Could WWII Planes & Guns Have Defended Against Modern Drone Swarms? | DCS
Вставка
- Опубліковано 21 тра 2024
- Recently we looked at using cheap, accurate and low collateral AGR-20 APKWS guided rockets to shoot down modern drone swarms. Today we follow up by using World War II warbirds with their cannon and guns to do the same job.
PATREON: / grimreapers
0:00 Overview
2:20 Scenario Details
3:36 Predictions
5:30 Take Off
USEFUL LINKS
GRIM REAPERS (UA-cam): / @grimreapers
GRIM REAPERS 2 (UA-cam): / @grimreapers2
GR PODCASTS: anchor.fm/grim-reapers
DCS TUTORIALS: / @grimreapers
DCS BUYERS GUIDES: • 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: / discord
THANK YOU TO: Mission Makers, Admin, Staff, Helpers, Donators & Viewers(without which, this could not happen) xx
#DCSQuestioned #WWII #Drone #WorldWar2 #Spitfire #GR #DCSWorld #GRDCSTesting #DCSTesting #DCS - Ігри
We all know the best way to counter drone is to use a comically large net
Actually literally pretty much true
I bought a can cannon the other day and I’ve been launching cast nets a drones for fun… kinda hard on the props but very doable
Laugh! :)
Or an even comically bigger flyswatter . . .
Comically large net ....... you read the 81st Site?
26:10 That was hilarious the way the ocean just swallowed the entire airframe in the shallows! 😆
These drones are just... Bonkers durable. I cannot imagine a Reaper or GlobalHawk surviving even _one_ hit from the kind of cannon WWII warbirds carried up for the purposes of shooting down bombers.
Given just how unreasonably durable these drones are, _and_ the fact that they had an arbitrary "I win" box instead of being chased all the way to their targets, _and_ the fact that your WWII warbirds didn't have any (effective) air-to-air radar of the sort that a counter-drone gun-truck _very quickly_ would get put on it, _and_ that you didn't have ground controllers directing your planes onto the targets, I'd say the handicap in this simulation should go to the warbirds.
In other words, I think using prop gun-trucks to shoot down drone swarms is probably a _fantastic_ idea.
I think ppl were hoping to see The A-10, OV-10, Super Tucano, Pucara, and MB-339 Aermacchi use APKWS! Plus The A-10 Brrt
They did use APKWS in one of the previous videos. That is literally the point of this video-people kept commenting that they’d like to see the GR use guns instead of the APKWS next time.
🎵 There are tough drones over
🎵 The white cliffs of Dover
Well played, very well played.
Hey Cap, just wanted to say Thank You for continuing to crank out the videos despite the health issues, and I sincerely hope things improve for you.
Trying my best.
Crazy seeing just how big those drones are compared to the WW2 fighters.
Seems like these drones have the armor buff unlocked.
CRAZY damage model on the drones. Would have been fun to see a YAK get in there & mix it up -
There was in fact a British drone programme in WW1, known for reasons of misleading any enemy spies as the Aerial Target. The best of the prototypes offered, a de Havilland designed 22 ft span monoplane, first flew successfully under radio control in March 1917. It had encoded transmissions which could be changed daily to fox further enemy snoops. Trials of six prototypes were called off after they had trouble launching some of them, but the basic idea was all viable and could have been developed into a combat weapon if the need had arisen. The man in charge was one Archibald Low. In 1918 he was also involved in successful tests of a boat drone.
Seriously??!??
De Havilland fanboi obviously missing some history here!
I'm surprised you used these drones again as they seemed to have OP damage models that made them nearly invincible compared to Shaheeds.
I wonder how WW2 bombers would fare? Those turrets might be faster at switching targets, and effectively infinite ammo is more plausible, if you filled the bomb bay with ammo....
Old 666 vs drones
While a swivel mount would absolutely help...
