Type 45 Destroyer HMS Duncan vs 17 Russian Attack Jets From Crimea In 2018 (WarGames 123) | DCS

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 30 жов 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 607

  • @johnoneill270
    @johnoneill270 Рік тому +321

    Its not over modelled - That is a completely unsurprising result. Type 45 is a purpose built Anti-Aircraft, fleet defence ship, designed specifically to operate in a saturation attack environment, based on lessons learned from the falklands conflict and the type 42's inability to cope with swarm attacks. Totally realistic

    • @jyralnadreth4442
      @jyralnadreth4442 Рік тому +22

      The Type 42 in that conflict was hamstrung with a 1950s era Radar that was used on the County Class Destroyer. No Moving target indicator, very poor low level detection performance and to make it worse the Argentines knew about these problems as they had 2 Type 42s themselves.

    • @MostlyPennyCat
      @MostlyPennyCat Рік тому +25

      ​@@jyralnadreth4442
      Which is why, with a new radar, Type 42 was shooting down cruise missiles with exactly the same missiles it had during the Falklands!
      Radar IS The Key was the lesson.

    • @SpartasEdge
      @SpartasEdge Рік тому +20

      Exactly John. You don't want to be an air unit going against a Type 45. The Type 45 is arguably the best and strongest anti-air vessel in the world; it's it's primary role; it's radar and anti-air capabilities, are frankly phenomenal.

    • @jamesbartlett5640
      @jamesbartlett5640 Рік тому +5

      Don’t they say that five Type 42 equals one Type 45?

    • @jyralnadreth4442
      @jyralnadreth4442 Рік тому +12

      @@MostlyPennyCat Exactly....HMS Exeter was equipped with the Type 1022 Radar and was a nasty surprise for the Argentine Air Force as they tried the same tactics with her as the other Type 42's present.....Exeter nailed 2 A4 Skyhawks and a Lear Jet and claimed a possible Exocet on May 30th 1982

  • @DWillis7
    @DWillis7 Рік тому +82

    I expected nothing less than exactly what happened. Type 45 is far more capable than people realise. Not over-modelled in any way.

  • @robertnemeth6248
    @robertnemeth6248 Рік тому +92

    T45 would be able to engage all 17 targets at once. There are various figures on how many targets can be engages at once but 32 is a generally accepted figure. However ASTER missiles have their own guidance radars so do not need ship guidance. So theoretically the ship should be able to shoot all its missiles at at targets until it runs out. Once 24 Sea Ceptor are added these will be integrated too, The upgrade will have 24 Sea Ceptor and 48 ASTER 30 block 1 and then 1NT.

    • @dogekoko9865
      @dogekoko9865 Рік тому

      you know the british goverment admitted to the type 45 sucking

    • @LondonSteveLee
      @LondonSteveLee Рік тому +3

      Type 45 could engage way more than 32 targets simultaneously if it had the missile to do so.

    • @dogekoko9865
      @dogekoko9865 Рік тому

      ​@@LondonSteveLee yes the radar can but the aa missles are ass

    • @LondonSteveLee
      @LondonSteveLee Рік тому +4

      @@dogekoko9865 ASTER 15s are amongst the most capable medium range anti-air missiles in the world - but they are no good at point blank range.

    • @dogekoko9865
      @dogekoko9865 Рік тому

      @@LondonSteveLee thats what i am saying i am not a russian fan but russian supersonics close the gap before it locks on

  • @Davros-vi4qg
    @Davros-vi4qg Рік тому +126

    Spoiler: we may have found out why USN Carrier Bosses like having a Type45 in the defensive mix 😮

    • @LondonSteveLee
      @LondonSteveLee Рік тому +2

      Not really - Type 45 has probably got the best RADAR but that's about it. Too many missing capabilities, it's very vulnerable. So we'll be able to see with absolute precision what's about to sink us - rule Britannia... I suspect the enemy wouldn't conveniently sit in a holding pattern in the perfect performance envelope of your limited anti air missiles but not in a pattern that would enable them to launch an attack themselves! Late flight Arleigh Burkes are in a different league to Type 45 in all-round capabilities - they shouldn't be - it's a matter of funding. When we dropped Type 45 from 12 to 6 hulls - they promised it meant they would be fully equipped - better to have 6 fully armed destroyers than 12 skeleton ships they said - they lied. We've got 6 skeleton ships - none of which would last an hour in combat against a determined enemy.

    • @mrfrisky6501
      @mrfrisky6501 Рік тому +19

      ​@@LondonSteveLee when did you serve in the Navey lad?

    • @dogekoko9865
      @dogekoko9865 Рік тому

      you know the british goverment admitted to the type 45 sucking

    • @MrWorldwide00
      @MrWorldwide00 Рік тому +2

      @@mrfrisky6501 I'm pretty sure you mean Navy? And having Navy service means nothing. You don't have to be a former sailor to be well versed on hardware and the politics behind such things...

    • @mrfrisky6501
      @mrfrisky6501 Рік тому +6

      @@MrWorldwide00 predictive toxt kid - so what tec giant do you work for son?

  • @99IronDuke
    @99IronDuke Рік тому +104

    That was actually pretty accurate from what I know about the type 45 and yes, the 4.5inch gun can engage fast jet targets.

    • @LondonSteveLee
      @LondonSteveLee Рік тому +11

      Sort of - the 4.5incher can be aimed with loose guidance from SAMPSON - ie point at general threats - but it's NOT actually RADAR guided (slaved) with proper predictive aiming - that project was cancelled by Cameron's mob. A criminal act because it would have increased the effectiveness of Type 45 for peanuts (also providing cheap inch-perfect land bombardment capabilities) - particularly as the VLS missiles are not replenishable at sea - so swarm attacks with low value aircraft or drones would soon run Type 45 out of missiles. The sort of target that the main gun SHOULD be able to engage in this day and age given the world class RADAR and compute power onboard Type 45 but cannot. Penny pinching will end up with sunk 45s and dead sailors - we learned nothing from the Falklands.

    • @simonestridge6096
      @simonestridge6096 Рік тому +6

      There are rumours that a 4.5 inch shell destroyed an ASM in the Falklands war

    • @henricomonterosa4534
      @henricomonterosa4534 Рік тому +4

      @@LondonSteveLee Interesting point, indeed especially seeing the current developments in Ukraine that looks really stupid. A military expert should have seen that coming from miles away. Reminds me of our brilliant idea to cut our military spending so hard we had to retire our Gepards...

    • @Sirmartini321
      @Sirmartini321 Рік тому

      That wld never happen.

    • @LondonSteveLee
      @LondonSteveLee Рік тому +1

      @@simonestridge6096 Yes the arguments still rages whether HMS Avenger took down the Exocet with her gun or not! In theory it's more than possible, early generation sea skimmers have very predicable flight profiles.

