Alright. You got me. I don’t play DCS or any flying games. My father was a pilot. Retired air force (he has to explain the terminology you guys use). I’m a driver. Love the videos so much I’m a Patreon member now. I blame Grump. He’s a legend.
This scenario shows flaws in the AI. The F14s flew right into the fleet AA range and into the swarm of SAMs. In addition the F14s stayed supersonic instead of slowing down to dogfight and evasive speeds. I'd like to see this with more humans on both sides along with the ability for squadrons to RTB and rearm.
19:41: I'm am NOT a real F-14 pilot, but from what I've heard, an F-14 could get airborne with 6x AIM-54s. The problem was, they couldn't land with all six still onboard. And no one wanted to jettison multiple $2.7M USD (inflation adjusted) missiles into the sea.
You could in fact trap with six although it required a significant reduction in fuel, only 2K lbs for the D model, in order to remain below max gross trap weight. Note: with six, and their rails, you’re looking at ~8700lbs.
I am an USAF veteran of the 70's and I have to say DCS gets a few things quite wrong about guided munitions from that era. I worked as a missile guidance and control specialist (included guided bombs) and they were quite readily available to both the USAF and USN and were used in Vietnam. The Maverick had both optical guidance (100% kill rate when fired with target lock) as well as a passive radar guidance with a white phosphorous warheads used against SAM radar. These should have been available to your 70's naval planes instead of using dumb bombs. The AIM 7 and AIM 9 kill rates when fired with target lock (against the era planes) had kill rates close to 100% also. Laser guided bombs were quite accurate at the time . This tech was available and used in the early 70's. Other munitions were in the development stage at the time that DCS considers new weaponry such as guided ship launched missiles as well as cruise missiles.
@OverlordAntares The early models used in Vietnam were indeed pretty abysmal, but they were designed to see a large radar reflection from a large, barely maneuvering target. It wasn't initially meant to be a dogfight missile but a bomber intercept missile. Also, when you factor in that BVR was largely prohibited in the Vietnam theater, it took away the primary advantage that the Sparrow had. If pilots had been allowed to fire against older low tech MiG-17s in full BVR engagements, they likely would have been far more successful. All that said, those were mid/late 60s versions. I believe there was a much improved version introduced in the early/mid 70s which had a roughly 70% kill rate in the 1991 Gulf War.
well yes Michael, what you say is correct, by last years of vietnam there were already some TV guided bombs and laser bombs being used... but the fact is that A4E was in fact used in the 60s (along with the F4 Phantom II) and pods for dropping guided bombs was adopted in the later A4M, which required the radar to be removed in order to fit the equipment. The correct USNavy 70's CV air group should be tomcats + A6 Intruder with smartbombs and/or Maverick AGM. A4E could use the Bullpup, but i think it is not modded in the game. Last but not least... late Vietnam AIM-9G was quite better, but even the revolutionary AIM-9L isn't that big of a threat against a modern aircraft with improved flare programs. AIM-7 had a great kill ratio against aircraft without (or very basic) RWR and pilots not trained for BVR engagement
That's because they were flying close air support missions, typical CENTCOM loadout. A recent video from the Truman CSG showcased an F/A-18E carrying 6 AMRAAMs and 2 9Xs
So one thing I noticed: There's a tactical flaw here on the part of the '70s carrier group. The F-14s being unable to dodge the AMRAAMs at full speed is indeed a serious problem, but the Phoenix has a longer range. That being the case, once the Tomcats are within range to start firing at the Hornets, they should throttle back to improve maneuverability, thus reducing hit probability for their opponents, and also increasing the time before the F-18s come into the AMRAAM's range. This allows the deployment of even more AIM-54s, and more Hornet kills before they can mount a counterattack. The option would even exist to "kite" the Hornets, using the F-14's superior thrust to maintain a range that makes it difficult for the Hornets to return fire. Have the F-14s hang out and pick off the Hornets in this way until they achieve total air superiority, then it's basically lunchtime for the Skyhawks. Edit: The reduced speed also eliminates the SAM threat from the enemy carrier group.
I have to say Cap, you often overarm the F-18s in these sims. Its lovely to have 12 missiles onboard, but as you see they cant even get supersonic and so can't really sling their -120s. Especially the first couple bogs would really really benefit from only carrying 6, or even just 2 so they can get fast and get a couple missiles off which would break up the tomcats. Still good fun to watch, keep at it!
In reality, the Phoenix had a range of 400 miles, 0-100,000ft. The F14 radar could lock up to 6 targets at > 200 miles and launch on all 6 while tracking up to 24. I am not familiar with the modern missiles (I worked for the DOD before Hornets were even announced). In this scenario, the F14s could have engaged as soon as the were airborne and detecting Hornets.
I wonder how the fight would have gone with "Attack within radius" instructions. I know it's not the "Default setting", but it is better tactics if the defined mission is "Protect the CAS guys for the mission of destroying ground targets." This isn't really testing what was the better airwing, rather which airwing is better suited to the predefined AI instructions, IMHO.
This is my favorite channel right now. I don't even play the game, but come from the old days of JSF, Comanche Maximum Overkill, and F-117 combat flight sim days and this channel is so damn interesting to watch. The history, the facts, the simulation, and the serious tone of it is absolutely engaging. Good show everyone, cheers!
I dont think most of us even play the game. Its so resource intensive it requires an arm and a leg to get atleast a semi functional setup to keep dcs running.
@@spyous7884 kind of, it actually doesn't run too bad in 1080p, 2k is a lot harder though. A 1000$ pc would probably do pretty well. PC prices are normalizing though and you can use for more than just DCS. I think the most expensive part is gear, a decent stick(VKB NXT) costs 150$, track IR another 50$, and a cheap throttle like 100$. I'd say these are all necessary, imo they make a world of difference.
@@hooptiej basically what i said, but you don't need to spend more than 300$ to get a decent set up with a hotas and track ir. There aren't many budget options but they are there! You don't need to spend 500$ on a WINWING hotas setup and 200$ on track IR5 or whatever that POS is called. At the end of the day, if it's what you love doing/are passionate about it you'll shell out 500$ on a hotas. Maybe not all at once though. Most people that play DCS are really passionate about aviation and military aviation and with how good DCS i can see why people play so much and are willing to get a good setup. Just look at the amount of A10 and F18 sim pits there are for DCS.