But, I don't see putting the ammo in the bomb bay as plausible, at least for most WWII bombers. You'd have to figure out some what to get the chain of ammo (assuming it's a belt-fed machine gun, which some would be, some wouldn't be) from the bomb bay to the guns... Without jamming the guns. A lot of belt-fed guns also have a limit on the amount of belt that they can actually pull into the gun (because most belt fed guns, particularly in WWII, were using energy from the cartridge to actuate the feeding of cartridges). Unless it was designed for it in the first place, I just don't see that being possible. *Maybe* with a crew member reloading the guns from the ammo stored in the bomb bay? That said... I'm sure someone out there will come back and say that there was at least 1 WWII bomber that WAS designed to do this. I also know that there were "gun ships"... Essentially, smaller bombers made to use guns for ground assault. But, gun ships tend to be optimized for ground assault, not anti-air.
The use of Spitfires in particular (by most of them) didn't make much sense. The Spitfire just doesn't have much firepower. For context, it's shooting .303 British, which, honestly, has very similar terminal ballistics to modern 7.62 NATO (AKA .308). Sure, that's a powerful rifle round. But, in something like a drone, something that isn't flesh, you're only going to be punching .303 inch holes in it... If the drones aren't armored. Something like .50 BMG (which is used by the Mustang, which they did have 1 of)... Or even a 20mm would make a LOT more sense.
Think the extra ammo could be stored in the bomb bays, all stations on B-17s and 24's as well as most other American bombers had the ability to be reloaded in flight. You can see pictures of extra belted ammunition crates stored around the bulkhead around the radio room in lots of photos.
@@alexsawicki Oompa Loompas.
"Starfighter doesn't need wing, we don't need wings." That gave me a chuckle. Thanks boys!
No P-47 :( I also believe The A-1 Skyraider and F4U Corsair would have done very well! lol request, WW1 Planes intercept Drones! Perhaps a couple Zeppelin's and Simba's Boat Plane as well!🙏👍
The Thunderbolt is not great in that kind of low-speed, low-level high-manouvering combat regime. Too heavy and too sluggish
Are the drones made from vibranium? They are stupidly hard to shoot down...
26:10 It's made of wood, it should float. Explodes.
He forgot he was carrying flares made of potassium.
That water also gets very deep very quickly 🤣
In a way, the AIM-9 & AIM-120 (as well as cruise missiles and smart bombs for that matter) are drones delivered to their launching area by high-performance aircraft.
Not one of you went full "Hot Shots" and tried to swat a drone out of the air with their wing. Amazing discipline for a GR mission.
I told the boys to behave during this one.
You smooth in that Spitfire Cap.
Hey Cap, one extremely minor thing you could change-when you title a chapter something like “Take off”, UA-cam doesn’t show it as a point on the timeline but the entire section of the video from that point until either the next chapter or the end of the video shows up as “Take off” (so usually the majority of the video is a chapter called take off). I think it would be better to call the chapter where you do the mission something like “Battle” or “Mission”.
Noted.
Have you flown any F-4U's?
Reenact a baa baa Black sheep squadron flight.
I wonder how WWII naval defenses would do against a drone swarm. Like a battlegroup without air cover, just the guns on the ships.
If everything is modeled correctly, I would guess a Spit with eight .303 machine guns would be in its element
They did have some fierce dog fights over London and other large cities. I don’t know if any civilians were killed due to ammo fallout. I imagine the chances of hitting anyone in some of the remote areas of Iraq are pretty low.
Almost the perfect mission for a Hawker Hurricane! Great video cap
You need Gepard ammo that self destructs before obliterating civvies... hackable??? Also: DCS is being very generous re: how many 303 or canon rounds a generic drone can survive 😂 in reality it's gonna be more like one unless it's *really* lucky or gets hit through a wing away from control surfaces etc. Superb video 🙏
Given the size, probably at least a few if they don't connect with something critical like a struct
Yup I was thinking that too
Interesting test and another great video. Thanks Reapers.