  • @spinmaster4348
    @spinmaster4348 Рік тому +64

    The radar is called s-1850m and it is a 3d L-Band aesa radar that is capable of tracking at ranges up to 2000km when used in a ballistic defense role. 6:40

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Рік тому +14

      thx

    • @garymyers6638
      @garymyers6638 Рік тому

      Rumble is mostly loaded up with right wing nut jobs posting crazy ass shit because Rumbl doesn’t practice any kind of standards monitoring. I really really really have a hard time with right wing nut balls,… especially the ones that post crazy ass shit.

    • @Medieval_Arpad_cooks
      @Medieval_Arpad_cooks Рік тому +3

      @@grimreapers That's the big flat panel that he is talking about. The one on te mast top is an AESA S-Band that does target designation and mid course updates. Missile radar seekers are active as mentioned above. The things on the sides of the mast are satcom.

    • @MostlyPennyCat
      @MostlyPennyCat Рік тому +1

      ​@@Medieval_Arpad_cooks
      SAMPSON (the big ball) does actually perform mid course guidance, the active seekers on Aster are for terminal guidance.

  • @paulgray5513
    @paulgray5513 Рік тому +8

    What you have just found out is that the Type 45 destroyer us the best air defence destroyer of any nation. This is not over modelled this is what they were designed to do. The Sampson radar is designed to track over 200 targets and then prioritise the threat and select the appropriate system to kill the threat. They can engage between 20 and 30 targets at once. All of this came from analysing the naval aspects of the falklands war. The Arliegh burke is probably the best allround destroyer currently in service, but as someone pointed out the US task forces love having type 45’s along for air defence as simply nothing can touch them. They have now had an upgrade which makes them even more deadly. Generally just stay out if there envelope.

  • @Marri-Tech
    @Marri-Tech Рік тому +41

    The ability for the type 45 to be actively tracking each jet from takeoff before engagement would allow them to get rockets off probably as quick or quicker then they did in the simulator

    • @mooglefourteena
      @mooglefourteena Рік тому +3

      Missiles not rockets! Don't mean to be pedantic but since it's a simulation I'll correct with what I know. Asters have a guidance system hence are missiles not rockets.

    • @Marri-Tech
      @Marri-Tech Рік тому +4

      @@mooglefourteena Correct... But also pedantic 🤣

    • @EnglishScripter
      @EnglishScripter 11 місяців тому

      Its not a minor detail at all, a military with missiles, could flatten a military with rockets.@@Marri-Tech

  • @tollietime
    @tollietime Рік тому +36

    As designed, to swat swarms of dumbasses getting too close. Props to the crew of the Duncan for staying so calm and professional.

  • @godalmighty83
    @godalmighty83 Рік тому +31

    Sampson can track upto 1000 targets, the size of cricket balls travelling at 'over mach 3', upto 400km away, and control 16 interceptors onto threats simultaneously. Although the rumour has always been that tracking targets at ~mach 4.5 is well within capability. Beast of a radar, but hilariously expensive, played a significant part in half the T45's being cancelled.
    And yes, the main gun does have an Anit-aircraft mode, and can engage air targets at upto 20km out, but hits at that range are pretty damn unlikely.

    • @watcherzero5256
      @watcherzero5256 Рік тому +6

      Nowadays while main guns can attempt to directly intercept an air target their main role is they create a wall of flak along the targets flightpath by rapidly firing multiple rounds at different angles with varied fuse timers. The hostile missile/aircraft then has to fly through the flak wall thats gradually descending through the air with their own speed working against them by magnifying the damage they suffer from impacts.

    • @hb1338
      @hb1338 Рік тому +3

      Unless you have served as a PWO on a D class, you don't have the slightest idea of the true capability of the 1045 and 1046 radar sets. You make yourself look silly by pretending that you do. The reduction in procurement had nothing to do with the cost of the ship, and everything to do with political interference.

    • @godalmighty83
      @godalmighty83 Рік тому

      @@hb1338 Most of the stats in my post come from the Royal Navy website, what are rumours are clearly labelled as rumours. Unless you think that the Royal Navy are just pretending?

  • @SNOWDONTRYFAN
    @SNOWDONTRYFAN Рік тому +12

    Even before the Duncan picked up those aircraft , one would normally expect NATO EW assets in the region to have marked the pilots the moment they broke wind climbing into their relics , in the meanwhile NATO thanks the Russians for providing the best realistic training for its warships

  • @matthewellisor5835
    @matthewellisor5835 Рік тому +33

    Once again, the GRs propriety, judicious discretion in unencrypted transmission and perfection of professionalism are in keeping with the highest traditions of the squadron, the simulator and in service to their valued viewers.

  • @michaelwheatley8394
    @michaelwheatley8394 Рік тому +11

    (1) The Sylver VLS (as used on the T45) is listed has having a much higher rate of fire than the Mk-41. Better missile eflux handling systems. But this is per 8-cell module, so I'm not sure how relevant this is in practice.
    (2) The old SM-2 required missle directors, one per target but up to 2 missles per target. The Arleigh Burks have 3 of these AN/SPG-62 fire-control radars.
    The new SM-6, and Aster, uses datalinks (like Meteor) and the Sampson radar can track 1000 targets. In the case of warships, this is specifically to handle swarms of aircraft.
    (3) Apparently the probability-kill p(k) for one Aster is (at least a bit) better than the P(k) for a pair of SM-2's, at least when the Aster was first designed, so they fire one per target, rather than a pair per target.

  • @danhodson7187
    @danhodson7187 Рік тому +9

    I had our lovely ship down for a resounding win and she didn't disappoint. Awesome!

  • @adamtheninjasmith2985
    @adamtheninjasmith2985 Рік тому +19

    I think this one went off really well guys. The type 45 would have been on alert and tracking everything before the engagement which would make sense as to why it was firing so quickly. They already had the targets all they had to do was push the button so to speak.

  • @munchingfoo
    @munchingfoo Рік тому +5

    The suitcase shaped things on the flat roof behind the main radar are HF radio antennas designed to go straight up and bounce off the atmosphere. They enable radio comms behind mountain ranges that would otherwise be radio blind spots.

  • @tacticaldelusion
    @tacticaldelusion Рік тому +16

    You took on one of the most advanced destroyers in the world with 17 4th gen aircraft, you can't say you're surprised at this.

  • @mixit2413
    @mixit2413 Рік тому +24

    4 years ago when the Ducan was swarmed by the Russian's the daughter of our parts manager was on that Destroyer on that tour and they were not worried (well they were worried but I mean they weren't worried about the ship capabilities) they had all the planes targeted and locked. If it had gone hot all the planes would have been dead,

    • @exidy-yt
      @exidy-yt Рік тому +3

      Kind of like how it actually played out. ;-)

    • @LondonSteveLee
      @LondonSteveLee Рік тому +2

      No they would not as the planes were too close - ASTER 15 won't hit s--t at under 1.8 miles at low altitude - a fantastic missile one it gets a track but the minimum engagement profile is a real problem. Type 45 desperately needs Sea Ceptor if it doesn't want to join Moskva in the black sea.

