The reason the SM-3's didn't fire until the YJ-21's were out is because the SM-3 is a strictly anti-Ballistic missile interceptor. It doesn't engage cruise missiles.
@@grimreapers I just went back through real quick as I thought I had seen them all. I have, I didn't watch them all the way through again, but I'm pretty sure Rapid Dragon isn't firing air to air in any of these videos. Would a C-17 make an effective escort for AWACS? Not that I think it is a good idea, but it makes a decent stand in for P-8 Poseidon., which I think does pair well with AWACS. What can actually work via data link, JTAMS, SM-6, ESSM, etc....
@Grim Reapers - Thank you, all of you! Thank you for doing the best you could with DCS's limitations and the scenario I gave Cap. I appreciate your time and dedication to all of it!
@@grimreapers - I would definitely like to see you do this one again with the additions others have noted in the comments. Could Air Force aircraft (from Andersen AFB) be involved as well, or does server limitations prevent you from doing it? It might be cool to see the F-22 Raptor go up against the J-35. I would put the CSG's a little bit closer in from both directions.
Why do you appreciate it though? Genuine question. It's a video game that they're trying to pass off as some kind of serious simulator or even at all indicative in any way about how these hypothetical scenarios would actually play out. I think their videos do much more harm than good since they're sold as simulations or "hard truths" or something.
@@coreyleander7911 - I appreciate it regardless of how realistic it may be because it gets someone to mentally walk through possible scenarios in their head of what could happen. It serves the same general concept as the CSIS war game between the U.S. and China did. It brings awareness to the every day person (that has no military background), from a generic level, of the basic complexities of military operations.
One small thing is there should have been a few units of US CRAM trailers (basically CIWS on a trailer) at the airbases. They can be easily airlifted in by C-17's and the Army has a ton of them
How many is a ton and are they networked? I am picturing something amazing and hilarious. If they're networked maybe they could be scripted to not waste all their ammo
@@Ariccio123 At least 43 Centurion C-RAM were built/ordered by 2008, mostly for places that no longer need them. They don't seem to be networked (minimal support requirements seems to be a design goal) but who knows what people aren't talking about.
@@Ariccio123 5 total Batteries are in the Active army, 4 in the national guard. They are networked through fire control radars of the same type. I believe they can be linked into other branches systems via data-link but im not sure.
@@benjaminshropshire2900 Army likes them for the light infantry divisions. Considering SHORAD only is convenient for units with armored vehicles and 101st,82nd,10th, and 11th don't have them CRAM is gonna stick around for those units. (at least in the 101st at campbell i saw at least 20 units there)
That's already happening, they are already starting to put in extra air defense systems, with a lot more work next year. I believe it's all planned to up and operational by 2026 or so. So this roleplay really has Guam really heavily under-modeled. Guam will have Aegis Ashore, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), Typhon, Patriot, and Enduring Shield. It will have like 20 individual air defense sites. China could, theoretically, launch a saturation attack like this against those kinds of defenses, but I think it would cost them a large percentage of their ballistic and cruise missile inventory.
Guam is set to have 20 new air defense sites. AEGIS weapon system SM-3 block IIA SM-6, AN/SPY-6, THAAD, Patriot, Iron Dome, TYPHON, Avenger air defense systems, mobile launch platforms with SM-6 & Tomahawk cruise missiles.
Lovely boom-boom video Cap, thank you. That's a really weird bug with the Burkes. If you recall back to the Pearl Harbor defense video, we saw the exact same thing, where it gets down to perhaps ~75 or 80% drained in the full anti-air configuration, stops firing, and then continues firing again. The Avengers at Anderson also appeared to hold fire? I'm commenting immediately after the cruise missile attack. I can't help myself, I like to comment when my thoughts pop-up into my head. Regardless of the outcome, this shows how much effort it takes only to try and temporarily disable a relatively small base. It's in a strategic position, sure, but it's considered an unsinkable carrier for a reason, as it doesn't take too much to rebuild the buildings or runways. There was a recent quote from the military though, stating they want to make Guam one of the most defended US air spaces and are actively working to make that happen. This is likely the realization that Guam will serve as an important strategic fallback base if there were ever a massive war with China, as Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, and Okinawa will all be right in the middile of things. Also, as you stated, there's no way this would realisticially happen with SIGNAL/HUMAN/satellite intelligence sources and satellite coverage to observe missiles launches, ship movements, large air movements, and really the beginnings of any large attack. It's a big blue ocean to cross and impossible to hide those ships. Finally, it's important to note China has continued to anger its neighbors in the region. Signapore is considered an allied base of operations, and now we see South Korea becoming a major arms developer/exporter, Japan is spending record amounts on defense and becoming more than a WW2-era defensive only force, Taiwan continues to prepare for their defense, although a bit slower than they should, Australia is becoming more serious about their defensive capabilities particularly by operating top-tier nuclear attack subs in the near future, and finally the Phillipines is developing into an important strategic ally due to their constant harrassment by Chinese vessels. The Phillipines is allowing the US to operate off of more islands/ports/airstrips lately and they're effectively providing the US with more "unsinkable carriers" to rely upon relatively close to China and their own series of militarized islands. It goes back to what others have said though. All this effort for Guam? And what would one expect to do with holding Guam? Unless you also take out Okinawa, S. Korea, Japan, and Hawaii, have fun while you're on a short vacation in Guam hah.
I would like to ask what has China done to anger neighboring countries in the region? About Taiwan? If Taiwan（ROC） claim independent, China will definitely resort to force, but will it not attack other neighboring countries? Only if the neighboring country, under the leadership (or instigation) of the United States, takes the initiative to firstly attack China's dispatched troops to regain Taiwan, then China will fight back, right?