Poooosh......the man who fell to Earth (and bounced !)
You can tell that these guys are used to firing missiles
Seems like the P-38 would have been well suited for this one...
Holy shit. I just this second realized that you guys did this concept months ago, and just yesterday it was done in real life, and now here we are recreating it.. you like... made the future...
All those Raytheon turrets in the drink
Suggestion for a scenario: a strike aircraft fight
Pitting the A10 and Su25 and or the Mig27 and F111 against another in a Air to air engagement
You should make it a better economy question with the warbirds. Put modern SAMs on the land and go after them with warbirds. This would then put a penalty (financially) to letting drones get past you. The SAMs would shoot down any leakers to accomplish the mission, but cost a tonne to do it. BTW it was a FIM-92 on a Predator MQ-1
awesome display! I really believe that this is what a protracted decade long modern WW will look like after 7 or 8 years of conventional warfare and all the high tech supply chains and high tech chip factories have been taken out.
Would guess a bomber like the B-17 or Lancaster might work better, as could fly parallel to the swarm, and the gunners could take out the swarm.
the A1H model of Skyraider can carry 4x 20mm cannon and lots of 7.62mm SUU-11 Gun Pod Miniguns, the F89D was equiped with over 100 proximity fused rockets.
The Swedish Visby Class corvette with just its 57mm Bofors could mop up a lot of the drones over the English Channel. 200 round magazine with a 30 second reload
I think the Boulton Paul Defiant has finally found its calling!👍
The Vergältungswaffe-1 was more a precursor to the cruise missile than it was to the modern drone.
The direct precursors to modern drones were the UAVs of the 1990s and early 2000s. IIUC, these were flown by remote control and were expected to come back at the end of each mission.
They were also sent ahead of SG teams to scout for goa'uld activity.
@@hanrockabrand95 That was normaly the tracked MALP
Not wanting to be pedantic about your pedantry, but IMHO, technically: no.
I think the confusion is because "drone" is overused, thanks to Bezos and US miltech seeding "drone" panic because they want sub 400' airspace cleared because$$$. You're talking about "drones" like predators etc which are semi autonomous radio controlled aircraft which are indeed expected to return. This mission is about "drones" which are the same airframes *in DCS* but filled with explosives making them simply slow guided missiles... which is what a V1 was.
@@rainerbehrendt9330 As I recall, the MALP was used more to make sure there were habitable conditions on the other side. The UAV was used to scout more extensively and (at least in one case) to paint a target for missiles.
@@hanrockabrand95 THe MALP was the first one to send through. The gave readings about the Conditions of the other Side including optical Infos. In most of the Episodes there was only the MALP in use. Drones were sometimes use when a greater Formation uses the Gate. SG-1 little Troup not counting.
Hey, bit of a weird request, there is a video out of an aim-120 variant chasing down a Kh101 in cruise. In the video from ukraine the aim120 is still supersonic ,(I think), and reaches the point where the Kh101 was about 13 seconds later. I bet the Aim120 caught up, but I was wondering if you could simulate it, under different conditions to see if the Kh101 could have avoided the aim120 variant? I'm almost certain it caught up, but could make for an interesting video, could defo put a spin on it like, "Could F16 intercept Russian missile?!?!?!?" or something of that nature, anyway, love the work, keep it up, thank you :)))
hmm I'd need exact details (range, aspect, alt, etc to make it worth simulating)
I do wish there would be a way to simulate the effects of the anti-drone guns that are in service, and see if they could be mounted on planes in some fashion. Given how sketchy the information is about their effectiveness on larger drones like the Shaheds instead of your garden-variety FPV drone, however, I can't say it's something that can be replicated in a DCS test.
