@grimreapers that did look kinda shaky, performance wise. The sensor package build, not the flying. I don't know enough to get down to that level of tweaking the assets, but before the unified release, I had managed a hypersonic SM-6 variant I was testing as a land attack weapon from the updated Arleigh Burke that CH released. The the original flight III and tyco with the 3 different role loadouts. I can definitely see how being able to build my own bottom-up or modified with permission mods would have some interesting potential. I'm so glad your channel introduced me to DCS World. Thanks again! No, I wouldn't have shared that modified CH content with anyone. Just for my own education. Because even I can see his code's efficient and his assets are great. I wouldn't disrespect his work like that.
@@grimreapers "NO". ,,, because the war will be in Beijing, Shanghai and all China. . The Philippines will allow US-Military to get approx 200 kilometer closer to China. ,,, station 1,000 units ICBM/Minuteman Nuclear missiles in the West Philippines Sea, Batanes group of islands, Luzon Straits and Philippines Sea using 16 units US-Nuclear submarines and US battle-ships loitering in China's perimeter.
How're you feeling, Cap? I remember you making a video a while back about how you would be taking some time off from commentating, and then you have commentated on every video since... 😂 Hope all is well. We appreciate you, you stubborn SOB. Cheers mate 🍻
My wife also says I am very stubborn. I'm about the same TBH, trying to find the reason for my voice being so f*cked up. Just spent a small fortune$ seeing a private ENT doctor but he couldn't really find anything wrong with me. Struggling on.
@@usmc4eternitey it's like five robotic lions that can combine to form a giant fighting robot. I know it sounds silly when I say it like that but growing up back in the 80s it was awesome.
@@grimreapers No we love your beautiful British accent commentating the battles. It's just a shame when so much is happening all at once in the big battles that you can't commentate all of it!
Why can't you build a simulated recon satellite by just taking the AWACS, removing its surface ceiling, and placing it over the target area, invulnerable, and +300K feet, and 0 speed as of it were a star destroyer in the Star wars sim?
@@AjEdw aye but they can be geo-synchronised to remain above one particular area. And in a game like this, with closed virtual maps that don't replicate earths movements, it would in fact "sit still". See, you're not the only one that can be an insufferable know-it-all.
@@SA80TAGE They cannot be geo-synchronised. They are placed into much, much lower orbits and don't have anything like the onboard fuel required to move into a geosync orbit over a random location
@SA80TAGE Geosynchronous orbit is much much further out, 36,000 KM versus 500-1000km. You can not have a high resolution picture that can find something so tiny as a carrier group at that range. No satellite can move itself from LEO to Geosynchronous, it has to get there on launch. Communications satellites and some weather satellites are in geo sync. As are some radar based but again the resolution is not sufficient to detect a carrier group. Try not to be a d!co and listen to experts that tell you something
Predictions? Irl? Nah F-35, E-2Ds, various space based platforms, and systems like Australia's skywave OTH radar will probably give plenty of early warning. If the weapons are guided via satellites, the carrier group has anti sat capabilities. Hypersonic weapons have a very hard time with targeting through a mix of the plasma sheathe effect and the very limited time they have to acquire a target, which will vastly enhance the capabilities of EW systems like Nulka and F-35s using their AESA radars as super powered EW antenna arrays. In the sim? Yes. The kill chain will be greatly simplified, EW is extremely poorly modeled in DCS, there will be nothing like the Nulkz decoy system in play, and without those factors it's simply a matter of the SM-3 and SM-6 not having a high enough PK against these missiles.
The U.S. doesn't underestimate anybody. We prepare for enemies that are 10x as strong as they actually are. That's why we continue to stay so far ahead of everyone else. But it's also why U.S. citizens have the luxury of being arrogant and confident in our military. We know that even if the enemies are several times more capable than they claim they are, the United States has already prepared for it.. @@tamiraaa8916
If that was a British carrier fleet we'd have missiles, gnus, strong language and used teabags for defence. Not just any teabags, proper builders teabags! 🤤
"we'd have missiles, gnus, strong language and used teabags for defence" *Wow! You've compromised our national security, for the sake of a game????* You revealed our top secret long range anti-aircraft gnu program!!!!!! Mind you they're a formidable weapon when you get them really angry by sticking a bloody great rocket up their arse 🚀🦬 Also great for clearing enemy trenches if you can drop them in at Mach 2.
"we'd have missiles, gnus, strong language and used teabags for defence" *Wow! You've compromised our national security, for the sake of a game????* You revealed our top secret long range anti-aircraft gnu program!!!!!! 🚀🦬
Love the thought on this one. Surprised at the results. Have you considered doing a "Red Storm Rising" scenario, but instead of US, have 2027 Chinese fleet as the target? Could have various tech levels from Soviets/Russian?
Imagine the feeling. You're in your Wish fighter, got a few Temu missiles. You've got 200 total flight hours and you're going up against an electronic warfare nightmare piloted by a guy with 1500 hours in ONE model of that aircraft. All the nopes.
Immagine flying your overpriced fighter that has a 30ish% combat readiness rate with your DEI pilot that isn't even sure about their gender and is on a cocktail of drugs to make them into what every they they want to turn themselves into. Using missiles produced with parts sourced from china (despite the fact your defense contractors pinkyswear they're not using chiense parts)
Chinese Over-the-Horizon Radar (OTH-R) systems utilize atmospheric refraction, using the ionosphere to extend radar signals beyond the horizon and detect targets at great distances. These systems are designed to monitor large maritime areas, which is essential for naval operations. Their advanced signal processing helps manage clutter and interference, enhancing tracking accuracy. Generally, these radars have a detection range of up to 600 kilometers (370 miles), depending on atmospheric conditions. 600Km it's like TWICE the range of an AWAC radar. they are essential to the chinese military doctrine. just imagine detecting a carrier battlegroup 600km away.
on a side note, despite the carrier group having successfully defended itself it has effectively been mission killed and would be forced to retreat lest the H6s come back for another strike or some PLAN warships show up.
Hi cap, It probably wouldn’t work and is horribly unrealistic, but I think it would be fun if you were able to load up CA vehicles into chinnok, and drop them into an active combat zone with people controlling them. The chinnok would fly in with a pilot and flight engineer, drop the tank/ whatever works, and the flight engineer would switch roles to the tank to act like the helicopter dropped it with a crew
I imagine as soon as the Chinese detected a US plane, they would direct an adjacent AWACS and bombers on an intercept course so if the first group was destroyed, the second group might be able to complete the mission.
I thought the concept of a ballistic missile submarine was scary. Now, there are higher speed aircraft capable of firing ballistic missiles!! I guess it's a good thing that China doesn't have any strategic bomber better than the " Wish B-52" right now. 😂😂
Is it me or the chinese anti-ship ballistic missiles final stage speed is kind slow at mach 4?? ICBMs final speed is like mach 25... shouldnt these missiles do at least mach 12??
it's absolutely adorable you think anything in this game is "accurate" to real life lol. The planes don't even match their real world counterparts for flight models, not exactly. And DCS doesn't use actual dynamic radars, every airframe (and missile) rcs is a flat value no matter what angle they are seen from. Also they are not actually ALLOWED to model defence and weaponry systems 1 to 1 with real world stuff.... Part of their contract with the military. "yes, lets give the public, and by extension, our enemies, access to run accurate simulations against specific weapon systems, surely that would never backfire right?" Don't be so dense. If you take these videos as "proof" of anything then you're an idiot, plan and simple.
in a realistic scenario. china would have spotted the carrier with their Yaogan satellites or WZ8 drones and fired their missiles well beyond the range of retaliation
You mean the ability to track a carrier group by satellite that nobody can seem to do in order to Target it? But yet somehow the Chinese are able to do that? Also please tell me how your Hypersonic drone is going to be able to detect anything? Because neither radar or Optical sensors are going to work through the plasma that a Hypersonic drone would generate. Hypersonic drones are literally a work of fiction and cannot exist with with anything close to current technology😂😂
@@hughmungus2760 China doesn't have the capability to guide their missiles towards moving targets via only satellite. That's a capability only the U.S. currently possesses with AEGIS. And the UK as well. China needs to paint the target with radar. And besides, even if they could, the U.S. would simply shoot the satellites down and ruin the guidance. And also, in a realistic scenario, the U.S. would have advanced warning from integrated land based radars in allied countries surrounding the area. They'd know the attack was coming the second it'd been launched. And the F-35's would've made quick work of the AWACs, J-20's and attacking bombers before any of them even knew they were being fired up on.