    • @Bob10009
      @Bob10009 Рік тому +1

      @@LondonSteveLee it is getting it 😉😎

    • @danielmichaels1505
      @danielmichaels1505 Рік тому +4

      @@LondonSteveLeeAll Type 45s will be equipped with an additional 24 CAMM tubes by 2032, Good upgrade but couldn’t come soon enough

    • @bobbyrayofthefamilysmith24
      @bobbyrayofthefamilysmith24 Рік тому +4

      @@LondonSteveLee To be fair a fighter isn't going to fire antiship missiles from 1 mile away either. Once they got in that close it was obvious they were buzzing the ship. The ship could probably shoot them with CIWS at that range.

  • @Roni-kg1sw
    @Roni-kg1sw Рік тому +10

    Well it is a highly specialised anti air warfare destroyer designed from the ground up for this sort of situation so it’s not really over modelled

  • @MoistGrundle
    @MoistGrundle Рік тому +6

    The bonus footage was worth every bit of time. I'm pretty sure even the Brits on board would have to be impressed enough to put their tea cups down momentarily for a "good show" or two. Then promptly swat them out of the air lol.

  • @jonathanwigmore2323
    @jonathanwigmore2323 Рік тому +10

    Type 45 doing what it was designed to do! The Achilles heel of a 45 has always been the lack of missiles. Adding x24 Sea Ceptors into the mix will really help longevity in a fight 💪💪

    • @evelynroadmedia9415
      @evelynroadmedia9415 Рік тому

      I have heard that the type 45 is more of a convoy vessel, so the lack of missile is not that dreadful, considering you more than likely have an astute with a number of its own sea to air missiles nearby.

    • @dogekoko9865
      @dogekoko9865 Рік тому

      the uk admited to the thype 45 sucking

    • @jamiegray6931
      @jamiegray6931 Рік тому +1

      ​@@evelynroadmedia9415 It pretty much is. UK naval doctrine is T23 ASW, T45 AAW, and Astute for ASW, all defending the expeditionary force of the QE or the Litoral strike group.
      They operate alone a lot of the time because they can all be general purpose to an extent. But if the RN sends a sole T45 into a warfighting scenario it's unlikely to go well.

    • @leeowen4989
      @leeowen4989 Рік тому +1

      @@evelynroadmedia9415 The Astute class doesn't have sea to air capability (at least not publicly disclosed) It's purpose is to deal with surface/sub-surface and land targets.

    • @hb1338
      @hb1338 Рік тому

      @@evelynroadmedia9415 If you really want to understand the NATO doctrine, have a look at the constitution of the various CSGs.

  • @danielmichaels1505
    @danielmichaels1505 Рік тому +11

    In the next couple years Type 45 will start to get an additional 24 tubes for CAMM increasing the firepower on these beautiful ships, It’s just a shame money constraints ruled out more SYLVER VLSs

    • @bobbyrayofthefamilysmith24
      @bobbyrayofthefamilysmith24 Рік тому

      Should have 100 missile minimum along with anti sub and real offensive anti ship missiles. It's a ship that would have been brilliant in the Falklands but not great in 2023. The fault lies with corrupt peado government scumbags cutting costs

  • @jyralnadreth4442
    @jyralnadreth4442 Рік тому +7

    The Sampson Radar spikey ball (Type 1045) is AESA and the S1850M (Type 1046) the rectangular one is 3D and is a AESA...the Type 45 has 2 AESA radars

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Рік тому

      thx

    • @hb1338
      @hb1338 Рік тому

      Incorrect - how many aerials does the 1045 have ?

  • @Fred-eg9sx
    @Fred-eg9sx Рік тому +9

    the Chinese type 055 is a much larger vessel than the Type 45. For reference, the type 055 is bigger than a Tico.

    • @JinghisKhan
      @JinghisKhan Рік тому +1

      Exactly. A Type 45 vs a Type 052D is a even fight. Type 055 is another weight class.

  • @璩語輝
    @璩語輝 Рік тому +6

    8:04 WOW that's some impressive flying Mr.Sock!

  • @emfournet
    @emfournet Рік тому +5

    The scream at 14:58 is absolute comedy gold. *chef's kiss

  • @clangerbasher
    @clangerbasher Рік тому +30

    Sampson is freakin' awesome as a radar.
    The war in the Donbas has been going on since 2014.

    • @stephencollins9062
      @stephencollins9062 Рік тому +1

      Yeah Obama installed zelinsky exactly for this purpose,why do you think they pulled out of Afghanistan so quickly?
      They knew they had another war right around the corner,

    • @clangerbasher
      @clangerbasher Рік тому +1

      @@stephencollins9062 Nothing happens in a vacuum. Yes Obama is a big player in this sorry affair.

  • @torn.blue.sky101
    @torn.blue.sky101 9 місяців тому +1

    "Clear to engage"....
    "Okaaayyyy...so. Ice cream then?"

  • @aaronstreeval3910
    @aaronstreeval3910 Рік тому +15

    I really hope they will model the Admiral grigorovich frigates. It would be awesome for y’all to do these Black Sea war games. With the best ships remaining in the Black Sea

    • @LondonSteveLee
      @LondonSteveLee Рік тому +4

      Can DCS model drunken poorly trained sailors and half the systems broken from lack of maintenance? Of course even with those failings the Grigorovich frigates would still defeat Type 45 which currently has no anti-ship capability outside sending Torpedo armed Lynxes off to be shot down. Removing Harpoon before NSM was available was a criminal act of negligence - as was delaying the fitment of Sea Ceptor.

    • @stephencollins9062
      @stephencollins9062 Рік тому

      @@LondonSteveLee disgusting appraisal of Russian people.

  • @thegoldeneagle9890
    @thegoldeneagle9890 Рік тому +7

    Great video same thing happened with closer range to HMS Defender ships from the Russian coastguard firing but out of range but they still had to get fireproof gear out because of the threat

    • @Davros-vi4qg
      @Davros-vi4qg Рік тому

      GR did that video as well a bit back 😀

    • @thegoldeneagle9890
      @thegoldeneagle9890 Рік тому +1

      @@Davros-vi4qg well a breakdown when it happened I have watched since the long range was a phoenix missile from an f14 and the reapers blowing up star destroyers

  • @Hill_Walker
    @Hill_Walker Рік тому +7

    In terms of EMPing them with radar, it's probably not about frying yourself much as it's directional. It's more likely the 1/r² element of RF which makes it less effective.

    • @watcherzero5256
      @watcherzero5256 Рік тому +3

      Modern ship and aircraft radars have an attack mode where they really do try and knock out the enemy with concentrated beam strength, they also have the ability to insert hostile code into enemy systems though those functions are really really classified.

    • @hb1338
      @hb1338 Рік тому

      @@watcherzero5256 .. so classified that you don't have the slightest idea whether or not they exist.

    • @watcherzero5256
      @watcherzero5256 Рік тому

      @@hb1338 Oh I KNOW they exist :)

  • @RedTSquared
    @RedTSquared Рік тому +3

    Wow, I did not expect that! Love the Bonus Footage at the end!