Having the F-14's getting too close to the ships really skewed the results. Without that, the red team would have had more time for ground attack, not to mention less F-18's getting to the island in the first place. Enjoyed the simulation
This was so close it deserves another run. I’d bet if it was all humans things might turn out different. The Tomcats wouldn’t over pursue like the AI did and the Hornets would be able to use their advantage of more modern electronics too. Another AI simulation is still something that would be interesting. Are there not A-6 Intruders in DCS? I love watching y’all’s videos but other than that don’t know what is and isn’t included.
Using AI, launch the F-14's after the A-4's. This would take into account the A-4's slower speed and allow the Tomcats to arrive over the island at about the same time as the A-4's. This should also solve the issue of the F-14's having to fight inside the SM-2 umbrella and the Hornets not getting into the fight early
With all due respect to how much time it takes to prepare these simulations, this was a crap battle. There is NO way the F-14s would close to within SM-2 range. ZERO chance. They would provide air cover for the A-4s and stay over the island and not close. If this battle showed that? Then the 1970s carrier group would won without all the loss of the F-14s.
Absolutely disagree with you on the "silly turning around". That is precisely what you would do. You get to keep your formation of the flight, it gives you time to build altitude, keeps in the air defence umbrella while you are at your most vulnerable . Going off piecemeal is a damn good way to get outnumbered in CAP.
Whether this was super realistic or not…. That’s for people more knowledgeable about this subject than me to decide, you cannot deny how freaking exciting this was to watch. That ending was insane!
That one was interesting. I have a few comments. 1) The Tomcats' behaviour where they loiter and circle after launch would make sense in some circumstances. Obviously if the F-14 is launching as Alert-5 to intercept an incoming threat to the fleet, they should burn out hard for speed and altitude immediately. The sooner they get into range the further away from the fleet the threat gets interdicted. However, with a mission profile where the orders are to proceed to a waypoint and fly CAP, forming up their wingpairs and flights before proceeding would be good practice. In this scenario getting into CAP a couple mins earlier won't make much difference, but unit cohesion might. 2) I don't know if there's any way to program the Tomcats not to approach into SM2 range of the fleet? 3) I think one trick missed would have been to give the 2000s fleet some electronic warfare Hornets. I suspect a bit of jamming might degrade the Pheonix' tracking noticeably. Not sure exactly what's available in the game, but you get the idea.
Again, I'm not aware of the aircraft choices in DCS, but Grumman EA-6B's Prowler's began transitioning to the Boeing EA-18G Growler's from 2009 IIRC. Regards Rob
@@grimreapers …right. Which is why I was asking why they weren’t included in the 2000s group? I sort of thought “early 2000s” would have still had them. Am I missing something?
That SAM wall just changed the whole landscape. You're right if the AI was a little smarter and proper doctrine would have been to fall back and guard the A4's near the objective.
While this is a great game and simulator, it would be interesting to see the 70's carrier vs Super Hornets and F35s. In either simulation, I don't see ECM and other technology that would probably make the Phoenix not as effective as it is here.
The 1970s F-14 team would have been even more effective if you made them start spawning the A-4Es before the F-14s finish spawning. Basically make first 3 F-14 + 1 A-4E, then the rest all 2 F-14 + 2 A-4Es until there are not more of either A-4E or F-14. Then it is all catapults for the remaining aircraft.
So glad I'm subscribed! This is what I like to see. All glory to our historic fleet when the weaponry was designed to be used for maximum death eg. end of days scenarios. It doesn't matter if it runs on propellers strings and weights as long as it gets the first kill. I don't think its the weaponry that makes the difference in todays battles. Its the information speed at which you can identify what exactly was killed and what to target next, where you are, who or what is coming at you and how close your support is makes all the difference. Older pilots had a paper map, radar blip and a radio and two eyes.
How is this got me on the edge of my seat watching!? I never dreamt about looking for simulated aerial battles...but here I am. Like button and subscribed! TY Grim Reapers!
Fun Sim! FWIW I remember talking with a Phantom crew flying off the Coral Sea, as they explained they were able to compete with Nimitz/F-14 because they were forced to use better tactics. They had older more experienced crews that were more efficient at launches and recoveries and at fighting their older aircraft. That's not to say the AIM-54 wasn't a game changer.
Legacy hornets always fly double bubble IE 2 fuel tanks and empty centerline during carrier operations. We bombed the hell out of the Serbs in 1995-96 (VFA-82). Has to do with bring back weight. We were flying lot 10s and the Marines VMFA251 flew lot 18s. Marines also had a harm missile come off on landing and Skip across the flight deck right in front of me. I was on L4 working on a plane.
WOW! Was cheering at the screen at the end, the battle kept getting the tables turned back and forth... Slow A-4s pulled it out at the end I can't believe it. I thought the modern planes had the ground attack win guaranteed omg! Ha haaa!!! So awesome! :D
8:58 I'm rooting for the Tomcats, they are the better plane in every category except maintenance. Though I am wondering what kept them from being set up as 6-gun since that's something that they should be capable of. YAY!!! Fabulous finish!
Hot damn, you weren't lying with your thumbnail cap. This was bloody entertaining 😎😄 P.S. If there are Tomcats involved I can't bet against them. Just too damn sexy.
There's some pretty interesting documentaries out there where they used old decommissioned Phoenix missiles to test hypersonic missiles. It was such a massive missile that they had the room to play with. Pretty awesome watch if you have some time
Whenever I see an F14 I hear Burt Reynolds' Trans Am from the movie Cannonball Run. When I see an F18 I hear the sound of the Japanese entry into the same movie. Great vid guys. Love to see that one with real pilots.
I reckon another way the F-14s will have hamstrung themselves is how they had pushed so far forward they had essentially forced the F/A-18s to bunch up to some degree around the carriers so if/when the F-14s ran out the A-4s are suddenly dealing with a tidal wave of F/A-18s rather than the few that were arriving after scrambling.
@ approx 9min; Cap'n per your request, I'm piping in. With the more modern carriers, you can fairly quickly launch 4 fighters. The older class, apparently, can only launch 2. But if they, both sides, allow the other planes to use the full deck, then they both could be slapping planes in the air every 30-60 seconds!
Hey Cap, video idea - it would be cool to see a re-enactment of the major fictional battles in the Tom Clancy novel "Red Storm Rising", basically what if the cold war went hot in the 80's. Some pretty interesting scenarios like Russian surprise attack and invasion of Keflavik, Iceland and it being re-taken by US forces in an amphibious assault, surprise Badger bomber attack on a US naval carrier group including a simultaneous decoy attack, and the US using A-10's and early stealth technology to defend the Fulda Gap from a Russian tank blitz. Love the channel and content!
