HUGE Iranian Shahed-136 Drone Swarm vs 2020's US Carrier Group (Naval Battle 81) | DCS
Вставка
- Опубліковано 1 тра 2024
- We simulate how effective a 150 x Iranian Shahed-136 drone swarm would be against a modern US aircraft carrier strike group.
GRIM REAPERS 2 (UA-cam): / @grimreapers2
PATREON: / grimreapers
0:00 Overview & Details
3:02 Drone Damage Test
3:59 150 x Shahed-136 Drones vs 1990's USCG
8:32 150 x Shahed-136 Drones vs 2020's USCG
14:15 150 x Shahed-136 Drones(spread) vs 2020's USCG
20:11 150 x Shahed-136 Drones(tight) vs 2020's USCG
24:13 F-14A vs USCG
USEFUL LINKS
GRIM REAPERS (UA-cam): / @grimreapers
GRIM REAPERS 2 (UA-cam): / @grimreapers2
GR PODCASTS: anchor.fm/grim-reapers
DCS TUTORIALS: / @grimreapers
DCS BUYERS GUIDE: • DCS World Module Quick...
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
FACEBOOK: / grimreapersgroup
TWITTER: / grimreapers_
DISCORD(DCS & IL-2): / discord (16+ age limit)
DISCORD(TFA Arma): discordapp.com/invite/MSYJxbM (16+ age limit)
OTHER
CAP'S X-56 HOTAS MAPS: drive.google.com/open?id=1g7o...
CAP'S WINWING HOTAS MAPS: drive.google.com/drive/folder...
THANK YOU TO: Mission Makers, Admin, Staff, Helpers, Donators & Viewers(without which, this could not happen) xx
#DCSQuestioned #GRNavalBattle #DCSNavalBattle #Shahed #Shahed136 #Drone #DroneSwarm #aircraftcarrier #Iran #GR #DCSWorld #Aviation #AviationGaming #FlightSimulators #Military - Ігри
"Careful of the jet wash." Cap flies through jet wash, engine stalls. Cap: "Oh my God my engines have stalled. Why did that happen?"
*big sigh*… get another one-
Supercap
With a Maverick helmet....
@@sirname5122 LOL, my thought exactly.
😆😅😂🤣
Almost like they never made a really famous movie where one of the characters died because of that exact thing
Knowing RC models I highly assume that any blast inside a 100ft raduíus would flip a drone around and tilt it's guidance system. Look at the large Delta wing catching the shock wave...it might even brake apart.
My completely uneducated guess would be that a single hit on a target in the swarm would be all but guaranteed to take out 20+ more from shrapnel and shockwave given how tightly they are grouped. There's no way these cheapo drones would just keep flying. A single piece of shrapnel (and there would be a lot) to the propeller or any vulnerable area (which is basically the entire drone because they are as light as possible and have no armor) would likely take them out or render them ineffective in some way.
Still a pretty interesting and entertaining simulation!
Yes I agree the Shockwave might take out more than the Shrapnel even!🤨 A large Airburst Bomb would take out a large swarm of drones imho 👍😁
On the Sahed drones, the longer the swarm is distributed, the more time Aegis has to engage. To decrease the engagement window, the drones should be as low as possible and spaced on an arc centered on the carrier so they all have roughly the same distance to target.
For extra spicy, get those Tomcats on target from a reciprocal bearing while Aegis is engaging the drones.
Agree, however what would happen if the drones were spread out such that each drone requires its own interceptor? Can a “spread swarm” fully deplete the fleets resources? Even if a ship isn’t sunk, every intercept is a financial win for team drone, no?
@@jamesrbronson . . . Not when the bill is delivered hours later.
@@uncletiggermclaren7592 Agreed. You fail to incapacitate the carrier....the retaliation is going to be devastating.
@@gungho57 Even just making a serious attempt at a carrier. Some things are inevitable reactions.
When you get to a certain level of power, you don't have the luxury of backhanding a serious opponent and then stopping to ask him "what the hell do you think you are doing?". He who hesitates is lost, when we are talking about Fleets and Nukes.
I am not an American, and certainly no proponent of ignoring the International Rule of Law. However, you would HAVE to go to town on someone who took things to that level, just to get everyone's head in the right space.
@@jamesrbronson Imagine caring about a "financial win".
Thank you, yet again, for making me laugh. You have an amazing ability to mix tense situations, comedy, and expert narration into well designed situations.
So much boom boom and cool angles. Cap's editing skills are getting sharp as a tack.
While you may be limited by game dynamics, I would like to point out that the 5 inch (127mm) guns of the Burkes are duel purpose weapons systems that can fire proximity fuse and VT fuse rounds in the unit-air mode. Though for practical reasons a combined missile / 5 inch gun engagement would be rare.
Yes sir, that's one of my "it would be awesome to have one day" items, but I'm just amazed we have VLS with different missiles for the first time. I also believe the Mk 38 25mm autocannons have anti-air capability via fuzed munition, but I'm not 100% certain. If so, I'm guessing they would have the same effective range of the Phalanx CIWS roughly?
