's and has a popular CZcams channel.
I second that. Ward! Oh I say Ward! Over here good fellow.
I am a PATREON with him, sending this link. This video was excellent for my stupidity on fighter tactics. Thank you @Grim Reapers
Mooch!
In the mid 80s there was a van called the 20-B4 van. It would park on the pier, spend 2 days connecting up to all of our ships (Adams Class DDG) systems. They injected video and had guys on the van on comms playing group command and other ships. We spent 3 days playing war games with it. It was awesome. Other ships could fire missiles and guns etc, but we were the only real ship in the simulation.
It was always against the Soviets. Each day saw increasing size and complexity in attacks. Day 1 we would clean up the Soviets, Day 2 we could hold our own. Day 3 was a saturation attack like this one, but not 100. We would get most of them, but a few always got through.
that sounds cool
We need more info. What tactics would you use? How was ECM calculated? In the 80s we had a huge ace up our sleeve, which was Adolf Tolkachev giving us the Russian crown jewels. Our ECM would have been unstoppable as we knew their war reserve modes.
@@taylorc2542 don’t totally understand your post. What more info do you need
@@lohrtom I just creamed in my pants ty sir.
@@taylorc2542 Thats not correct. The CIA has never released any detailed information about the intel Tolkachev supplied. He certainly provided useful info but he did not compromise all Soviet ECM thats for sure. US/NATO ECM was not unstoppable at all. I worked in EW and we underestimated their capability and by 2000s they had much better ECM than we did. PS keep in mind the KGB ran Tolkachev for almost a year providing disinfo and the impact of that has never been revealed. The KGB could have undone some of the benefit he provided with that disinfo.
The KH-22 in the game comes in a bit too shallow. In reality, they were designed to come in at a 30 degree dive angle. As EW's, we called them "The Spinning Chair" missile. CIWS's max angle (back then anyway) was 45 degrees. Sea Sparrows weren't effective against a small target coming in at that speed and angle. So, if you saw an empty, spinning chair at the SLQ-32 or WLR-1H consoles, then abandon ship because the EW's were already on their way over the side.
Wow!
sea sparrows couldnt take our F4's on the floor of the ocean in argentina either.
Yeah, the SM2s couldn't deal with the speed of those missiles either.
And a Tu-95 Bear D missile guidance OHT datalink to the missiles kh-22 and Tu-22m3m's for launch at maximum ranges!
Long before F-14's can fire AIM-154's
And the Tu-142 Bear F mod 1-3 could provide datalink to the kh-22 and Tu-22m3m's!!!!!
That changes the whole game especially when the Tu-22m3m's are outfitted with 18 KH-31 krypton missiles each?
The E-2 is normally placed 100-200nm along the axis of the expected attack. So the E-2's will see them 100-200 miles earlier.
Also the cats would be on station 120 miles out along the expected axis of attack
If CSG came closer than 1000km to USSR shores the carrier could've been attacked from any side
@@user-qn3xu5ee3t Depends if you can find it. Back in the 80's a nuke carrier and it's entire battle group sailed out of Norfolk for England and promptly disappeared from the USSR's tracking net. A few days later, F-14's from that carrier were intercepting Soviet recon planes over the Barents Sea while it's strike squadrons were practicing attack runs on simulated Soviet ships in the Norwegian Sea. The carrier, it was tucked away in a Fjord launching it's air wing almost unimpeded, interrupted only by some Norwegian F-16's who did a quick attack against it.
Yepp. This simulation was realistic only in the sense that it simulated what would have been simulated back then in 1985. In a real world setting, such a situation would only have occurred if everyone in headquarters and ministry of defence had gone dumb and deaf. No headquarter would have left an important factor like a carrier group unprotected like this.
There very likely would have been a U-2R near providing long range radar data, satellites would have seen the Soviet bombers fuel and arm up, this and that piece of intercepted communication giving warning of the incoming threat earlier, this close to the coast of Nato-Partner Turkey, there would either have been Turkish F-104S supporting the US carriers or, pretty likely, USAF fighters that would have been stationed in Turkey to respond to political tensions that could have resulted in such big action… And the Tu-22 wouldn't have come around this naked either, I guess.
@@Eo_Tunun This simulation isn't representative of any likely scenario. There's no way the US would send a carrier group into the Soviet lake called the Black Sea. A more representative simulation would be the North Atlantic or Norwegian Sea with the carrier at least 1000 nm away from the USSR, well out of range of any Soviet fighter support, the E-2 and a destroyer or frigate stationed well forward as a radar picket, and the Tomcats scrambled with plenty of time to mount a coordinated defense.
I remember playing "Harpoon Classic '97" and this happened a lot. Best defense was having a good CAP, a well positioned AEW Hawkeye, and a lot of luck.
One of my first computer games. Loved playing Harpoon. Still have the PC CD of Harpoon Classic. The North Sea missions were my favourite. Also played Warship Commander with 1/3000 scale model ships back in the early 80s. Needed the entire living room to play out a scenario like this one because of the distances involved.
Shouldn't these bombers in the video attack with fighter escorts?on the other hand did the bombers in harpoon attack with fighter cover?
@ger du I think fighters in air to air loadouts should exceed 1000km flying out of thier bases,that would make for an adequate range,if fighters can be sent in dozens to protect attacking bombers or strike aircraft that would technically creat a large zone of access denial for the opposing navy incase it operates without air force cover.
@ger du I see what you mean ,and I mostly agree,but I dont think the tomcat's phoenix is an issue,the attacker can send as much escort fighters as it wants,while the defender will be limited to a small amount of patrolling interceptors,btw I would like to ask what does the buster range you mentioned means?
@ger du I see, thanks a lot !
I can't believe how invested in these scenarios I become! I was cheering at Kitchens getting knocked out. Exciting stuff!
same
I served aboard USS Theodore Roosevelt from before commissioning ( Oct 86) through 1990. Once we went into active service Nimitz was transferred to the Pacific and we got Nimitz air wing CAG8, which included the Jolly Rogers as shown on your F-14 skins. That bit of accuracy on your part made my day.