@@XkMeng The US could claim the role as aggressor in numerous past conflicts and also numerous potential future conflicts, but not in SE Asia and the seas surrounding China. First, China dredged onto various reefs and tiny micro islands to build larger man-made islands and then build defensive and offensive military outposts including runways. Next, I believe the latest version is called the 10 dash line, but essentially, China is claiming that the entire South China Sea, including areas recognized via international law as being outside of their legal claim to territorial water boundaires and exlcusive economic zones, are in fact, China's territory. This goes against various countries like Vietnam, Phillipines, and others. Their neighbors have much smaller militaries and are effectively being bullied by China's navy, coast guard, and larrge fleet of fishing vessels recruited to take orders from the Chinese military. Taiwan itself has claimed to be a democratic and independent territory as far back as the Chinese civil war between those supporting democracy and the communist elements of China that are in power of the mainland today. The democratic government effectively escaped to Taiwan and has claimed independence since including building up their military. Of course, the US essentially supports any country or breakaway government who wishes to follow the values of a democratic government. However, I sense that you feel the US and/or others are the aggressors in the region. In this specific situation, China is th aggressor. The US isn't going to begin any war in the region and their current push to develop upgraded capabilities/weapons/strategy is to defensively counter China's growing aggression. Taiwan and the US aren't going to attack China, but China is building their military aggressively for a couple decades now, and it's a pretty poor secret that they look to take Taiwan by force, if possible, along the same lines as re-absorbing Hong Kong, although that was a bit different situation politically with UK influence set to expire there. Taiwan has no outside third-party government or higher power, it is simply the Taiwanese government itself not wishing to be part of mainland China.
@@jamison884 1. China's claim in the South China Sea is based on the inherited 11-dash line from the Republic of China (ROC). In 1946, Japan returned the islands in the South China Sea to ROC and established boundary markers, which were surveyed and declared in 1947 with the assistance of the United States. At that time, there was no opposition because there were no independent countries in the vicinity but only colonies. You cannot establish a new country to seize territory that has already been claimed by others. Furthermore, the BBC/CNN never told you that among the larger islands in the South China Sea, China only occupies 8, while Vietnam occupies 29, the Philippines 9, Malaysia 5, and Brunei 1. The practice of land reclamation and island expansion was actually initiated by Vietnam in the 1970s. 2. Democratic regime? No, the term "democracy" was a slogan of the Soviet Union and never appeared in the United States' Constitution. It was only after the Cold War that the United States seized the legacy of the Soviet Union and claimed to be a democratic country. As for the Republic of China (ROC) during World War II, that regime was already thoroughly corrupt, even more so than the late Qing Dynasty. Before the war, the average life expectancy of Chinese people was only 35 years. Therefore, the ROC was abandoned by the entire Chinese people. During the civil war, although the ROC had better weapons and foreign support, its army collapsed at the slightest touch, with large numbers of defections, as no soldier was willing to fight for the ROC regime. 3. After fleeing to Taiwan, the ROC has been preparing for a counterattack on the mainland. Its leaders have never declared independence. Both Chiang Kai-shek and his son, Chiang Ching-kuo (the second-generation leader who led Taiwan's development into a developed country), were nationalists and staunchly opposed Taiwan independence. They knew that if they caused Taiwan to become independent, they would be regarded as eternal villains in the history of the Chinese nation. Therefore, to this day, Taiwan's constitution still includes Taiwan, the mainland, Xinjiang, Tibet, and even Mongolia, with a larger territorial scope than the PRC's constitution. 4. The United States has never based its foreign relations on whether the other party is a "democratic" regime. Not at all. Even during the Cold War, the Soviet Union was the democratic country, while the United States was a republic. Until today, we have never recognized the United States as a democratic country. The term "democracy" is not found in the Chinese constitution or the US constitution. China is the true democratic country.
@@XkMeng Thanks for the history lesson, but I observe how things actually are, not what the history lesson says they should be. The US is a democratic republic, and although the political system is quite terrible, often leading to mediocre choices at all levels of state and federal office, and the electoral college is an in inherently vulnerable outdated system, it has worked well enough to get the US where it is today. China is a one-party pseudo-dictatorship with a rather unique combination of socialism, Marxism, and capitalism dictating its national economy. Say whatever you want about the territorial situation in the S. China Sea, but the countries involved are not happy with China and that's all that really matters (to them). The US isn't concerned with occupying small islands in the S. China Sea and like Europe before her, has given up on colonialism. Having access to runways and ports in the region definitely helps, but you know as well as I know, such usage isn't indicative of a greater plan to take territory from allied countries. The US is in the region to support and defend allied countries like Japan, South Korea, Philippines, Australia, and Taiwan. Taiwan isn't going to be invading the mainland and if that were ever truly their goal, they're historically bad at preparing for it, as they would have zero chance at ever establishing a permanent beachhead. From a purely militaristic perspective, the concept is straight ridiculous and will never happen. What's more likely to happen? China using it's extremely large military buildup since the mid-2000's (in particular) and attempting to take back Taiwan via force. Luckily for the US, Taiwan, and US allies in the region, China relies on far too many imports for its daily energy and food supplies, and any war would lead to both sanctions and a blockade, which China wouldn't be able to survive for an extended period of time. The US has absolutely no interest in conflict in the Pacific, but that's currently the number one threat to the US, its regional allies, and the worldwide economy, so it will continue to prepare for the worst and continue the military buildup in stride with China.
yeah theres ample evidence of aircraft elevators on the Ford breaking down during routine operation. And its a known fact that if one the electromagnetic catapult on the Ford breaks down, all of them break because of how they're wired up.
Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) in Guam has approximately 340 fighter and attack aircraft assigned to it. The base also has about 100 additional deployed aircraft that rotate on Guam
The day after I bitched about missing Fly in these battles, the man, the myth, the German is back! Good to hear your laughter in the chat again! Now all we need is Damp and Violet back!
@@FlybywireTheGerman No worries, we all understand that real life has to take priority over gaming, but it was good to see you back in the mix even if it's the only chance we'll have for a while.
YJ-21 doesn't follow normal ballistics it follows Sanger ballistics, SM3 would not be able to intercept them, only SM6 could. Also, the carrier around Guam would be hit by DF-26 from the mainland, funny that you didn't include that.
I’m pretty sure that Guam is slated to get Aegis Ashore system by that time. Also, perhaps some of the unused VLS cell have Tomahawks or Asrocs in them.
Roger that was the idea of the picket ships, best I could do for an analogue of shore AEGIS. Still not working properly, they have a big weird pause in the middle of their firing. Real annoying.
0H YEAH AMER!CAN LGBTQ GENERAT!0NS, ARE Y0U SURES?!! CH!NA ICBM, L0NG RANGES STAND 0FF HYPERS0N!C, SUPERS0N!C M!SS!LE W!TH VAR!ETY WARHEADS INCLUD!NG FUEL B0MB, BUNKER BUSTER CAN FLATTEN ANY US M!LL!TARY BASE EAS!LY!!! US EQU!PMENT IT JUNKS, IT'S JUST C0RRUPT!0NS AND BR!BER!ES PR0JECT MADE BY US B!LL!0NA!RES DEEP STATES F0R LARGE PR0F!TS!!! G00D LUCK P00R AMER!CA TAXPAYERS🤭🤭🤭☺🤣🤣!!!
@@grimreapersIm pretty that pause was them running out of SM-2s. For any Aegis system, it would need a combination of SM-2s/3s/6s. When a ship runs out of SM-2s its very vulnerable to CMs and low flying aircraft. Not even SM-6s can supplement for a lack of SM-2s. Atleast not at the ranges in the video. The SM-2MR is a MR-SAM, but at the same time can operate very efficiently as a SR-SAM. The SM-3/6 can do neither of those things. Hope this helps.
The J-35 is supposed to be able to carry 6 missiles, it’s intended designated WS-19 engines should provide a maximum take off weight that’s almost 5/3 of the F-35 and it’s weapon’s bay appears way larger by the leaked photos
There is ALWAYS at least one attack submarine ready to go to sea there. Don't forget the coast guard assets there (they might be able to do a suicide run). Guam, likely has more than one Patriot battery, I know that they have a THAAD battery there.
Is it there full time? Also as far a subs, obviously its the same for both sides, and the AD would be abserloutely overwhelmed, i dont know alot about anti-submarine warfare, but i have a good understanding of a submarine squadrons contribution to BM warfare. And i think the ships on both sides would be overwhelmed depending on how many subs or sub squadrons are sent though
Exactly. These "simulations" are fatally flawed from the lack of submarines and, nowadays, orbital reconnaissance assets. A Chinese task force wouldn't get near Guam without eating a bunch of Mark 48 ADCAPs.
Dude treated it as a sparring match. He just matched the smaller dudes energy when he could've ko'd him in the first round easily. I almost think the dad set this up. 😅
32:45 I actually think the irl loadout would be 4 PL-15s. The overall design of J-35 (lack of gun port and side missile bays) suggests it is designed to snipe at long range while the lock is provided by frontline fighters via data link. Without a side bay it also means PL-10 would have to acquire the thermal lock from the fighter itself. However, this capability is unconfirmed afaik.
The equipment doesn't think, but people do. I believe they will have loadouts based on the scenario. I mean, why force yourself into a disadvantage when you have alternatives?
In order to prevent the carriers from being jammed by aircraft. At the beginning of each battle, place a stationary fighter on the flight deck the island that you can enter into at will, and fire upon any aircraft that cause traffic jams. Food for thought!
Cap you need to change the YJ-21, since you can't model the extremely powerful ECM systems on the US ships you need to lower the YJ-21 accuracy to replicate what would be happening to the seekers on the missiles. It reduces the chance that a missile can hit.
This. People often forget that warships around the world have very potent ECM systems. The modern V5-V7 AN/SLQ-32 is a beast! Add to that Mk36 Chaff and Flares, Mk59 floating decoys, Mk234 Nulka decoys, and on some ships the AN/SLQ-59 jammer and you have a vessel that is seriously hard to hit even if it isn't shooting back.
None of the ships in game have any decoys or countermeasures at all. If you want the chinese missiles to be nerfed because of US ECM then the US missiles need to be nerfed because of chinese ECM. And the same for every other country.
It was a little funny, when Fire said he hit the carrier but not the plane, the first thought in my head was that at least he could hit the barn with that gun.😊 Love all the work you all do, thanks for the fun! Peace.
superior realism. chad demonetized modern scenarios vs virgin WW2 goofy who cares nonflicts. Remember the first china vs Taiwan wargame? How one built ontop of another, well we havent returned that yet but these little ones are a good start @@coreyleander7911
Cap have you gotten anywhere with adding the helmet mounted display to the F-35 for increased situational awareness and the ability to utilize the HOBS aim 9x? If you're still working on that, I was also wondering if you have seen the new conversation with the F-35 pilot that let it slip the F35 has higher AOA than the F18? Is that something that can be tested?