I like the idea of using the guns if possible since it would be 'cheaper' but more due to saving missiles for threats that require them.
@@jamison884 I believe the MK38 would have more range as the Shell is bigger. Not sure about the anti air capability though
@@jamison884 I assume so as wiki says it has HEIT Self destructing round that are usually only used against air targets like in the C-RAM
@@jamison884 In terms of max range alone the 25mm would win, but in terms of effective range against an incoming ASM, CIWS would win every time. The 25mm is manually aimed, with all the limits that implies. The Phalanx is radar guided and computer controlled, vastly more accurate. This gives it edge in effective range. The 25mm auto cannons are more for surface targets, i.e. small boat attack. Thought they can engage airborne targets, they are just not as effective as the CIWS
Thank you so much Cap. It's beautiful. I wanted to see the modern CSG since you debuted it.
Thx J, still ironing out the bugs etc.
@@grimreapers Dude, you need a real simulation. If you know anything about Iran's military capacity, you should know they'd come at any target with a lot more than a few drones and a couple airplanes. Iran would sink the entire naval group within a few hours. Please get your thick, poor, English head out of your azz. Thank you.
This was a fun video. I’d be really interested to see this test again, but only with CIWS and RIM-116 as the carrier group’s defense. That’s a target rich environment.
I love the trench run style missions. So tense! 😅
Thanks for the video, it was very interesting to see what would happen with that massive swarm. The F-14 run at the end seems like it could be the next Top Gun plot lol
This is not what drones would fly like in a swarm they would be at different altitude and Criss cross vectors with evasive flying.. They NEVER fly in a straight line!!
Happy New Years from Aussie Land... Love your work.. And may you be blessed with Nukes and great graphics
The official Simba Fanclub thanks you for this wonderful video! It was eye openeing and a little scary to think of the implications but great video game footage!
Except not enough From Sir Simba, he only said 10 words. it’s time for cap to at least allow him 15 words per video. Not trying to push it but I think at least 12.5 words would be fair.
Simba's contract states 10 words per vid.
Hello, Cap! I think a battle between those drones and WW2 carrier group and escort Zeros/Seafly*.. would be interesting and fun. Thanks for the videos!
Nice!
Well if you knew anything about actual military weapons you would know that drones against a WWII aircraft battle group wouldn't do any better. The amount of armor on WWII ships and the lack of sophisticated equipment would greatly reduce the impact of any hits made by the drones. Also, WWII ships had massive amounts of anti-aircraft guns. Flak would rip these little drones apart. Each shot would be taking out groups of drones, not just one or two. German flak guns were responsible for half of all US Army aircraft lost over Germany. Drones today have a far better chance than they would have back in WWII.
@@georgeyoung613 Yeah, guns went out of vogue because warplanes were too fast and could attack from too far away for the guns to be effective, and little suicide drones are slow and can't really stand off when the whole point is to impact the target.
@Boo Bah I agree for the most part. Guns on aircraft are still a potent combination. It just depends on the guns and how they are used. Take the A10 for instance. Tanks, LAV's and just about every other mobile platform don't stand a chance. Another aircraft that still uses guns is the C130 Spector gunship. I got to see a live demo of one at 29 palms in CA during our desert warfare training before deployments. When it comes to a slow moving drone, the best weapon would be a CIWS (R2D2). But when it comes to defending our navel assets, our military would prefer to destroy any threat as far away as possible. It's hard to question that logic.
Video gave me a good laugh, you guys don't disappoint.
LOVE the cost simulator!! 3M cost of drones cost 250M to destroy.
The important cost is the value of what you are protecting.
almost first... really love the content so far! I'd love to see some more Aussie content, especially with the new F-35s we'll be getting (+ all the new stuff on the navy side with the new funding) and I'm curious how it'll stack up against the likes of China for example with their already pretty impressive navy. Maybe worth having a comparison for a contemporary, and a future (when Aus theoretically receives all the new hardware) would be good as well? Absolutely love the war games content, and I wish you the very best throughout 2023!
Thank you Cap fro this great battle. IMO the shock wave from the Agies missiles would destroy these lite unarmored drones within a large radius. Like 400' from each incoming missile detonation. So the drones would really have to spread out and fly very low to avoid some of this damage.
I saw a very interesting video from Mr. Ward Carroll (former USN Cmmdr.), not long ago, titled "Insider Reveals Ford Class Aircraft Carrier Secrets"...
In it, his guest, who helped design the carrier, claimed it had an enormous amount of surplus energy capacity, 100 megawatts, or something in that ballpark, and the reason it had this, was to allow it to attach long-range microwave weapons to the deck, in the future, to counter such things as drone swarms. True story. You can youtube it and verify.
That's probably the first thing the power will be used for. Then a laser-based CWIS. After that? Probably something that could replace the Sea Sparrow. And who knows beyond that. The ships are intended to sail into the next century after all.
This is realy cool. Great job.
Wow! That was entertaining. A couple of points. The 76.2mm DP guns on the destroyers and cruisers, firing blast frag shells in a preset AA low level pattern would fill a large amount of sky with a continuous curtain of shrapnel. Also, the CSG would be maneuvering wildly to screw up the drone targeting. Even though you can' model it yet in DCS, the most likely success would be attacking with submarines OR a mixed attack of drones and submarines or even drones, Bogs and submarines.
