Can A Multiple Directions Attack Beat An AEGIS US Carrier Group? (Naval 11) | DCS
Вставка
- Опубліковано 13 тра 2021
- Master Sheet: docs.google.com/spreadsheets/...
Playlist: • Naval Battles
SPONSORS
Winwing: www.wwsimstore.com/STORE
Winwing USA: fox2.wwsimstore.com/STORE
USEFUL LINKS
GRIM REAPERS(UA-cam): / @grimreapers
GRIM REAPERS 2(UA-cam): / @grimreapers2
GRIM REAPERS(Odysee): odysee.com/$/invite/@grimreap...
DCS TUTORIALS: / @grimreapers
DCS BUYERS GUIDE: • DCS World Module Quick...
DCS OFFICIAL SITE: www.digitalcombatsimulator.co...
ONE TO ONE LESSONS: grimreapers.net/one-to-one-le...
DONATE/SUPPORT GRIM REAPERS
MERCHANDISE: www.redbubble.com/people/grme...
PATREON monthly donations: / grimreapers
PAYPAL one-off donations: www.paypal.me/GrimReapersDona...
SOCIAL MEDIA
WEBSITE: grimreapers.net/
STREAM(Cap): / grimreaperscap
STREAMS(Other Members): grimreapers.net/gr-twitch/
FACEBOOK: / grimreapersgroup
TWITTER: / grimreapers_
DISCORD(DCS & IL-2): / discord (16+ age limit)
DISCORD(TFA Arma): discordapp.com/invite/MSYJxbM (16+ age limit)
OTHER
CAP'S X-56 HOTAS MAPS: drive.google.com/open?id=1g7o...
CAP'S WINWING HOTAS MAPS: drive.google.com/drive/folder...
THANK YOU TO: Mission Makers, Admin, Staff, Helpers, Donators & Viewers(without which, this could not happen) xx
#GRNavalBattle #DCSNavalBattle #GR #DCSWorld #DCSQuestioned #Aviation #AviationGaming #FlightSimulators #Military - Ігри
Have y’all tested if Heatblur modeled the ability for the AIM-54 to intercept incoming anti ship missiles?
ua-cam.com/video/jKKnX_-wR5I/v-deo.html
@@grimreapers thanks!
@Brian Jones The F14 IS the only aircraft that can carry the AIM54, but I did see Tomcats in this video
@Brian Jones The AIM-54 and it’s accompanying radar, the AWG-9 was actually initially developed to be used by the F-111B. But when that project fell through and the navy scrapped the F-111B they moved the system over to what would become the Tomcat. And so the F-14 was really the only plane to ever use the Phoenix, but the missile itself was initially developed for a different plane.
One of the major test of the Tomcat before it hit the fleet was to lock onto 6 cruise missiles and fire 6 AIM-54's at the same time. Results were something like 2 direct hits and 4 proximity. The missiles didn't have live warheads so the proximity kills were estimated.
Attacking from one side,concentrating all the missile from that direction is more likely to open a breach in the defense. By spreading to 360 degree the missile salvo you are actually maximising the carrier group defenses....
Yea since PESA and AESA can scan and track from all directions. Concentrating on one side means that you are exposed to less arrays. And ships on the other side of the carrier group have a shorter reach.
multi-directional attack only works against older ships with rotating radars and such.
Would like to see this repeated from one direction, far more realistic.
Multi Direction attack would only work to divide the CAP fighters.
Unless surface missles are also launched from a chain of islands in the near vicinity in combination with subsurface launched munitions i don't see many if any asm ,atgm even reaching conventional point defence ranges since lazers are a thing. Also wouldn't jamming and anti jamming strategies make the entire ordeal of a single side attack that more effective?
Exactly, CIWS loves this approach
365° coverage? Damn, a carrier group that beats geometry can beat _anything!_
180 milion dollars in missles to iake out a 10 billion dollar carrier. the math says yes, its worth it
Not including it's escorts.
It would never happeb
@@gamingclipz7309 he just saying mAN
'Oh he's dropped his tanks' kinda like drunk dude taking his shirt off in a pub scuffle XD
Dropping gloves
I know nothing about DCS, but i love these videos. A perfect mix of everything, tension, techical facts, cool animations, cool planes and ships. Keep it up!
Much appreciated!