@Grim Reapers Lockheed Martin has confirmed that work is progressing on a weapons bay adapter for F-35 Lightning II A and C variants, according to a response by the company to The War Zone’s inquiry. Dubbed Sidekick, the device would increase the amount of AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM) the stealth jet can carry internally from four to six. The Sidekick concept has been floating around in the F-35 space for a few years, but it was largely unclear what Lockheed Martin’s exact plan for the adapter was, as well as its developmental status, or if its emergence was at all related to the jet’s ongoing Block 4 modernization effort. The War Zone earlier this month reached out to the company to ask for any updates and was given confirmation that Sidekick now has backing As noted, Sidekick will only be compatible with F-35As and carrier-capable F-35C variants. This is because the remaining short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) F-35B variants belonging to the U.S. Marine Corps have smaller internal weapons bays on account of the lift fan that it uses to realize its STOVL capabilities. The War Zone followed up with Lockheed Martin to clarify if Sidekick will be a part of the Block 4 upgrade effort or if it will be an independent offering that could be retrofitted to older F-35s as well as installed on new-build models.
thank you for this battle. my daughter is presently stationed on the Emory Land AS39 home ported in Guam. as a Navy vet, and from what she can tell me without getting into court martial level trouble, as soon as things with China/Taiwan get hot, her ship and every other sea worthy vessel, will depart enroute to "undisclosed" locations. from dead cold boilers to underway is likely 8 hours or less. a sub tender is not a surface combatant, so not a primary target. but is is a sub support/repair/rearm vessel, so a prime target of opportunity. so likely, in this scenerio, the navel target area would likely be empty
I like to be objective. The logistics involved in this attack is probably beyond China. Pretty sure the first sign of aggressive action would put the entire hemisphere on scramble.
9:00 "Why would they attack Guam?" Good question. Result, regardless of the outcome... Flash message to Pacific Fleet: Conduct unrestricted warfare against all surface and submarine assets of the Chinese Navy.
For a high attrition battle like this, I wonder what effect pilot survivability has on things? If your pilots trust their plane to keep them alive, even if the plane it self if falling out of the sky in small bits, will they be more effectively aggressive or more wastefully reckless?
The description of a "moonpie" that was given, was inaccurate. In British terms, i would describe it as a sandwich made from soft marshmallow filliing, with two digestives as the bun, then dipped and fully covered in semi hard, semi dark chocolate. They're delicious, but contain enough sugar to trigger diabetes.
I think with this kind of operation all the defending force would have to do is inflict enough damage on the attacking force to make any further offensive movement/invasion untenable. This also goes far an invasion of Taiwan.
Do you mean some kinda 'shock and awe'? Be so effective, efficient, lethal and above all overwhelming for one battle so that you have to fight no more?
@@rileymorrisroe6743 no not so much shock and awe, but being able to damage the invading so much that their original mission is untenable. Not necessarily winning but damaging them enough that they have to withdraw.
@@Pablo668 Oh i get you, i thought you meant a deterence by abserloute annihilation upon first contact. But you mean outright destruction upin foest contact. So, i somewhat agree, but not exactly with the way you described. I think the way you described would work against a nation that isnt an industrial and technological powerhouse like China/Russia (Their production capabilites dwarf even those of China currently). So mabye is North Korea attack South Korea. But against China, lets say, that wouldnt work as its military is so big and production so strong that a strictly defensive action wouldnt work, an offensive action however? That might, but that would be very difficult aswell, as it would have to beat Chinese air/missile def, and then hit numerous targets, ranging from military to industrial targets aswell as likely critical infrastructure and governance buildings to completely and effectively neutralise the country. So itd be difficult to say the least. Its possible that if the defenders completely wipe out the attacking force it will discourage future assualts (what i was referencing initially) but that then depends on the resolve of the nation attacking and how much they need that victory. I think though, in a large theatre war, completelt destroying an enemy assault on a specific area will deter a secondary follow up assault in the same manner, but it wouldnt end a war or remove the attacking force ability to fight. To summarise, what you say is possible but only from a strictly offensive stand point. But as far as deterring future assaults on an area, this theory could work. But it wouldnt remove the militaristic capabilities of a nation. Sorry for the rant but i hope this helps.
1st June, 2026. Amidst the historic battle of Guam a brave J-35 pilot defects to the nearly destroyed Anderson AFB where Air Force personnel later state he was amazed at the variety of sweets available for sate at the base.
Thanks for another great video Cap! I would be curious to see if you just did the attack with missiles, would the human pilots stationed at Guam be able to eliminate enough of the cruise missile to prevent the destruction of the base?
My only complaint with this sim..... The humans are able to spawn in, with j-35s even after all the j-35s had been destroyed. To make it better. They should have only been able to use planes that are available. Cause then it's unlimited number of lightning vs j-35. You don't magically reload the cwis or ABs after they have fired all missiles. Why allow magic planes. Great video as always though
GR, how about recreating Operation Mercury, the Battle of Crete? BTW, I really enjoyed today's video. I was surprised that the US doesn't have a stronger missile defensive system on Guam. Considering its importance in the Pacific, I would think they would invest a bit more to defend themselves. Granted 250 missiles was a little crazy. But it seems that swarms are now a major part of military doctrine so you need to invest more in defensive systems to counter such strategies.
Back in March the DoD announced a 1.5 billion dollar overhaul of Gaums air defenses , it should get Aegis Ashore, IFPC (similar to iron dome) more THAAD, Patriot and I think some C-RAM.
Guam is currently in the process of getting 20 new air defense sites. AEGIS weapon system SM-3 block IIA SM-6, AN/SPY-6, THAAD, Patriot, Iron Dome, TYPHON, Avenger air defense systems, mobile launch platforms with SM-6 & Tomahawk cruise missiles.
I thought anyone knows that If it's just an attack from an offshore platform, If you want to completely paralyze Guam, at least three carrier strike groups.
If you fire 100 more cruise missiles than defensive missiles.... what did you think was going to happen? Seriously, you act all surprised but there was no doubt in the beginning.