76.2 mm guns... maybe if the ships were Italian ;)
I was thinking those drone speedboats that Ukraine used on the Russian black sea fleet, combined with shahed's, may work.
A carrier protected against a strike means a good offensive counter strike is coming back at Iran. If you launch cheap drones and fail, the repercussions are expensive.
Even if you succeed…..
Please note that the ESSM is around 1/4 the size of SM-2. They are packed four per VLS cell, compared to 1 per cell with SM-2. They are the short(er) range missile, used when something has penetrated the wall of SM-2/3/6
The guy has absolutely no idea what you just said yet made this simulation.... 🤣
Would it matter if you had two cargo drone-carrier ships on *two* sides of a carrier group, or does that not matter?
Or could each drone in the swarm tow a radar reflector below/behind them to attract lots of missiles to perhaps let some drones survive longer?
I believe Cap tested time on attack scenarios coming from one direction and multiple directions a long time ago and the multiple direction attacks either performed the same or perhaps worse. It may be worth another test again though? In the real world, Aegis can track hundreds of targets to the best of my knowledge, and all weapons from the 127mm cannon, 25mm autocannons, 20mm Phalanx CIWS, and Mk 41 individual VLS cells can be assigned a single target each and network across all local Aegis ships for target deconfliction, effectively making the direction irrelevant. Just my best guess though!
From the flight deck of the Forrestal, we used to watch F-111s come in just feet above the water and pop up to just miss hitting the ship then drop back down to the water level to escape. After the F-111s the slower trailing F-4s would come over and the ones w/o low burner on would smoke trail and give themselves away. Fun to watch back in the late 1978.
Hi Capt, Chinese tonight. The visit to gourmet burger was most disappointing today for lunch.
Loving the output - thank you.
Ball bearing filled shells like a large shot gun would help - even missiles with the old tungsten cubes.
Chinese AND burger in one day? Unbelievable!
To me it makes sense to send out an initial swarm, 250-300 drones to deplete the ships of missles and sea wiz ammo.. Then have 2 smaller swarms of like 150-200 drones each. Each wave sent one after another. By the 3rd wave, missles and possibly sea wiz would be depleted. A single wave isn't what, I'd think, would make sense in the real world.
Love the videos! Some really fun scenarios. Thanks
there is no way cv group gets out of this alive.. this is math, cv group cost what 16 billion usd, and has how many missiles for interception? 500, 1000?.. so to overhwelm system you need 2000 drones..each costing only 20 thosand usd.. it means it would cost iran 50 million usd to kill a cv group that cost 16 billion.. and yes, you would send wave after wave.. 2000 drones? yeah ..and also most of time US CV group is not full strength like we see here, but most likely CV and cruiser and destroyer..
makes sense to me dude! Multiple swarms of drones to deplete defenses or one massive super-swarm with thousands of drones just like the thousand bomber raids of WW2. Of course i think short range directed energy *laser* or particle weapons powered by the carriers nuclear reactors would eventually turn the tide. Who knows?
@@edcox1630 lasers sucks as they don't perform well in cloudy, foggy conditions.. it is definitely the future but right now its mostly sci-fi toy to play in hollywood movies
How long do you think source of the drones would last after the first detection of a swarm?
@@williammassey9275 source of drones? what like factories? they can be hidden and numerous, hard to detect and destroy, ..launch sites? again, in 1 truck you can have 8 such drones, and they have range, so you can launch them basically spread all around country with convergence point so they strike naval asset in mass and not 1 by 1..
Good episode! :)
the f-14s were freckin great, love you guys. so much fun and funny . . .
It occurred to me that the destroyers have a weapon that I’ve not seen used in DCS that might be fairly effective and less costly.
The 5 inch gun is a dual purpose gun. It can fire proximity fused flak rounds. Might work pretty good against a swarm of small targets and be a lot cheaper.
Hey Cap, one question and one video request. I am so in love with the hard work you guys did and it's quite the accomplishment, so congrats once again on serious modding capabilities.
1. I saw SM-2, SM-6, and ESSM fire off. Nearly all of the Nimitz class carriers also have these SAMs for self-defense too:
2 × AIM-7 SeaSparrow Mk 29 missile launcher (8x)
2 × RIM-116 RAM Mk 49 missile launcher (21x)
The Gerald R. Ford class carriers swap the older SeaSparrows for ESSM:
2 × RIM-162 ESSM Mk 29 missile launcher (8x)
2 × RIM-116 RAM Mk 49 missile launcher (21x)
It would be awesome to have these functional for the sake of accuracy and added firepower (58 more missiles isn't trivial in my opinion), especially since the carrier is always the target and can use all the point defense possible.