1991 Gulf War CAG with Tomcats, F/A18 As and Cs, and A6E Intruders (A7Es instead of F/A18s if using USS John F Kennedy) would even more lopsided. A7s and A6s in 1991 were using Mavericks as well.
Kind of shows you how much the USN could use a dedicated air superiority fighter/interceptor. A naval version of something like the F22 should have been built. The Tomcats speed was impressive. Cool simulation!
I honestly doubt 70’s pulsed Doppler have any anti jamming capability at all. It is the specialty of AESA radar, which can jump between frequency quickly.
I dont know how effective the f35 is without an awaks or a bunch of the supporting logistics. For multirole their fine but for grabbing asses almost any other carrier based craft will school it.
@@timothybayliss6680 yeah but they have reduced RCS, they can datalink with each other, all of which should have reduced the F14’s advantage somewhat…at what range would a Phoenix get a good lock on a low RCS aircraft? Then add in jamming and is it not possible that the F14 from 1970 would be sensor blind and have to resort to visual range attacks? Their ships radar too? Don’t forget we are putting a 1970’s standards of tech against a 00’s standard of tech, that doesn’t just mean the airframe is from the 1970’s, it means any additions or upgrades made to the tomcats radar, missiles, systems etc are all rolled back to 1970’s levels. Technically the hornets are almost 70,s airframes, being from the early 80’s, that’s why super hornets would be more representative of the 00’s - and super hornets coupled with growlers would be tough on 70’s tech I presume, and F35s near invisible.
Im wishing the Navalized NGAD will adopt some of the strengths of the Tomcat but just make it stealthy. Massive power, high speed, long range and all aspect stealth
Equipped with two f135 engines giving it around 86,000 pounds of thrust with afterburners? Fantastic. Giving those engines the planned upgrades for more thrust? Can you imagine?
@@deanspanos8210 the AETP Engines that are under testing right now are insane. The requirements indicate the new engines will have at least 10% more thrust; Pratt & Whittney/GE have indicated they've exceeded requirements. the next gen engines used on NGAD will produce around 210Kn of thrust minimum. These jets will be insanely powerful
USS Theodore Roosevelt launched an F-14D, of VF-31, for the last time on 28 July 2006; piloted by Lt. Blake Coleman and Lt. Cmdr Dave Lauderbaugh as RIO.[67] The last two F-14 squadrons, the VF-31 Tomcatters, and the VF-213 Black Lions conducted their last fly-in at Naval Air Station Oceana on 10 March 2006
If the 70's would have stayed on the Island it would have been way more one sided. Got to love how the game just throws random actions in to make it more exciting.
Cool don't you guys know during periods of time in the past.They had missiles that got 25% to over 50 percent failure crazy! That is why they fired at least 2 missles at a time.
The 70's did not win because of luck or skill or the F14's. They won because of AIM-54 and that's it. It's by will of the mighty AIM-54 that the F14's were able the keep the F18's out just long enough so the F4's could carry out the attack.
The AIM-54 and the F-14 were built to go together. Also those AIM-54s are too accurate, they were designed for attacking Bears...... There appears to be no jamming or any decent avoidance. This also goes back to my other comment of why you would group up. The F-14 was designed as a fleet defending interceptor not to go dogfight other fighters as well. Not to go out and defend attacking fighters. Which is why the F/A-18 is the better fleet aircraft. The F-14 were just too big and single role, which is why (sadly) the F-14 had to go and not be replaced
The phoenix is under performing right now because they nerfed them kinematic ally but they can't fix the Ed guidance yet so it's taken a beating this patch. It will be better in future
No non-top secret tech that's as old as I am (that's old!) should ever be.... nerfed. That's a developer(s) and release management team taking into complaints, zero internal governance, and suspect game management. With the per unit cost of play a really dedicated player will probably pay in this game, DCS customers deserve much more... yet there is probably not much better in the market....
@@carnifexor3010 stuff is constantly being tweaked to make it closer to reality. And that's before you get into having to make workarounds for game engine funkiness
Ah, and a game is a game, they all have quirks. It's meant to be fun and it really shows as such, The (sports!) colour commentary, ending ironic & total giggle of an upset, was masterfully done It is Very easy to gripe bitch and assume from the sidelines, something I know well, but occasionally forget, well because, humans. If can see it and call it others, I have do do the same when I leave a giant turd of a response. After I uncorked and loosend my colonatomy, I rewatched it paying attention to the same reason i typically watch while buckled and strapped onto the Can, paying to Aqua-Buddah to safely deliver this GR proxy butt baby... I hope more find this capacity which is easy to forgrt sometimes.... Remembering this, is sometimes just a matter of allowing delivery and now assuming a relaxed state, vs commenting while (virtually) as you bloody-pants pants on everyone else's eye balllls. When in doubt, rewatch thr video and dont let your Anus, butt baby, scream and shout. Thanks Aqua-Buddah. Have a great week!
This should have been set up so that it's pure CSG vs CSG and with no ground stuff. Instead of sending out the strike aircrafts with ATG weapons, arm them with Anti-Ship weapons and then see which carrier sinks first
Whenever you look at a Tomcat, don you just wish that someone modernized it and kept it in service? I sign in frustration whenever I read about why Tomcat was replaced. Even now, I get super frustrated when I realized that China’s J-35 was a medium sized fighter like F-18 and F-35, not like the Tomcat. I can only wish that the 6th gen F/A-XX will be a twin engine heavy fighter.
@@Vkat696 what about it is antiquated? It could have had AESA radar, fly by wire, new glass cockpit, and better engine with easier maintenance if the Super Tomcat was chosen over the Super Hornet.
@Thomas Zhang The range and top speed of the F-14 just weren't as important anymore. The Soviet threat was replaced by a much less potent Russian threat and China was still 2-3 decades away from being a serious threat to carrier groups when the F-14 was retired. Factor in an aircraft that was always tricky to fly and always very maintenance intensive, thanks in no small part to the swing wing, and it just made sense to replace it with the cheaper Super Hornet... which will never be the outright interceptor that the Tomcat was, but is highly flexible, has more docile handling and is much cheaper to maintain.