Why is it like those SM-3 and SM-6 missiles apparently can only be fired from ships? I mean, this might sound like a stupid question, but why not litter the entire island of Guam with arrays of SM-3 and SM-6 launching tubes on hidden locations, giving the island like 500 or up to a 1,000 of these missiles? We know that the Chinese rely heavily on supersonic and hypersonic missiles anyway, thus raising the question, of putting just loads and loads of SM-3 and SM-6 launching facilities on the island? The Awacs is already there to guide them.
Fox Four used to be the brevity code for guns but I think we stopped using it after the Vietnam War. If the B-52s got involved, they would've been launching LRASMs, not JASSMs. JASSM can't hit moving targets. The Super Hornets could've stayed home. The F-35s really carried the day in the air battle.
Nice scenario! This reminds me of Germany considering invading Iceland in WWII. Yes, they may have been able to take Iceland, but they could never hold Iceland thus they decided against any Iceland attack. Thanks for putting this together! An interesting idea for China to buy standoff distance between Chinese forces invading Taiwan and supporting US forces.
realistically I suspect china will do long range attack on guam regularly to keep it out of operation and forgo attempting to invade at all. After the initial strike, guam would take weeks to repair at best and follow up strikes would be much easier.
@@gundamator4709 jamming would be kind of useless against cruise missiles hitting large static targets. They are likely hitting pre-designated targets.
I wonder if aegis decided that essm's weren't worth defending another target with. So it only used them to destroy missiles deemed too be targeting specific targets.
The 1st line of defense would've been the air wing shooting down the cruise missiles. To conserve air power, perhaps only the Hornets could've flown out to meet the initial barrage of cruise missiles. The F-35 could've been reserved for OCA/DCA. This way the Aegis ships and other IADS could've conserved their magazines better
I imagine there's no way to implement it currently, but it would be interesting to see how the rumored multimode seeker of the AIM-260 would change these engagements.
Not sure who put this together for you, but there is a 1B upgrade to the air defense in Guam including THAAD. THAAD is already on the island. You do realize that after 250 missiles and 1/2 a Billion the only thing that happens at Andersen is ... the Seabee's get excited.
realistically I wonder how many missiles china can fire at guam before defenses get saturated. There isn't an unlimited supply of interceptors on the island. Hell, china could to shaheed type swarm attack on guam from neutrally flagged containerships 1000km away and just deplete defenses that way.
@@hughmungus2760 Any place on earth can be saturated including Beijing. These SAMS just raise the cost. And I am only talking conventional weapons. I think I read that after 7-days of full up fighting both the USA and China would be out of all the "nice stuff." Then like before in the Pacific, it would be an industrial slog. The difference is that on day 1 there (most likely) would not be Chinese bombers over America, but the reverse would be true. Repairing Guam may actually be easier than defending it from missiles. Concrete is not "that" expensive.
@@rickrude978 Yeah but Beijing is a massive city with 20 million people and land borders to equally densely populated adjacent provinces. Any damage the US can deal to chinese cities, china can repair fairly quickly because it has the construction crews and resources on hand, as well as infrastructure redundancy. Guam is in the middle of nowhere, the runways will probably be repaired fairly fast, but whats not going to be easily replaced are the fuel storage facilities, radar installations and aircraft maintenance facilities, port facilities. ect. Those will require specialised machinery to be shipped in from the US mainland which could be destroyed on the runway or while attempting to dock at a makeshift port. Destroying major civilian infrastructure on the island and causing a massive humanitarian crisis would also add to the complexity of reconstruction. It would be... politically catastrophic if the US let civilians on its own territories die of starvation and dysentery while only shipping in military supplies. Yes, both sides will probably run out of standoff munitions quite fast and the barrages of missiles will slow to a trickle. But one side clearly has the industrial advantage to wage this kind of sustained war of attrition while the other doesn't Im not even going to go into detail about the civilian side of industrial capabilities but needless to say, one side is the world's largest exporter of manufactured goods and one side is the world's largest importer.
@@hughmungus2760 You have some points, but no it is not that hard. For example, fuel. The fuel bladders we had in Afghanistan are _giant balloons_. I am serious. They are made of some rubber-like material. Just sitting in giant holes. Blow them up, causes a lot of fire, roll out more giant rubber balloons. It is a lot easier to keep an airfield working then you think. The jets can land on roadways on Guam. All the roads. You are going to destroy all of the airfields and every straight road? It is nearly impossible to remotely destroy Guam or Tawain for that matter. American drop so many bombs, day, after day, after day, during WW2 and we still did not remove the Japanese or German's industrial capability until we ran tanks over it. Read about the Battle of Guadalcanal in WW2. Basically, to remove the Japanese we had to invade. For the Japanese to remove the US, the Japanese had to invade. Fighters were taking off and landing while bombs were falling. We were rebuilding the airfields within hours / days. And then they were destroyed again. And then the Japanese would do the same thing. Rebuild and start launching sorties. And if you think that example is "too old" (TLDR it is not) then realize that in Kandahar Afghanistan we were under rocket attack (admittedly not very good attacks, but constant) on a daily basis, and I am unsure it even interrupted flight operations. I will say again, it did not even interrupt flight operations. In real war, so many safeties stuff, and all of nonsense is just removed. it is just double turning every day. Day and night. The Chinese cannot "take out" Guam without putting boots on the ground. And they can't do that. They can damage it. And anything stupid enough to be on the ground when this thing kicks off is dead. (I am sure the DOD doesn't know that...right) But days after the rockets / missiles stop falling there will be sorties. And of course, the Navy doesn't even need Guam. It is nice, makes things easier, but it does not even need it. it resupplies in the deep blue.