For a request, once you get the server back up and running, I'd absolutely love to stress test the 2020's modern Aegis CSG in rounds of both increasing difficulty and odd scenarios to see how the system handles it, and it could easily be an entire mini-series of videos. Here are some random ideas with very little thought put into them (human pilots on both sides):
- Around 12x fighter/bombers (perhaps some bombs or big RU rockets with some Fox-3) already at altitude along with long range anti-ship missiles already in the air and on their way vs. the CSG with an AWACs and 4x CAP up, but otherwise scrambling (the humans could be the CAP). The amount of both could be tested a bit, with the idea to try and distract Aegis with the anti-ship missiles while the attack aircraft try to get through a limited fighter screen.
- For maximum boom-boom, have the Iranian suicide drone swarm (in the spread-out configuration) as a ToT attack with the massive Iranian Boghammer fast-attack swarm like that video a long time ago. I don't recall specifically, but were the two 25mm Mk 38 autocannons on each destroyer working back in the old version? If not, seeing those added into the mix and perhaps working .50 Cal machine guns for anything in close would be cool.
- Use a map with a sizeable island, and although it's not realistic, it would be awesome to see a full group of Russian/Chinese ships pop out from around the other side of the island and essentially charge the US CSG at close range into its flank so we can get a video with some 127/130mm cannon fire like the old days. :)
- In order to show off the SM-6 range and altitude, perhaps have 24x RU/CH high-altitude bombers trying to attack from high altitude on a bomb run (not too realistic these days but it adds some variety), while another ~24 Mig-31's release high sub-sonic/supersonic anti-ship missiles ToT.
- Perhaps take the entire Russian northern fleet (minus their broken aircraft carrier) and have it engage a single CSG. If it needs to be a bit more realistic to balance the forces, you could give the CSG a Marine Amphibious Ready Group with an amphibious assault carrier Wasp class (F-35B configuration), and if they're modeled in DCS, two LPD amphibious landing dock ships (San Antonio class) . If they aren't modeled, perhaps it would be fun to finally use those LCS ships that were modeled earlier (4 of those to replace the two large amphibious ships), as sort of a corvette class equivalent.
Thank you Cap and GR!
Thanks!
loving the scoreboard
I'm curious to see how the gun on the Visby class with its programmable ammo would deal with this sort of attack.
I was waiting for the 'swarm' to come from every aspect angle. To me, the idea of the swarm is you have more drones than the fleet has missiles, or the time to engage all the targets is longer than the ingress time of the drones. I would have taken all 150 drones and spaced them to approach from at least 180 degrees, but most likely 360. Not only is that 'worst case' for simultaneous engagements, but you also guaranteed that 1 missile == 1 drone
The more spread the drones are the easier it is for the Aegis to track them, as you are on different panels,.so you actually help the system
@@aitorbleda8267 Can you go deeper into that?
@@cowmoo5596 An AEGIS system is a composite flat panel radar. they are PESA radars.
So what you have is an array of antennas
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AN/SPY-6 (link to AESA, PESa is similar but passive elements)
Each element has a sector that it controls, with overlapping.
If you separate the targets, you are in line of sight of more panels, and therefore you have more elements to track them.
Not only that, but radar returns of targets that are close are diffucult to differentiate, and tend to appear as a single target. Doubtful for an AEGIS with Shahed returns signatures on the system, but as a general rule.
Of course, if the targets are too close, then a single missile might kill several shaheds, so it is not always a good plan...
Also, most AEGIS being PESA, they have trouble with many different targets
www.rfwireless-world.com/Terminology/AESA-radar-vs-PESA-radar.html
good video thanks.
LOVE THAT plane attack at the end!!!! HILARIOUS!!!!
Happy New Year Sir Cap. Random question. Would the us navy allow a cargo ship to get within a few miles of its carrier fleet?
Keep up the great work please
No.
They wont even allow lighthouses but some things are just too hard to sink
Would have been interesting to see if you would done a realistic scenario where there's a simultaneous attack by drone swarm and exocet missiles lunched by the Iranians against the carrier group
عالی بودخوشمان آمد🎉🎉
Thanks for the costs of all these fancy weapons.
Could those drones also fly lower? So they don't get detected by the radars.
YES, IN REALITY MISSILES CAN'T TAKE OUT SMALL SIZED DRONES, BUT DCS IS OP! SHAHED-136 ARE WAY EFFECTIVE IN UKRAINE! US MADE MISSILES ARE STRUGGLING AGAINST THESE DRONES IN UKRAINE, THERE ARE PLENTY OF PROOFS AVAILABLE!
I just posted the same question....lol
Radar would detect them all the way down to nearly sea level.
They must let the US win. What do you expect here?
@Joey Liu im pretty sure you have no idea what you're talking about. It's not a question of "letting the US win". Why do you think we spend close to a trillion dollars on national defense every year? We spend more than the next 10 countries combined. And you think a hundred and fifty little drones are going to take out not just the most advanced aircraft carrier in the world, but also the most powerful battle group the planet has ever seen? Facts don't care about your opinions.
I’m sure that fifty containers on an oil tanker’s deck would set alarm bells ringing aboard the carrier.
OK fine, it's a cargo container ship then.