Great video and fantastic presentation! But not realistic. There was no tactics used at all and you restricted the technology for both sides. Not to mention no bomber would engage a ground target with a boggy near by. They would have situational awareness due to the AWAC providing support. The modern task force would be co-ordinated between all air wings to engage the targets at the same time, not charge in like fools. 1. Instead of using A-4's, you should be using A-6 Intruders's supported by A-4 skyhawks and EF-111A Raven's for ECM. Second, NO F-14 pilot would speed into combat knowing full well they had the Phenix onboard with AWAC support. You charged them into a dog fight when they would never need to get that close. You placed them into an engagement at max speed, removing their ability to jink or even avoid getting shot down. Loitering is an amazing thing - get into position and then wait for the enemy to pop their heads up.The F-14's had the range but no patience. 2. One word, F/A-18G Growlers. Where are they? They would single handedly turn those Phenixes into waisted metal. The Hawkeyes would never be so far away from their designated patrol zone. They would be overseeing the target area, not staying back with the fleet - unless those ships had no radar or com equipment. Another thing you should be aware of is that you don't carry EVERYTHING you can going into battle. Those F-18 E/F were over burdened and could not reach their Mach 1.2 velocity with a combat load. They should of had 1/3 less on them, flying at 15,000ft for a short range attack run. F-18E/F should of had 6x AIM-120 AMRAAM, 2 AIM-9X with ECM pods. F-18 E/F should of had 2x AIM-9X, ECM pod, 2x AIM-120 AMRAAM, Hughes pod and 6x AGM-65E Maverics. For this mission there was no need for an external fuel tank to add weight and the E2-Hawkeye would of had the strike wing defensive from the Phenix Missiles at 50 not miles. I don't mean to be an ass with such a GREAT video but in all realism, the 2000+ fleet would have just launched cruse missiles to destroy the artillery. I know, not what the video was about but thats the reality of the fleet battle. Keep up the fantastic effort and amazing videos. I look forward to seeing more from you. ;)
Have to agree with you. The concepts of air superiority and outer air battle, which in this case would have been over the target and not the battle group, were completely ignored. Should have had 12 plane squadrons and replace the A-4's with A-7E's and added 10 A-6E's, and their guided weapons, off of the Forrestal. Not having the Growlers and Prowlers is also a problem.
also i think the 2000s CSG would have won, realistically Considering their technology being modern. Also, The F-18s could have fired their AMRAAMs at the tomcats at the first place.
Capt, from memory reading Mil Aviation mag in 1972, Tomcats worked in pairs at all times, with the Hawkeye guiding them that was as well, so turnig and waiting would be accurate for the time. Just my memories of a 60 year old Aussie fart.
Being an old M114 artillery guy, I knew the M109 well. We used to fire the same caliber, 155 mm. howitser, and our M114's and M109's had the same barrel mounted. What I'm trying to say is, we moved positions once every while. It would be great to see the M109's move in the simulation. Don't know if it would have an impact on the effectiveness of the ordonance dropped from the planes, but it would definitely add to the realism of the scenario.
Yep. How much does the old Shooting and Scooting still work? Up North here, our old 109s are monuments and the M777 are used. Wondering with the New Cold War, how the old tactics would fare??
How effective are Russian Mig 25/31s vs bogs.
Ie the Foxbats/Foxhounds using R33/40 missiles.
From memory they didn't do well: czcams.com/video/IVrpwFgX6fc/video.html
@@grimreapers I love you Cap haha, hopefully can meet up at RIAT or something
Well Foxbat has the only confirmed air to air kill against Hornet (1st Gulf war) and maybe even F-14s in Iran-iraq
Alright. You got me. I don’t play DCS or any flying games. My father was a pilot. Retired air force (he has to explain the terminology you guys use). I’m a driver. Love the videos so much I’m a Patreon member now. I blame Grump. He’s a legend.
This scenario shows flaws in the AI. The F14s flew right into the fleet AA range and into the swarm of SAMs. In addition the F14s stayed supersonic instead of slowing down to dogfight and evasive speeds.
I'd like to see this with more humans on both sides along with the ability for squadrons to RTB and rearm.
19:41: I'm am NOT a real F-14 pilot, but from what I've heard, an F-14 could get airborne with 6x AIM-54s. The problem was, they couldn't land with all six still onboard. And no one wanted to jettison multiple $2.7M USD (inflation adjusted) missiles into the sea.
True.
agree
You could in fact trap with six although it required a significant reduction in fuel, only 2K lbs for the D model, in order to remain below max gross trap weight. Note: with six, and their rails, you’re looking at ~8700lbs.
I am an USAF veteran of the 70's and I have to say DCS gets a few things quite wrong about guided munitions from that era. I worked as a missile guidance and control specialist (included guided bombs) and they were quite readily available to both the USAF and USN and were used in Vietnam. The Maverick had both optical guidance (100% kill rate when fired with target lock) as well as a passive radar guidance with a white phosphorous warheads used against SAM radar. These should have been available to your 70's naval planes instead of using dumb bombs. The AIM 7 and AIM 9 kill rates when fired with target lock (against the era planes) had kill rates close to 100% also. Laser guided bombs were quite accurate at the time . This tech was available and used in the early 70's. Other munitions were in the development stage at the time that DCS considers new weaponry such as guided ship launched missiles as well as cruise missiles.
I haven't heard of a Maverick with a WP warhead and passive radar homing, what is it called?
I thought the Sparrows Kill Rate was abysmal, though. I'm not too sure.
@OverlordAntares The early models used in Vietnam were indeed pretty abysmal, but they were designed to see a large radar reflection from a large, barely maneuvering target. It wasn't initially meant to be a dogfight missile but a bomber intercept missile. Also, when you factor in that BVR was largely prohibited in the Vietnam theater, it took away the primary advantage that the Sparrow had. If pilots had been allowed to fire against older low tech MiG-17s in full BVR engagements, they likely would have been far more successful.
All that said, those were mid/late 60s versions. I believe there was a much improved version introduced in the early/mid 70s which had a roughly 70% kill rate in the 1991 Gulf War.
@@control_the_pet_population Gotcha, I know Sparrows had a lot of BVR kills in the Gulf War, as well as some Sidewinder kills.
well yes Michael, what you say is correct, by last years of vietnam there were already some TV guided bombs and laser bombs being used... but the fact is that A4E was in fact used in the 60s (along with the F4 Phantom II) and pods for dropping guided bombs was adopted in the later A4M, which required the radar to be removed in order to fit the equipment.
The correct USNavy 70's CV air group should be tomcats + A6 Intruder with smartbombs and/or Maverick AGM. A4E could use the Bullpup, but i think it is not modded in the game.
Last but not least... late Vietnam AIM-9G was quite better, but even the revolutionary AIM-9L isn't that big of a threat against a modern aircraft with improved flare programs. AIM-7 had a great kill ratio against aircraft without (or very basic) RWR and pilots not trained for BVR engagement
On my recent deployments, we would use 1 AIM-120, 2 9X's, 1 AGM-65, and 2 JDAMS.