"365º all around"
I see what you did there RC . ♥
"Let´s do a 360 and get the hell outa here!" ;-)
Someone is going around in circles.
TIL there are 365° in a military circle!
@@ben.turner I can't find any sources stating that :/
@@neurofiedyamato8763 it's a joke. I'm sure he meant 360 but just said 365.
The missiles you fired didn't go to 49ft right away because the low setting is 7000ft. In order to get the harpoons to go to 49ft right away you need to set them so they open their radar right away. The altitude you can set is only for the cruse part of flight.
Harpoons missiles: lmao I'm gonna miss this carrier like a champ
They are harpoons not sparrows. Sparrows are us fox1 air to air missiles
@@commiccannon592 and what is sea aparrow?
@@ser43_OLDC a carrier defence missile
@@FatOnAxis yes but, also is a close range defence sistem that also destroyers can use, and in each vls can carry 4
@@ser43_OLDC You're thinking of the SeaRAM for the Destroyers. That uses the naval version of the AIM-9. The AIM-7 Sea Sparrow is now VLS launched only. So after the SM-2's are launched it would be used as a middle layer defense. However, it's proven great against aircraft and large anti-ship missiles like the Gnat but not that great against low flying small anti-ship missiles. The AIM-9 SeaRAM on the other hand has no problems acquiring and hitting those targets. Unfortunately it's range is only 6 miles but can be placed on most ships even very lightweight ships.
Nice one! This playlist has been rather entertaining.
"things are getting pretty stupid at this point"
Cap, that point was passed LONNNNNGGGGG ago lol
lol
This brings to mind a real world test scenario I participated in over 30 years ago. Was working at testing one of the TARTAR NTU upgrades. The NTU system could set a QR range and once a target entered that range would go in to the QR scheduling cue. The system was designed to handle a maximum of X targets and if another target became a higher priority target (i.e. faster than the original resulting in an earlier threat to the force) it would reschedule the QR target engagement schedule in the cue. We entered X targets equally spaced around the ship at a range outside the QR threshold. All targets were on a direct course towards the ship and set to travel at the same speed, they were all started at once. This group of targets crossed the threshold at the same time and the engagement scheduler placed the targets in the QR schedule. Now the fun part, an equal number of targets on identical bearings were started in on the same course but at a higher speed so that they would pass the original targets and cause the engagement scheduler to drop the original target from the QR schedule and add the new targets. Needless to say the computers didn't like this non-real world scenario and couldn't handle X targets all being rescheduled at the same time. When we staggered the speeds of the second group the results were much, much better.
As far as your scenario it looks like you have two Perry Class Frigates, Two Ticonderoga Class Cruisers, and four Arleigh Burke Class Destroyers. The maximum SM-2 loadout on a Tico Class is 122 and on a Burke Class is 90 or 96 (depending upon flight level of ship). The Perry Class is not SM-2 capable it has SM-1 missiles. This means that you could have available a maximum of 628 SM-2 missiles and 80 SM-1 missiles. The main difference is that SM-1 missiles require illumination of the target from the Mk 92 FCS for their entire flight thus limiting how many missiles could be expanded in this scenario (probable reason a majority of those getting close to the carrier were coming through the area of the Perry Frigates). SM-2 only requires illumination by the Mk 99 FCS during the final few moments of flight thus many more SM-2 missiles could be in flight at any one time. Another variant which you may or may not be able to set is weather to use SHOOT-LOOK-SHOOT or SHOOT-SHOOT-LOOK, I suspect from the way it appeared to be playing that it was SHOOT-SHOOT-LOOK. There is a maximum number of targets which can be engaged simultaneously by each AEGIS. platform as Mk 99 assets although only needed for the final stage of engagements and is also influenced by the fact that some of the Mk 99's may be in a blind zone (can't radiate through your own superstructure) on some targets.
These are highly entertaining. Also entertaining seeing technicians come out of the woodwork with specific details on capabilities of US hardware (even if some are old).
*Drops tanks almost on top of you
"You wot mate? You wanna have a go at me?"
Is DCS modeling the carrier and ships ECM/Jamming systems? would help explain the miss rates.
The carriers have chaff, deployable decoy balloons, decoy rockets and the rooms below the main deck count as spaced armor.