@@ObiWanShinobi917 and how do you know this? China has a satellite constellation with equal or greater accuracy than GPS and it has global coverage. It also has a vast network of earth observation (reconnaissance) satellites that can track within the RF, visible and infrared spectrums. You'd be a fool to think china doesn't have some kind of command and control system to network all those sensors together. In fact I already mentioned china specifically produced the Yaogan series satellites that observe the asia pacific in geostationary orbit in the visible spectrum and can passively track any US warship with a resolution of 2.5m. No radar required. Hell. I recall theres an article of a chinese optical satellite taking realtime videos of a US airfield with fighters moving around.
Hi Cap, nice video as always, but maybe the scoreboard is double what it is? When the KJ-20 0 got killed, it said 2x KJ even though only one was killed. However, it does not affect the results, so it's all good! Thanks for the video!
also, Im pretty sure J20s themselves can spot the carrier and relay information targetting information. Their range might not be as good as an AWACs but they can remain undetected while spotting the carrier at +100nm out.
They don't carry the sensors for that, they would need active radar. Their passive radar would not be able to pick up the aircraft carrier because the aircraft carrier would be locked down and not emitting any signals. So no the j-20 would not be able to detect the carrier group😂
E-2D's UHF band APY-9 radar will have already detected J-20 at a much longer range. Not to mention AEGIS platforms including Burke destroyers use BMD radars which can also detect J-20 at long range. Even Ford class carriers and upcoming Constellation class frigates now have BMD radars. So their is NO way a J-20 can approach an American CSG undetected. Though it is still possible for a J-20 to approach undetected a lone Burke Flight I/II destroyer operating on its own by flying low below the horizon of the older SPY-1 radars.
@@johnsilver9338 at 100nm out even if you can detect a J20 with UHF you can't shoot it down. You'll have to scramble to intercept The J20 only needs a target quality track for a few minutes before YJ21s arrive. I say 100nm is being extremely generous, the J20's radar can see a 4th gen fighter sized target out to well over 150nm (otherwise why would the PL15 even have that much range) A carrier is going to be a heck of alot more detectable on radar than even the biggest 4th gen fighter.
They absolutely could ships make massive very visible wakes satellites would absolutely see it and they aren’t stealth they emit a ton of em and have massive radar signatures, that parts a dumb question any relatively capable nation could locate a csg
What @Utubesuperstar said, plus what is the point of making a video in which nothing happens for 25 mins? Obviously the only case you play out in the sim is where there is detection leading to combat
@@Utubesuperstar I’m really not sure what you are getting at. I wasn’t posing a question of my own. I restated the title of the video. I have no doubt that China COULD detect an CSG. My personal objection to this simulation is that the it started out with the AWACS nearly already in position, and certainly on a near perfect heading. And while it is true that a satellite can see the wake, its much more nuanced then that. Even Chinese peer reviewed papers admit that it begins to fail once a ship is moving more than 20-knots. And resolution is another issue. And on top of that just knowing where to point the satellite in the first place is an obstacle to overcome on its own. Analyzing the images, even with the use of computers and a good algorithm isn’t real-time tracking, although it may be close to it, but it would still incur a delay.
@@Utubesuperstaryou do realize in a wartime scenario that carrier group is not going to be admitting a single electronic beep whistle or anything else they will be silent. The only way you're going to detect them is by visually finding them or getting within radar range
Great video! I've never really been a fan of the SuperBog, but, now that it is equipped with the AIM-174B it is really like the Tomcat. Although I'd always prefer the Super Tomcat, this new configuration is very interesting.
Didn’t they reverse the decision to retire the Ticonderoga Class? I think they’ve had the service life extended. Please look into this. Have a blessed day! 🇺🇸🤝🇬🇧
Great Vid! At some point, could we see a 1v1 between an Arleigh Burke and a Kirov class? It could just be off to the side of a main battle or something, just thought it'd be cool to see how they match up by themselves.
Silly set up...a bunch of bombers were just randomly flying out to sea and just happen to be exactly pointed at the carrier? And no AWACS would be allowed that close to a carrier group in the first place
I just love people who criticized and yet they don't take the time to actually watch the video listen to the scenario. Cuz if they did they would realize that their comment is kind of dumb
@@Wyomingchief look, he can do any video with any criteria he wants; I would just ask, what is the point? If you're going to use scenarios that are so obviously unrealistic, what do you learn?
Isn't a carrier group that has fired all or most of its defensive missiles tactically defeated, since it then has to return to a port somewhere to re-arm?
No. Carriers are resupplied by supply ships. They don't need to return to Port. They also could resupply the missiles via air as well. The one thing that the US military does better than anyone else is logistics. They are truly unmatched in that area.
@@GageEakins Currently VLS cells cannot be replenished at sea. Although the navy is conducting some tests right now, but the ships still need to be retrofitted.
the carrier would be fine. as long as the reactors are critical and the supply train keeps them fed and fueled, they can go all day long, baby. the destroyers and cruisers might need to return to port to restock VLS, but the 7th fleet alone has enough small boys to support two CSGs, and still have a few left over. the third fleet, which covers the central and eastern Pacific, has like three times as many small boys. planes aren't the only ones that can use the chainsaw tactic.
We can simulate the air-launched YJ-21 more reaslitically than the ship-launched variant. I can get the air-launched variant to arc up to 300,000ft. Sadly the ship-launched variants are limited to about 55,000ft. This means the air-launched variants can be intercepted by SM-3 while ship-launched variants can not.
I think Ukraine War has demonstrated that intercepting Hypersonic Ballistic Missiles is a more difficult task than expected maybe turn down the PK for SMs by 15%.
Not even closed because of the Aegis missile defense system is based off of input from every ship in that Carrier Group along with any air assets. Whereas the intercepts that are currently being made are being made based off a singular Patriot radar system. Patriot isn't quite as good as the combined assets of the US carrier task group
@@Wyomingchief Intercepting Mach 4 targets is calculating intercept points, when it moves 7 meters in 5 milliseconds, chances are there is no real-time course corrections possible, as such guesstimating probable location of target is what is happening, and at relative speeds needed by interceptor and target, that could anything between bullseye to 15 meters. The addition of radars improve resolution, but increase latency, and when talking about intercepting Hypersonics, latency is what matters most.
Probably been asked before, but could you clarify what hardware you have currently running this sim? I have DCS, but I've only ever used it as a combat flight sim, and not a battle sim. Wondering if my system could handle as many units.