i honestly believe that modern COIN aircraft are an incredibly important asset for modern militaries, especially economically. I'm shocked that they arent being invested in as much as i believe they need to be. I understand that the proliferation of things such as iglas and stingers, as well as larger turret mounted guns (think .50s, 20s, 23s, etc in a truck bed, or even emplaced) is the major deterring factor as to why they havent been invested in, but if you think about it, they would be incredibly useful outside of front line use. Rapid border/coast line response in lieu of the much more expensive per hour patrol aircraft (just response, not standard patrol), drone swarm protection, faster strike potential in comparison with attack helos. If you went the bronco route as opposed to the super tucano you could also theoretically use them as light transport/resupply, think airdropped (wishful thinking i know). there is just so much capability overlap that these COIN aircraft can provide at a tiny fraction of the day to day and procurement costs level. While the super tucano can cost about the same as an A-10 per plane, the per hour cost of a super tucano is 1500 bucks, as opposed to 20k for the a-10, let alone the other aircraft america/allies use for seemingly menial tasks that a COIN aircraft would excel at. I guess at the end of the day its a cost vs safety consideration. If deployed intelligently, ie in non-frontline combat (such as ukraine) i genuinely the cost savings far exceed the risks. In a day and age where even a small conflict requiring dedicated forces can seriously damage a nations economy, i think its prudent to start considering these cheaper alternatives for non-front line combat duties.
Instead of guns, you need flamethrowers - you'd be fire breathing dragons!
Having spent a lot of time in IL-2 Sturmovik flight sim, it seemed to me that one of the gunnery problems here was firing from too far away. There's no tail gunner and no evasive action, get right on their . . . rears . . . and give 'em a couple of short bursts and bob's your uncle (unless he isn't of course). I cheerfully acknowledge that I may well be wrong, but that's my two sesterces worth.
Another good video; but it got me to thinking: maybe barrage balloons are the way to go.
We got our first airplane in 1982. We stored our airplane at a farm and would talk off from the grass field. We've never had any issues.
I wonder how much a properly tuned gyro gunsight would help for these, since they're all the same size, flying at the same speed, without maneuvring
Now do drones vs the Yamato or Imperial Japanese Navy strike group.
After watching grassland take-offs, I finally understand why those historically ingamous "Knights of Ni" were so interested in "Shubberies". 2 or 3 well placed shrubberies would simply have been catastrophic!!
"The defense department regrets to inform you that ... yada yada ... small plants" 😋
The mission designer is locked up in the basement. Working on your next mission....lol
Marry last video and this video together ... A-29N Super Tucano with APKWS rockets!
+GrimReapersAtomic *12.7x99mm synchroguns in the forward fuselage, above the engine, are practical for drone swarms. Less parallax w/r/t the sight that way.*
P-38. Nose mounted .50’s, no converging zero to worry about.
My question is, what warbird type planes can be produced today that can do this job? We cant send in all the historical warbirds.
Just a suggestion GR Team... for future encounters with tough targets, it has been tried to mount the A-10 Warthog gun on a Spitfire (and it worked!). Also British Typhoons from WW2 era were mounted with rockets (might do well against ships and bunkers too??). And a few wags used crates of Willie Peter (WP) grenades from their inverted cockpits, if any of this can be modeled??
Actually I would have liked to have seen a P40 or a Hurricane to see how a slower max sped plane could do.
In WWII the Brits used Tempests and Mosquitos to do this to early drones (V1s), because they were fast enough for the intercept.
EDIT: They got round the ammo issue, by wing tipping them I believe.
Tipping the V1s with their wing tips was a last act of desperation. Very dangerous, very difficult, and very rare.
Wouldn't it be interesting if drone warfare changed air combat completely? To the point where smaller and slower gunships are the order of the day instead of hyper-expensive stealth?
"Change air combat completely?"
No, it won't do that, because the hyper-expensive stealth planes would _feast_ on prop-driven slow gunships. You'd use your first-wave of drone swarmers to draw out the guntrucks, your gofast stealths would feast on the gun-trucks, and then the second wave of drones gets through.
I'm simple man. I see FW-190 with the one, the only apriopriate BMW engine i press like. But my heart was broken when Poosh switched to the damn Mosquito
No it's "the camera adds 10 rounds" because it's like when someone's watching you type but with DCS.