Also during acceptance testing the Sea Sparrows were more accurate than expected. Physically hitting the target drones instead of simulated explosion within shrapnel range. Wound up costing millions in destroyed drones.
the TF30-P414 was a wonderful engine to work on! Boy do i miss them
cool
The lack of ECM probably increases the number of soviet losses. A force of this size would have massive jammer support which would reduce the effectiveness of both the AWACS and the internal fighter radar.
The battle group would also have EA-6B jamming and SLQ32 and RBOC.
The American fleet near the coast of Crimea will be destroyed primarily from land-based coastal defense missile systems, and not from tactical bombers. if they go, then only in the second wave to finish off. In Crimea, several hundred anti-ship missiles are deployed both on stationary installations located in rocks and from mobile missile systems. In fact, Crimea is an unsinkable aircraft carrier. there are also several regiments of strike aviation and air defense aviation located there. and 30,000 soldiers in the garrison of the peninsula. Nato has nothing to catch there.
The USSR didn't have a jammer capable of the speed of the Tu-22M. But it could cloud the force for a while. But the downside is that the USN would launch more ready fighters if a huge ECM wall went up.
The Jammers would have alert the fleet sooner and F-14 radars were top of the line during those years.
@@midobecker9251 did the AIM54 have home on jam ?
More cold war scenarios please, be great to see a video breaking down the numbers and types used by both sides of the iron curtain
Definitely more cold war. Unfortunately DCS still lacks some equipment on both sides but that's basically true for all time frames.
There were no VLS equipped Ticonderogas in 1985 - only three ships, all armed with twin arm SM-2 launchers. Really love these interception videos. I'd love to see an early Cold - War bomber interception mission with B-52s vs ground radars, SA - 2s, Mig - 19s, and 21s.
By the early 80's DoD had regular access to late 90's class Pentium class machines with 800 MFLOPS. CDC Cyber mainframes, and Cray's had more than enough computing power to simulate this. The Soviets would have had much less computing power at hand however they could still run a simulation and just wait longer for the results. Both sides simulated this without the great graphics.
cool
I wonder if you could hack such a system so the simulation gives the results you want it to give. Say if a soviet spy managed to gain access in some form and change the internal program in some form so the end result shows the simulation giving the result the soviets want it to give. Afterwards US naval planners would adjust their planning based on that. So in the event of war their planning would be faulty all the while the soviets know this. In such situations even a minor change can spell doom for a fleet. This works vice versa as well. Sounds like gaining access to these supercomputers and changing them would be a priority for any country looking to sabotage war plans in their infancy.
@@florinivan6907 Intelligence agencies then and now have considered this. Computers that run these kinds of sims are not on the internet and all the code is peer reviewed.
@@AndrewTubbiolo Obviously they're not online. But it would be a huge intel coup to gain access and mess around with it. The closest equivalent I can think of is when colonel Redl of the austro-hungarian counterintel bureau sold every war plan to probably the russians. If I was head of an intel agency compromising these supercomputers in a subtle way(that in a real war would be catastrophic) would be just about at the top of my list of goals. If I was to guess I think someone has accomplished this the only question is who.
Flashback to the good old days playing "Harpoon" on the amiga :)
That was Larry Bond's game that Tom Clancy used (collaborated with Larry Bond) to format "Red Storm Rising."
@@pastorjerrykliner3162 Yep. Well, Larry Bond developed the boardgame, the computer came after that and the book. Harpoon was actually the reason why I got a job in CIC on a norwegian frigate. I had more detailed knowledge of Nato and russian weapons systems, sensors and aircraft than most on board :D .
VLS was such a game changer that having 2x Ticonderoga class with their massive 00's spec VLS banks makes this already artificially skewed in USN's favor. Not to mention I have heard that a 6x Phoenix loadout for patrol F-14's was a no-go due to landing weight constraints so the CAP would have 4x Phoenix each max from what I understand.
The first VLS equipped Ticonderogas entered service in the mid 80's, so far as I know.
Well in this case they know they WILL BE firing the Phoenix. So I feel like they could take off with 6 because they knew they wouldn't be landing with them.
@@gato2 the on deck planes would have six, of course. Re-read what I wrote. CAP would still be on rotation because high threat environment ≠ under attack. They need to land regularly and I doubt shipboard stores or doctrine allows for ditching 2x Phoenix into the sea every few hours.
The Tomcat could recover with 6 AIM-54s onboard, they just didn't during peacetime because of the high wear and tear it caused on the airframe plus the fact it required trapping with a very low fuel state. I'm pretty sure if you're expecting the Soviets to send a 100 plane cruise missile strike at any moment, as a CAG you launch the CAP with with 6 AIM-54s and accept the risks.
@@jasonosmond6896 source? Good info but you know how CZcams comments are. I have heard that 4x AIM-54 already required near full fuel dump for recovery.
In the 1980's the Russians had Bears, Badgers, Backfires.
US had John McClane, Steven Seagal, and Chuck Norris.
I'd back US.
@@grimreapers I would not as while the NATO was catching up in the mid 80's they were still just catching up and had a long long way to go.
Luckily for the US by the 1980's John *McCaine* was no longer able to repeatedly crash planes and damage ships.
Thanks for this video. It's great fun seeing this animated, having modeled these kinds of scenarios on VAX and Symbolics machines in the 1980s as a contractor for DARPA/SPAWAR.
I would think the carrier battle group would've turned around away from the engagement after launching all their F-14s and the ships would've formed a barrier in front of the carriers, plus the ships would've been equipped with chaffs to decoy the missiles. Nevertheless, great video.
Yeah DCS is a crap naval warfare sim. No ship chaff, flares, ECM, ECCM the SM-2 just self destruct if their first target is destroyed. No data sharing/directing. The tomcats just pushing forward after firing in stead of falling back just cluttering the radar picture more. And a bunch of other limitations. But it is a fun thing to run to see boom booms.
@@calmterror Well it definitely lacks all of these things, but it evens out when you pair up the Russians and the Americans, because in the game the Russians also have a lot of limitations, so all the disadvantages more or less cancel out.