@@rickrude978 I guess this goes into the strategic and political implications of war rather than technical or tactical. Realistically theres a limit to how much benefit you can get out of rebuilding a base over only to get it blown up over and over. Protracted strategic bombing will eventually cause society to break down and population to be unable to sustain themselves, places like Taiwan only produce 1/3 of the food it consumes and has to ship in most of it. With sufficient bombardment of critical logistics infrastructure on the island, you will eventually force a surrender or totally depopulate it. In the case of guam, Guam produces less than 10% of the food it consumes, any US attempt to rebuild after an attack will be severely hampered by the necessity of addressing humanitarian needs which if the US failed, would cause social order on the island to completely collapse. Alternatively, a more long term means of denying the use of guam maybe to use air dropped mines which could be fitted to any weapon that can deploy cluster munitions. Finally, its not the fighters on guam china is concerned about but the bombers, which cannot take off without a dedicated runway.
2:24 in other words China has 2 days, until the end is near, and even if they can capture Guam in that time, they will just get kicked out, bc of no supplies
You seem to have forgotten that you're playing a *videogame.* Do you honestly think *anything* in a virtual environment is going to be a direct representation of military equipment that's still in active use?
Improved Version: ua-cam.com/video/cZTUSgpn3PM/v-deo.html
It's weird to see Guam playing itself for once.
Yes it is a nice treat for me also.
Maybe if the ww2 Marinas map and the Corsair ever get released it can play itself again.
CH!NA CAN FLATTEN US M!LL!TARY BASE IN PAC!F!C EAS!LY, INCLUD!NG GUAM, HAWAI, ETC!!!
🐉🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳🇨🇳👍
*squints at Guam*
Not sure if real…
Hahaha
The reason the SM-3's didn't fire until the YJ-21's were out is because the SM-3 is a strictly anti-Ballistic missile interceptor. It doesn't engage cruise missiles.
Good point
They should have put the burkes in front so essentially could be used
0H YEAH AMER!CAN LGBTQ GENERAT!0NS?!!
PLEASE G!VE M0RE D0NAT!0NS F0R H0MELESS US VETERAN F!RST!!!
True, since YJ-21 can be seen as ship-loaded DF-21, which is a ballistic missile.
Or gave them a SM-6 load out which is basically a SM-2 and SM-3 in one
Wonder if C17 could launch air to air missiles via Rapid Dragon and datalink to AWACS... either in real life or in game?
Agreed - plenty of Rapid Dragon here:
Rapid Dragon & MALD vs Russian Black Sea Fleet: ua-cam.com/video/sHTGKG1cYec/v-deo.html
Rapid Dragon vs IJN WWII Carrier Group: ua-cam.com/video/QXONs2voDjE/v-deo.html
Rapid Dragon vs Russian Black Sea Fleet: ua-cam.com/video/rvUTl6xjxqY/v-deo.html
Rapid Dragon vs Omaha Beach Defenses: ua-cam.com/video/k4T1WWtVyYk/v-deo.html
Rapid Dragon vs Chinese Invasion Fleet: ua-cam.com/video/MQ1wrspnL7A/v-deo.html
RAP!D DRAG0NS IT'S AN0THER US M!LL!TARY INDUSTR!AL C0MPLEXS JUNK HARDWARE, L!KE L00KHED F35 FLY!NG SUBMAR!NE!!!
🤪🤪🤪🤭🤭🤭🤣🤣🤣
It can and has! I highly recommend the videos linked, they're great fun.
@@grimreapers I just went back through real quick as I thought I had seen them all. I have, I didn't watch them all the way through again, but I'm pretty sure Rapid Dragon isn't firing air to air in any of these videos.
Would a C-17 make an effective escort for AWACS? Not that I think it is a good idea, but it makes a decent stand in for P-8 Poseidon., which I think does pair well with AWACS. What can actually work via data link, JTAMS, SM-6, ESSM, etc....
@@ur_quainmaster7901 Effective escort? Probably, but they're too limited in numbers and strategic airlift is still pretty important
Simba landing his J-35 and going shopping at the Super Mart has to be my favorite Grim Reapers moment.
44:40
Like you called it out yourselves, timing at 31:50 though🤣
"Fly is out of missiles, RTB!"
>The AIM-260 coming right for him
"Are you SURE about that?"
It was just an expedited RTB
@Grim Reapers - Thank you, all of you! Thank you for doing the best you could with DCS's limitations and the scenario I gave Cap. I appreciate your time and dedication to all of it!
Thanks Jeffrey.
@@grimreapers - I would definitely like to see you do this one again with the additions others have noted in the comments. Could Air Force aircraft (from Andersen AFB) be involved as well, or does server limitations prevent you from doing it? It might be cool to see the F-22 Raptor go up against the J-35. I would put the CSG's a little bit closer in from both directions.
Why do you appreciate it though? Genuine question. It's a video game that they're trying to pass off as some kind of serious simulator or even at all indicative in any way about how these hypothetical scenarios would actually play out. I think their videos do much more harm than good since they're sold as simulations or "hard truths" or something.
@@coreyleander7911 - I appreciate it regardless of how realistic it may be because it gets someone to mentally walk through possible scenarios in their head of what could happen. It serves the same general concept as the CSIS war game between the U.S. and China did. It brings awareness to the every day person (that has no military background), from a generic level, of the basic complexities of military operations.
@@Jeffrey.1978 that's pretty insane. You might as well be watching wrestling, but I'm sure you do that too.
One small thing is there should have been a few units of US CRAM trailers (basically CIWS on a trailer) at the airbases. They can be easily airlifted in by C-17's and the Army has a ton of them
How many is a ton and are they networked? I am picturing something amazing and hilarious. If they're networked maybe they could be scripted to not waste all their ammo
@@Ariccio123 At least 43 Centurion C-RAM were built/ordered by 2008, mostly for places that no longer need them. They don't seem to be networked (minimal support requirements seems to be a design goal) but who knows what people aren't talking about.