  • @soccernflying5709
    @soccernflying5709 Рік тому +4

    Life isn’t always gum drops and unicorns. My day starts with making coffee then coming to the Grim Reaper‘s channel, seeking a hit of validation. It lifts me up to hear I am valued. Not joking. You guys are seriously a spark of joy in my life. I really enjoy binging the channel and getting to know you all. In some weird sense it feels like family. Thank you. Cheers! ❤

    • @dexlab7539
      @dexlab7539 Рік тому +1

      Agreed!…love hearing “Hope you are all doing wonderfully well” 😊😊

    • @chrisstopher2277
      @chrisstopher2277 Рік тому +1

      my brother from another mother.

  • @mecampbell30
    @mecampbell30 Рік тому +5

    Both large spiny radars are 3D AESA radars (although the L band antenna has weaker elevation resolution). The black flat panel Thales radar just operates at a lower frequency (requires a larger antenna, has greater range but less resolution). The round Sampson radar operates at a higher frequency, has better resolution all around and is much better at picking out close low flying threats.
    The 2D radars are the small ones that are used for marine navigation the side of the mast.

    • @watcherzero5256
      @watcherzero5256 Рік тому +1

      The S1850 has a range upto 2000km and is the main volume air search radar while the Sampson radar has a range of 400km and is used for fire control.

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Рік тому

      thx

    • @hb1338
      @hb1338 Рік тому

      @@watcherzero5256 Sampson is multi-function.

  • @ktwei
    @ktwei Рік тому +8

    Well a Type 45 is the only thing that could kill James Bond.

  • @timbaskett6299
    @timbaskett6299 Рік тому +6

    I like the Su-24 "Fencer" mainly because it's an "Aardvark-ski". The Russian near equivalent of the F-111. Does this mean the Duncan is a "Flanker Spanker"?

  • @the_beef4762
    @the_beef4762 Рік тому +8

    Great video as always :) These types are my favs.

  • @WardenOfTerra
    @WardenOfTerra Рік тому +2

    The American's just jealous by saying the 45 is over-modelled. He wouldn't be saying that if it was an American ship.

  • @jamesscalzo3033
    @jamesscalzo3033 Рік тому +6

    Loved the video @Grim Reapers! Can't wait for the next video man! The British Type 45's are quite Interesting as well as the Type 22 Frigates. It would be Interesting to see how a Multinational Force with a Ticonderoga-class Cruiser, A Few Flight I and Flight IIA (Technology Insertion) Arleigh Burke-class Destroyers, 1 or 2 Type 45 Destroyers, 3 or 4 Type 22 Frigates, a Nimitz-class or Gerald R. Ford-class Aircraft Carrier, a Queen Elizabeth-class Aircraft Carrier and The French Aircraft Carrier Charles De Gaule were to Grab the Unexpected Attention of 2 Krivak-class Frigates, 2 Neustrashimy-class Frigates, 3 Admiral Gregorovich-class Frigates, 6 Grisha-class Corvettes, 1 Tarantul-class Corvette, 1 Bora-class Corvette, 4 Buyan-M Corvettes, 3 K-300P Batteries, 12 Su-24 Fencer's, 18 Su-27 Flanker's and 8 Mig-25 Foxbat's. I know this is a Tall Order given that you've got the Current Entirety of the Russian Black Sea Fleet with Their Top Notch Aircraft and Anti-Ship Missile Batteries in support going against the American, British and Some French Forces in the Area but it should be quite the Fireworks Display nonetheless.
    Can't wait to see how things go and I'll catch you in your next video!

    • @99IronDuke
      @99IronDuke Рік тому +2

      The current Royal Navy frigate is the type 23. The Type 45 destroyers will also soon have Sea Ceptor SAM's.

    • @gavin1506
      @gavin1506 Рік тому +1

      Type 22''s are in Other navies e.g. Romanian. They carry 7 inch Guns. The missile systems aren't great.
      The type 23's also help in defence and offence.

  • @sensibledriver933
    @sensibledriver933 Рік тому +4

    The 45 desperately needs the additional mk41 and the Martletts on the auto cannon mounts.

    • @LondonSteveLee
      @LondonSteveLee Рік тому

      And Sea Ceptor - and DS30M fitted to all ships - not just Duncan. When we dropped from 12 to 8 then 6 hulls the promise was to fully equip the ships - lies as usual!

  • @Jack0Young
    @Jack0Young Рік тому +2

    It seems very accurate for public information of the ship. It was designed to be purely anti aircraft and to be sailing in a fleet with different specialisms. This doesn't surprise me at all. Brits learnt a lot in the Falklands.

    • @LondonSteveLee
      @LondonSteveLee Рік тому

      We learned nothing from the Falklands we still have under-funded air defence destroyers with half their intended systems missing.

    • @Jack0Young
      @Jack0Young Рік тому

      @@LondonSteveLee Unfortunately, it will take another conflict, like the Falklands, to remind our government of the importance of the Royal Navy. (Remember, hey were about to sell off one of our carriers when they were invaded)

  • @Wilko601st
    @Wilko601st Рік тому +4

    Im so glad this tub finally came out on top..I was dismade at the last video where it was made to look pants..Yes I had wondered why rumble was quiet..thanks for explaining amd im sorry guys I cant currently afford patreon but have and will part of my hard earned cash when ever i can. Please continue to make very entertaining videos and also get cap to repeat as many amusing sayings especailly when he has NO idea what hes agreeing too

    • @Markus117d
      @Markus117d Рік тому

      Ikr lol.. It's almost as if when you put a ship designed almost exclusively for air defence in the role it's designed for ( ie Air Defence ) it will do impressively well compared to what happens when trying to make it conduct anti ship or land attack. Who knew and could have guessed that 🤣

  • @sih1095
    @sih1095 Рік тому +2

    I well remember shooting a media piece on HMS Daring many years ago, they showed us a video of the CIWS in operation tracing out letters. But they wouldn't let us use it..

    • @joeds3775
      @joeds3775 Рік тому

      Wonder why.... Some one spelling out fuck Boris....

  • @InsanityorNothing
    @InsanityorNothing 4 місяці тому +2

    That went exactly how I thought. Duncan is doing exactly what it was made for.

  • @fa0676
    @fa0676 Рік тому +3

    From someone who knows T45s, the Long Range Radar Type 1850M would have these aircraft as soon as they took off (along with satellite picture) and 1045 (Multifunction Radar) would 'paint' every one of those aircraft with a missile. One false move and the hatches open and an Aster is on it's way. I'd say at least 15 splashed on first engagement. Phalanx and MS30 will have anything else which comes near. Those Russian aircraft are seriously old. And T45s don't have NSM. They had Harpoon

    • @LondonSteveLee
      @LondonSteveLee Рік тому

      But the Russian jets were allowed to get well within the minimum engagement profile of ASTER 15 at (near) sea level. Duncan was a sitting duck.

  • @iseriver3982
    @iseriver3982 Рік тому +4

    Did you hear about the British bulldog that killed a bear?
    Bear choked on it. ☺️

  • @TheAmbex
    @TheAmbex Рік тому +2

    My first GR video was the Kerch Bridge attack. Been here ever since.