@@calmterror But sm-2s are way op in DCS to, almost 100% hit probability. That would never happen in real life vs a 1400mph target..
@@iatsd Your statements are the kind of Arrogance that disgust me to no end - you're pretending that a US Carrier group is some kind of hapless "target", and that the US Navy and Military as a whole is just going to absorb pot-shots and "take it" with a smile.
Let's dispell some of that Arrogance: In Real Life - REAL WORLD HISTORY, not your Fantasy-driven game - from World War Two and all the wars between that and the Present-Day, "US CV Groups" have DECIMATED Land-bases and their aircraft, NEVER the other way around - even all the Japanese Kamikazes couldn't sink a US CV, let alone stop them from destroying Japanese air bases and fleets in the Philippines, in Formosa, in Okinawa, in Kyushu, etc to the point that Enemy Land-based aircraft in the post-war era basically "bluffed" and retreated, even to adversarial territories to escape American Air-superiority (from North Korean and Soviet Pilots retreating to China, to Iraqis retreating to Iran and Syria).
As for the USSR?
Want more background? ANY attacks on a US Carrier Group is regarded as an attack against American Territory, an attack on an American CITY, one with Nuclear reactors.
That is STANDING American Military Policy - has been for the past 75+ years*.
The LAST Country to successfully attack a "US CV Group".... was conquered by American Forces, its Military Forces destroyed or disbanded, it's Cities Leveled by Nuclear and Conventional Weapons, its religion desecrated as a sham, its "Emperor-god", demoted to mere mortal, its People humiliated in historic fashion, etc.
So it would be in this case. If a "US CV Group" all American Forces respond and converge on the Enemy nation, including FTs in Boomers spinning up Tridents and Polaris.
You have SERIOUSLY underestimated the extent of the response to an attack on a "US CV Group", by arrogantly pretending that the attacking Nation (along with its trade, infrastructure, cities, etc) is going to be "ignored" by American Military Forces.**
It is "Magical Thinking" at its worst.
*The USSR was supposed to have the same policy - US Armed Forces operated on this understanding, as did the Soviet Armed Forces. It is ridiculous - and dangerous - for neophytes to blithely spread misinformed talk about attacking a Nation's Vital Assets, including Nuclear Assets. Do you understand WHY even normally superficial politicians are so concerned about Nuclear facilities being hit by terrorist attacks of ANY kind? Because any such attacks would indicate a BROAD red-line has been crossed - something dumb politicians are terrified of dealing with - the response to which has been PROMISED for decades: a Nuclear Counterstrike gets placed on the table.
No surprise that the Soviets thought twice about Nuclear Reactors (at certain times in the Cold War, they pointedly asserted to American Officials that they weren't even CASING American Nuclear facilities in CONUS) - so imagine how dangerous they felt it was (and STILL is) to attack something that was not only regarded as a "Nuclear Facility" and "Sovereign American Territory", but an actual "American City" with institutional ties to America's most credible Strategic Force (American Ballistic Missile Subs). There is good reason why Boomers were never hamstrung with any extraneous lockouts or physical "safeguards". Contrary to what you hear in the media, Nuclear Weapons release is ultimately at the discretion of the Crew (even if not specifically authorized by the US President). For however "disciplined" a crew and Captain might be, every Strategic Planner understands that an element of "uncertainty" is not only inevitable, but desired: In the same way that it is dangerous to allow "One Person" to launch Nuclear Weapons (Two-Man Rule), it is also dangerous to allow "One Person" to STOP a Nuclear Weapons Launch - like a Gun Jamming, or in the event of an Enemy realizing/thinking that the President is a weakling and a coward who won't pull the trigger - this situation of paralysis is extremely dangerous to the Nation...until the Enemy and "Allies" realize the American Crewman aboard the Ballistic Missile Submarines might NOT stand idly by as their friends and family back home are attacked and even Nuked - even if countermanded by their Commander in Chief.
**The biggest "Vulnerability" the US Policy faced was "Non-State" actors, thereby giving Enemy and "Allied" Nations a potential "Get-out-of-Jail-Free-Card" if they could support Terrorist and Nuclear attacks against a vital US target - this loop-hole was finally closed, as it is now US Policy that all Terrorist attacks have State-Sponsors by default - What does that mean? It means that US politicians get to designate Countries A B C etc for being "uncooperative" in American investigations of Terrorist activities. So if a Nuke goes off in America (for example, destroying a "US CV Group"), then the counterstrike includes Nuking Countries A B C etc.
You can see why Pakistan cooperated so readily after this change; the entire "Afghan" War being predicated on Pakistan - after all, it's not the first time American forces have been in a undeclared "Cold" War against Nuclear Powers, nor the first time American Forces have retaliated in limited strikes against that Nuclear Power's Military, Cities, Infrastructure, etc.
@@isolinear9836 First of all, history in this context is irrelevant, so throw that out the window. The USA has never fought anything even remotely like a Soviet naval strike, so what you have DECIMATED in history are just fiction at this point.
And what has the US standing policy to do with anything?
In this moment in time it's war, and in a war you attack the enemy, really does not matter if you have a policy that say "an attack against a carrier is an attack against US soil"
Its war, missiles will fly, against the USA, against Carriers and US bases all over the world…
And there you have a bit of history, again, and again it's irrelevant, Japan is not Soviet, and neither is Russia or a nation like China....
You say "So it would be in this case" and mentioned what you did with Japan, and its a big No, in this case they do the same and the world will burn...They can lit you on fire just as much as you can burn them down, so again, its war, gloves are off, an enemy will not be scared of attacking a Carrier group, abviously trade will be damage and bombs will fall all over, citys, infrastructure, ports and railways will be hit but thats how war works, at least of you fighting a real enemy, remeber, this is not Vietnam, Japan or Afganistan, this one bite back and they can do to you what you can do to them,
"US Armed Forces operated on this understanding, as did the Soviet Armed Forces. It is ridiculous - and dangerous - for neophytes to blithely spread misinformed talk about attacking a Nation's Vital Assets, including Nuclear Assets. "
No, in war you strike all assets, nuclear powered or not, nuclear armed or not....you do not se a Carrier closing in on your nation and start bombing you and not attacking back, or US ASW assets dont stop attacking a nuklear powered submarine because of a policy, if they sttop, they will die..