As long as you're not just running the minimum requirements, you should be able to run it just fine. I've got a 2-year-old system and I can run these kind of Sims easily. And I know cap is running a system that's older than that by far
does the military use a combat sim? In 2010 i tested a game for army infantry that could kind of handle platoon level missions, but the controller was impossible and lag was impossible. Creating a full on sim that could handle division movements would be smart.
Cap, I know if would make for a boring video but there is a reason they put the fighter screen way out towards the threat axis. It does require a lot of tanker assets.
Sorry to hear about the youtube troubles, Cap. If you rerun your fleet interceptor/defender competition with AIM-174s and ST-21s I'll subscribe to the other platforms.
Dude don't use orbit as a measure of hight, orbit means you have gained sufficient velocity to not to fall back to Earth, part of that is being decently enough out of the atmosphere that your orbit wouldn't instantly decay, but mostly it's about the velocity, which even hypersonics do not travel at orbital velocity mach 20 is only 6860 m/s orbital velocity is ~7800 m/s in LEO.
cap I have a suggestion that the radar cross section can be less of j20 here is the data that I found (The F-35 has a lower RCS than the F-117 and is comparable to the B-2. The J-20 would have an radar cross section of about 0.01 square meters.)2.aim 260 is not in service or tested yet but PL-17 is tested so I think you should give j20 PL 17 as well and the the sim again
@@grimreapers, maybe the F35 pilot was a communist at heart and wanted to defect to China. That's the kind of story that makes your fans rage but keeps you monetized on UA-cam. :D
So to fight Chinese AWACS attacking US carrier group you would need : 1. anti-air missile with longer range than the chinese AWACS detection range (so more than 250 miles) OR 2. a submarine/submarine drones in the area ahead of the carrier group that can take out the AWACS before it gets in range of the carrier group... or 3. a very very very fast plane (like SR-72) armed with anti-air missiles that could fly ahead of the carrier groups and take out every awacs while it flies over china at hypersonic speeds. Maybe an idea that could work... if the US planted underwater anti-air missiles ``mines/drones``(with integrated radar) so if a war ever kicks off, those underwater anti-air mines would take out any awacs plane in the area if ordered to do so... which would take the chinese by complete surprise. But I dont think this kind of weapon even exists right now or is being developped at all... and if it did, it would need a lot of them to cover the area you want protected... but i still think its a good idea... :)
Basically what is realistically doable is an unmanned stealthy arsenal sub. Surface, nail the aircraft, submerge. If it can have a decent radar (no idea if it's doable), it would be self-sufficient aside from receiving a que when to surface.
large AWACs are quickly becoming the battleship of the skies in that they're too expensive, too vulnerable and are better served by networked fighters, drones or satellites.
One to watch is the Hypersonic unmanned aircraft engine Reaction Engines are working on, apparently the ground tests are up to Mach 3.5 sustained, as the new Tempest being a supposed drone controller, things might get interesting by the end of the 2020's. Stupidly fast stealth UAVs, carrying Hypersonic missiles are going to ruin someone's day.
Well not only that but Hypersonic drones that are going to gather intelligence is going to be also more mutually exclusive. You can't run radar or Optical sensors behind a plasma
I watch your content all the time. I'm entertained with it. Being former military myself I still find it entertaining. Problem is your setup is really not realized the way it would be the way that it would go down. Both of us knowing this, I would like like for you would express more that the NATO portion of these exercises would not be so naive in their approach. Just saying, express that more than you do. Keep going. I love your content. 😊😊😊
Uh no. 1) Carrier would know instant it had been detected and launch own AWACS. 2) Ballistic missiles have predicable trajectory so fleet goes evasive and time to calculate optimal intercept. So intercept missiles won't just fly randomly (excluding fact that satellite would also track ballistic missiles reaching 300,000 feet). 3) Chinese missile would have to have excellent seeker to alter course to hit moving ships. 4) New SM-6 A2A (AIM174) have seekers to intercept ballistic missiles guided by either ships, AWACS or F35. 5) Carrier would launch refueling F18s. Dogfight would be just for fun when the mission is over.
1.) Slow targets like carrier and destroyers can be passively detected and tracked/locked by EW UAVs (with satellite image recognition), because carrier obviously have to maintain communication for aircraft operation. It is possible that carrier only know it is detected when destroyer only detect the ballistic missile flying toward them. 2.) Modern ballistic missiles have maneuvering capability. For example, CM-401 launched by H-6 (Clearly not YJ-21) have "near space trajectory"(SM-3 as space interceptor is completely useless), "supersonic maneuverablility"(easily adjust trajectory) and "top down attack"(SM-2 and SM-6 can only begin to intercept it when it dives right above the carrier with 30-40km vertical distance). 3.) slow moving ship is almost stationary target to fast missile. The most important thing you missed is the relative speed between CM-401 and anti-air missile. Mach 10+ relative speed is double of any chemical explosion speed, so ballistic missile can easily out run the explosive shock wave. SM-2 and SM-6 would be ineffective and intercepting ballistic missile head on is even more ineffective at the first place.
And yet the satellites aren't good enough at this point to reliably track an aircraft carrier 100% of the time. Because satellites in a low enough orbit to reliably track it or not able to be in a geosynchronous orbit so they're only going to get brief glimpses of it. Satellites that are actually in a geosynchronous orbit are too far away and don't have the optical capability of reliably tracking
perhaps, but then what? They cannot easily get out of the way in a huge lumbering unmanoevrable slow target like an AWACS. All it means is they get time to radio out that they are under attack
@@harryspeakup8452 theoretically you can shoot it down. Because ships when fired upon by SM6s do defend themselves, I dont see why escort fighters can't do the same. But I dont think theres a recorded instance of an air to air missile shooting down another air to air missile so its purely theoretical
Because they have a fuel tank in the fuel tank Can Only Hold so much fuel. When he says they ran out of fuel, that means they've reached Bingo Fuel and have to return to the carrier. It doesn't mean they literally stop Flying😂😂
As for detection how china would try to detect US carriers far away from its shores wouldn't be with expensive and easy to shoot down AWACs but with their WZ8 hypersonic drone which can be air launched from a H6 variant. Seeing that in game would be interesting because so far a maneuverable hypersonic target is nearly impossible to shoot down at range.
Except they've talked about it but that's not a demonstrable capability at this point. And honestly I don't think it's something that they are capable of doing. Because of hypersonic speeds their sensors are not going to work through a plasma Shield😂
@@Wyomingchief for starters the plasma only becomes a problem at above mach 10 and it only forms along the front of the missile meaning it can still be remotely guided via datalink from a rear mounted antenna. If we're going by demonstrations, nobody has unclassified footage on any of the US missiles being demonstrated either so its all up for speculation.
DCS is really awesome for military simulations... but all it lacks right now is simulating submarines + torpedoes + anti-torpedoes systems... if DCS ever got that... + lets say being easier to run like thousands of ships-missiles-planes at the same time... we could do really realistic war scenarios.... Are submarines ever planned for DCS or modders planning to do anything about it?? I dont know if it would be possible to simulate some kind of major 1000+ missile attack on israel with DCS or would DCS crash? Are the various iranian-hezbollah missiles even in DCS? That would be interesting to see since that scenario has a huge chance of happening... It would be interesting see how israel could carry out airstrikes against hezbollah missile sites and if hezbollah could take out some planes... Another scenario would be simulating a north korean attack on seoul... with artillery and missiles while the US-SKorean tries to take out as many artillery sites and missiles launch positions as possible... Of course you could only simulate like a tiny part of the border but imagine being able to simulate seoul taking artillery and missiles with buildings blowig up, that would make one hell of a show.
for those massed attack sims you're better off using something like CMANO which handles it much better than DCS but still has the same level of realism
People keep forgetting DCS is not a naval combat simulator. And if you want that kind of realism you're going to have to go to one of those programs. DCS is strictly for air combat with some Naval assets added in when it comes to their air defense
So I know DCS and Ace Combat have a bit of rivalry (and the latter is also not exactly realistic) but how about you try running some Ace Combat missions/campaign in DCS to see how plausible they are?