This seems to be our universal load out at the moment.
But what would you do for air superiority?
That's because they were flying close air support missions, typical CENTCOM loadout. A recent video from the Truman CSG showcased an F/A-18E carrying 6 AMRAAMs and 2 9Xs
Why can't the newer carrier get planes off as fast? Two words, "Safety Briefs".. LOL
Gotta have your PT belt on, as well.
@@RossOneEyed everything is safer with a PT belt on!
FOD walk
ALL PILOTS STANDBY FOR EMERGENCY CAP
hold up sir, you're 12 hrs behind on your daily sexual harassment and diversity class
To many soyboiz calling Crew Rest.
So one thing I noticed: There's a tactical flaw here on the part of the '70s carrier group. The F-14s being unable to dodge the AMRAAMs at full speed is indeed a serious problem, but the Phoenix has a longer range. That being the case, once the Tomcats are within range to start firing at the Hornets, they should throttle back to improve maneuverability, thus reducing hit probability for their opponents, and also increasing the time before the F-18s come into the AMRAAM's range. This allows the deployment of even more AIM-54s, and more Hornet kills before they can mount a counterattack. The option would even exist to "kite" the Hornets, using the F-14's superior thrust to maintain a range that makes it difficult for the Hornets to return fire. Have the F-14s hang out and pick off the Hornets in this way until they achieve total air superiority, then it's basically lunchtime for the Skyhawks.
Edit: The reduced speed also eliminates the SAM threat from the enemy carrier group.
I just love seeing the veterans and engineers commenting on what they worked with back in the day. A quality contribution to a quality channel.
agree
I have to say Cap, you often overarm the F-18s in these sims. Its lovely to have 12 missiles onboard, but as you see they cant even get supersonic and so can't really sling their -120s. Especially the first couple bogs would really really benefit from only carrying 6, or even just 2 so they can get fast and get a couple missiles off which would break up the tomcats.
Still good fun to watch, keep at it!
Cap always overarm fighters which they would never did in real life.
@@liuziyue462 Cap doing Cap things, am I right?
@@ryz_vik So true
In reality, the Phoenix had a range of 400 miles, 0-100,000ft. The F14 radar could lock up to 6 targets at > 200 miles and launch on all 6 while tracking up to 24. I am not familiar with the modern missiles (I worked for the DOD before Hornets were even announced).
In this scenario, the F14s could have engaged as soon as the were airborne and detecting Hornets.
I wonder how the fight would have gone with "Attack within radius" instructions. I know it's not the "Default setting", but it is better tactics if the defined mission is "Protect the CAS guys for the mission of destroying ground targets."
This isn't really testing what was the better airwing, rather which airwing is better suited to the predefined AI instructions, IMHO.
This is my favorite channel right now. I don't even play the game, but come from the old days of JSF, Comanche Maximum Overkill, and F-117 combat flight sim days and this channel is so damn interesting to watch. The history, the facts, the simulation, and the serious tone of it is absolutely engaging. Good show everyone, cheers!
You should find a way onto the service. You will never regret it. Even at it's worst moments, it's a treat to play.
I dont think most of us even play the game. Its so resource intensive it requires an arm and a leg to get atleast a semi functional setup to keep dcs running.
@@spyous7884 kind of, it actually doesn't run too bad in 1080p, 2k is a lot harder though. A 1000$ pc would probably do pretty well. PC prices are normalizing though and you can use for more than just DCS. I think the most expensive part is gear, a decent stick(VKB NXT) costs 150$, track IR another 50$, and a cheap throttle like 100$. I'd say these are all necessary, imo they make a world of difference.
@@JD96893 its not the $1k PC thats the issue, its the extra 10s of hundreds in HOTAS and/or Headset
@@hooptiej basically what i said, but you don't need to spend more than 300$ to get a decent set up with a hotas and track ir. There aren't many budget options but they are there! You don't need to spend 500$ on a WINWING hotas setup and 200$ on track IR5 or whatever that POS is called. At the end of the day, if it's what you love doing/are passionate about it you'll shell out 500$ on a hotas. Maybe not all at once though. Most people that play DCS are really passionate about aviation and military aviation and with how good DCS i can see why people play so much and are willing to get a good setup. Just look at the amount of A10 and F18 sim pits there are for DCS.
Having the F-14's getting too close to the ships really skewed the results. Without that, the red team would have had more time for ground attack, not to mention less F-18's getting to the island in the first place. Enjoyed the simulation
This was so close it deserves another run. I’d bet if it was all humans things might turn out different. The Tomcats wouldn’t over pursue like the AI did and the Hornets would be able to use their advantage of more modern electronics too. Another AI simulation is still something that would be interesting. Are there not A-6 Intruders in DCS? I love watching y’all’s videos but other than that don’t know what is and isn’t included.
Using AI, launch the F-14's after the A-4's. This would take into account the A-4's slower speed and allow the Tomcats to arrive over the island at about the same time as the A-4's. This should also solve the issue of the F-14's having to fight inside the SM-2 umbrella and the Hornets not getting into the fight early
There are AI A-6s there's been some talk and screenshots of an A-6 module I believe but I read it was extremely early in development.
There is an A-6 mod but it's WIP. Only carries dumb bombs at the moment
Most A-6s were retired before the 2000s
With all due respect to how much time it takes to prepare these simulations, this was a crap battle. There is NO way the F-14s would close to within SM-2 range. ZERO chance. They would provide air cover for the A-4s and stay over the island and not close. If this battle showed that? Then the 1970s carrier group would won without all the loss of the F-14s.
An early 2000's carrier group tended to have at least 12 tomcats in a squadron with the ability to run ground attack like the hornet.
Absolutely disagree with you on the "silly turning around". That is precisely what you would do. You get to keep your formation of the flight, it gives you time to build altitude, keeps in the air defence umbrella while you are at your most vulnerable . Going off piecemeal is a damn good way to get outnumbered in CAP.
That was one of the most unbelievable twists at the end ever. It looked like modern has the win.
Whether this was super realistic or not…. That’s for people more knowledgeable about this subject than me to decide, you cannot deny how freaking exciting this was to watch. That ending was insane!
"Mach 4 telegraph pole" is an awesome description for a missile.
That one was interesting. I have a few comments.
1) The Tomcats' behaviour where they loiter and circle after launch would make sense in some circumstances.