Really wee done video! I've been reading about this stuff for four decades and this video just opened my eyes to how impressive the weaponry and how heavy these fights would have been. I was literally clutching my notepad through the battle.
The USAF back in the '60s developed a nice counter to a mass Soviet bomber strike in the Genie Missile - a 1.5kt nuclear AAM.
Great video! 8 regiments of Backfires vs a single CVBG - tough proposition for the Americans. More likely to see a two carrier group at least in the Norwegian sea, but still this is not unrealistic. I thought it was 2 x 12 Tomcats per CVN? So 24, not 30? 6 x Phoenix was a thing - you just had to jettison a couple before you came home. Apart from VLS Ticos, the other missing thing was the jammers on both sides. Oh, and the Tu-95s trying to find the carriers first...
You are correct, this did not account for the 6 EA-6B Prowlers that would be doing their thing. Also, I was in the Navy during the early 80's (CV-62).
And copious amounts of chaff and chopper decoys too?
Depending on the range, the bombers wouldn't be going alone either... this was basically closer to best case for the US, starting with fighters in the air, no enemy CAP or Anti-Awacs sweeps, no enemy AWACS... and Bombers coming in high instead of low and fast up until the last moment when they are detected (increasing the range they got detected)
The most critical thing however is the Enemy AWACS or other assets such as recon drones, subs, trawlers or other assets tracking the Carrier so the bombers can come in fastand low and as stealthy as possible using full EMCON until they get detected. Even The Tomcat , as good as it was, would struggle to shoot down a single bombers *unless* it found itself on a perfect axis when the bombers were launching
@@GSMonroeFolkMusic Yeah and if the prowler had the same impact it did in Harpoon ANW, that could be quite significant... but the strike also doesn't have to be as large as this one was to succeed either, provided offensive EW and AEW with some Offensive fighter sweeps, 30 bombers could deliver their payload without taking any losses and reliably hit *several* ships, killing a few & opening up the CVBG to follow on attacks.
Kill OHP pickets and Spruance class ships and you substantively open the door for subs.
Kill Burkes and Ticonderoga or a couple of Hawkeyes and Prowlers, & your followup strike is gonna do even more harm with fewer missiles... not to mention expenditure/attrition. assuming support vessels are killed too ... which they would be because they carry reloads and stores... all of which can force an expeditionary force back to port.
not as invulnerable as many want to believe.
Its surprising how vulnerable a Carrier group could be to the loss of a few key assets. Its large because it needs to be large to cover all the ways it can be attacked.
What i think is emerging now however is missile technology which could render Carriers obsolete & vulnerable.... bang for buck wise these hyper modern missiles are going to win every time. I think the age of missile and drone dominance is already on us.
@@martinpalmer6203 But you'd have some of the 'cats up-threat
There was a tabletop game using miniatures called "Harpoon" used by both the US Navy and Tom Clancy to play out an attack like this. It was used by the Naval War College, and Clancy used it to play out a Soviet attack on a carrier in the Atlantic.
Yep.
there was also a computer version (I played it in middle school). "Red Storm Rising" was a collaboration between Tom Clancy and Larry Bond who created "Harpoon". The novel was essentially several scenerios from the GIUK battleset tied together.
@@teslamax5529 That's what I understand too
Amazing how accurate the modeling was by the 80s Soviets. World class mathematicians. This one is dancing around the edges of Red Storm Rising, which would be a neat project, giant integration of forces, huge headache to program, but wouldn't be censored like the brilliant China/Taiwan series. Oops sorry, did I say too much...?
Some of the missiles got through in that book too but with smaller bomber groups. I cannot recall how much smaller though but I know there were malfunctions and attrition too.
I was thinking the same thing. IIRC, the American had a huge battle group. .teo forrestals and the French Foch. The russians sent out badgers which launched slower old cruise missiles kingfish maybe... with escorting jammer badgers to simulate the raid. The tomcat interception with Phoenix was wasted entirely. The backfire raid came from 145 degrees out low and fast with kitchens. The predicted outcome was the focus sunk, one of the American carriers sunk, and one crippled, but able to make port.
I was thinking that would be a neat setpiece engagement to model too. The outcome would likely be similar to this result, or worse.
I think it's safe to say such simulations were not done by mathematicians, but simulated on computers as well. The biggest grunt of calculating power in video game simulations goes into the graphics. If you can skip these, simulations become pretty easy for computers of those days. I have no idea what Systems the Soviets had available, I know that Cray 1 and Cray 2 were being used for such purposes. They easily had the ability to calculate several such simulations in a day.
The US would've just launched a nuke to take out the swarm of missles.
@@Eo_Tunun - Well, computing gets easy without graphics except that in those simulations, you have an extremely large amount of permutations. So many individual pieces with many different possible responses, it reminds me of trying to simulate molecules accurately, you quickly find out it is not possible to accurately model anything without waiting thousands of years. So shortcuts are taken, the only question is, how clever were the Soviets regarding their algorithms for simulations. How much data could they pack in there?
Probably, half of the Phoenix would have failed to keep locking to the target since at initial phase of destruction of bombers would saturate the air with debris that possibly having bigger echo than a complete high speed cruising Tu-22
I love this content! Keep pumping out the war games
Great video! You mentioned the F-14A model for the 2 manned aircraft gave issue passing Mach 1, and that the engines come alive after 1.3 or so, this could be the more accurate drag model, as for all aircraft the profile drag increases around Mach 1, and the drops back a little, which might be missed in the AI versions, causing them to easily accelerate. This drag rise and fall explains why some aircraft can be supercruise - not needing the thrust of reheat after M1.3 to maintain speed. Even the Lockheed Blackbird suffered this, which is why they performed the "dipsy" to break through Mach 1.