I'm glad you guys do this. We need people to think "outside of the box" and create scenarios like this. One day a Modern Carrier will go down but it will be when its "most vulnerable". Either in port or passing through a "strait" where it can be hit from land air and sea. No idea/scenario you guys create is far-fetched. keep thinking outside of the box!!!
Spy-1 radar tech here. What you're trying to defeat is the human factor when it comes to responding to the threat and what level of readiness they're in. Are they the first shots fired in a war? Maybe. If they're expecting attacks, prolly not.
I have no idea why it took so many sm-2s to take the missiles out, I meant their pk isn't 100% but that's a bit silly given the AGM slow and straight flight profiles.
"Do you agree with my consensus?" I had to write that down.
New radio code for bandits dropping tanks = "Chavs squaring up"
lol
I love that during the first attack you were asking why the low down missiles weren't being engaged by the SM-2s. I didn't know the flat earth society had pilots lol.
365 degrees RC? where are you getting those extra 5?
Auxiliary power
sm2 vs harpoon... thats friendly fire! US dont miss at that!
4 destroyers (90 VLSea, or up to 360 missiles minus 20 each for tomahawks and 10 ASROC figure 240 on the DDGs) 2 cruisers (120 VLSea, or up to 240 missiles again minus 20 for tomahawks and 10 for ASROC figure 180 on the CGs) 2 frigates (40 missiles, figure minus 4 for harpoons about 36 SM-1 each standard, or 72 AA missiles). total sans carrier (240+180+72=492) 492 standard missiles, 120 tomahawks 60 ASROC, 24+ harpoon, and on the carrier 16 sea sparrow, 42 RAM. At 5 missiles to the missile that's 99 missiles to exhaust the Standard missile load out.
Please keep labels on. It's tough to see the small missile dots on mobile.
Would be cool to see the Type 45 Destroyer implemented into this game. Possibly the best Anti-air destroyer in the world at present, even the US has recognised that
@@rickrasmussen8022 in multiple training scenarios, multi-national exercises, and when dozens of Russian Jets have gone around the destroyer when it was deployed to the Black Sea, it showed it's capabilities to track anything (up to a thousand objects) within 250 miles. Its even recognised by the US as "as good as it can get for an air defence destroyer"
@@rickrasmussen8022 "benign environment"?? dude sea is sea, jet is jet and an exercise is an exercise, its not like they gave locations of those jets to the destroyer during the exercise.
@@rickrasmussen8022 alright Armchair general. I think I’ll take the word of real combat professional over you.
Shame that in this situation, Type 45 would run out of missiles real quick....
@@Bob10009 I thing you’re forgetting that the Type 45 has 2 Phalanx CIWS guns. The type 45 is universally recognised at the world most advanced and most capable anti-air warfare vessel in the world.
I witnessed a war at sea practice strike while in the Navy. 12-15 planes from every point of the compass, coordinated to arrive simultaneously. Scary.
I wonder why the Harpoons were turning away at the last minute? Does DCS simulate the electronic warfare capabilities of warships?
Not that we are aware of.
Was wondering if it was chaff - most modern warships have some sort of decoy/chaff system
It was simply a visual bug I thought, as RC reported the harpoons hit the carrier.
@@MrBJPitt Ah, I see. I haven’t played DCS online yet as my PC struggles enough in single player.
I think it was just a last minute case of Harpoon social anxiety, getting the gumption to attack then backing off at the last minute.
I love when a plan comes to fall apart .... That carrier just floated away Cuz Super Cap couldn't kill it. Fun video fellas! Love these silly challenges!
Postpone the testing till Wags fixes the missiles, if you're launching 16 missiles but half of them are being ineffective then the test is invalid.
Like if you were testing how good you are with a gun at hitting a target but half your test ammo are blanks you'll never actually know how many times you missed.
You had some questions about what the ratio of sm2 missile to take out 1 missile it is 2 to 1. While I was on board a DDG during a practice exercise we took out 35 missiles with all our weapon systems. That is not the most 1 ship could do because it would depend on what missiles went defective on launch. But within a certain distance you will still deal with CIWS. I also wanted to add that when this would happen the escorts, DDGs, and CGs, would light up all the radar and RF to intice the enemy missiles to hit them instead of the carrier. The carrier in turn would turn off all of the non-essential RF and radar, while still maintaining the picture of the battle by means of Link.
thx
Ships have chaff and flares and active ECM just like jets. I wonder if ED are simulating that now? The Atlantic Conveyor wasn't the target of the Exocet missile that sunk it, but the original target deployed chaff which confused the missile and caused it to reacquire.