Obviously if the F-14 is launching as Alert-5 to intercept an incoming threat to the fleet, they should burn out hard for speed and altitude immediately. The sooner they get into range the further away from the fleet the threat gets interdicted.
However, with a mission profile where the orders are to proceed to a waypoint and fly CAP, forming up their wingpairs and flights before proceeding would be good practice. In this scenario getting into CAP a couple mins earlier won't make much difference, but unit cohesion might.
2) I don't know if there's any way to program the Tomcats not to approach into SM2 range of the fleet?
3) I think one trick missed would have been to give the 2000s fleet some electronic warfare Hornets. I suspect a bit of jamming might degrade the Pheonix' tracking noticeably. Not sure exactly what's available in the game, but you get the idea.
Again, I'm not aware of the aircraft choices in DCS, but Grumman EA-6B's Prowler's began transitioning to the Boeing EA-18G Growler's from 2009 IIRC.
Regards
Rob
"How did they manage that?" Inaccurate modeling of ECM.
Great video. With sensible AI for the F-14s, it wouldn’t have been close, the 70s group would rule the day.
That was exciting! I reckon if the Tomcats had better self preservation tactics that would have been so much easier. Excellent stuff!
What i want to know is, could a US Carrier group beat the a joint force of WinWing, Ridge Wallet and Manscape sponsorship adverts.
Agreed, the Tomcat is one of the best looking planes ever!
Why not 14Bs in the 2000s group? They would have still have had them until 2006; 2004, commonly.
B model was 80's.
@@grimreapers …right. Which is why I was asking why they weren’t included in the 2000s group? I sort of thought “early 2000s” would have still had them. Am I missing something?
I'm just wondering if there would've been any difference with using an A-6 versus the A-4. Is the Intruder not available in DCS?
What gets me the A-4's in the 70's (not 70 - early 72) would have been using the AGM-65 Mavericks just like the F-18's are using.
Not to mention Martin Marietta AGM-62 Walleye, with it's 113kg (250 lb) explosive warhead......
Regards
Rob
That SAM wall just changed the whole landscape. You're right if the AI was a little smarter and proper doctrine would have been to fall back and guard the A4's near the objective.
While this is a great game and simulator, it would be interesting to see the 70's carrier vs Super Hornets and F35s. In either simulation, I don't see ECM and other technology that would probably make the Phoenix not as effective as it is here.
The 70's carrier group had f-4s and F8 crusaders as well as a few different aircraft.
The 1970s F-14 team would have been even more effective if you made them start spawning the A-4Es before the F-14s finish spawning. Basically make first 3 F-14 + 1 A-4E, then the rest all 2 F-14 + 2 A-4Es until there are not more of either A-4E or F-14. Then it is all catapults for the remaining aircraft.
I’ve been aboard the Forrestal when it went for refit in Philly is 1982-1985, I believe. Three days up, three days down.
honnestly this was Superbowl kinda thrill , thank you ! got me on the edge of my seat !
So glad I'm subscribed! This is what I like to see. All glory to our historic fleet when the weaponry was designed to be used for maximum death eg. end of days scenarios. It doesn't matter if it runs on propellers strings and weights as long as it gets the first kill. I don't think its the weaponry that makes the difference in todays battles. Its the information speed at which you can identify what exactly was killed and what to target next, where you are, who or what is coming at you and how close your support is makes all the difference.
Older pilots had a paper map, radar blip and a radio and two eyes.
I used to live in Guam and spend a lot of time in Saipan... I love how you set these battles out there.
Glad your voice is back and all recovered Cap👍💪
yup
15:00 i just cryyyy from the mk60 missile description!!!!
You can see the insane speed of those SM-2's. This was really fun to watch.
How is this got me on the edge of my seat watching!? I never dreamt about looking for simulated aerial battles...but here I am. Like button and subscribed! TY Grim Reapers!
Hi Chris! Welcome to the madhouse...
And yes you could certainly land a tomcat with 6 Phoenix missles on board, it just leaves little extra gas for time around the boat
This has got to be the most edge-of-my-seat video ever!!!
This was quite funny and entertaining. Your commentary is adding like 1000% 😀
This battle needs the DCS Cinematic treatment.
Would be interesting to see this again if the Cats had not gone into range of the ship defences.
Fun Sim! FWIW I remember talking with a Phantom crew flying off the Coral Sea, as they explained they were able to compete with Nimitz/F-14 because they were forced to use better tactics. They had older more experienced crews that were more efficient at launches and recoveries and at fighting their older aircraft. That's not to say the AIM-54 wasn't a game changer.
Legacy hornets always fly double bubble IE 2 fuel tanks and empty centerline during carrier operations. We bombed the hell out of the Serbs in 1995-96 (VFA-82). Has to do with bring back weight. We were flying lot 10s and the Marines VMFA251 flew lot 18s. Marines also had a harm missile come off on landing and Skip across the flight deck right in front of me. I was on L4 working on a plane.
By far the best one of these you have ran! very entertaining!
Maverick development dates to the 60s, believe it or not. Entered service in the early 70s, and been upgraded repeatedly.
The reason the F14 circles the carrier is to pick up thier Wingman. Ward Carroll talks about this on his CZcams channel
Remember that winwing technology is your ultimate hardware solution :) 20
yup sure is
I watched this last night and have come back to give the thumbs up / subscribe and say that I very much enjoyed this video. Well done.
Tomcat going to wipe the floor with the 18
WOW! Was cheering at the screen at the end, the battle kept getting the tables turned back and forth... Slow A-4s pulled it out at the end I can't believe it. I thought the modern planes had the ground attack win guaranteed omg! Ha haaa!!! So awesome! :D
8:58 I'm rooting for the Tomcats, they are the better plane in every category except maintenance. Though I am wondering what kept them from being set up as 6-gun since that's something that they should be capable of.
YAY!!! Fabulous finish!
Hot damn, you weren't lying with your thumbnail cap. This was bloody entertaining 😎😄
P.S. If there are Tomcats involved I can't bet against them. Just too damn sexy.
This is a banger of a video CAP! That finish was crazy!
Wow, my heart rate was up there at the end. More twists than an M. Night Shyamalan movie.
There's some pretty interesting documentaries out there where they used old decommissioned Phoenix missiles to test hypersonic missiles. It was such a massive missile that they had the room to play with. Pretty awesome watch if you have some time
Asfmr navy vet been out since late 80s i never thought i see the sweet 16s vs the dont ask dont tells lol but this was interesting to say
Whenever I see an F14 I hear Burt Reynolds' Trans Am from the movie Cannonball Run. When I see an F18 I hear the sound of the Japanese entry into the same movie. Great vid guys. Love to see that one with real pilots.