I almost think that AIM-260 is too fast in game? Consequently, it struggles to re-aquire stealth planes, PL-15 gets more time to do it. I wish I was smarter, then I'd be able to fix all of these problems we have.
You are about air and carriers but you forget every carrier group has a sub or two. Do you not think the other side would have subs around. They could also give away the position of the carrier. If they did they would die but?
Yeh, we've had to fiddle with things a bit because IRL the YJ-21 would come down steeper, we can't model that trajectory, so we've had to give SM-3 a little extra capability to account for this. As ever, best we can do.
AIM260 is actually in production. And if you pay attention you will notice that this is a simulation base 2 years in the future😂😂 guess you're not as smart as you thought you were
F-22s already started integrating with AIM-260 since two years ago. Even then AIM-120D3 is already on par with Meteor and older AIM-54 Phoenix in terms of range also since 3 years ago. So against PL-15, AIM-120D3 and Meteor are enough. Against PL-17, AIM-174B are enough. AIM-260 is just an added bonus.
Using Data Link-16. Can a fully loaded B1-B Lancer or Super Tomcat fly close to sea level using five F-35 or five F-22 as an escort cover shell per missile truck(F35/B1B), as a radar deflecting blanket to get into a high probability kill range?
Would be great if you actually made this a bit more realistic. Typically there are only about 3 Arleigh Burgh destroyers in a carrier group and you just doubled that.. bummer realistic would be more fun. Also satelites will track carrier groups no awacs needed
Please before you make suggestions you should probably know a little more about what you're talking about. In a wartime scenario which is exactly what we're talking about, I guarantee you that carrier group is going to have at least six other combat ships with it. Also contrary to what people think carrier battle groups are not easily tracked by satellite. But please provide me with a legitimate link that proves I'm wrong😂
@grimreapers that's exactly what I thought, but I do appreciate you confirming it for me. You have got some damn fine modder pals, and I know you've gotten into it, Cap. Your 2027 builds and runs have been wonderful stuff. Eye-opening when the USAF suddenly announces they're firing the SM-6 at planes from other planes all the sudden, and you have got it built and edited to start simming in a couple of days. Outstanding work, guys, gals and otherwise!
@Wyomingchief thank you. They're pretty good about that, when they're using a sharable mod. As in it's not something that they've modded without the creators permission to redistribute that way. They're pretty good at not violating other folks IP and effort like that. Can't be said for every channel in this particular genre.
An F-35 can act as an AWAKs. Do you have that modeled in game?
DCS can't model them as both AWACS and combatants. Limitation of the model.
I've modelled it once here: ua-cam.com/video/0zgVrc8EzC4/v-deo.html it's a bit of a pain to get working so most of the times I just use normal AWACS.
@grimreapers that did look kinda shaky, performance wise. The sensor package build, not the flying. I don't know enough to get down to that level of tweaking the assets, but before the unified release, I had managed a hypersonic SM-6 variant I was testing as a land attack weapon from the updated Arleigh Burke that CH released. The the original flight III and tyco with the 3 different role loadouts. I can definitely see how being able to build my own bottom-up or modified with permission mods would have some interesting potential.
I'm so glad your channel introduced me to DCS World. Thanks again!
No, I wouldn't have shared that modified CH content with anyone. Just for my own education. Because even I can see his code's efficient and his assets are great. I wouldn't disrespect his work like that.
Does does the J-20, actually the J-20 does a better job since it has better radar and optical senors than the F-35
@@grimreapers "NO".
,,, because the war will be in Beijing, Shanghai and all China.
. The Philippines will allow US-Military to get approx 200 kilometer closer to China.
,,, station 1,000 units ICBM/Minuteman Nuclear missiles in the West Philippines Sea, Batanes group of islands, Luzon Straits and Philippines Sea using 16 units US-Nuclear submarines and US battle-ships loitering in China's perimeter.
7:04 "Several lines of defense, as you know. SM3, SM6, SM2, ESSM, Phalanx, Chopsticks, Rude Words." Thanks for that. 😂
You may discount the Phalanx.
How're you feeling, Cap? I remember you making a video a while back about how you would be taking some time off from commentating, and then you have commentated on every video since... 😂 Hope all is well. We appreciate you, you stubborn SOB. Cheers mate 🍻
My wife also says I am very stubborn. I'm about the same TBH, trying to find the reason for my voice being so f*cked up. Just spent a small fortune$ seeing a private ENT doctor but he couldn't really find anything wrong with me. Struggling on.
@@grimreaperswell as the great band Journey has said “Don’t stop believing”
@@grimreapers You're still here, that's what counts. God speed.
“Sharp Sticks and Rude Words” needs to be a shirt.
lol
bro, that SM-6 hit the AWACS so hard it gave it additional wings.
An American kindness
I think we were seeing the reason for the double numbers on the Scoreboard.
Hearing Cap say "it's almost like a modern Tomcat now" had me spitting my cup of tea all over my screen 😱
0:05 looks like the missiles are about to form Voltron..
Hahahaaha
Not sure a lot of peeps will understand that reference
@@davidhuss2301 Yea.. 1980s was a long time back...I guess most of these peeps grew up chasing Pokémon..
What the hell is a Voltron? A car?
@@usmc4eternitey it's like five robotic lions that can combine to form a giant fighting robot. I know it sounds silly when I say it like that but growing up back in the 80s it was awesome.
Nice. I like the slightly smaller, slightly tactical-er battles where you can keep tabs on every aircraft.
It's really just because of my troublesome voice, hence the smaller battles. Less talking.
@@grimreapers No we love your beautiful British accent commentating the battles. It's just a shame when so much is happening all at once in the big battles that you can't commentate all of it!
Why can't you build a simulated recon satellite by just taking the AWACS, removing its surface ceiling, and placing it over the target area, invulnerable, and +300K feet, and 0 speed as of it were a star destroyer in the Star wars sim?
Satellites don't sit still, they move around the earth at around mach 30
@@AjEdw aye but they can be geo-synchronised to remain above one particular area. And in a game like this, with closed virtual maps that don't replicate earths movements, it would in fact "sit still". See, you're not the only one that can be an insufferable know-it-all.
@@SA80TAGE They cannot be geo-synchronised. They are placed into much, much lower orbits and don't have anything like the onboard fuel required to move into a geosync orbit over a random location
@@harryspeakup8452 did you really just say satellites can't be geo-synched? How thick are you?
@SA80TAGE Geosynchronous orbit is much much further out, 36,000 KM versus 500-1000km. You can not have a high resolution picture that can find something so tiny as a carrier group at that range. No satellite can move itself from LEO to Geosynchronous, it has to get there on launch.
Communications satellites and some weather satellites are in geo sync. As are some radar based but again the resolution is not sufficient to detect a carrier group. Try not to be a d!co and listen to experts that tell you something
Tactically, those valued super hornets did the advanced hokey pokey maneuver.
Wonderfully valued Hypersonic boom boom.
Predictions?