What you need to do is target ship after ship not go for carrier straight away. P700 for example does that. goes for nearest then others.
Yep, spend 4 p700 on 4 cruisers and the aaa capabilitys are severely reduced. You will reduce firepower and detection of the aegis Plattform that way, also reducing the layered defence will allow the dump (as modeled) missiles to get closer to the carrier.
The "go for the main target first" is nothing a military does today, first the defence will be softened... Be it by corrdinated strikes against aaa batteries oder the power grid, whatever.
There is a reason radar homing missiles have been developed and used.
I think, if you want to go for the carrier first, directly without a detour you'd need a supercavitating torpedo with a nuclear warhead...
@@justacomment1657 it's going to be pretty hard to soften defenses on carrier group - after first air raid or naval standoff, carrier might launch attack aircraft to retaliate so you just won't have a chance to attack them another time. I mean, AI in DCS wouldn't do it, but in real life carrier will probably launch operation to bomb the runway of an airbase that launched the attack or it will directly engage enemy ships that were targeting it - like that, second attack will either be delayed enough to escape combat or completely denied
@@chiken6559 well yes and no.
You will obviously lauchn your attack at the same time. But some of the misses should target the cruisers while the others go for the carrier. Retaliation is big problem. But I guess thinking of a limited engagement is out the window if someone decides to go for a carrier...
@@chiken6559 not if they already have the aircraft loitering waiting for the defenses to soften.
@@dovydasgedvilas9165 they wouldn't be able to loiter unnoticed around the carrier thanks to AWACS, carrier will just send interceptors to take care of large portion of the strike package so aegis ships would have to deal with a lot smaller number of missiles, and if we're talking about carrier group with F-14s then they would be able to intercept some part of the missiles making job for remaining ships a lot easier. So along with carrier group defense, attackers' offensive capabilities are going to be significantly lower than in the first attack - if you can't disable carrier's ability to launch planes, they're going to make it a lot harder to do any kind of damage to the carrier group
You do realize no CSG is ever in a formation like this unless its for a Photo Op with extra ships added right? - Former SWO
Depends on the threat. Screen commander can set up whatever formation is necessary, even outside of doctrine.
Isn't the Aegis system in DCS rather limited at how many targets it can track?
Or has that been fixed in some update?
Yeah, we all doing very well thanks to you. =)
Hey Cap, you should try out CMO "Command Modern Operations" or CMANO to do stuff like this. It's not as pretty but I'd argue that as far as systems capabilities its much more realistic then DCS.
SeaRAM is supposed to be super accruate up to 6 miles. It looks like they missed every target which is shocking.
Yeah that looking pretty unrealistic.
super accurate is relative, compared to other systems contemporary to it, yes, compared to what a human thinks is a lot, no
@@gaiamission7200 True. But compared to something like the CIWS it kind of has it beat easily with a 95% intercept rate with the original model. We're at Block 2 now which added infrared on top of radiation tracking with better kinematics. Sooooo yeah it's pretty accurate.
@@randallsanchez3161 phalanx never had a 95% intercept rate in real conditions, only against single targets, when most attacks will include 4 or more projectiles, it struggles, especially considering its prioritization issues
hi cap, can you please, PLEASE make a video on a realistic russian carrier group?
How get more realistic than this? this group actually sailed. ua-cam.com/video/Lc8hPPiyhZk/v-deo.html
@@grimreapers the emphasis is on Russian
@@grimreapers standard Carrier Strike group of the Russian Navy:
- Admiral Flota Sovetskogo Soyuza Kuznetsov ( You know this one )
- Pyotr Velikiy ( You know this one as well )
- Marshal Ustinov ( Slava )
- Admiral Vinogradov ( Udaloy 1 )
- Another Udaloy 1, Don't know it's name ;)
- Admiral Ushakov ( Sovremennyy )
- Admiral Flota Sovetskogo Soyuza Gorshkov ( Gorshkov )
- Admiral Flota Kasatonov ( Gorshkov )
- 1 Resupply ships
- 1 submarine
Note: Gorshkov Frigates can be considered as Udaloy 2's, Bcoz they are AMAZINGLY ARMED ships with top of the lien weapons.