I reckon another way the F-14s will have hamstrung themselves is how they had pushed so far forward they had essentially forced the F/A-18s to bunch up to some degree around the carriers so if/when the F-14s ran out the A-4s are suddenly dealing with a tidal wave of F/A-18s rather than the few that were arriving after scrambling.
Will be amazing to see this battle scenario with real guys. Hornets will be out of gas real quick
@ approx 9min; Cap'n per your request, I'm piping in. With the more modern carriers, you can fairly quickly launch 4 fighters. The older class, apparently, can only launch 2. But if they, both sides, allow the other planes to use the full deck, then they both could be slapping planes in the air every 30-60 seconds!
Hey Cap, video idea - it would be cool to see a re-enactment of the major fictional battles in the Tom Clancy novel "Red Storm Rising", basically what if the cold war went hot in the 80's. Some pretty interesting scenarios like Russian surprise attack and invasion of Keflavik, Iceland and it being re-taken by US forces in an amphibious assault, surprise Badger bomber attack on a US naval carrier group including a simultaneous decoy attack, and the US using A-10's and early stealth technology to defend the Fulda Gap from a Russian tank blitz.
Love the channel and content!
cool
1991 Gulf War CAG with Tomcats, F/A18 As and Cs, and A6E Intruders (A7Es instead of F/A18s if using USS John F Kennedy) would even more lopsided. A7s and A6s in 1991 were using Mavericks as well.
Kind of shows you how much the USN could use a dedicated air superiority fighter/interceptor. A naval version of something like the F22 should have been built.
The Tomcats speed was impressive. Cool simulation!
Honest question - would 70’s jets & missiles be able to cope with 00’s jamming and countermeasures? Then, what about a modem carrier with F35s?
It’s unfortunate you don’t have access to super hornets rather than legacy hornets.
…imagine a few of the hornets were growlers, would 70’s tomcats and Phoenix’s cope?
I honestly doubt 70’s pulsed Doppler have any anti jamming capability at all. It is the specialty of AESA radar, which can jump between frequency quickly.
I dont know how effective the f35 is without an awaks or a bunch of the supporting logistics. For multirole their fine but for grabbing asses almost any other carrier based craft will school it.
@@timothybayliss6680 yeah but they have reduced RCS, they can datalink with each other, all of which should have reduced the F14’s advantage somewhat…at what range would a Phoenix get a good lock on a low RCS aircraft? Then add in jamming and is it not possible that the F14 from 1970 would be sensor blind and have to resort to visual range attacks? Their ships radar too? Don’t forget we are putting a 1970’s standards of tech against a 00’s standard of tech, that doesn’t just mean the airframe is from the 1970’s, it means any additions or upgrades made to the tomcats radar, missiles, systems etc are all rolled back to 1970’s levels. Technically the hornets are almost 70,s airframes, being from the early 80’s, that’s why super hornets would be more representative of the 00’s - and super hornets coupled with growlers would be tough on 70’s tech I presume, and F35s near invisible.
Im wishing the Navalized NGAD will adopt some of the strengths of the Tomcat but just make it stealthy. Massive power, high speed, long range and all aspect stealth
Equipped with two f135 engines giving it around 86,000 pounds of thrust with afterburners? Fantastic. Giving those engines the planned upgrades for more thrust? Can you imagine?
@@deanspanos8210 the AETP Engines that are under testing right now are insane. The requirements indicate the new engines will have at least 10% more thrust; Pratt & Whittney/GE have indicated they've exceeded requirements. the next gen engines used on NGAD will produce around 210Kn of thrust minimum. These jets will be insanely powerful
Look up the Video F14 Super Tomcat. That would have been far superior to the F18. There are outlines on why the F18 Super Hornet was chosen.
you should look up the super tomcat 21. We could of had what you were talking about but nooooooo F-35 program
You guys should do a recreation of Iron Eagle, 2 F-16's vs 6 or so Mirage fighters, plus taking out the ground targets.
That was VERY exciting! I'll be the first to admit that CAP's animated commentary raised the thrill level.
We need a Grim Reapers bingo or drinking game. I suggest “dans le visage” on the board. 🤣
USS Theodore Roosevelt launched an F-14D, of VF-31, for the last time on 28 July 2006; piloted by Lt. Blake Coleman and Lt. Cmdr Dave Lauderbaugh as RIO.[67] The last two F-14 squadrons, the VF-31 Tomcatters, and the VF-213 Black Lions conducted their last fly-in at Naval Air Station Oceana on 10 March 2006
If the 70's would have stayed on the Island it would have been way more one sided. Got to love how the game just throws random actions in to make it more exciting.
Cool don't you guys know during periods of time in the past.They had missiles that got 25% to over 50 percent failure crazy! That is why they fired at least 2 missles at a time.
Exciting episode! Nail biting stuff.
I love the skyhawk. Fingers crossed they smash those targets.
20mm would tear up those Paladin arty pieces.
The 70's did not win because of luck or skill or the F14's. They won because of AIM-54 and that's it. It's by will of the mighty AIM-54 that the F14's were able the keep the F18's out just long enough so the F4's could carry out the attack.
What a clutch game, good job fellas!
That looks like it would be a fun mission with 40 players instead of AI
Completely agree. Would love to participate in that.
Agree, but man it's hard to organise that...
The Japanese called the Doolittle raid the Did Little raid. I couldn't help but chuckle
The F14's are just partying blasting "Danger Zone" and doing flybys on the deck before they get into formation.
The AIM-54 and the F-14 were built to go together. Also those AIM-54s are too accurate, they were designed for attacking Bears...... There appears to be no jamming or any decent avoidance. This also goes back to my other comment of why you would group up.
The F-14 was designed as a fleet defending interceptor not to go dogfight other fighters as well. Not to go out and defend attacking fighters. Which is why the F/A-18 is the better fleet aircraft. The F-14 were just too big and single role, which is why (sadly) the F-14 had to go and not be replaced
The phoenix is under performing right now because they nerfed them kinematic ally but they can't fix the Ed guidance yet so it's taken a beating this patch. It will be better in future
No non-top secret tech that's as old as I am (that's old!) should ever be.... nerfed. That's a developer(s) and release management team taking into complaints, zero internal governance, and suspect game management. With the per unit cost of play a really dedicated player will probably pay in this game, DCS customers deserve much more... yet there is probably not much better in the market....