A fascinating scenario enacted here, brilliantly narrated and edited. Thank you, gentlemen, subbed! Moar, please...
This was better than a typical aircraft movie. Half the drama is visual, the other half is in my head, imagining the real situation.
Yes, yes, please do what a new carrier group would do against such a massive attack. Love these sims guys! Keep em coming!
Did I know that? Dude, I lived it. Nothing like seeing a Bear-D flying around your formation...😬
Stumbled on this channel yesterday and totally addicted. Great videos!
WElcome Joe
That was absolutely fascinating!
Well done, boys.
For reference: the assault on the nato fleet in red storm rising was also a multi regimental attack with a first wave of drone targets to soak up missiles. Ended up blowing up a carrier and damaging two.
USS Saipan was not a carrier, it was a helicopter assault ship carrying approx 2000 marines.
Semantics, just like how the jsdfs izumo is a "helicopter destroyer"
I just rechecked and nimitz was definitely damaged, Saratoga's radar mast was askew. Both are carriers. Full fleet carriers 😂
And Foch definitely counts as a carrier.
That was an awesome sim, I wonder how the 80s carrier group would perform against a modern carrier group in the sim? they used to have 24 tomcats and 24 bogs.
Actually that's a cool idea.
Those tomcats radar probably become useless due to modern jamming, such as EG-18
Doubt anything happens except dog fights. US navy doesn’t have much for anti ship work. And each other’s defenses would pretty much shield them.
Hats off to you. I was in highschool when Red Storm Rising first came out on the shelves. Wonderful work in bringing this to us.
Absolutely fascinating video though BTW, awesome work and setup, fantastic!
The soviets even tried having an AWACS sub that could control the missiles on terminal. it had a radome on top of the sail so it would surface and then be able to use the radome.
Really, really interesting! It seems that the takeaway is that the earliest possible detection by the Americans would be the key to fleet defense. The Phoenixes seemed to do a good job. The Tomcats simply couldn't get into launch position in the required numbers to reduce the Backfires by the required amounts. Surely the Navy, understanding this, prioritized observation of the Kola Peninsula so they would know when a large force of bombers took off.
These videos definitely underscore why the American military spends so much on surveillance and intelligence. Their defense-in-depth approach really works best when they can detect a threat 500+ miles out.
I love every single video, it is so entertaining and interesting. Keep up the amazing work!! One of my favorite CZcamsrs ever :)
thxx
Sum of all fears- well done!,a lot of works gone into this.
Living in Northern Norway, back in 86 there was a carrier "on our porch" practising off the coast of Vesterålen. That's not that far from Russia.. This scenario might have played out something like this up here... Even today, our Nato QRA F16 out of Bodø (being replaced by the F35 1st of January 2022 out of Evenes) intercepts Russian flights taking of from the northern parts of Russia, flying in international airspace all the way from the Kola peninsula down along the Norwegian coast off the coast of Scotland/Shetland, before they turn back north. Simulating newclear strikes at Europe. The cold War is unfortunately very hot again..... 😔
Interesting, however as others have pointed out the threat axis is always known to some degree. With a carrier 1000 NM off the Kamchatka peninsula the Soviets wouldn't be able to come from any direction (and their initial targeting would be imprecise). The E-2 and picket ships would be positioned along the threat axis, not behind it and a small number of fighters (maybe 4) would be positioned hundreds of miles toward the expected threat sitting there at max E burning 2400 lb/hour with a KA-6 tanker keeping them topped off. It's likely that the bomber package would be detected by the Tomcats before the E-2. On the other hand, there is no way you could get that many 6x Phoenix loaded Tomcats airborne that fast. But there is also no way you could get 100 3xKitchen equipped backfires airborne and in formation, and all cued to the same and correct target without getting picked up by some ESM. Also there would be significant amounts of jamming and chaff on both sides (difficult to model in DCS no doubt).
The threat axis for air and surface is usually known but Soviet doctrine was to attack using subsurface assets also. The threat bearing for a subsurface attack would be unknown and if the CVBG was close to enemy territory one could expect multiple subsurface attacks using cruise missiles and torpedos from multiple bearing lines. A CVBG did not have the ASW assets needed to repel a massive submarine attack.
DCS is mostly eye candy and function tinkering, the actual simulation side is very weak. For example the A.I. doesn't know even the basic air combat manouvers and lawn darts on its own when challenged. WW2 birds exhibit completely ridiculous stall and performance characteristic, try to flip-flop on takeoff, outclimb the F-15 that coincidentally made the climb performance record 40 years later etc. This kind of "simulations" are just not realistic at all.
Not to mention the electronic countermeasures. It would be an electronic mess trying to target the carrier from far away. They'd have to get closer to achieve burn through.
@@michaeljohnson4258 almost all Soviet era attack submarines were jokes and could have been picked up by Stevie Wonder using braille sonar. Each US CVBG is accompanied by a Los Angeles or two.
@@zippers4ever172 really Zippers? And on what experience are you basing your uninformed opinion? I guess during your time in the Navy you actually gained contact on Soviet era subs like I did?
How fascinating, I'm currently reading Red Storm Rising, and this sort of brings to life some of the battles described in the novel. Well done on this video!!
The sports announcer commentary makes this hypnotizing
But the Second "Wave" of Tomcats once the Kitchens were detected should have fired their AIM-54s at the Kitchens, they didn't. They pushed by on to the bombers. The AIM-54 was designed to hit incoming missiles as well as aircraft. especially ones as large as the Kitchens
I know the phoenix could target cruise missiles but i am not sure it would be at all or very effective against Kitchens.... Maybe large subsonic cruise missiles but i would have to go ask or try find something about that.
@@pietersteenkamp5241 I don't see why not, the missile was designed to chase MiG-25 Foxbats as well. so speed isn't an issue. and they can track sea skimming missiles. And the Kitchens are half as as big as a fighter anyway.