@@Ariccio123 5 total Batteries are in the Active army, 4 in the national guard. They are networked through fire control radars of the same type. I believe they can be linked into other branches systems via data-link but im not sure.
@@benjaminshropshire2900 Army likes them for the light infantry divisions. Considering SHORAD only is convenient for units with armored vehicles and 101st,82nd,10th, and 11th don't have them CRAM is gonna stick around for those units. (at least in the 101st at campbell i saw at least 20 units there)
Yeh as soon as I re-watched this I realised we forgot C-RAM :(( :(
15:30 I'm pretty sure the DoD laid plans to make Guam one of the most defended places, if not the most defended place on earth in the coming years.
Plans are nice but as Mike Tyson once said. "Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the mouth."
@@Stinger522 Based Mike Tyson
That's already happening, they are already starting to put in extra air defense systems, with a lot more work next year. I believe it's all planned to up and operational by 2026 or so. So this roleplay really has Guam really heavily under-modeled. Guam will have Aegis Ashore, Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD), Typhon, Patriot, and Enduring Shield. It will have like 20 individual air defense sites. China could, theoretically, launch a saturation attack like this against those kinds of defenses, but I think it would cost them a large percentage of their ballistic and cruise missile inventory.
Guam is set to have 20 new air defense sites. AEGIS weapon system SM-3 block IIA SM-6, AN/SPY-6, THAAD, Patriot, Iron Dome, TYPHON, Avenger air defense systems, mobile launch platforms with SM-6 & Tomahawk cruise missiles.
DF-51 can't wait to smash Guam
@@jonathantoymakerI didn't know DF-51 was capable of feeling that way.
@@everypitchcounts4875Yes that new A.I. is very emotional 😁
@@jonathantoymaker Is that the FOBS system?
@@gundamator4709 I can't answer my enemies questions...
Lovely boom-boom video Cap, thank you.
That's a really weird bug with the Burkes. If you recall back to the Pearl Harbor defense video, we saw the exact same thing, where it gets down to perhaps ~75 or 80% drained in the full anti-air configuration, stops firing, and then continues firing again. The Avengers at Anderson also appeared to hold fire?
I'm commenting immediately after the cruise missile attack. I can't help myself, I like to comment when my thoughts pop-up into my head. Regardless of the outcome, this shows how much effort it takes only to try and temporarily disable a relatively small base. It's in a strategic position, sure, but it's considered an unsinkable carrier for a reason, as it doesn't take too much to rebuild the buildings or runways. There was a recent quote from the military though, stating they want to make Guam one of the most defended US air spaces and are actively working to make that happen. This is likely the realization that Guam will serve as an important strategic fallback base if there were ever a massive war with China, as Taiwan, South Korea, Japan, and Okinawa will all be right in the middile of things.
Also, as you stated, there's no way this would realisticially happen with SIGNAL/HUMAN/satellite intelligence sources and satellite coverage to observe missiles launches, ship movements, large air movements, and really the beginnings of any large attack. It's a big blue ocean to cross and impossible to hide those ships.
Finally, it's important to note China has continued to anger its neighbors in the region. Signapore is considered an allied base of operations, and now we see South Korea becoming a major arms developer/exporter, Japan is spending record amounts on defense and becoming more than a WW2-era defensive only force, Taiwan continues to prepare for their defense, although a bit slower than they should, Australia is becoming more serious about their defensive capabilities particularly by operating top-tier nuclear attack subs in the near future, and finally the Phillipines is developing into an important strategic ally due to their constant harrassment by Chinese vessels. The Phillipines is allowing the US to operate off of more islands/ports/airstrips lately and they're effectively providing the US with more "unsinkable carriers" to rely upon relatively close to China and their own series of militarized islands.
It goes back to what others have said though. All this effort for Guam? And what would one expect to do with holding Guam? Unless you also take out Okinawa, S. Korea, Japan, and Hawaii, have fun while you're on a short vacation in Guam hah.
Can you paste this to my Discord J? Can;t read ATM. Wife calling.
I would like to ask what has China done to anger neighboring countries in the region? About Taiwan? If Taiwan（ROC） claim independent, China will definitely resort to force, but will it not attack other neighboring countries? Only if the neighboring country, under the leadership (or instigation) of the United States, takes the initiative to firstly attack China's dispatched troops to regain Taiwan, then China will fight back, right?
@@XkMeng The US could claim the role as aggressor in numerous past conflicts and also numerous potential future conflicts, but not in SE Asia and the seas surrounding China. First, China dredged onto various reefs and tiny micro islands to build larger man-made islands and then build defensive and offensive military outposts including runways. Next, I believe the latest version is called the 10 dash line, but essentially, China is claiming that the entire South China Sea, including areas recognized via international law as being outside of their legal claim to territorial water boundaires and exlcusive economic zones, are in fact, China's territory. This goes against various countries like Vietnam, Phillipines, and others. Their neighbors have much smaller militaries and are effectively being bullied by China's navy, coast guard, and larrge fleet of fishing vessels recruited to take orders from the Chinese military.
Taiwan itself has claimed to be a democratic and independent territory as far back as the Chinese civil war between those supporting democracy and the communist elements of China that are in power of the mainland today. The democratic government effectively escaped to Taiwan and has claimed independence since including building up their military. Of course, the US essentially supports any country or breakaway government who wishes to follow the values of a democratic government.