Irl? Nah
F-35, E-2Ds, various space based platforms, and systems like Australia's skywave OTH radar will probably give plenty of early warning. If the weapons are guided via satellites, the carrier group has anti sat capabilities. Hypersonic weapons have a very hard time with targeting through a mix of the plasma sheathe effect and the very limited time they have to acquire a target, which will vastly enhance the capabilities of EW systems like Nulka and F-35s using their AESA radars as super powered EW antenna arrays.
In the sim? Yes. The kill chain will be greatly simplified, EW is extremely poorly modeled in DCS, there will be nothing like the Nulkz decoy system in play, and without those factors it's simply a matter of the SM-3 and SM-6 not having a high enough PK against these missiles.
don't underestimate the enemy
The U.S. doesn't underestimate anybody. We prepare for enemies that are 10x as strong as they actually are. That's why we continue to stay so far ahead of everyone else.
But it's also why U.S. citizens have the luxury of being arrogant and confident in our military. We know that even if the enemies are several times more capable than they claim they are, the United States has already prepared for it..
@@tamiraaa8916
@@tamiraaa8916 Americans didn't learn that lesson in Vietnam, no chance they're learning it now.
@@tamiraaa8916 don't underestimate the USA and her allies
@@sleeplessdev7204no one in this comments section ever underestimate the United States routinely it's the opposite way around.
If that was a British carrier fleet we'd have missiles, gnus, strong language and used teabags for defence. Not just any teabags, proper builders teabags! 🤤
New! Teabagging in DCS!
@@BoraHorzaGobuchul
😆👍
😂
"we'd have missiles, gnus, strong language and used teabags for defence"
*Wow! You've compromised our national security, for the sake of a game????* You revealed our top secret long range anti-aircraft gnu program!!!!!! Mind you they're a formidable weapon when you get them really angry by sticking a bloody great rocket up their arse 🚀🦬
Also great for clearing enemy trenches if you can drop them in at Mach 2.
"we'd have missiles, gnus, strong language and used teabags for defence"
*Wow! You've compromised our national security, for the sake of a game????* You revealed our top secret long range anti-aircraft gnu program!!!!!! 🚀🦬
Top work. For the next step, how about modelling the USA trying to resupply Taiwan? Either by sea or by air. (q.v. Operation Pedestal in WW2.)
the problem with that kind of resupply is that the moment anything lands on taiwan rocket arty from the mainland hits it.
Love the thought on this one. Surprised at the results.
Have you considered doing a "Red Storm Rising" scenario, but instead of US, have 2027 Chinese fleet as the target? Could have various tech levels from Soviets/Russian?
Hey Cap, does the AIM-174 fit inside a B1R? If so could you demonstrate one with f-35 guidance
I believe he did. Not sure
@@MunjoMunjo-qi2txi think you're talking about the ones where it was launched from an F-15EX but he hadn't done anything with the B-1R
AIM-174 I think is smaller than a GBU-31 so it should fit.
Can confirm, the B-ONE-R can use the AIM-174B.
Doing that next week.
As soon as the Awacs went down in the second scenario the bombers were like "Game over man! Game over!"
I wish this can include WZ-8 hypersonic drones that PLA attached onto H-6
12:33 jeez Cap, you dont have to call us out like that lmao
Imagine the feeling. You're in your Wish fighter, got a few Temu missiles. You've got 200 total flight hours and you're going up against an electronic warfare nightmare piloted by a guy with 1500 hours in ONE model of that aircraft. All the nopes.
Immagine flying your overpriced fighter that has a 30ish% combat readiness rate with your DEI pilot that isn't even sure about their gender and is on a cocktail of drugs to make them into what every they they want to turn themselves into. Using missiles produced with parts sourced from china (despite the fact your defense contractors pinkyswear they're not using chiense parts)
unless this is a declaration of war attack, the fighters running combat air patrol would be vectored onto the AWACS wouldnt they?
They were up until they detected J20
Chinese Over-the-Horizon Radar (OTH-R) systems utilize atmospheric refraction, using the ionosphere to extend radar signals beyond the horizon and detect targets at great distances. These systems are designed to monitor large maritime areas, which is essential for naval operations. Their advanced signal processing helps manage clutter and interference, enhancing tracking accuracy. Generally, these radars have a detection range of up to 600 kilometers (370 miles), depending on atmospheric conditions.
600Km it's like TWICE the range of an AWAC radar. they are essential to the chinese military doctrine. just imagine detecting a carrier battlegroup 600km away.
That's the working method of any and all Over-the-Horizon Radar systems, not just Chinese.
on a side note, despite the carrier group having successfully defended itself it has effectively been mission killed and would be forced to retreat lest the H6s come back for another strike or some PLAN warships show up.
Thank you, Cap! This is the exact scenario I was hoping you could bring to life.
Cap, you friggin rock!
Hi cap,
It probably wouldn’t work and is horribly unrealistic, but I think it would be fun if you were able to load up CA vehicles into chinnok, and drop them into an active combat zone with people controlling them. The chinnok would fly in with a pilot and flight engineer, drop the tank/ whatever works, and the flight engineer would switch roles to the tank to act like the helicopter dropped it with a crew
Trying to do that now.
I imagine as soon as the Chinese detected a US plane, they would direct an adjacent AWACS and bombers on an intercept course so if the first group was destroyed, the second group might be able to complete the mission.
What I really want, Cap, is Lancs with Tallboys or Grand Slams.
But the devs at DCS don't care . . .
Yup I could get behind those big bombs also.
I thought the concept of a ballistic missile submarine was scary. Now, there are higher speed aircraft capable of firing ballistic missiles!!
I guess it's a good thing that China doesn't have any strategic bomber better than the " Wish B-52" right now. 😂😂
Is it me or the chinese anti-ship ballistic missiles final stage speed is kind slow at mach 4?? ICBMs final speed is like mach 25... shouldnt these missiles do at least mach 12??
I did look into it and most-predicted speed is around mach 4 for an actual impact, so just used that.
Chop sticks; dirty words? Laughter. Thank you!
A trend im seeing with the AIM-260 is it just randomly giving up and going dumb, I wonder why that is?
I would love to know that also. There is no way to debug these missiles. Your guess is as good as mine.
Excellent simulation! No matter which way you cut it, America will not be taking an L
The good thing about fighting with a sharp stick is that it can be used as a floatation device in case of a water landing.
These videos are great Cap, keep doing what you do, love it
Ah finally. An accurate representation of China vs U.S. Airpower
it's absolutely adorable you think anything in this game is "accurate" to real life lol. The planes don't even match their real world counterparts for flight models, not exactly. And DCS doesn't use actual dynamic radars, every airframe (and missile) rcs is a flat value no matter what angle they are seen from. Also they are not actually ALLOWED to model defence and weaponry systems 1 to 1 with real world stuff.... Part of their contract with the military. "yes, lets give the public, and by extension, our enemies, access to run accurate simulations against specific weapon systems, surely that would never backfire right?" Don't be so dense. If you take these videos as "proof" of anything then you're an idiot, plan and simple.
in a realistic scenario. china would have spotted the carrier with their Yaogan satellites or WZ8 drones and fired their missiles well beyond the range of retaliation
You mean the ability to track a carrier group by satellite that nobody can seem to do in order to Target it? But yet somehow the Chinese are able to do that?
Also please tell me how your Hypersonic drone is going to be able to detect anything? Because neither radar or Optical sensors are going to work through the plasma that a Hypersonic drone would generate. Hypersonic drones are literally a work of fiction and cannot exist with with anything close to current technology😂😂
@@hughmungus2760 China doesn't have the capability to guide their missiles towards moving targets via only satellite. That's a capability only the U.S. currently possesses with AEGIS. And the UK as well.