I would like to see a US Carrier Task Force (3- 4 carriers) versus a Soviet Bomber Group battle taking place in the Barents Sea baaed on the John Lehman (US Secretary of the Navy 1980 -1986) naval Strategy during the Reagan Presidency. It is my understanding that during a military crisis / war - multiple US carriers would work together to enhance their protection and lethality.
Fantastic job thanks for the video
Always a pleasure seeing the "Jolly Rogers" on the tailfin of an F-14
Thank you for the little nuggets of Soviet planning and history.
I wonder how this would go in Command Modern Operations? The mantra of having more missiles than the enemy definitely applies. Maybe time for collaboration with HypOps?
Just a couple of questions on the setup and mechanics of it, I know it's an ideal setup but compared to the real world but a)what would the loadout of Tomcats in the CAP and scramble have been ready with full loads of the Phoenix? I remember reading something ages ago about having to drop excess missiles to make landing weight. b) Would there have been any other US aircraft in the air or possibly taking up deck space?
The Tomcat and Phoenix were specifically designed for this job. The Tomcat pilots would hypothetically fly beyond bingo to take down as many bombers as they could then eject.
Why not tank the Tomcats to return to the ship? You can easily launch a tanker to refuel them instead of wasting part of your AAW assets. The BG Admiral is smarter than that.
I love these modeled simulations! Great Work!
I really like this channel, I've been on the edge of my seat!!
I believe this was in the book “Red Storm Rising” whereas the F-14 with Phoenix missiles fired at what they believed was Soviet bombers but turned out to be drones. The Soviets were ruthless firing a large number of missiles at the battle group.
Loved that book. The naval engagements, if you could call them that, were a trip. You can tell Tom Clancy had a ton of love for the Navy and diving into all the little details and scenarios around how they operated. Real shame to see how companies like Ubisoft and some film studios have really dragged his name through the mud with the schlock that's been coming out lately.
@@shadow7988 "Red Storm Rising" was a collaboration with Clancy and Larry Bond. I believe the story was a yarn tying together many scenarios from Harpoon's GIUK battleset. (Larry Bond created the miniatures game that became Harpoon.)
@@teslamax5529 Learn something new every day! Never knew that
Hey, a battle idea for your group. In the book Red Storm Rising, by Tom Clancy, there is a stealth fighter attack on Soviet AWACS birds leading into a general air battle and air field raid in the early 1980's. After that, there's a Russian attack like this one on a US carrier battle group. Could be a fun mission for your squadron to fly or even a nice campaign.
thx
This was super interesting. I would love to see the same scenario against a presend day carrier group.
The AIM-54C was not in service yet in 1985; it didn't come out until maybe '88 or '89, so your exercise should be using AIM-54As. The AIM-54A wasn't solid state, it used vacuum tubes that had to be thermally conditioned with a coolant that was circulated through the missile. The coolant cooled the missile at low altitudes, and heated it at the higher altitudes. The missile would freeze and the electronics would be destroyed if it wasn't heated up high. Because of this fact, no Tomcat could carry AIM-54As on the wing pylon stations because none of the Tomcats were manufactured with plumbing for the coolant out to the pylons. The 1 famous missile shoot during testing that had 6 missiles in the air simultaneously against 6 different drones was done with a modified test airplane that had coolant lines running externally out to the pylons. The more reasonable weapon load-out would consist of 4 AIM-54s, 2 AIM-7s, and 2 AIM-9s. Also the F-14 squadrons had a maximum of 12 aircraft, and it would be extremely optimistic to assume all 12 would be in an up status at the same time. Realistically you might get 9 or 10 jets launched that were in good condition.
thx
Tactics vs Strategy - would you really use up all of your Backfires to take out 1 carrier group? That said, I loved watching this.
There were about 500 Tu-22Ms made. And about 200-250 Tu-22s were in service as well
As someone who was on a carrier in the early 80’s I can tell you that the phoenix miss,e system did talk to each other and had different target methods. One was closest target and another would take into account fod damage that would damage other planes in the enemy formation.
thx!
Another fun event. Thanks guys.
The TU22 M2 "backfire B" was the variant during the 80s and they made just over 200 of them - with the M3 variant coming into service in 89.
Let me know when you get a carrier launching 30 F-14s. Would mean well more than 30 aboard. Never happened. I sailed with a two Tomcat squadron airwing and it was quite the shitshow of deck space, hangar space and spare parts.
Have you read Tom Clancy's Red Dawn Rising? There's a really cool chapter where USSR attacks a US carrier group near Iceland with TU 22s and Bears (Radar Jamming), and in Hunt for Red October, the US National Guard uses A10's to scare off the Kuznetsov fleet. Might make an interesting video to reproduce them
Red Storm Rising. Red Dawn was this really neato land sim by TSR.
Mr. Sock always seems to make me smile, great clip Cap.
I made two deployments aboard USS Carl Vinson in 84/85 and 86/87 and we had two Tomcat squadrons (VF-51 and VF-111) each with 12 aircraft, so the results you got were a bit optimistic. The A-7 Corsairs (also 24 in two squadrons) could each carry two Sidewinders (or at least normally did; maybe they could carry more under the wings but I never saw that), but they wouldn't have been all that effective against the bombers. We typically had only two (or was it one?) Tomcats on five-minute alert. Figuring the time from engine start to airborne is five minutes and there were four catapults, it would take about a half hour or so to get 24 airborne, maybe 20 to 25 minutes if everyone was really on their game.
Of course taking the simulation out of the perfect world would mean some number of aircraft would be down for various reasons.
CORRECTION: I didn't take into account that all the US aircraft would be starting their engines at about the same time, so I think the total to get 24 airborne would be 15 to 20 minutes.
ADDITION: I forgot to mention this, but you sounded like you were giving the blow-by-blow of a boxing match! (That's a compliment.)
This was fantastic. Yup, this reminds me of Red Storm Rising. I have a request. Can you redo the great Marianas Turkey shoot with Japanese Aces in the cockpit and not the poorly trained pilots they fielded at the time? For me, it would be a true test of the aircraft quality of that time period. Thanks.
Good idea.