@@grimreapers haha
So the answer is to take a bunch of old airframes that were due for scrap anyway, pile as much boom as possible onto them, fit radio controls and get the guys from the Rotor Riot channel to plant their faces into the carrier from 10 feet altitude. Seems like a sound strategy!
could the drones be programmed to skim the water similar to how you flew in. Then spread them out as much as possible and see if they can sneak through the missile cover and get by the seawiz?
You need to compare the dollar value of the missiles fired against the cost of repairing or replacing a carrier. Definitely worth the money.
13 bill for a Ford carrier.
@@zdpeters4325 Right, so the price of the missiles to defend it is justified.
That doesn't even mention the 4,000 people aboard who are put in danger as well.
@@GageEakins Well yes, there is that.
I keep thinking about the old battleship biehive shells.
The thought was that shooting a salvo of massive 16-Inch rounds airbusting full of ball barings and shred large groups of aircraft.
It did not work in reality, as you did not modern radars and targeting computers and you had to set the timer manually for the airburst, before loading the shells.
But with modern tech it would be pretty simple and much cheaper then spending 300million $ of missiles to take out large swarms.
Not even modern tech, just mid to late WWII stuff. The USN was using proximity fuses in early 1943.
@@dgthe3 Well getting a 16" shell within 1943 proximity range on an aircraft flying 500km/h at 10.000 feet is a masterful shoot indeed.
At that point laser or jamming guns are better. Why cover your ship in old cannons?
@@skylanh4319 Ships already have access to ECM systems, but you can harden your missiles pretty well against that.
Laser defense system may become a thing but we do not have the tech yet.
But we do have computers that could place a 1ton fragmentation round right in the path of a swarm of missiles.
A 1ton "AHEAD" shell would clear a massive area.
@@steffenjespersen247 very few countries have the tech to create communications that can't be jammed.
We do have the tech for laser systems. They just require huge amounts of electricity and have issues through weather. And targeting that precisely for long enough.
I think an emp missle would be better then some shotgun blast.
i like the statistics window
The virtual budget is astounding.
Just wondering when you started talking about sm-2s going after these 136s...the cost difference is ridiculous.
Its a lot cheaper to replace the SM-2s than an entire aircraft carrier so the cost difference isn't that massive
Considering the difference in defense budgets I'd say 1/100 ratio was a draw.
Don’t worry, the US taxpayers can pay for the damages of all carrier groups in a fking hour.
@@ObeyNoLies Defence budgets are about 1/50. GDP is nearly 1/100 though. So in purely economic terms, Iran would bankrupt itself faster building $20,000 drones than the USA would making $1,500,000 missiles, if they each did it in a 1:1 ratio. Which is utterly insane.
I feel like a WWII era fleet carrier with it's full gun complement would get along better than a current carrier in this scenario as it had a MUCH more robust anti air capability. I'd love to see a WWII era carrier fighter wing + the carrier group AAA vs. the drones.
Computer drones would outperform human manned gun drones. The drones would have gotten closer to the carrier group. But it still would be interesting to see.
@@metatechnologist Closer, yes. But I feel like they'd still ultimately end up with a 100% kill rate (or very close) due to the fact that those drones are much slower than even the fighter/bombers of that era combined with the massive volume of flak a WWII era carrier group can sustain. Modern carrier groups aren't built to counter huge numbers of incoming attackers whereas an old WWII vintage group was designed to counter large aerial attacks. Like you said, it would be interesting to see.
You guys realize there is 360 degrees of attack direction. Not only a block of drones. Absolute evasive action. VERY INTERESTING. Cheers.
Very interesting video, TY.
If I was planning such an attack I would use multiple swarms using a mix of mainly cheap decoy drones to wear down the missiles defences. And to also send a few decoys towards each ship. by the fourth wave may have overwhelmed the group to keep up the rate of missiles launches.
You would have fighter jets blowing you up before you launched your first wave. lol
They started with all in the air and no fighters.
Also, decoys wouldn’t save you much. The explosives are not the expensive part of a drone or missile.