@@grimreapers Please redo that video, put the Russian frigates up front like the Americans, bigger ships at the back, and put equal amounts of aircraft on both teams (I really wished there are MiG-29Ks though)
Could the Russians actually get an entire carrier group underway?
Hey guys, appreciate your work as always. Have you tried waiting until the attackers are closer to fire so that the Aegis system is attacking the aircraft at the point of missile release to help confuse the system? Almost like all the attackers are wild weasels also.
I think it will take more then from one side, simply because in a single sided attack ships like cruisers have masked CIWS, While the carrier its self will in an attack from any direction have half its weapons masked by the ships structure.
In reality I think the Cooperative Engagement Capability means they can use the AWACS (or even JSF radars) to shoot SM2s
SM-2 has a secondary IR seeker that allows it to intercept incoming aircraft or missiles that are below the radar horizon anyway, but I don’t think this is modeled in DCS.
It's simple math, as long as you fire more missiles than a carrier group can defend, you are gonna overwhelm their defense. If we don't use carriers carefully, the same thing is gonna happen in South Asia Sea. Unless we start to deploy our own anti-ship missiles with our allies around the region to counter chinese fleet and their missiles.
Awesome guys 👍
There a radar system for a type 45 destroyer on the hills above Portsmouth. The engineers there said they could take over ATC from Swanick. It would be better if the parked in the Thames. So yes, Duncan could track 64 missiles.
thx
It looks like they waste more SM-2s on the high flying Harpoons (because they start shooting earlier) so perhaps trying to run them out of missiles might be a tactic.
Yes it is. This is also the tactic with SAMs. Just drain all their missiles and attack when they rearm. ^^
Yup, that does seem to be the case. Would be interesting to see how it works out with 64 Harpoons all coming in high. Since the missiles coming in low isn't viable anyway, it might be worth trying.
Loved the attempt Guy’s definitely hard to knock out a carrier , how about some kamikaze zeros and the slow flying Swordfishes going at it .
Japanese from above and Swordfish skimming the waves
Cap - you mentioned that if there were 5 SM2s per anti-ship missile, that would be 300 SM2s. Unfortunately for your calculations, looking at entry on Wikipedia, ONE Arleigh Burke class destroyer carries almost 300 missiles (276). So each destroyer could (theoretically) defend against all 64 missiles with 16 aircraft firing simultaneously.
So the amount of SM2s isn't the problem for the US, it's tracking the oncoming missiles that's probably going to give you the win.
Wow!
Well in theory perhaps but in actuality they're rarely full in peacetime - lots of money if nothing else. Also the VLS cells are used for things other than SM2s (Tomahawks, Subroc, ESSM) but yes they do have a lot of SM2s, that said on the last attack it did look like the group in DCS had run out.
@@tomriley5790 It looks like they weren't refilled with ammo before that last attack. Some of the ships that stopped firing on the previous wave weren't firing during the final wave.
@@claytonanderson9665 VLS systems don't refill - the VLS is the magazine. Unless you mean in DCS, I'd imagine Cap closed the mission and restarted it so they should have been full (if set up that way)
Theoretically yes, if an Arleigh Burke had all 96 cells dedicated to air defense with 60 cells for quadpacked ESSMs and 36 cells for SM-2/SM-6. (60 ESSMs x 4= 240 ESSMs + 36 SM-2/SM-6 = 276 total missiles. But DCS doesn't have ESSMs so it's safe to say all 96 cells are SM-2s. Ticonderogas have 127 cells and Oliver Hazard Perrys have a 40 missile magazine. So even if all the U.S. ships in this CSG (4x Burkes, 2x Ticos, 2x OHPs) were fully equipped with SM-2s and no ESSMs, then we're looking at 718 total missiles. That's more than enough to dedicate 5 missiles for every incoming in an attack of 128 vampires. So if anything gets through to the carrier it's because they either closed the distance too fast for the ships to put out enough interceptors (like with the 2x Kirov scenario) or there's just so many incoming that there's no time to simultaneously track and guide SM-2s to them all (like here). I'm not sure why they stopped firing in that last scenario unless they wasted like 7+ interceptors per target early on or something.