  • @steviet9452
    @steviet9452 Рік тому +2

    While stationed at port Stanley the type 45 can paint targets setting off from Buenos Aires! The argies hate it as their ews just screeches at them as soon as their airborne!

    • @hb1338
      @hb1338 Рік тому

      There are no Argentinian combat aircraft based anywhere near Buenos Aires.

  • @Davros-vi4qg
    @Davros-vi4qg Рік тому +1

    Was chatting about this just yesterday. Interesting times for all!

  • @Bob10009
    @Bob10009 Рік тому +6

    The ship is not over modelled, it was designed to do exactly that. In fact, in reality, if we were at war, those jets would have died almost as soon as they’d taken off.

    • @LondonSteveLee
      @LondonSteveLee Рік тому +1

      I don't think it's over modelled either - but - the earth isn't flat, they wouldn't be shooting aircraft down they cannot see. Realistically (unless during total war) the rules of engagement would mean Type 45 wouldn't return fire until there's actual threat (ie an ASM in the air) by that stage Duncan is dead as there would already be more ASMs than Duncan has missiles to deal with (if Russia meant it) - don't forget that 30 miles off Crimea would put Duncan in range of an unknown number of land-launched ASMs as well as the attack aircraft - there would also undoubtably be an AWACs flying giving the Russians precise targeting information. If the original Channel 5 situation happened (aircraft are well under 2 miles) Duncan is toast, ASTER 15 needs nearly 2 miles to get a solution on anything at sea skimming altitude - it has to get the initial burn phase out the way before it could get down there. But as this scenario was scripted it was perfect for Type 45 - lots of loitering targets at 3-10 miles - easy pickings for Type 45 which could simultaneously engage all of them.

    • @Bob10009
      @Bob10009 Рік тому

      @@LondonSteveLee you’re right, the earth isn’t flat but none of these aircraft were flying on the ground, so, as I said “if we were at war”, type 45 can track, identify and target aircraft WAY beyond visual range and would be able to knock all of the ones in this scenario out of the sky at max range. You brought up an added AWACS for the Russians…..we have them too 😉

    • @LondonSteveLee
      @LondonSteveLee Рік тому

      @@Bob10009 An AWACS could easily sit beyond the range of ASTER 30 and track a ship sized target - actually even a normal fighter aircraft would detect a ship beyond the range of ASTER 30. My point is modern namby pamby rules of engagement would mean the aircraft would get inside the minimum engagement profile of ASTER 15 before we'd react - too late - dead ship. Type 45 desperately needs effective point defence and we need to get on with fitting the auto-cannon to the rest of the 45s - it's only on two as far as I know - unlike Phalanx the auto-cannon has a reasonable chance of engaging something sub-sonic flying on a fairly static course before it gets close enough to do real damage on kinetic energy alone.

    • @Bob10009
      @Bob10009 Рік тому

      @@LondonSteveLee as does sea captor which will be fitted soon.

    • @hb1338
      @hb1338 Рік тому +1

      @@Bob10009 The Russians are down one AWACS aircraft at the moment.

  • @benjaminarnold2881
    @benjaminarnold2881 Рік тому +4

    For the CIWS problem: could you give it a refillable magazine with a really short reload time?

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Рік тому

      We can add CWIS but not actually edit it as it is a "core game" weapon.

  • @jamison884
    @jamison884 Рік тому +3

    I think the scary part is this ship model, which did not perform the best up against the Chinese benchmark, is acturally not over-modeled. I believe aircraft in a random pattern around the ship like that just flying close by without using the advantage of long range missiles, should and will (did) get oblitrated per the video. You have a giant moving SAM site that can defend itself and has the capacity of a basically all the missile batteries you'd come across for hundreds of miles in all directions. The video doesn't even model the EW capabilities that should be far superior to any RU jet.
    This is what makes me excited for the future DDG(X) model. They're essentially keeping the successful Arleigh Burke model and building a new ship/design because they need an abundant amount of more physical space and power to support freakin' laser beams, crazy electronic warfare capability, and adequate room to support decades of upgrades.

    • @hb1338
      @hb1338 Рік тому

      .. nor does it model anti-missile EW capability.

  • @kiwiviking175
    @kiwiviking175 Рік тому

    Love the outtake at the end; could watch an entire episode of you lot shooting the s*** as you arse around!

  • @ThinBlueLineGuardian
    @ThinBlueLineGuardian Рік тому +4

    14:58 is my favorite part

  • @craiggillham143
    @craiggillham143 Рік тому

    Your trip around the sensors suit of a 45 was waaaaay off 😂

  • @Moody0013
    @Moody0013 Рік тому +1

    🇬🇧🇬🇧please read this (not worried about you reading it out just info for you) I watched that as it happened and the way the Russians buzzed they wasn't swarming HMS Defender it was a jet every fer seconds. I honestly think that they would have lost out big time. 🇬🇧🇬🇧
    I know I'm going to be biased but I genuinely think that the original jet's would have gone down. They would have sent more after and THEN we would have paid but like I said we WOULD have knocked them out the sky 👍🏻 I'd love to see it run like that. Keep up the good work guys

  • @mecampbell30
    @mecampbell30 Рік тому +2

    A high powered radar can fry the electronics of a poorly built fighter, but it's easy enough to EM shield electronics so that's it's not an issue. It does take attention to detail though.

  • @Carvetii
    @Carvetii Рік тому +4

    That scenario against the Chinese destroyers didn't take into account That Royal Navy sailors would make a massive differance. I highly doubt the Chinese are anywhere near competant as the Royal Navy

  • @thereverant5203
    @thereverant5203 Рік тому +3

    I definitely did not see this coming. Aster 30, best Aster!

  • @ivanstepanovic1327
    @ivanstepanovic1327 Рік тому +4

    Russian main tactic in situations such as this is: approach the target from multiple directions (minimum 4 directions), have every plane launch at least 2 missiles so that they roughly reach the target at the same time, turn around and GTFO real fast!

  • @xenaguy01
    @xenaguy01 Рік тому +2

    I never, never, never expected that result!

    • @Oxley016
      @Oxley016 Рік тому +1

      I did, that is what the 45s are designed to do.

  • @tufftrucker40
    @tufftrucker40 Рік тому +4

    I don't know if the ship was over modeled but the speed that ship was dishing out aa missles and smashing Russian aircraft was impressive to say the least.

    • @danielmichaels1505
      @danielmichaels1505 Рік тому +2

      From my knowledge I believe Type 45 can salvo launch/control 16 missiles at once hitting different targets

    • @watcherzero5256
      @watcherzero5256 Рік тому +3

      The radars unclassified figure is it can guide 16 missiles at a time (real figure higher) so launching salvoes of 8 at a time as it did in the video was actually under modelled, would probably be closer to the missile spam of the Arleigh Burke Flight III DCS model they created in real life.

    • @furiousscotsman2916
      @furiousscotsman2916 Рік тому +4

      Yea the British usually underplay their weapons heavily to the public. The released numbers are on avg between 25-50% worse than they actually are.