Fighting over Dover, I'm getting real _The Battle of Britain_ movie vibes.
I don't think this problem will be fully solved until we have AI drone (swarm) defenders, equipped with laser weapons.
How about using Flak as well?
I might be wrong, but the V-1s were to my understanding sometimes taken out by flying a fighter close to it and use the wing to tip the wing of the V-1.
The Russians also used “full contact” to take down that American drone over the Black Sea. Likely that was a test to see if it would actually work.
Last week the Ukrainians released video of them using a Yak-52 for anti-drone work and having the back-seater shooting down an Orlan-10.
You need Guided Air Burst Bullets for the 5in Gun and some A-10s modified as Floatplanes or we go back to WW2 Stile Ships whit 100 AA Guns
Stunning displays of marksmanship 😝
The BF-109 seemed to do very well against the drones with its 2 13.5mm, 2 20mm and 1 30mm cannon...
Maybe not in DCS, but carrier America with 7 attack copters (bell viper) would shoot guns more accurately? Has sidewinders for cruise missiles.
What about WWII flak guns? Would that be cheaper still?
They are tiny and you have to hit them, and the ammunition costs a fortune compared to rifle-caliber MG ammo and 20mm Hispano.
Why aren't we using Lasers to shoot drones down?. The U.S. has the T-USLP weapon that shoots in 1 quadrillionth of a second virtually turning the air into plasma. It stands for Targeted Ultra Short Laser Pulse.
I would think that the Mosquito, P-38 and B-25 (unfortunately neither in game) and BF-109, with their nose guns would be best for this.
[Thinking] On the other hand, the American fighters all use .50 BMG, and German fighters and Mossie use .20mm cannon, both of which are surely more effective against hard-to-kill targets than the British .303. Seems to me the Spits are especially ill-suited for this job.
It would be interesting to see how slower aircraft would do, like mid 1930's biplanes. They would be a closer match to the drones airspeed, but I doubt the lighter armament would be effective.
Even the Grim Reapers prolly couldn't do this using F-86 Sabre
Ukraine has been using YAK 52 prop trainers with guns fitted to go at the drones ..
Don't you attack from an off up angle and not straight in line with the tail? At least it looks like that's what you were doing.
And see, the best thing if we do it with modernized aircraft, we can load the self destruction ammo for light cannons, that CWIS use, American or other nations version, can easily adapt to 25 mm also. And rock modern prox fuses, which sure will drive up the cost per round, but use them in modern low cost turbo props, with radar gun sights, and all the fancy bells and whistles, with a single, light, modern auto cannon lower rate of fire, and all the ammo it can carry for it. And give them data link, so they can all see each other and what ground and awacs can see too. And the stipulation that they only attack while facing level at higher altitude, or point upwards/towards the aggressor nation so any rounds that don’t self destruct, fall on the enemy. Unless they are cleared to engage one going after a truly high priority target. They could easily get away with single autocannon with only a 400-800 rpm fore rate, against slow. Non maneuvering targets. And a couple thousand rounds at the low end, more like 3-4k rounds of what they could actually carry, if specialized for that. They have a volume, not weight problem. At that point. And of if I remember right, America’s version can more ordinance than the others, as we based it off of a crop duster, made to be as powerful, fast and efficient as possible, carrying the most payload. As its job is to just work, and turn a profit. And you do that, by checking all the boxes I mentioned. So one of them. Set up like I said, and maybe a couple smaller auxiliary tanks, so they can stay up long enough to find and close/go Winchester and if need be for a while longer to keep eyes and sensors on them, until more show up. And I still stand by modernized Flak towers to fill in gaps in coverage/defend the approaches to vital infrastructure. And act as the second to last line of defense, the final line would be CWIS/avenger like platforms. And you’d use high end systems to protect all the lesser assets from modern/high speed threats.