Nothing wrong with the Harpoon modeling over land. In actual engagement planning you never have the Harpoon fly over land or even close to the coastline. Harpoon no likey land. Those dishes you speak of on Aegis ships are CWI illuminators. SPY 1 will detect and track the targets and fire SM-2s. The SM-2 only requires CWI guidance for last few seconds of flight so it can have many missiles in the air and time share the CWI illuminators. Also, Aegis can track a lot more then 64 missiles. Typical engagements are two missiles per engagement but in a saturation raid in reality they would probably change that. Older ships had SM-1s that required CWI illumination before launch so engagements were limited to how many fire control channels you had. An FC channel would be how many dish radars you had. Each dish was basically two radars: a pulse Doppler to track and a CWI for guidance. If you want to see what an old school saturation raid looked like, park 10 OHPs out there and repeat the test. You will sink all of them. The probable reason your Harpoons missed the carrier is chaff. That the only realistic answer. Someone mentioned jamming. Harpoons have a Home On Jam (HOJ) feature. They love active jammers.
thx
Who wanna study SST when you have this much cool stuff in physics
The USN retired all the active service Tomcats in 2006, therefore this is not really a good match up.
The same scenario was played out in Tom Clancy's book " Red Storm Raising"
The problem with the CIWS gun that was described in the book was real and got fixed because of that book.
The new Aegis radar has been up graded and more missiles have been added to the US warships.
One other thing to consider is that the defensive support ships in the Carrier battle group don't sit right next to the carrier.
They sit I think 100 miles away to better give warning and protection.
The harpoon missile is slower than Russian missiles.
Not sure if it's modelled but perhaps the missiles were being decoyed by chaff? I think AEGIS could originally engage 20 targets at once from any direction (using the planar arrays) - I'm not sure if that's current or if the newer versions are more capable - porbably classivied.
Fun test! Could you try this same test using only older style carrier group that has old fashioned spinny radars? (Aegis not invented yet, like PRE-1973). The Chinese Silkworm and Soviet Styx anti-ship missiles predate the Aegis radar, and could have been used against carriers during the era of spinning radar dishes.
The SM-2s were being used at too close of a range at 15 miles...that would be where Evolved Sea Sparrow would be more effective
This reminds me of red storm rising by Tom Clancy
If you even spend 200 million for one or two hits on a carrier then you're already in the green, you're taking the carrier out permanently or out for repairs for months.
Bingo; and if you even have to spend 1 billion to sink a carrier that is a cost effective action in a war, a fair trade compared to a carrier's price. This also has interesting implications. If you can overwhelm a carrier groups defenses and annihilate it entirely even for the cost of a few billion in a overwhelming strike, then you have just rendered carrier groups obsolete. A country like China could theoretically pump money into overwhelming numbers of hypersonic ground based missiles with incredible range, and it would be basically impossible for the US navy in a war to operate as required. What does the Navy then do if you are forced to operate 500-1,000 miles away or more for any offensive target?
@@-Zevin- China has already done that.
@@-Zevin- this is what I've been saying. A Ford class is 13 billion a unit. Even if every missile is 10 million a unit (that's a vast vast overestimation), you can fire 1,300 of them before shooting missiles is more expensive than the carrier. Will it take 1,300 MODERN anti-ship missiles to kill a carrier? No. Modern Chinese missiles are more advanced than harpoons.
@@EEEEEEE354 Exactly, in-fact It is quite likely or at least possible a single current Chinese anti ship missile could penetrate current carrier defenses. As far as I know current missile interception technology does not work for hypersonic missiles. Not to mention it's also entirely possible if not likely that China too would deploy decoys on their missiles. Carrier groups may go the way of the battleship already. Only really being useful on far inferior small countries like they are being used in the middle east.
If I was designing a Navy at all today my money would be on Submarines and surface ships would be missile platforms. A missile cruiser is also probably a much more rational ship in this age. Modern hypersonic cruise missiles outrange naval aircraft as they only need to make a one way trip and they do it with far more payload than a small naval strike craft can carry.