China needs to paint the target with radar.
And besides, even if they could, the U.S. would simply shoot the satellites down and ruin the guidance.
And also, in a realistic scenario, the U.S. would have advanced warning from integrated land based radars in allied countries surrounding the area. They'd know the attack was coming the second it'd been launched.
And the F-35's would've made quick work of the AWACs, J-20's and attacking bombers before any of them even knew they were being fired up on.
@@ObiWanShinobi917 and how do you know this? China has a satellite constellation with equal or greater accuracy than GPS and it has global coverage. It also has a vast network of earth observation (reconnaissance) satellites that can track within the RF, visible and infrared spectrums. You'd be a fool to think china doesn't have some kind of command and control system to network all those sensors together.
In fact I already mentioned china specifically produced the Yaogan series satellites that observe the asia pacific in geostationary orbit in the visible spectrum and can passively track any US warship with a resolution of 2.5m.
No radar required.
Hell. I recall theres an article of a chinese optical satellite taking realtime videos of a US airfield with fighters moving around.
I really liked this sim. Great job Cap
Hi Cap, nice video as always, but maybe the scoreboard is double what it is? When the KJ-20 0 got killed, it said 2x KJ even though only one was killed. However, it does not affect the results, so it's all good! Thanks for the video!
honestly I feel like the fa18s would be set up kinda like an f14 with 2 aim174s 4 aim120s and then 2-4 aim9s
"their bits are extending, gigity" haha nice
It'd be a trip to be a swabbie on a ship that launched all its SAMs. You'd know you either live or die in the next minute or so.
also, Im pretty sure J20s themselves can spot the carrier and relay information targetting information. Their range might not be as good as an AWACs but they can remain undetected while spotting the carrier at +100nm out.
They don't carry the sensors for that, they would need active radar. Their passive radar would not be able to pick up the aircraft carrier because the aircraft carrier would be locked down and not emitting any signals. So no the j-20 would not be able to detect the carrier group😂
@@Wyomingchief AWACS have to use active radar too. Doesn't matter. Granted a J20 with its radar on is a heck of alot more survivable than an AWACS
Yeh I realised this when I was making the mission, but it just made it too easy for Chi, I really wanted the AWACS dynamic to create a cool battle.
E-2D's UHF band APY-9 radar will have already detected J-20 at a much longer range. Not to mention AEGIS platforms including Burke destroyers use BMD radars which can also detect J-20 at long range. Even Ford class carriers and upcoming Constellation class frigates now have BMD radars. So their is NO way a J-20 can approach an American CSG undetected. Though it is still possible for a J-20 to approach undetected a lone Burke Flight I/II destroyer operating on its own by flying low below the horizon of the older SPY-1 radars.
@@johnsilver9338 at 100nm out even if you can detect a J20 with UHF you can't shoot it down. You'll have to scramble to intercept
The J20 only needs a target quality track for a few minutes before YJ21s arrive.
I say 100nm is being extremely generous, the J20's radar can see a 4th gen fighter sized target out to well over 150nm (otherwise why would the PL15 even have that much range) A carrier is going to be a heck of alot more detectable on radar than even the biggest 4th gen fighter.
Could China locate a US carrier group? To find out we are going to test that by starting out with the Chinese side already having detected them.
They absolutely could ships make massive very visible wakes satellites would absolutely see it and they aren’t stealth they emit a ton of em and have massive radar signatures, that parts a dumb question any relatively capable nation could locate a csg
What @Utubesuperstar said, plus what is the point of making a video in which nothing happens for 25 mins? Obviously the only case you play out in the sim is where there is detection leading to combat
@@Utubesuperstar I’m really not sure what you are getting at. I wasn’t posing a question of my own. I restated the title of the video. I have no doubt that China COULD detect an CSG. My personal objection to this simulation is that the it started out with the AWACS nearly already in position, and certainly on a near perfect heading. And while it is true that a satellite can see the wake, its much more nuanced then that. Even Chinese peer reviewed papers admit that it begins to fail once a ship is moving more than 20-knots. And resolution is another issue. And on top of that just knowing where to point the satellite in the first place is an obstacle to overcome on its own. Analyzing the images, even with the use of computers and a good algorithm isn’t real-time tracking, although it may be close to it, but it would still incur a delay.
@@harryspeakup8452 yes however I believe you’re misinterpreting my comment, or at least the intent behind it.
@@Utubesuperstaryou do realize in a wartime scenario that carrier group is not going to be admitting a single electronic beep whistle or anything else they will be silent. The only way you're going to detect them is by visually finding them or getting within radar range
Great video! I've never really been a fan of the SuperBog, but, now that it is equipped with the AIM-174B it is really like the Tomcat. Although I'd always prefer the Super Tomcat, this new configuration is very interesting.
Great work Cap...... Thanks !
Didn’t they reverse the decision to retire the Ticonderoga Class? I think they’ve had the service life extended. Please look into this. Have a blessed day!
🇺🇸🤝🇬🇧
I wonder how much carrying missiles on F35 wings would affect its stealth.
There is actually some cool science there, I'd like to do a vid on it at some point.
Great Vid!
At some point, could we see a 1v1 between an Arleigh Burke and a Kirov class? It could just be off to the side of a main battle or something, just thought it'd be cool to see how they match up by themselves.
Silly set up...a bunch of bombers were just randomly flying out to sea and just happen to be exactly pointed at the carrier? And no AWACS would be allowed that close to a carrier group in the first place
No. Apparently, you skipped the briefing where Cap explained what was happening.
I just love people who criticized and yet they don't take the time to actually watch the video listen to the scenario. Cuz if they did they would realize that their comment is kind of dumb
@@Wyomingchief look, he can do any video with any criteria he wants; I would just ask, what is the point? If you're going to use scenarios that are so obviously unrealistic, what do you learn?
Passive sensors outrange active.
ESM, ELINT, by air and subsurface units will play a big part.
Agreed
Isn't a carrier group that has fired all or most of its defensive missiles tactically defeated, since it then has to return to a port somewhere to re-arm?
No. Carriers are resupplied by supply ships. They don't need to return to Port. They also could resupply the missiles via air as well.
The one thing that the US military does better than anyone else is logistics. They are truly unmatched in that area.
@@GageEakins Currently VLS cells cannot be replenished at sea. Although the navy is conducting some tests right now, but the ships still need to be retrofitted.
the carrier would be fine. as long as the reactors are critical and the supply train keeps them fed and fueled, they can go all day long, baby. the destroyers and cruisers might need to return to port to restock VLS, but the 7th fleet alone has enough small boys to support two CSGs, and still have a few left over. the third fleet, which covers the central and eastern Pacific, has like three times as many small boys.
planes aren't the only ones that can use the chainsaw tactic.
You did good Cap!
Sm-3s were shoot too late somehow and nearly all malfunctioned because the ballistic missiles were already too low at that point
Well spotted.
Yes, they could, but karma and epic regret would be very fast in coming!
Interesting scenario!
given that Type055s in game only carry 8 YJ21s, 12 H6s with 4x YJ21s each are equivalent to 6 Type055s... The dreaded 'end a game in 2 minutes' mix.
We can simulate the air-launched YJ-21 more reaslitically than the ship-launched variant. I can get the air-launched variant to arc up to 300,000ft. Sadly the ship-launched variants are limited to about 55,000ft. This means the air-launched variants can be intercepted by SM-3 while ship-launched variants can not.