البته این شبه سازی چیزی هست که خودشان دوست دارنددرونش پیروزشوندومثل همیشه بزرگ نمایی بکننداماایران اگربخواهدحمله کنداول قایق های بی سرنشینی که بسیارپیشرفته هستندکه نسخه ی اولیه اش همانی بودکه دردریای عمان به ناوهواپیمابرآمریکااثابت کردوناوراغرق کردبودوپیشرفته ترشدکه۱۵سال پیش عملیاتی شدوحتی یمن هم ازش استفاده کردوناوامارات رانابودکردونسخه یجدیدوپیشرفته اش که دونوع هستندیکیشون انتهاری همانندپهبادشاهد۱۳۶ودیگری باجای دادن ۲۰تا۳۰تاراکت وموشک تابرد۷۰۰و۸۰۰کیلومترراداراست دوروزپیش نسخه یجدیدش به همراه موشکی بابر۶۰۰تا۶۵۰کیلومترویک موشک کروز دیگرباهواپیمایی هم باسرنشین وهم بی سرنشین که هم مثل قایق تندروبه سرعت ۲وخورده ای کیلومتربرساعت سرعتش برروی دریادرهنگام پروازباسرعت ۳۵۰کلیومتربرساعت باطول پروازخوب که آن هم خیلی وقت پیش عملیاتی شده بودنسخه ی جدیدش رونمایی شدبه غیرازموشک ابومهدی بابرد۱۰۰۰کیلومتردردریاوخشکی وسرعت بالاکه هم ازسوی برتاب درخششی وهم ازقایق شلیک میشودودشمن اصلی وفرضی راتشخیص میدهدبعلاوه درارتفاع بسیارپائین پروازمیکندورادارگریزی عالی داردکه حتی دشمن رائول میزندکه به سمت دیگری میرودوزمانی که سیستم پدافندی دشمن چه درخششی وچه دریاغافل گیرمیشودوبسیاردقیق ونقطه زن است داداشم ایران استادجنگ نامتعارف هست اینجور که این کلیپ روساختن ایران حمله نمیکنه
@@hamid638 True
Check this out
Tactical Swarm Drones
Such mass use of cheap swarms with robotic support vehicles gives a large amount of redundancy and resilience. Using such massed systems used in various combinations can be very effective on the battlefield, being far cheaper than most other military systems at achieving high success rates, without endangering your own assets. With the advent of ever cheaper, very compact AI autonomous systems and advanced sensors, the possibilities to transform warfare is vast. The automatic abilities to recognise targets including friend or foe and to safely deactivate, unlike cluster bombs, limiting non combatant collateral damage and unwanted structural damage.
Unlike most military hardware, mass production and logistics of such drones is very fast, enabling millions to quickly be produced and easily transported for deployment.
The system uses three main arms that are complementary
Tactical Command drones aided by Robotic support vehicles
Micro Data repeaters drones
Micro sensor, decoy and 'mop up' drones
Repeater drones form communication chains between the tactical drones carrier for micro drones and the support central command robotic support vehicles networks. These networks use a variety of data links including secure optical systems that are resilient from conventional electronic jamming.
Deep cover swarms are specialized micro drones used for close quarter search and destruction in densely demanding areas.
Each larger tactical attack drone has a selection of micro drones using a variety of functionalities and sensors.
The command drones are used to direct 'attack' swarms.
Decoy swarms have high radar and heat signatures used to overwhelm any radar and infrared detection systems.
I appreciate it's probably unrealistic but what about a drone swarm from multiple directions, ie from North, South, East, West, or a big circle tightening up. Would that spread allow them to get in much easier due to tracking and multiple directions?
ETA. Also what about the drones approaching from below the 15ft height the F14s tried to do
Was going to suggest the same thing myself!
How would you get them on all four corners? Do the Iranian drones have the range to kite around the carrier groups effective engagement range? Maybe Iran attacks the fleet as it's moving around the Horn of Africa.
I thought about using a weaving drone swarm as a meat shield for a flight of high speed bombers using long range standoff ASuMs.
I think the immense speed differences would sufficiently confuse automated A2D systems, a cloud of supersonically accelerating missiles suddenly bursting out from a subsonic cloud of weaving blips.
In this scenario I think the best use case is flying them straight at the carrier group in loose formation in a trickle day after day. Use up the American ammo and keep the troops on edge for as long as you can. Until you think the time is right for a conventional strike. Without missiles those carrier groups are defenseless. The economy of scale will kick after you make a few 1000 drones.
@@darkjill2007 like I said, unrealistic but even two or three sides from say a couple of cargo ships.
ESSM is a 'low end missile'.
SM-6 is the high end missile.
I was cringing when the ships shot SM-6s at the drones... IRL that would not happen, what a waste of money lol
@@surefresh8412 Me too. I was careful to put 'low end missile' in quotes!!!
@@surefresh8412 I am surprised the USN is still fielding Phalanx.
@@clangerbasher I also found it funny he called the ESSM a "big missile" when in reality it's small enough four fit in a cell!
@@surefresh8412 Yes. By the same token I know nothing about airplane missiles.
Thanks for the interesting video Cap. Where can I find the Shahed-136 mod, so I can experiment myself?
Cap flies through jet wash, engine stalls. Cap: "Oh my God my engines have stalled that have never happened before... Someone need to revisit TopGun again...
He even had a Maverick helmet
I would like to see the same 150 but launched from 3 directions…..3 separate Q ships
These could be used as a missile soak before a Silworm attack or a suicide boat attack, Could you try this scenario Cap?
yes
@@grimreapers awesome
Set up drones flying lower altitude might change outcome little bit
Great video
This is fascinating. I wonder if I've are using such software to determine the "max wasting" spread of drones for incoming air defense? Send yours want to deploy them in that way which costs the carrier group the most missiles deployed.
It's just so unrealistic. If there was that dense of a drone swarm and a missile came in and hit the middle of them it would take out a bunch of them, not only a couple at the most.
For drones that small the shockwave and pressure differences created by the heat of the explosions would have a serious impact on flight characteristics. There is a video of a Cessna flying through the wake of a Bell 205 (civilian Huey) and flipping over. These drones would stand little chance of making it through that alone.