    • @Akm72
      @Akm72 Рік тому

      @@danielmichaels1505 Just to add another number, they can launch 8 missiles in 10 seconds from the Sylver launchers.

  • @Istandby666
    @Istandby666 Рік тому +2

    I'm sadden by Cap....he forgot to mention the biggest wrestler back then.... Andre the Giant.

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Рік тому +1

      Andre! And Animal and Hawk, and the Natural DIsasters.

  • @AdventTannhauser
    @AdventTannhauser Рік тому +6

    May be better if you allow the Russians to get the first shot off (and see how the Type 45 responds) and also allow some of the Russians to be BVR.

  • @EdGeyy
    @EdGeyy Рік тому +3

    Interesting video and fun to watch. One point to note is that Duncan would fire salvos against inbound Mx. 2-3 Aster minimum against a smart munition, so that brings the saturation side of things further into focus.

    • @MostlyPennyCat
      @MostlyPennyCat Рік тому +3

      Says who?
      Aster is a hit to kill munition, you're only supposed to shoot one at each target because they don't miss.
      That was the whole point, not needing to salvo.

    • @EdGeyy
      @EdGeyy Рік тому +1

      @@MostlyPennyCat Respectfully - I'm pretty well qualified to say what I said.

    • @hb1338
      @hb1338 Рік тому +3

      @@EdGeyy If you were, you wouldn't be here.

    • @EdGeyy
      @EdGeyy Рік тому

      @@hb1338 Right, because fanciful wartime scenarios are reserved for the unemployed. I'm here for entertainment, just like you.

    • @LondonSteveLee
      @LondonSteveLee Рік тому +1

      ASTERS were designed with the philosophy to hit what they are fired at - they are expected to be 1 missile 1 kill missiles. You do not fire salvos of ASTERs - that's why Type 45 only has 48 cells. - each missile is supposed to count.

  • @exidy-yt
    @exidy-yt Рік тому +4

    Nice comeback for the Type 45!! It may not be able to take on similar class ships, but it can scrub the skies of 2 flights of enemy aircraft with speed and style! Great run guys, always good to have Grumpnik back in the skies and Sock is.....Sock. Sweet paint job on that Flanker tho!

    • @housey4297
      @housey4297 Рік тому +4

      We have Astutes to deal with all those lovely Chinese cruisers ;)

    • @godalmighty83
      @godalmighty83 Рік тому +2

      I'm pretty sure that the loss to the chinese anti-ship missiles was a glitch of some sort, Sampson is more than capable of tracking them, yet the missiles simply didn't fire.

    • @exidy-yt
      @exidy-yt Рік тому

      @@godalmighty83 As I recall, they all fired but they simply ran out: they were chucking Aster 15s and 30s at a rate at least twice the rate of the Chinese destroyers sending their own anti-missile missiles, and thus ran out first. 4-1 per vampire was simply far too great a rate of fire then was needed. Mind you this is almost certainly a DCS thing. I am sure IRL they would be more sensible and sending 2 or at MOST 3 per incoming. But hey, we're all armchair admirals in the end.

  • @hwestbc
    @hwestbc Рік тому +2

    Is the 45 going to get updated at all? They’re adding 24 camm missiles, and the uk is adding the abm block 1 aster 30 that might really help against the type 55

  • @gavin1506
    @gavin1506 Рік тому +1

    Looking at the Wiki pedia entry, you are under loading the type 45. Before we argue the merits of wikipedia, it's a benchmark. there should be an extra SeaCeptor (24x) cells. This then enables the Asters to all be Aster 30's (48x).

    • @Akm72
      @Akm72 Рік тому

      None of the ships have received the firepower upgrade yet, the first ship with the power plant upgrade has only just returned to the fleet.

    • @gavin1506
      @gavin1506 Рік тому

      @@Akm72 and the type55 has everything as well?
      As to upgrades... there are some with them. Considering they sail past where I live. Some have additional things on them.

    • @Akm72
      @Akm72 Рік тому +1

      @@gavin1506 I just use the Royal Navy Lookout website as a source for what's going on. No doubt they are not 100% right on all things, but they let me keep more or less up to date.

    • @gavin1506
      @gavin1506 Рік тому

      @Akm72 I think my point is.. Wikipedia states its coming. The type 55 from China states its coming. So using it as the standard... just add it.
      As far as things go Wikipedia is full of propaganda... but if you use it for all sides it's fine.

    • @hb1338
      @hb1338 Рік тому

      @@Akm72 Incorrect.

  • @DarkendOceans
    @DarkendOceans Рік тому

    14:57 when grump dogged that missile 😂

  • @edwardtandy9613
    @edwardtandy9613 Рік тому

    I also heard a quote from the Captain in which he stated that the EWS could drop the aircraft out of the sky, but that was a surefire way to start WW3

  • @ryand900
    @ryand900 Рік тому

    Type 45 is a beast. Real life situation I read that all the jets were locked on, and in a flick of a switch missles are launched at once its a absolute machine.

  • @Wolfe351
    @Wolfe351 Рік тому

    the EW is the little spikes on the upper part of the main mast, the domes on either side are most likely COMMs

  • @jeffwiltshire
    @jeffwiltshire Рік тому +1

    Still wouldn't have the Ensign on the quarterdeck while at sea, entering/leaving harbour or alongside only.

  • @bigbore4498
    @bigbore4498 Рік тому +1

    Man Cap really new some of the greatest professional wrestlers. Back when wrestling was actually fun to watch. Maybe it’s just because I was a kid.

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Рік тому +1

      Na, it was friggin awesome back then.

  • @lukio12
    @lukio12 Рік тому +2

    Are there any plans to upgrade the asters on the type 45 mod? From the US carrier group vs k300p video 1990s US missiles performed better than modern asters, which obviously is just not the case. Youre trying to make these sims more and more accurate but the type 45 as it is now is far from accurate

    • @LondonSteveLee
      @LondonSteveLee Рік тому +2

      NATO want Type 45 to be converted into ICBM duties - the RADAR has already been tested and cleared for those duties. The idea is to replace ASTER 15 with Sea Ceptor and use the ASTER 15 VLS tubes for ASTER NT1 (anti ICBM/high altitude aircraft.)

  • @mk6315
    @mk6315 Рік тому

    @13:33
    Fire Control Room:
    “prank em lads”

  • @Sun-Tzu--
    @Sun-Tzu-- Рік тому

    Are they my golf clubs going round on top of that ship radar? Thanks again guys

  • @stephenmorrish
    @stephenmorrish Рік тому +1

    You guys need to get on as many platforms as possible, may I suggest Utreon as an additional option.

  • @VimyScout
    @VimyScout Рік тому +5

    Rule Britannia 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿 🇬🇧

  • @the_beef4762
    @the_beef4762 Рік тому +22

    Is it just me or does Russia's ordinance (especially their bombs) look so crappy? They look like WW2 shaped bombs compared to Western ones.

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Рік тому +15

      Yes they are a bit odd. They still use those.