Dear CAP, could you reenact the Israel air bombing mission against the IRAQ nuclear ☢️ power station outside Baghdad. The range and payloads to the correct spec’s. Thank you 🙏 love your videos.
Is that the mission where the F-16s were pushed to their absolute range limits? If Cap does it, it will have to be a condensed version.
There was a PC game called Harpoon that would run similar scenarios back in the early 90’s. I recall one was a 2-3 CV assault against Kola Peninsula bases. Was always a matter of f14’s vs Backfires.
Here Sir: czcams.com/video/jiYQ0HxqpnE/video.html
@@grimreapers thank to you my good 👍 sir
@@romakrelian yes, it was a daring raid, there’s a great video on you tube about the mission and it was a hell of a distance with no mid air refuelling, plus the low level altitude I’m not sure if they had the same radar as the RAF tornado bombers had I think it’s called ground terrain radar guidance, the RAF were absolutely amazing at it.
Perfectly done👍
Could you imagine being out in the middle of that piece of ocean on the deck of a ship watching this fight go down??!! The sonic booms and explosions would be incredible as well as watching all those planes falling t ok the ocean......WOW!!!
This scenario is precisely what to the introduction of higher rate missile launchers (VLS) and also missile guidance improvements under the AEGIS umbrella. Prior to fully-integrated Aegis systems no US ship could guide more than 3-4 AA missiles at a time. Aegis & upgraded missiles software & hardware is what allows today's US warships to oversee many more missiles simultaneously. And it was developed to minimize the effectiveness of the brute force attack we saw here.
It would be interesting to try the same scenario in CMO where you can simulate the proper ship types and weapon fits. Without VLS Ticos and the addition of Jamming badgers, the US job would be even harder. The Cold War would have been grim if it kicked off properly.
CMO?
@@CowMaster9001 Command: Modern Operations. It's a war simulator with an extensive database of real life weapons systems and platforms. It's pretty in depth and allows modelling quite complex situations.
What an amazing simulation Cap 🤩
Thank you
I had a game called Harpoon which you could simulate these types of attacks. Had a lot of fun attacking Kola peninsula scenario. Have to throw out your F14's as far out as possible to meet threat.
Fantastic video guys! One thing I would point out is that while this is ideal for the Americans, it's also pretty ideal for the Russians - they're right near their own bases. Far out to sea, each bomber might be only able to carry 1 or 2 missiles instead of 3, and carriers might have come in pairs or even threes with their attendant escorts.
agreed, a more likely scenario would have been more like "Red Storm Rising" with the incoming bombers coming down off Norway before surrounding the CVBG to make the F-14s spread out. This would reduce the missile load/bomber.
Just as a heads-up...the AWG-9 and the AIM-54C were built to work in conjunction with each-other. ~150nm engagement range and at Mach 5, it was about $5 million with each pull of the trigger.
havent visitid this cahnnel in a while. glad i did. this channel is awesome
Welcome!
Finally! A DCS CZcamsr does a Bomber Intercept mission, this is one thing I've been wanting for a LONG damn time. XD
This exact scenario was in the book Red Storm Rising by John Clancy, except it takes place in the North Atlantic instead of the Black Sea. The Soviets launch a decoy volley of large missiles, which the U.S. fleet detects and believes are the incoming bombers. It's only after the American Aegis equipped ships, and U.S. carrier aircraft, expend all of their long range anti aircraft missile, that they realize their mistake. The Soviet bombers unleash a volley of real missiles that overwhelms the close in anti missile ship defenses, and devastates the U.S. and allied ships.
I read it and it's pretty ironic. Because the Soviets were winning the navy war for the first days or so but loosing the ground war. IRL I would've expected them to do the exact opposite. Loose the navy war but getting at least to the Rhine river
And to research that section he used the Wargame Harpoon (no simulators, just hexes and counters) to model the engagement. Harpoon was used by the US Navy as well because it was so representative. The results was destruction of the CVG(N). But it didn’t quite happen like that in the book.
Red Storm Rising great book! Tom Clancy, not John.
@@19580822 Yep, I got that wrong. I actually went over to the bookshelf to look at my copy to make sure I had the title and author correct before I wrote my comment.😕
Red Storm Rising was the only Clancy book I read that I really cared for, but it was excellent.
The Third World War by John Hackett also had an interesting portrayal of a NATO vs Warsaw Pact conflict. Perhaps that's where I got the name John from by mixing up the two.
@@dongilleo9743 I read The Third World War also. Written by a former British general if memory serves. Surprised you only cared for the one Clancy book. I've read most, but not all of them, and I really liked Debt of Honor and Executive Orders; heck they were all pretty good, but I like reading about military strategy.
Highly unlikely that (1) Turkey would have allowed a non Treaty carrier battle group into the Black Sea, and (2) the US Navy would have risked a single carrier battle group by its lonesome in a high threat environment. More likely scenario would be a pair or even 3 carrier battle groups of the 2nd Fleet in the North Atlantic or Norwegian Sea, with its flanks protected by Allied aircraft based out of Iceland, Scotland and Norway to protect the North Atlantic convoys which would become necessary as part of Reforger. Backfires and Badgers would deploy from the airfields around Severomorsk in Murmansk.
highly likely that such attack would be accompanied by the lunch from subs and ships from all directions with some nukes as warheads
Yes, putting a carrier group into the Black Sea would be extremely foolhardy. In order to save their bombers for other missions, the Soviets/Russians could just use a few tactical nukes from their subs. I'm sure that is is one of their scenarios.
@@jguillot72 Especially easy after grounding the CVN in the straits at high tide...
Served on a cruiser (Bainbridge CGN-25) during this time period. The Tico class still had the MK 26 twin arm launchers using Standard SM-2MR (medium range) missiles but there was only two or three of this class. However the primary carrier escort at the time was still the Leahy and Belknap class cruisers with their twin MK 10 launchers. These cruisers used the Standard SM-2ER (extended range) missile with a range of 90+ miles which could have engaged the Kitchens further out. Also the escorting vessels would be spread much farther apart than depicted in the video.