Yup i notice it definitely shock wave will affect those drones flight with that tight formation
FOD is Foreign Object Damage. So FOD WALKS are when the crew is required to walk to deck to look for and remove debris so that the sorties can fly out without sucking debris into their engines. Essentially, he is sayind that the drones will get within a specified range capable of littering the deck with debris.
I was curious as to what it meant. Thanks!
Hey Cap, would it be possible to model lasers in DCS? They could probably be used for a 2025 carrier group.
Trying to get it to work now.
I find it hard to believe a real carrier group is that ineffective at killing an F-14 thats flying low, unless they're all doing the moskva thing where they have their defenses off because their coms break if they're on
Well the issue here is that they didn't have an AWACS in the sky, which is rare when going anywhere where a threat could be coming. The game also doesn't model the over the horizon radar that the US actually has which bounces radar waves off the ionosphere to get over the curvature of the earth. Also if the carrier spotted a tomcat coming in like that, it would send its own planes up to intercept as well as air defenses.
The F-14 run was done with the 1990's carrier group, I could try it again against the 2020's group.
Hello. Thanks for sharing. What kind of Video Card are you running?
That approach with the F-14s is epic. Better than most movies lol
No way it would ever touch the carrier group, even with late 1980’s tech.
Maybe minor damage, but swarms will saturate the carrier defense systems, everything is focused on too many targets. Missiles will be everywhere, sensors will be going off like hell. Even with a modern fleet lol and then this drones are communicating with each other, locking, prioritizing targets so it's also hard to predict where they're going.
Thing is with these Drones, all you would have to do is change course, as they're only gps guided. Also Airburst AA Munition for the Mainguns on the Destroyers and Cruisers would be very effective.
It can be a decoy to depleate the SSMs but then Iran has mach 4 missiles like Persian gulf missiles with 400 km range 1500 kg warheads which can then be used after the swarm
@@majorix1 They make ELINT ones so they could just chase the ships' radars.
Oh yes it would - the US have never managed to stop a large slow lumbering 1st gen sea skimmer aimed at them in anger in actual combat. The score is currently 3-0 to the skimmers.
I'm seriously worried for the US navy when it comes to drone swarms irl
dont be they wont be fireing missiles at swarms in real life they will be jamming them also with slow swarms they wont be able to catch ships since ships also move and it takes time to go far in the drones, if they don't get the correct data for where the ships are they cant hit them. drone swarms sound dangerous but the us isn't really scared of them.
@@yujinhikita5611 I'm not going to put bets on anything until it happens. Any type of attack that involves a swarm attack to over load defenses is feasible against the US as far as I'm concerned. Aerial drones, sea drones, missiles. I would never count on jamming to be the only source of defense. Plenty of weapons have been made jam resistant or even home in jam. And active protection like missiles and cwis are not unlimited.
@@Jor0716 well its probably not the only thing they'll use, i think they already got what it takes to bring down a swarm be it advanced jam resistant drones or cheap commercial once with bomb strapped to them. you also gotta think about how jam resistant drones are way more expensive and so you probably cant field them in very large numbers, and so at that point you can just shoot them down. we have also got laser weapons in development, which of course isn't in full service yet but has infinite ammo*. and ships being made now has the capacity to field high energy weapons. i really wouldn't be worried. but of course we cant know til it happens.
That was good.
Do you guys have flight logs that keep track of your flying hours in each type?
I really can't fathom why we (the US) keep sinking (pun intended) so much money into carriers. The economics just don't work out in my mind. Given how cheap drones/missiles are it seems likely that an adversary could quite easily overpower any hope of defending a large swarm of them at a fraction of the cost of the carrier itself.
Please take these videos with a grain of salt as it is just a Sim game and they can only get so accurate in terms of detail. IRL US Navy has a metric f*** ton defenses in place for various situations. Not to mention things they've likely never told the public.
@@thewakeup5459 Absolutely agree that DCS can't come close to mimicking real life, but it's just simple math. I don't care how many defenses are in play, at some point they reach saturation.
Let's say they can handle 1000 missiles per minute. That means I only have to reach 1001/min to get a hit. At $1mil per missile (just a number) that's only $1B to take out a $13B carrier. That doesn't count the planes and personnel.
I just don't see the math working as the missiles get better and cheaper and the ships get more expensive.e
@@thewakeup5459 Especially things like lasers as they are starting to fit them to ships.
@@memeboi8483 I was literally thinking about going back and editing my post to add something like that.
@@bitslammer Consider it's _not_ just the US. China is as well-they're projected to have procured up to six carriers by 2035.
It's not just a matter of "x number of missiles versus x number of defenses." What's your delivery method for getting 1,001 missiles onto a CSG?
Nowadays people tend to critique a CSG's ability to defend itself and overlook the strategic value of a CSG. Carriers are mobile airfields and are meant to operate out in the open ocean, providing support with their aircraft squadrons. Other cheaper assets are the ones getting up close doing the "physical" fighting.
In peacetime, carriers make a big political statement. They secure interests overseas and are an instrumental asset in achieving bluewater status.
We're definitely not experts on this. Chances are the people in charge know more than we do. If multiple countries continue sink money into carriers, they've concluded carriers are important enough to be devoting this much resources into them.