@@-Zevin- 100% agree with everything you say. I don't even think China needs to use its hypersonic missiles. To shoot a bunch of old ones and you can oversaturate the air defenses. Overall I think our Navy is a glass Cannon. At least the Marine corps has smaller more mobile aircraft carriers, with less people and less equipment to lose if they get hit. If we lost a Ford class (when not if tbh), morale would drop. As you said a lot of our military is only optimized for fighting smaller inferior militaries.
1:24 I didnt know that covering 365 degrees was even possible
Hi Cap, one (may be two) mig 21 with nuclear bomb, and the AGM.... make your move. Excelent video👏
Did that in vid 1 or 2, forget which. Works a charm.
Maybe viggens with rb 15? It seems like they fly really low. Maybe it reduces the radar signal
What if yall tried the hornet assault from different altitudes as well as the different angles and also stack multiple Hornets from each direction as well
You have to add up all of the Serviceman's Group Life Insurance that gets paid out if all of those sailors die.
A Swedish diesel sub had no problem doing it
Best ever US vs US.......That's a lot of Hornets up in the air!
Wow thanks, i enjoyed this research video a lot. Could you do a multi direction attack with close Russion destroyers, that would help to sink itt for sure. LOL
Perhaps carriers should have a few more CIWS on each side to "overwhelm" the incoming. Maybe exploding shells with shrapnel!
best way to sink carrier is by torpedo i think. Or supersonic antiship missiles.
One Gotland-class submarine should do the trick ;)
Maybe in a choke point or confined area but open ocean is a completely different story. Good luck trying to have a 20 kit diesel sub stay in contact with a 35 kt CVN
Wonder if the carrier has some sort of ECM jamming which is why the harpoons turned away
Having all incoming missiles on one threat axis should still be an advantage for the defenders since they can retarget outgoing missiles as each inbound one is destroyed. If they have to fire down multiple axes, then those extra SM-2s won't have the energy to be retargeted across to incoming missiles on a different bearing. So the group can still effectively engage a multi-axis attack, but it might run out of missiles faster.
Can the sm-2 retarget? If yes, does it happen automatically, or manually?
The Joint Chiefs would like to thank you for doing the Lord's work, saving the DoD tens of millions of dollars in simulating various war scenarios.
Pleasure
An attack on a carrier group would invite a nuclear response, so go ahead. Just try it.
It would be a really dumb move..
hey cap, i was wondering is there any way to get a GBU (laser guided) to miss the target, from altitude, weather etc
yup, if you are above 10 miles alt it will not track.
In the first place, any enemy can never organize a multi-pronged attack because the Americans would immediately implement countermeasures.
It kinda looked like the game couldn't handle all those missiles out that it stopped launching the sa-2's
What will happen if you mass the attack. I mean by using various ship and plane missiles and launching them in such a way that they get there approximately in the same time?
The Soviets thought this was a good idea too using Blackjacks and Backfires - it didn't work for them either. There is no way to saturate a US CVBG. They can absorb - classified - but A LOT, more than you can put on an entire air force of bombers. No enemy plane is going to get within 200 nm and most will be tracked and killed around 400 nm.
Imagine flying a backfire and then just figuring out you got this awesome aircraft and make a run for it to some comfy island ;-)
@@udirt A MiG-25 pilot did just that.
I believe the best might be a decoy style approach. This would involve trying to overwhelm their defensive systems with drones and other low value systems, either running them out of ammo or causing them to be unable to prevent the main attack. ( Eg. Poobars parting, Iraq war.) Not correct spelling.
Wild weaseling basically
radar guided harpoons can be spoofed with chaff, is chaff and any other measures simulated .. also could the numerous targets confuse the poor old thing? they are very old weapons.
What gaming software is this. I like it! Wanna try it.
interesting and weird seeing those harpoons missing.... i've also had RB-15's miss for no apparent reason
TOT could be done but you'd need 100% exact info for a precise future spot the carrier group would be in
Probably better to fire the same number from one direction, cause once you get past the missiles, you would have fewer CWIS to overwhelm as the ones on the far side would be out of range.
Yes modern subs fire anti ship missles. That's sop for attack subs.
They fire offensive anti-ship missiles. But his point was they don’t fire defensively against anti-surface missiles (the incoming harpoons) so they’re irrelevant for this test.