@@carnifexor3010 stuff is constantly being tweaked to make it closer to reality. And that's before you get into having to make workarounds for game engine funkiness
It still made short work of those Hornets...
@@grimreapers it was frankly incredible how the cats just melted those hornets!
Ah, and a game is a game, they all have quirks. It's meant to be fun and it really shows as such, The (sports!) colour commentary, ending ironic & total giggle of an upset, was masterfully done It is Very easy to gripe bitch and assume from the sidelines, something I know well, but occasionally forget, well because, humans. If can see it and call it others, I have do do the same when I leave a giant turd of a response. After I uncorked and loosend my colonatomy, I rewatched it paying attention to the same reason i typically watch while buckled and strapped onto the Can, paying to Aqua-Buddah to safely deliver this GR proxy butt baby... I hope more find this capacity which is easy to forgrt sometimes.... Remembering this, is sometimes just a matter of allowing delivery and now assuming a relaxed state, vs commenting while (virtually) as you bloody-pants pants on everyone else's eye balllls. When in doubt, rewatch thr video and dont let your Anus, butt baby, scream and shout. Thanks Aqua-Buddah. Have a great week!
Couldn't have asked for a better ending entertainment wise
This should have been set up so that it's pure CSG vs CSG and with no ground stuff. Instead of sending out the strike aircrafts with ATG weapons, arm them with Anti-Ship weapons and then see which carrier sinks first
Outstanding GR! Keep it up. More like this
Gotta say that ending was pretty spectacular.
Cool video. The strike package could be more interesting with a mix of A-4s & A-6s. Really enjoyed this video. Well done.
CV-59 my sister Ship was onboard CV-61 Ranger
A hell of a fight, I really enjoyed this video 🤘
Awesome finish! Ouh boy...
Nice battle
Seems the old carrier launches faster because it doesnt deal with all the animation sequences of the deck crew.
Would love to see this run with alternating waves of Tom's & F4's launching + Tomcats avoiding Sams.
How many total planes were lost on each side?
Whenever you look at a Tomcat, don you just wish that someone modernized it and kept it in service?
I sign in frustration whenever I read about why Tomcat was replaced.
Even now, I get super frustrated when I realized that China’s J-35 was a medium sized fighter like F-18 and F-35, not like the Tomcat.
I can only wish that the 6th gen F/A-XX will be a twin engine heavy fighter.
@@Vkat696 what about it is antiquated? It could have had AESA radar, fly by wire, new glass cockpit, and better engine with easier maintenance if the Super Tomcat was chosen over the Super Hornet.
@@thomaszhang3101 why not fit in Hornet engines, hornet and viper electronics? that way the inferior planes keep the top gun alive!
@@balkancommenterwithseveree7552 The F-18 engines have less thrust so it would be a performance downgrade.
@Thomas Zhang The range and top speed of the F-14 just weren't as important anymore. The Soviet threat was replaced by a much less potent Russian threat and China was still 2-3 decades away from being a serious threat to carrier groups when the F-14 was retired. Factor in an aircraft that was always tricky to fly and always very maintenance intensive, thanks in no small part to the swing wing, and it just made sense to replace it with the cheaper Super Hornet... which will never be the outright interceptor that the Tomcat was, but is highly flexible, has more docile handling and is much cheaper to maintain.
Hangar Queen. It was time.
Great video and fantastic presentation! But not realistic. There was no tactics used at all and you restricted the technology for both sides. Not to mention no bomber would engage a ground target with a boggy near by. They would have situational awareness due to the AWAC providing support. The modern task force would be co-ordinated between all air wings to engage the targets at the same time, not charge in like fools.
1. Instead of using A-4's, you should be using A-6 Intruders's supported by A-4 skyhawks and EF-111A Raven's for ECM. Second, NO F-14 pilot would speed into combat knowing full well they had the Phenix onboard with AWAC support. You charged them into a dog fight when they would never need to get that close. You placed them into an engagement at max speed, removing their ability to jink or even avoid getting shot down. Loitering is an amazing thing - get into position and then wait for the enemy to pop their heads up.The F-14's had the range but no patience.
2. One word, F/A-18G Growlers. Where are they? They would single handedly turn those Phenixes into waisted metal. The Hawkeyes would never be so far away from their designated patrol zone. They would be overseeing the target area, not staying back with the fleet - unless those ships had no radar or com equipment. Another thing you should be aware of is that you don't carry EVERYTHING you can going into battle. Those F-18 E/F were over burdened and could not reach their Mach 1.2 velocity with a combat load. They should of had 1/3 less on them, flying at 15,000ft for a short range attack run. F-18E/F should of had 6x AIM-120 AMRAAM, 2 AIM-9X with ECM pods. F-18 E/F should of had 2x AIM-9X, ECM pod, 2x AIM-120 AMRAAM, Hughes pod and 6x AGM-65E Maverics. For this mission there was no need for an external fuel tank to add weight and the E2-Hawkeye would of had the strike wing defensive from the Phenix Missiles at 50 not miles.
I don't mean to be an ass with such a GREAT video but in all realism, the 2000+ fleet would have just launched cruse missiles to destroy the artillery. I know, not what the video was about but thats the reality of the fleet battle.
Keep up the fantastic effort and amazing videos. I look forward to seeing more from you. ;)
Have to agree with you. The concepts of air superiority and outer air battle, which in this case would have been over the target and not the battle group, were completely ignored. Should have had 12 plane squadrons and replace the A-4's with A-7E's and added 10 A-6E's, and their guided weapons, off of the Forrestal. Not having the Growlers and Prowlers is also a problem.
also i think the 2000s CSG would have won, realistically Considering their technology being modern. Also, The F-18s could have fired their AMRAAMs at the tomcats at the first place.
Capt, from memory reading Mil Aviation mag in 1972, Tomcats worked in pairs at all times, with the Hawkeye guiding them that was as well, so turnig and waiting would be accurate for the time. Just my memories of a 60 year old Aussie fart.
thx
Always wondered why there are no long range missiles in the arsenal anymore. The Phoenixes are what won that battle
Being an old M114 artillery guy, I knew the M109 well. We used to fire the same caliber, 155 mm. howitser, and our M114's and M109's had the same barrel mounted. What I'm trying to say is, we moved positions once every while. It would be great to see the M109's move in the simulation. Don't know if it would have an impact on the effectiveness of the ordonance dropped from the planes, but it would definitely add to the realism of the scenario.
Yep. How much does the old Shooting and Scooting still work? Up North here, our old 109s are monuments and the M777 are used. Wondering with the New Cold War, how the old tactics would fare??