Too bad there is not an effective way to run a YB-40 in these simulations. They could have theoretically carried up to 30 M-2 machineguns, not just the 18 they were tested with.
Re: Quad 20: Can't be believe all those hits didn't hit any thing critical???
Agreed
I was researching MEMS gyros to see which one I want in my IMU design, when I found out that the gyros used in quads and such, can drift up to 10º/S. That's per second!
On the other hand a MEMS gyro for navigation, has a drift of 0.001º/Hr (that's per hour!), but costs minimum $3K.
That explains why these drones drop out of the sky, or land a few seconds after losing GPS. These cheap gyros used in FPV and such, all suffer the same shortcoming.
I thought anti-drone guns EMP'd the electronics to make them drop like that. They just block their communications.
These stuff are surprisingly tough, way tougher than the armor cladded warbirds themselves! Didn't expect this!
not many systems to hit, the systems are small, and no pilot to target....
@@charlesparr1611 yes, but these are not armored and still they last longer than the armored airborne knights (warbirds). hehhe it's really a surprise.
@@LancelotChan I'd bet its because their damage model is seriously flawed....
@@charlesparr1611 I think so too!
@@charlesparr1611 with the current damage model I think a warbird will run out of ammo before taking down 3 drones.
C-ram and iron beam. Detection is key though. Need layered defenses though. Multiple lines of defense. Triple A should be added to that also. I was reading about a armed drone that hunts other drones. Air to air. Armed with cheap munitions.
Seeing as the warbirds turned out to be fairly effective against the drones I have to wonder if helicopters would be more or less so.
Also: scandal time: apparently... the Mustang *didn't* have a true laminar flow wing 😮😮😮
oof
I thought of a mission for the F-22 in a World War Two scenario: high priority and time sensitive air to air interdiction in radar defended airspace, I’m thinking of the mission to assassinate Yamamoto.
Cool
This might actually be something. How many trainer and coin aircraft exist in western arsenals we could spare for Ukraine?
Short takeoff on unimproved runways, simpler pilot training = distributed operations.
Hide trainers around the country train thousands of pilots and launch them when shaheds are coming
These pusher props and rear mounted engines on the drones should really be going down with critical power plant damage much more quickly.
What kind of armor plating do those drones use?
none, at least not in real life (no idea what they've assumed in DCS)
@@harryspeakup8452 I know. Just a joke. It’s funny watching them absorb 20mm and 30mm hits.
@@tbe0116 I agree: something so small and filled with fuel and explosives cannot be a bullet sponge!
@@harryspeakup8452 I actually think you'd be surprised. I actually think the .303 was pretty accurate. And they did mention that the 30mm was "low velocity"... But, 30mm is big enough to potentially have a payload, so...
how bout a group of AC-130Us flying ahead and shooting below at the swarms?maybe using fragmentation rounds if any does exist.with ground based missiles for last defence.
“How do I know if I have a laminar flow wing”…. Get out man 😂
I thought that...
@@grimreapers 👍
Only $50K for each UAV? That's a fantastic deal only available in DCS.
Even the "shitty Shahed" is $20K
Your gun conversion is way off recalibriate for close range drones.
Yak-52 against Orlan
YES PLEASE!!! WE NEED TO BRING BACK SPITFIRES AND MUSTANGS!!!!
The German Skynex anti drone system I believe they stated can take out drones for the cost of $4000 a shot. I have seen some videos about it. It looks like a anti air system that shoots an exploding shot that can blanket an area and take out multiple drones. Not sure if its still in development or has been deployed or just how truly effective it is.
These drones were unrealistically tough. A single well placed short burst would be enough to take down something like a shaheed.
No mention of the Yak 52 shooting down a drone a few days ago?
Yeh forgot about that one.
Does DCS have a L-39 ZA Albatross in the stable? Gun pod and two hardpoints. Turbofan.
It does yes!
I think that the V1 was the first cruise missile, not the first drone.