    • @TP-ie3hj
      @TP-ie3hj Рік тому +5

      its a game, but over all a country that spends 60 billion versus one that spends 800 billion a year on bombs ya your stuff will look old. I would imagine if you bought a house for oh say 60k and compared it to an 800k house your house would look old.

    • @Spartan1-1
      @Spartan1-1 Рік тому +4

      The USA uses bombs that look that way too

    • @suecobandito8954
      @suecobandito8954 Рік тому

      Ordnance, I believe.

    • @dododostenfiftyseven4096
      @dododostenfiftyseven4096 Рік тому

      Communists

  • @splatoonistproductions5345
    @splatoonistproductions5345 Рік тому +7

    This really does kinda make me wonder how the type 83 will be different, tho I have some ideas:
    So the type 26 was based off the lessons learnt from both t 45 and t23, incorporating the capacity and air capabilities of the t 45, while having a fixed anti ship armament of 24 missiles, and that replaces the type 23.
    The one to replace the type 45 I imagine will be a somewhat mix of the existing t 45 and new type 26 in terms of capacity. With a small increase in ship size, the t 83 I imagine will have around 60-72 defensive missiles, with a fixed armament exceeding 24, BUT could see the addition of an empty space which could hold some NSM type missiles like the upgraded t 45, giving this ship potentially a lot of variety with those sort of semi stealth missiles in the NSM’s, alongside whatever is used for the main battery.
    Personally I hope the designers take British destroyer designs seriously, before it was okay w the falklands lessons being learnt and developing the t 45, but nowadays that will only go so far, being able to shield a ship/fleet is important, but having little to no bite back isn’t feasible anymore, if neither side can destroy each other’s ships, it’ll ultimately come down to quantity, which the t 45 can only handle so much of

    • @michaelwheatley8394
      @michaelwheatley8394 Рік тому +1

      The T26 doesm't (and isn't intended to have) the anti-air capabilities of the T45.
      Its a replacement for the T23, but much larger, and with a large mission bay for support/logistics/special uses. (It's basically a pocked cruiser.)
      The T45 had a *lot* of issues with its power system... now resolved... but The T83 will ne correct from the get-go.

    • @splatoonistproductions5345
      @splatoonistproductions5345 Рік тому

      @@michaelwheatley8394 then why does it have the same number of anti air missiles as a type 45 eh? that just for show?? severely doubt it

    • @matthewjones5731
      @matthewjones5731 Рік тому

      ​@@splatoonistproductions5345 the type 26 is going to have less capable air to air missiles and a less capable radar than type 45 as it can't mount one as powerful or as high. At least thats what I understand as the reason it won't be as formidable in the anti-air role despite having same missiles numbers.

    • @splatoonistproductions5345
      @splatoonistproductions5345 Рік тому

      @@matthewjones5731 then why does it have the stated 48x next to the missiles? did you could how many silos there were on the preview model? Turns out the rest are in the mid section

    • @splatoonistproductions5345
      @splatoonistproductions5345 Рік тому

      @@matthewjones5731 pretty sure they’re gonna be the same missiles dude, why use the same vls system and use different missiles? Doesn’t make any sense

  • @cheetosjumboenjoyer6833
    @cheetosjumboenjoyer6833 Рік тому +2

    Remake of your falklands war 2 video with the type 45 for the Brits and J-10C + PL-15 for the Argentinians?

  • @Tinderchaff
    @Tinderchaff Рік тому +1

    *NERD ALERT* In the HMS Duncan video they are calling out what seem like random words, these are NATO codenames for radars. 'Slot Back' is the N-019 pulse-Doppler target acquisition radar used on the MiG-29, 'Drop Kick' is the fire control radar from the SU-24M and then we get to the odd one out; 'Top Plate' is not an aircraft radar, it is shipborne. From what I can tell 'Top Plate' is fitted to Kirov class battlecruisers and also Slava class cruisers. At 1:58 as the monitor shows the aircraft flying around you can see the silhouette of a large vessel in the distance.
    Love the video, btw :).

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Рік тому

      Slot Back also serves the early Su-27 Flankers I believe?

    • @Tinderchaff
      @Tinderchaff Рік тому

      @@grimreapers you might be right, as it was definitely a flanker flying around. I just assumed they didn't film the Fulcrum, if there was one.

  • @jerryalbus1492
    @jerryalbus1492 Рік тому +1

    I want to see a similar simulation, but using an Aegis-equipped destroyer

  • @charlesandresen-reed1514
    @charlesandresen-reed1514 Рік тому +2

    One more coat of paint and that jet would have hit the ship lol.

  • @patricktracy4371
    @patricktracy4371 Рік тому +1

    British Bulldog vs Russian Bear equals a pregnant bear. Total domination

  • @Anarchy_420
    @Anarchy_420 Рік тому +3

    Please🙏 Carrier Launched Fights
    First Round-- F-18 Hornet's with AIM-120C-7 VS F-14B Tomcat's with AIM-54's! Both launching from opposing Nimitz Class!
    Second Round-- F-18 Super Hornet's with AIM-120D's VS ST-21 Super Tomcat's with AIM-152 GDW's! Both launching from opposing Ford Class Carriers!
    Bonus Round-- SU-33's VS MIG-29KR's

    • @Anarchy_420
      @Anarchy_420 Рік тому +1

      Stealth Squadron's and Futuristic Planes VS Star Destroyer Fleet!
      Stealth Squadron's Center Front Formation-- Flying in Two Formations of Five-- Ten F-22 Raptors! Few miles behind-- Five F-117's! Flying a few miles behind-- Four B-2 Spirits in formations of Two! Few miles behind in the back One B-21 Raider!
      Right Flank-- Ten ST-21's! Few miles behind-- Five F-16V Block 72's with Optical Camo and Ten F-15STOL/MTD's(I kno Fox2's;)! At a higher altitude few miles behind-- Four YF-12A's! Flying underneath-- Two B-1R's and Five F-15EX's with AIM-260's! Few miles behind-- New Hypersonic "UFO'"! Plus The Millennium Falcon with Two X-Wing's and Two Y-Wing's!
      Left Flank-- Ten F-35's Five with LRASM! Few miles behind-- Ten F-117's in Two formations of Five! In the back-- Four B-2 Spirits! Please obviously include a couple AWACS
      Star Destroyer Fleet-- LOTS of Tie-Fighters, Good amount of Tie-Interceptors, Eight Tie-Hunters, and Four Corvette Raiders!! Corvettes start airborne!!🙏

    • @Anarchy_420
      @Anarchy_420 Рік тому +1

      UH-1H, SA342 Gazelle, UH-60 Black Hawk, and AH-64 Apache VS Mi-8, Mi-17, Mi-24 Hind, and Ka-50 Black Shark!

  • @RimReapr
    @RimReapr 20 днів тому

    6:50 is a satellite for communications/ external connectivity.

  • @R.Instro
    @R.Instro Рік тому

    13:30 "Hoist up the thing! Batten down the whatsit! What's that thing spinning?? Somebody should stop it!!"