I think Ukraine War has demonstrated that intercepting Hypersonic Ballistic Missiles is a more difficult task than expected maybe turn down the PK for SMs by 15%.
Not even closed because of the Aegis missile defense system is based off of input from every ship in that Carrier Group along with any air assets. Whereas the intercepts that are currently being made are being made based off a singular Patriot radar system. Patriot isn't quite as good as the combined assets of the US carrier task group
@@Wyomingchief Intercepting Mach 4 targets is calculating intercept points, when it moves 7 meters in 5 milliseconds, chances are there is no real-time course corrections possible, as such guesstimating probable location of target is what is happening, and at relative speeds needed by interceptor and target, that could anything between bullseye to 15 meters.
The addition of radars improve resolution, but increase latency, and when talking about intercepting Hypersonics, latency is what matters most.
Probably been asked before, but could you clarify what hardware you have currently running this sim? I have DCS, but I've only ever used it as a combat flight sim, and not a battle sim. Wondering if my system could handle as many units.
As long as you're not just running the minimum requirements, you should be able to run it just fine. I've got a 2-year-old system and I can run these kind of Sims easily. And I know cap is running a system that's older than that by far
AMD5900X 3080 32GB
it's funny google is giving you PSA ads when you can't get 90% of their products in the UK
does the military use a combat sim? In 2010 i tested a game for army infantry that could kind of handle platoon level missions, but the controller was impossible and lag was impossible. Creating a full on sim that could handle division movements would be smart.
Yes but I forget what it's called. It doesn't have the cool graphics like DCS but it is more reaslitic obviously.
As always Cap thank you for the great content for us viewers.
Sharp sticks and rude words! hahah
F-18 is now “modern tomcat”!!!!
Yeh, not quite as cool.
2500 Cheap Swarm Drone Vs Carrier...
oof, gunna need a bigger PC to run that one!
Cap, I know if would make for a boring video but there is a reason they put the fighter screen way out towards the threat axis. It does require a lot of tanker assets.
Yes, this mission made me really realise the use of a large tanker/fighter operation as a shield.
Sorry to hear about the youtube troubles, Cap. If you rerun your fleet interceptor/defender competition with AIM-174s and ST-21s I'll subscribe to the other platforms.
Dude don't use orbit as a measure of hight, orbit means you have gained sufficient velocity to not to fall back to Earth, part of that is being decently enough out of the atmosphere that your orbit wouldn't instantly decay, but mostly it's about the velocity, which even hypersonics do not travel at orbital velocity mach 20 is only 6860 m/s orbital velocity is ~7800 m/s in LEO.
I wonder if not Command: Modern Air / Naval Operations would be better suited for these kinds of simulation than DCS?
Have another strike ready after destroyers have expended thier defence missles. Missiles are cheap, bodies not going home are expensive
Do Russia and China against the US and Japan around Taiwan
cap I have a suggestion that the radar cross section can be less of j20 here is the data that I found (The F-35 has a lower RCS than the F-117 and is comparable to the B-2. The J-20 would have an radar cross section of about 0.01 square meters.)2.aim 260 is not in service or tested yet but PL-17 is tested so I think you should give j20 PL 17 as well and the the sim again
This was cool to watch, but that EWACs would have been snipped by an F35 flying CAP.
Fair point.
@@grimreapers, maybe the F35 pilot was a communist at heart and wanted to defect to China. That's the kind of story that makes your fans rage but keeps you monetized on UA-cam. :D
"All the wings!"
So to fight Chinese AWACS attacking US carrier group you would need : 1. anti-air missile with longer range than the chinese AWACS detection range (so more than 250 miles) OR 2. a submarine/submarine drones in the area ahead of the carrier group that can take out the AWACS before it gets in range of the carrier group... or 3. a very very very fast plane (like SR-72) armed with anti-air missiles that could fly ahead of the carrier groups and take out every awacs while it flies over china at hypersonic speeds.
Maybe an idea that could work... if the US planted underwater anti-air missiles ``mines/drones``(with integrated radar) so if a war ever kicks off, those underwater anti-air mines would take out any awacs plane in the area if ordered to do so... which would take the chinese by complete surprise. But I dont think this kind of weapon even exists right now or is being developped at all... and if it did, it would need a lot of them to cover the area you want protected... but i still think its a good idea... :)
Basically what is realistically doable is an unmanned stealthy arsenal sub.
Surface, nail the aircraft, submerge.
If it can have a decent radar (no idea if it's doable), it would be self-sufficient aside from receiving a que when to surface.
large AWACs are quickly becoming the battleship of the skies in that they're too expensive, too vulnerable and are better served by networked fighters, drones or satellites.
Curious if the big stick fits in the b-21. That would open up some options.
Doing that next week.
One to watch is the Hypersonic unmanned aircraft engine Reaction Engines are working on, apparently the ground tests are up to Mach 3.5 sustained, as the new Tempest being a supposed drone controller, things might get interesting by the end of the 2020's. Stupidly fast stealth UAVs, carrying Hypersonic missiles are going to ruin someone's day.
stealth and hypersonic are mutually exclusive. stealth coatings cant handle the temperatures at those speeds.
Well not only that but Hypersonic drones that are going to gather intelligence is going to be also more mutually exclusive. You can't run radar or Optical sensors behind a plasma
Really cool video
Red Storm Rising let's go!
Did you get the big stick and stealth working together? I thought they were incompatible.
They work but they don't work when you have humans in the simulation
Not really, for this I had to cheat by doing some naughty scripting behind the scenes. Not sure if I could get it to working in a big battle.
@@grimreapers ah ok thanks
I watch your content all the time. I'm entertained with it. Being former military myself I still find it entertaining. Problem is your setup is really not realized the way it would be the way that it would go down. Both of us knowing this, I would like like for you would express more that the NATO portion of these exercises would not be so naive in their approach. Just saying, express that more than you do.
Keep going. I love your content. 😊😊😊
Do understand, I simplified my comments the best that I can as do you. If that makes any sense. 😊
Yes, the problem is, I have a whole load of restrictions in the sim I'm using. If I had no restrictions, I'd would change a lot of the set ups.
This. But with B-1 or B-3 with big sticks and Amramm...
Uh no. 1) Carrier would know instant it had been detected and launch own AWACS. 2) Ballistic missiles have predicable trajectory so fleet goes evasive and time to calculate optimal intercept. So intercept missiles won't just fly randomly (excluding fact that satellite would also track ballistic missiles reaching 300,000 feet). 3) Chinese missile would have to have excellent seeker to alter course to hit moving ships. 4) New SM-6 A2A (AIM174) have seekers to intercept ballistic missiles guided by either ships, AWACS or F35. 5) Carrier would launch refueling F18s.
Dogfight would be just for fun when the mission is over.
uh, it's a game.
@@mattybob12310 And?
It's a sim video game, not an actual simulation. These are just for fun videos, not meant to be realistic.
1.) Slow targets like carrier and destroyers can be passively detected and tracked/locked by EW UAVs (with satellite image recognition), because carrier obviously have to maintain communication for aircraft operation. It is possible that carrier only know it is detected when destroyer only detect the ballistic missile flying toward them. 2.) Modern ballistic missiles have maneuvering capability. For example, CM-401 launched by H-6 (Clearly not YJ-21) have "near space trajectory"(SM-3 as space interceptor is completely useless), "supersonic maneuverablility"(easily adjust trajectory) and "top down attack"(SM-2 and SM-6 can only begin to intercept it when it dives right above the carrier with 30-40km vertical distance). 3.) slow moving ship is almost stationary target to fast missile.