Ideally, the 5inch guns would have gotten many of the drones. In real life, the fleet would have been trying to communicate with the drones to determine what pronoun they prefer before opening fire.
Important to take into account shrapnel from other drones taking multiple drones out. Also the shock wave from the explosion
Caps cackle when he laughs kills me.
You should do a simulation where Iran launches a large drone swarm like this one, but then have them launch Anti-Ship missiles after the drone swarm. In theory the ships should be low on sams by the time the Anti ship missiles are launched, causing the US ships to be defenseless against the missiles.
Considering they were barely starting to shoot their more advanced missiles…. Unlikely. Besides there is priority targeting. So unless they launch anti ship missiles after the attack they would be detected early and targeting.
what we do know is that drones make a great distraction and missile sponge. Now match that up with a time on target land based antiship missile strike and you might have some hits connecting.
So, to respond to a big drone swarm, I wonder if the USS could leverage MIRV code to direct some 9-12 individual mini warheads that can get independent targeting info from the targeting radar.
One SM6 could list a dozen little BLU-108 skeets (like from the CBU-97) Disperse a few clouds of BLU-108s over the swarm when it's out 10+ miles and they could knock down half of the drones, allowing the use of fewer invidiual SM-2s, -3s, -6s.
Just a thought.
@@robk1602 RE the skeets : one 'technical challenge' might be the speed of the drones (150 kph, min for Shaheeds, iirc) ... This might leave only one or two rotations of the skeet to pick out a target. Also, the skeet distribution would have to along the long-axis of (and a bit in front of) the drone-swarm, to allow for the most potential hits. This all means the skeet carrier needs to be quite maneuverable during it's final approach. Hm, also the skeets cab count on being within a defined vertical range, to ensure hitting ground vehicles with a penetrator... not sure what that max distance is, but the drone cloud could re-organize vertically, I guess, if it sensed a skeet-swarm attack. .. oh, the tangled webs we weave....
Could the 5inch guns be used for aa in this case would the blast radius be better?
If you can run in under the radar could you not use rocket pods?
Or missles that are aimed?
2 thoughts, 1 could you throw the drones up against the seawiz alone with no missles? im just curious how the cheap option would do, 2 why do you have to pop all the way up to drop those bombs with the f-14s? couldnt you just like do a shallower arc version of what the helicopters do when theyre lobbing rockets in a pop up attack? i mean the bombs are going to be going 400knots or whatever so if you released them in a lob 200ft from the carrier and scraped the deck as you came past wouldnt they hit the side? i could see there being some problems with the release mechanisim under gs but the gs would basically be in the right direction i know there was that comment about being too low to release and the x but you and sock seemed to be unsure if it would let you release or not and i mean even if you couldnt do it with bombs you could like totally do the same thing with ungided rocket pods. i dont know if they work on an f-14 but maybe an a10? probably easier to fly that low too
and MORE good science - GR style :)
I suspect that as soon as the drones were destroyed, the carrier group would then sink the tanker, if not sooner. Then they would sink every tanker within range.
I don't know anything about weapon systems. My question is can jets carry missiles that can intercept the carrier groups missiles? If so could the drones accompanied by jets have better effect? Thanks.
Can the drones be set to come in from all directions at once?
Hey cap could you do the battle of Iwo Jima. But the task forces is a morgen carrier strike group if not another thing I would like to see is a like a gulf war version for war game so the air attack from the start of the war love the content keep it up!
Multiple hits with 155mm rounds would do just as much damage and arrive a lot quicker.
Remember back in the 70s they were testing Sea Wolf against 4.5in shells doing more than Mach 1.
Interesting ! What happens if the drones are 5 times faster ? or a second and third wave sent ?
now this does look sick and im only half way into the video but i would like to see the crazy mini guns that fire 100k rounds a minute vs these drones
So, lower the altitude of the swarm to under 5 meters?
How do the 150 drones track their targets? How does each one ignore the other 149?
Isn't there ECM for that?
This is frightening! Mass drone launch followed by anti-ship missiles. The carrier group will have an expended ordinance, game over. We need an effective laser yesterday!
as regards the missiles blowing up too many drones at once - maybe it was the dynamite inside the drones warhead going off?
I would like you to use the same number of drones but have them staggered vertically as well as horizontally. Also it would be interesting to have them fly in low like the Jet Aircraft.
Don’t these drones need to maintain signal for targeting? So if they fly low they would lose signal and not be functional.
Multiple cameras drones would add different perspectives, maybe a camera drone hovering over the target. Would have helped with the smoke, but pretty cool 😎✌️
guys this is the most amazing and funny video ever.....thanks it is a lot a fun...thanks captain🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣
What would the effect of 30mm autocannon fire be on the waterline of a Destoyer or Frigate or Carrier...?? Could damage be done..? If so maybe the skimming the surface method has a future for an overmatched force against a strike group...
When will the new ships be available? :)
I am proud
What if 1000 drones are used in combination with 400 water drones, plus cruise missles or hypersonic missles and Tomcat attacks? Would that work, or the system is so efficient it won't make a difference?