Brilliant video! There is a similar mission in my 'Fear the Bones' campaign, albeit with only 20 Backfires. Lots of users complain that the mission is hard and the carrier gets sunk, but hey, they should try facing a hundred! :)
There's something I'm wondering though: If I had been sitting in Moscow, I would have sent 20-30 fighters ahead of the Backfires to keep the Tomcats busy and make them waste those phoenixes. I think that would have made a big difference, sending up these 'canon-fodders'.
A carrier group would not operate within range of Soviet fighters unless it was deep into the war and the Soviet air force was near destroyed. Maybe over the ocean in the Atlantic the bombers would get MIG-31 Foxhound escorts that could refuel and had long range missiles (although not as long range as the phoenix iirc).
the Tomcat was just an amazingly capable interceptor ,especially for the 70's when it started service . we would be in a much better position if we chose the tomcat 21 over the super-hornet
The problem with the Tomcat is that no one would let it fire first without visual confirmation, which would pretty much negate it's firing range advantage.
@@shorttimer874 it lacked modern IFF systems, a problem the new one would have resolved
It's engine problem meant that reliability was an issue throughout it's career and hence the Navy chose the Hornet and the super hornet which could fight as well as bomb. Tomcats were notorious with the engine troubles and the radar/avionics issues
In a real-life scenario where the USSR and America aren't already at war, how close would the backfires get to the carrier group before F-14's actually open fire?
Well there is video out there at a backfire buzzing a US carrier
@@dronevidsandfreedom Yeah they get very close.
The goal would be to destroy the bombers before they get into the missile launch envelope range. The bombers would not launch at max missile range but would try to get closer to improve hit probability.
The AIM 54 "Phoenix" had a top speed of Mach 5 itself;(Hypersonic Status).....Interesting battle here indeed. Outstanding!...they were retired back in September 2004. Iran still has a few on their F-14s.
Just became a DCS Nube. I have flown planes and helicopters (model planes, helis, years in clubs). Always wanted to fly an A-10 so bought A-10 and HIND (DCS). LOVE your sims/details and want, one day, to be just as proficient.
It's just so hard to know how this would play out in real life. The SM2's in this game only seemed to have a 20-30% hit rate.
But IRL a carrier group could intercept enemies while they are still at least an hour away from being able to fire missiles, something which this channel always overlooks.
Their PK on high Parabolic trajectory and speed KH-22s was probably much worse than that, these were coming in at like 20-30 degrees from the deck, not the desired trajectory, I think they got the missile modeling wrong here.
The speed given for the backfire with KH-22 with 3 missiles is likely too high. The use of the Black Sea to create the circumstances that allow an American Carrier group close to soviet soil is interesting.( pretty sure the map showed the Crimea.) The scenario also is limited by the very awesome software( Only military only sims are likely better from what I've seen and I am only an armchair general or admiral who broke his teeth of Harpoon on my trusty 386sx with maths co-processor and a full 1 megabyte of RAM.) Lack of EW both offensively and defensively also are problematic.
I spent many hours playing Harpoon, loved that game.
You earned yourself a new subscriber with this one. Well done!
WElcome to the party bus.
@@grimreapers Thanks! You guys are like drunk General Officers, dreaming up scenarios for War College/Pentagon world scenario papers/war games. "Hey how about NATO finds out that not Corona, but Guinness is causing the pandemic! We take out all the factories with FAE weapons dropped like in that Nicolas Cage movie, The Rock!" 😜
This brings back memories of playing Harpoon.
A launch of bombers of this magnitude would have been detected by national means and warning to the battle group would have been almost immediate.
and how many would have had technical difficulties and turned around or crashed
@@curtunderwood8039 Good question, beats the hell out me.
I really think that DCS gives the AI a bit of a free ride when it comes to weapon hit chances, as was pointed out at the end of the video the player Phoenix's had a P(Hit) of around 33% while the AI were pushing 80-100%.
A great video and a great result, but I think that the US would have had an even tougher time of it if the Soviets had their full suite of advantages - escorting fighters, jamming aircraft, corridor chaff rockets and maybe even a simultaneous attack from some subs and or surface ships. Soviet doctrine was all about overwhelming the defences, I think that with the above advantages (and the AI not set to god mode accuracy) they could have done the job with two thirds the force and half the losses.
Still - Orders of Lenin all round !
A phoenix launched at a non-maneuvering bomber, in range, valid shot, was virtually 100% unless it had a mechanical malfunction (like rocket motor initiator failure). I suspect the human players either 1 - fired on already targeted aircraft, 2 - Failed to support shots to active acquisition.
In the late 70s and 80s a man named Larry Bond played Backfire+ASCM vs USN CVBG scenarios out as tabletop minis games in the course of developing his Harpoon modern naval minis game rules. He chatted about his results with a friend named Tom Clancy who incorporated some of the ideas into his early books. Somewhere Clancy credits Bond as a source of inspiration maybe in Red Storm but possibly in Red October (it’s been a long time since I read it)
thx
I would like to see a simulation of the Taranto Raid in WWII. That's the one the Japanese studied in preparation for Pearl Harbor. I also would like to see the Ploesti Raid, including all the navigation screwups that made it so spectacular.
I don’t play this game, but I love watching these scenarios.
Did any of y’all serve in the military or is all your knowledge sims?
Both, but a lot of retired military
For me it's sims.
Woooooooo correlation data success!
Tom Cruise would surf proud...
Rest with God, those afflicted by tornados in America this week. AMEN!
Personalized Ads turned on should help now.
Thanks again LOL.
I'm not a gamer and this is the first like this that I've watched, very interesting, I've subscribed to hopefully watch more! Good job guys!
Really interesting how close your got the sim to the supercomputer sim used for Clancy's Red Storm Rising. Nicely done, m8.
Red Storm Rising was at least partly modeled by the Harpoon game - Clancy didn't have access to a supercomputer AT THE TIME.
There's a reason Larry Bond is listed as co-author for that book (he helped with the modeling/gaming).
@@bricefleckenstein9666 thanks for the correction, sir.