Set up situations where aegis ships are defending offshore of a airbase or something, set up like 3 or 4, Once the SM-2 are expended next line of defense would be the rolling airframe missiles along with the 5 inch gun batteries. Any missiles getting through that would then be engaged by the Phalanx. Phalanx doesnt engage missiles heading away so any it missed coming in would not be fired on as they leave. Last time i tried something like this, i dont think dcs had proximity fuses implemented. Also, you can have the airbase attacked at the same time from land from the otherside of the sam system, making target interception even harder. Sorta like we did in syria with our tomahawks.
And yeah first priority of the fighters would be to engage the cruise missiles with amrams, not take on enemy fighters.
Swedish submarine is probably laughing at this.
365 deg, how many is this in schoolbuses and jumbojets?
Or coke bottles?
was the water wall from the guns infront of the missle blocking the radar ? i detected once in a very low straight flight with an f-18 i believe over the sea. when fired guns far infront. and flying through the massive water splashes. That decreases the engine / turbine rpm massively. after passing the water barrier the engine rpm comes back to normal.
I think it was bugging out and trying to avoid being shot down when it should have been closing on the ship. You can see it turn away as it's getting close as it's coming under fire/
Uh, maybe. Higher probability, but those ships would have a hard time assuming such a formation being detected long before they ever got near the carrier group.
You should maybe maximize your chances by placing the group in a fjord, a bit like the attack on the Tirpitz.
I would like to of seen you deal with the 4 hornets which were chasing you down 😂😂😂
SUPERRRRCAAAP 😂
Lol. I was an AEGIS tech and operator for 10 years. Their ranges, RCS's and many other things are hilariously inaccurate. There's SO much more to this scenario that they aren't taking in to account. I played these same wargames on two actual Tico cruisers, and I cant stop laughing at this.
elaborate if you’re willing. inaccurate how? Over/under exaggerated?
@@KILLERAOC for one, Harpoon's are really big missiles. They have a massive RCS because of their turbine intake. SM's would eat them for lunch every day of the week, and twice on Sundays. Just an example. Obviously, there's a ton that I can't say, and even more that would take hours to explain.
I've tried to recreate this scenario in Command: Modern Operations. I used some wiki more or less on US carrier strike group composition and used two Russian Oscar 3 subs with 72x SS-N-26 Strobile (P-800 Onyx) each, with speed of 1600 knots. Subs were some 40 nautical miles away.
My carrier group of Nimitz CVN, 2x Ticonderoga and 3x Aleirgh Burke Flight 2A utterly defeated those 144 incoming missiles. The subs were on opposing ends of the group, if that doesn't overwhelm them I am not sure what would.
Cap, short of nuclear, I don't think there is a way to deal with modern US carrier groups.
Edit: I tried with hornets and harpoons (modern) as used in video... Better luck next time?
Who would win: A billion dollar CV fleet.
Or one sneeky swedish submarine guy.
sub!
365 degrees... I just can't unhear it..
I have some doubts about the model accuracy of DCS. Especially for the SM-2s. Seems like the hit probability is far too high.
Multi-angle has no merits when the AEGIS system is in use. AEGIS has a weapon control system built-in main radar system that is multi-directional. The vertical launch support multi-angle defense so is potentially even easier to defend because more last defense systems can fire. Different thing is when older air defense systems are involved, with separate weapon control radars who are not multidirectional, as on most Russian ships. In this case, the ship cannot at the same time direct its weapons to target flying from different angles.
AI launched Harpoon's fly at 50 ft for some reason. I can only get them to 150 ft when launching them at a level of 200 ft AGL. I wish ED would either update the Harpoon's model (also that don't have the punch that they should have) or bring out a guide to use it, properly.
Do you know by working with the simulation alone like to see how lasers can be useful but I think a Navy could use another class of missile something similar to the iron dome in Israel step for anti missile like two separate types like a medium range and short range
Love the content but what is 365 degrees?
Without watching the video, I doubt a multidirectional strike -- assuming the same numbers as previous failed tests, which doesn't seem like a safe assumption from the thumbnail -- would have any effect whatsoever in DCS. *Maybe* you could catch a human crew off-guard, but even then I kind of doubt it.
Should be fun to watch the attempt anyway, though.
Cap, can you do an updated test on ASM's? It seems like the harpoon has been Buffed with 2.7
rgr
The Aegis system can track 'Well over' 100 targets simultaneously out to a range of 'over' 100 NM.