  • @andyf4292
    @andyf4292 Рік тому +2

    hopefully the fencers are armed with Kingbolt and AS17. because thats what I always used to use in Harpoon, and looking at the numbers.... no, not enough SAMS.... dumb bombs on an antiship mission, not best plan

  • @suecobandito8954
    @suecobandito8954 Рік тому +1

    Good video, Cap. No tanker or AWACS assets?

  • @LondonSteveLee
    @LondonSteveLee Рік тому +5

    Of course, flying around the ship like this at stand-off range WOULD end in the result we saw if Duncan was allowed to engage - all in perfect range to be simultaneously engaged by ASTER which Type 45 is perfectly capable of.
    You should re-run the exercise how the Russians would ACTUALLY engage Duncan if they intended to attack. Firstly 30 miles off the coat of Crimea, Russia would probably have at least a dozen land-based anti-ship missiles available to them. They’d have an AWAC up sitting beyond the range of ASTER 30 and would know the precise position of Duncan. They would launch some land-based sea skimmers and simultaneously attack low and fast with the jets precisely directed by AWAC intelligence - not hover around at 3-5 miles waiting to be picked off. Depending on aircraft type we are talking 2-4 ASMs per aircraft along with the ground launched ASMs which would soon run Duncan out of ASTER 15s and then 30s. The auto-cannon would and could probably get a couple of ASM kills - Phalanx would hit nothing until its too late to matter.
    If you wanted to script the perfect way of Duncan shooting everything down - you just did it! That engagement is clearly not how Russia would attack if they meant it.

    • @furiousscotsman2916
      @furiousscotsman2916 Рік тому

      Hahaha and what of the Russians demonstration so far makes you think they would be so well prepared and organised .... they had one working gun on the flagship of the black sea ffs that was sunk by a modified penguin about 20 years out of date.

    • @LondonSteveLee
      @LondonSteveLee Рік тому

      @@furiousscotsman2916 Neptun(e) may be an old missile physically but it has absolutely state of the art AI onboard it - far more sophisticated than Harpoon for example. It's capable of understanding the defence capability of the ship it's attacking and calculates an attack profile which avoids the weapons systems most likely to engage it - like other advanced western ASMs - this is no KH-34. Also I suspect the RADARs and Comms were taken out by drone attacks before the ASM strike - something the west have yet to face and are just as vulnerable to. We should be spending billions on simple, cheap disposable anti-drone drones - not trying to recreate the ridiculous stealth programme with hideously complex unmanned aircraft.

  • @davidspencer7254
    @davidspencer7254 Рік тому +2

    "Overmodelled" 😂😂😂😂😂
    Thats the most petulant lack of cope ive ever heard on Grim Reapers.

  • @mgbale01
    @mgbale01 Рік тому +1

    Great video, moving to rumble

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Рік тому

      Rumble Link: rumble.com/c/c-2381990
      Odysee Link: odysee.com/@grimreapers:e

  • @cadian122
    @cadian122 Рік тому +1

    I really wasnt too suprised by the result ... The Russian craft were not aggresive enough in getting off as many missles as they could thou..
    That being said the Type 45 is a top of the line destoyer and I would expect it to wipe out air wings ...

  • @sulyokpeter3941
    @sulyokpeter3941 Рік тому +5

    Well, actually that Type 45 is not that bad... Okay vs the slower moving targets. :D Can you do a UK CSG vs The new K-300P ? You did it vs US CSG the old and the new one but Iam interested if the UK CSG can defend itself vs that fast sea skimming missiles. Lets do first 8 missiles and if they can shot it down, than move to 16 and so on.

    • @AyOuB.God-soldier
      @AyOuB.God-soldier Рік тому

      😂😂😂

    • @hb1338
      @hb1338 Рік тому +1

      It is far more likely that any future CSG will be NATO rather than solely UK.

    • @sulyokpeter3941
      @sulyokpeter3941 Рік тому

      @@hb1338 True, but UK just developed a new frigate and actually 1 of them is almost finished. The Type 26 Frigate. This is a game changer! 1x48 CAMM for ground-to-air missiles(these anti-air missiles is better than the Aster 15) and 1x24 for Anti-Shipping which can fit the next gen. anti ship missiles. MBDA developing now a new gen anti ship hypersonic missile which is stealth at the same time and can be launched from the Type 26. So imagine the Type 45(upgraded version with 1x24 more CAMM missile silos) with the Type 26 frigates from 2026. Game changer! It can actually hold up very well vs a Chinese CSG. And the Type 26 will be fitted with the Naval Strike Missile first, then upgraded to the new gen missile around 2030. So if Iam counting correctly, and if the news are true about the upgrade of the Type 45(Aster 30 which can intercept hypersonic missiles with the new upgrade, and the new CAMM + the Type 26 frigate) it can be one of the strongest CSGs in the world right now with the F-35B 5th gen fighters! Yeah, this is something…

  • @waynesworldofsci-tech
    @waynesworldofsci-tech Рік тому

    Watching this later after the Black Sea drone incident, Grump should have dumped fuel when he buzzed the ship.

    • @Markus117d
      @Markus117d Рік тому +1

      And also display the level of competence displayed by the Russian pilot by hitting the ship by accident. Russian pilot's aparently have the same skill level as the average Russian road user, If all those dashcam vids are anything to go by, And funnily enough the drone in effect had it's own dashcam that caught the incident, In case of any insurance claims lol... 🤣👍

  • @garymyers6638
    @garymyers6638 Рік тому

    Wow. French doorknob was new for me. Takes a lot of flexibility

  • @davebewshey1549
    @davebewshey1549 Рік тому

    HACKSAW JIM DUGGINS is who Chuck Norris has nightmares about lol

  • @TP-ie3hj
    @TP-ie3hj Рік тому +3

    Great videos very fun to watch. In this video you got to decide who would fire first and how to equip the attackers? The SU24 had the KH31s mostly AI? the SU27 had dumb bombs? While numerous aircraft flew a holding pattern waiting for their aster the SU24 the greatest distance fired at the ship... a second su24 fired it was no where near closest either. These were the AI I am guessing? Watching on small device so cant see the the details distance details etc.
    I think if you are going to set it up you ought to throw in a version with the Flankers or aircraft firing first. There was about a 18 second gap from aster out to first KH31 ??20 plus seconds to second jet firing its KH31?
    So question is how to beat a type 45 might be having more than two aircraft of 17 fire at it? Or better yet let the flanker Pilots decide if they want to drop their bombs when they buzz it? Similar fashion might be flip it over allow the air craft to fire first and the ship to respond 18 seconds later? That who fires first might change things a bit.

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Рік тому

      Su-24 were all AI. Most refused to fight due to the amount of missiles and just ran away.

    • @JinghisKhan
      @JinghisKhan Рік тому

      @@grimreapers Would love to see this replayed, but with the Russian squadron actually coming in for a full attack instead of first flying for intimidation. If the Fencers can actually get their full missile loads off, does the Type 45 have enough shots to swat them down and the follow-up Flankers?