The most important thing you missed is the relative speed between CM-401 and anti-air missile. Mach 10+ relative speed is double of any chemical explosion speed, so ballistic missile can easily out run the explosive shock wave. SM-2 and SM-6 would be ineffective and intercepting ballistic missile head on is even more ineffective at the first place.
Nice job. The Chinese have the satellites, too, and the US has jamming. Don't know if any of the EW can be modeled in your app. Thanks!
SAR satellite constellations are basically impossible to reliably jam then there are optical and infrared satellites
And yet the satellites aren't good enough at this point to reliably track an aircraft carrier 100% of the time. Because satellites in a low enough orbit to reliably track it or not able to be in a geosynchronous orbit so they're only going to get brief glimpses of it. Satellites that are actually in a geosynchronous orbit are too far away and don't have the optical capability of reliably tracking
How visible would AIM-174 be for AWACS? I imagine even shot on datalink, AWACS would still detect if fired on?
perhaps, but then what? They cannot easily get out of the way in a huge lumbering unmanoevrable slow target like an AWACS. All it means is they get time to radio out that they are under attack
@@harryspeakup8452 theoretically you can shoot it down. Because ships when fired upon by SM6s do defend themselves, I dont see why escort fighters can't do the same.
But I dont think theres a recorded instance of an air to air missile shooting down another air to air missile so its purely theoretical
In real life I suspect AWACS could see those AIM-174 a long distance. We can only partially model that.
Day 32 of asking Cap to bring humans back to carrier battles
How realistic is it for a pilot to just run out of fuel? It seems poor planning.
Because they have a fuel tank in the fuel tank Can Only Hold so much fuel. When he says they ran out of fuel, that means they've reached Bingo Fuel and have to return to the carrier. It doesn't mean they literally stop Flying😂😂
As for detection how china would try to detect US carriers far away from its shores wouldn't be with expensive and easy to shoot down AWACs but with their WZ8 hypersonic drone which can be air launched from a H6 variant.
Seeing that in game would be interesting because so far a maneuverable hypersonic target is nearly impossible to shoot down at range.
Except they've talked about it but that's not a demonstrable capability at this point. And honestly I don't think it's something that they are capable of doing. Because of hypersonic speeds their sensors are not going to work through a plasma Shield😂
@@Wyomingchief for starters the plasma only becomes a problem at above mach 10 and it only forms along the front of the missile meaning it can still be remotely guided via datalink from a rear mounted antenna.
If we're going by demonstrations, nobody has unclassified footage on any of the US missiles being demonstrated either so its all up for speculation.
Will investigate.
Looks like someone has forgotten about EW and the use of CAP! Such an important omission renders the entire war game useless.
Would the planes go out futher with a tanker near by off the carrier?
DCS is really awesome for military simulations... but all it lacks right now is simulating submarines + torpedoes + anti-torpedoes systems... if DCS ever got that... + lets say being easier to run like thousands of ships-missiles-planes at the same time... we could do really realistic war scenarios.... Are submarines ever planned for DCS or modders planning to do anything about it??
I dont know if it would be possible to simulate some kind of major 1000+ missile attack on israel with DCS or would DCS crash? Are the various iranian-hezbollah missiles even in DCS? That would be interesting to see since that scenario has a huge chance of happening... It would be interesting see how israel could carry out airstrikes against hezbollah missile sites and if hezbollah could take out some planes... Another scenario would be simulating a north korean attack on seoul... with artillery and missiles while the US-SKorean tries to take out as many artillery sites and missiles launch positions as possible... Of course you could only simulate like a tiny part of the border but imagine being able to simulate seoul taking artillery and missiles with buildings blowig up, that would make one hell of a show.
for those massed attack sims you're better off using something like CMANO which handles it much better than DCS but still has the same level of realism
People keep forgetting DCS is not a naval combat simulator. And if you want that kind of realism you're going to have to go to one of those programs. DCS is strictly for air combat with some Naval assets added in when it comes to their air defense
So I know DCS and Ace Combat have a bit of rivalry (and the latter is also not exactly realistic) but how about you try running some Ace Combat missions/campaign in DCS to see how plausible they are?
Talk soft and carry a Big Stick
Aim 260 really struggles against stealth. PL15 seems better. Possible to arm F35 with PL15 and have J20 arm with AIM 260 and see what happens?
DCS hates the 260.
I almost think that AIM-260 is too fast in game? Consequently, it struggles to re-aquire stealth planes, PL-15 gets more time to do it. I wish I was smarter, then I'd be able to fix all of these problems we have.
You are about air and carriers but you forget every carrier group has a sub or two. Do you not think the other side would have subs around. They could also give away the position of the carrier. If they did they would die but?
And yet you keep asking about submarines, when everybody has told you that submarines are not realistically modeled in a DCs simulator.
I don’t think you can use SM-3 to intercept targets below 100 km
yeah basically when the SM3 comes off booster its no longer effective as an atmospheric interceptor as the KV no control surfaces
Yeh, we've had to fiddle with things a bit because IRL the YJ-21 would come down steeper, we can't model that trajectory, so we've had to give SM-3 a little extra capability to account for this. As ever, best we can do.
@@grimreapers But isn’t the YJ-21 semi-ballistic like the Kinzel, with the maximum flight altitude of 50 km?
AIM160 in game for 3 years but sill did not enter service. 🤣🤣🤣
AIM260 is actually in production. And if you pay attention you will notice that this is a simulation base 2 years in the future😂😂 guess you're not as smart as you thought you were
F-22s already started integrating with AIM-260 since two years ago. Even then AIM-120D3 is already on par with Meteor and older AIM-54 Phoenix in terms of range also since 3 years ago. So against PL-15, AIM-120D3 and Meteor are enough. Against PL-17, AIM-174B are enough. AIM-260 is just an added bonus.
Using Data Link-16. Can a fully loaded B1-B Lancer or Super Tomcat fly close to sea level using five F-35 or five F-22 as an escort cover shell per missile truck(F35/B1B), as a radar deflecting blanket to get into a high probability kill range?
Could you do a guide on how to beat C-RAMs?
Will investigate.
W Cap as always
Would be great if you actually made this a bit more realistic. Typically there are only about 3 Arleigh Burgh destroyers in a carrier group and you just doubled that.. bummer realistic would be more fun. Also satelites will track carrier groups no awacs needed
They would increase the number if they knew china was being hostile
Please before you make suggestions you should probably know a little more about what you're talking about. In a wartime scenario which is exactly what we're talking about, I guarantee you that carrier group is going to have at least six other combat ships with it.
Also contrary to what people think carrier battle groups are not easily tracked by satellite. But please provide me with a legitimate link that proves I'm wrong😂
Yes it's a fair comment. I have a standard set of "best case" CSG layouts that I tend to use in the battles.
Who's F-35C mod are you using?
It's your own modification but I believe the link is provided in one of their videos
It started as VSN's and we've created our own private version from it.
@grimreapers that's exactly what I thought, but I do appreciate you confirming it for me. You have got some damn fine modder pals, and I know you've gotten into it, Cap. Your 2027 builds and runs have been wonderful stuff. Eye-opening when the USAF suddenly announces they're firing the SM-6 at planes from other planes all the sudden, and you have got it built and edited to start simming in a couple of days.
Outstanding work, guys, gals and otherwise!
@Wyomingchief thank you. They're pretty good about that, when they're using a sharable mod. As in it's not something that they've modded without the creators permission to redistribute that way. They're pretty good at not violating other folks IP and effort like that. Can't be said for every channel in this particular genre.