However, I sense that you feel the US and/or others are the aggressors in the region. In this specific situation, China is th aggressor. The US isn't going to begin any war in the region and their current push to develop upgraded capabilities/weapons/strategy is to defensively counter China's growing aggression. Taiwan and the US aren't going to attack China, but China is building their military aggressively for a couple decades now, and it's a pretty poor secret that they look to take Taiwan by force, if possible, along the same lines as re-absorbing Hong Kong, although that was a bit different situation politically with UK influence set to expire there. Taiwan has no outside third-party government or higher power, it is simply the Taiwanese government itself not wishing to be part of mainland China.
@@jamison884 1. China's claim in the South China Sea is based on the inherited 11-dash line from the Republic of China (ROC). In 1946, Japan returned the islands in the South China Sea to ROC and established boundary markers, which were surveyed and declared in 1947 with the assistance of the United States. At that time, there was no opposition because there were no independent countries in the vicinity but only colonies. You cannot establish a new country to seize territory that has already been claimed by others. Furthermore, the BBC/CNN never told you that among the larger islands in the South China Sea, China only occupies 8, while Vietnam occupies 29, the Philippines 9, Malaysia 5, and Brunei 1. The practice of land reclamation and island expansion was actually initiated by Vietnam in the 1970s.
2. Democratic regime? No, the term "democracy" was a slogan of the Soviet Union and never appeared in the United States' Constitution. It was only after the Cold War that the United States seized the legacy of the Soviet Union and claimed to be a democratic country. As for the Republic of China (ROC) during World War II, that regime was already thoroughly corrupt, even more so than the late Qing Dynasty. Before the war, the average life expectancy of Chinese people was only 35 years. Therefore, the ROC was abandoned by the entire Chinese people. During the civil war, although the ROC had better weapons and foreign support, its army collapsed at the slightest touch, with large numbers of defections, as no soldier was willing to fight for the ROC regime.
3. After fleeing to Taiwan, the ROC has been preparing for a counterattack on the mainland. Its leaders have never declared independence. Both Chiang Kai-shek and his son, Chiang Ching-kuo (the second-generation leader who led Taiwan's development into a developed country), were nationalists and staunchly opposed Taiwan independence. They knew that if they caused Taiwan to become independent, they would be regarded as eternal villains in the history of the Chinese nation. Therefore, to this day, Taiwan's constitution still includes Taiwan, the mainland, Xinjiang, Tibet, and even Mongolia, with a larger territorial scope than the PRC's constitution.
4. The United States has never based its foreign relations on whether the other party is a "democratic" regime. Not at all. Even during the Cold War, the Soviet Union was the democratic country, while the United States was a republic. Until today, we have never recognized the United States as a democratic country. The term "democracy" is not found in the Chinese constitution or the US constitution. China is the true democratic country.
@@XkMeng Thanks for the history lesson, but I observe how things actually are, not what the history lesson says they should be.
The US is a democratic republic, and although the political system is quite terrible, often leading to mediocre choices at all levels of state and federal office, and the electoral college is an in inherently vulnerable outdated system, it has worked well enough to get the US where it is today.
China is a one-party pseudo-dictatorship with a rather unique combination of socialism, Marxism, and capitalism dictating its national economy.
Say whatever you want about the territorial situation in the S. China Sea, but the countries involved are not happy with China and that's all that really matters (to them).
The US isn't concerned with occupying small islands in the S. China Sea and like Europe before her, has given up on colonialism. Having access to runways and ports in the region definitely helps, but you know as well as I know, such usage isn't indicative of a greater plan to take territory from allied countries.
The US is in the region to support and defend allied countries like Japan, South Korea, Philippines, Australia, and Taiwan. Taiwan isn't going to be invading the mainland and if that were ever truly their goal, they're historically bad at preparing for it, as they would have zero chance at ever establishing a permanent beachhead.
From a purely militaristic perspective, the concept is straight ridiculous and will never happen. What's more likely to happen? China using it's extremely large military buildup since the mid-2000's (in particular) and attempting to take back Taiwan via force. Luckily for the US, Taiwan, and US allies in the region, China relies on far too many imports for its daily energy and food supplies, and any war would lead to both sanctions and a blockade, which China wouldn't be able to survive for an extended period of time.
The US has absolutely no interest in conflict in the Pacific, but that's currently the number one threat to the US, its regional allies, and the worldwide economy, so it will continue to prepare for the worst and continue the military buildup in stride with China.
I’m always very happy to see a new video from Grim Reapers when i get home and open UA-cam on my TV 👌
Genuine question, why? It is similar to how someone likes WWE even knowing it's fake and not at all even close to representative of real life?
I wouldn't worry about technical problems.
I guarantee you any battle like this IRL would have technical problems out the wazoo.
Fair comment.
yeah theres ample evidence of aircraft elevators on the Ford breaking down during routine operation. And its a known fact that if one the electromagnetic catapult on the Ford breaks down, all of them break because of how they're wired up.
At least in real life we can see how these platforms actually work instead of how Russian Muscovites who made and develop DCS think they do.
Would love to see a replay of this cap . And Simba at the end with the " kiwi berries " sale had me laughing 😂
$2 for an avocado in 2026 seems unrealistically low the way things are going.
@@TheStormpilgrimin 2026 everyone will be paying for them in Yuan 😂
Andersen Air Force Base (AFB) in Guam has approximately 340 fighter and attack aircraft assigned to it. The base also has about 100 additional deployed aircraft that rotate on Guam
So essentially even with the 7th fleet completely redirected, there is way to attack short of a ICBM barrage.
The day after I bitched about missing Fly in these battles, the man, the myth, the German is back! Good to hear your laughter in the chat again! Now all we need is Damp and Violet back!
thanks man sadly it was just a single Day i could make it but wenn my Vacation is in the Xmas Time i will be here more often
@@FlybywireTheGerman No worries, we all understand that real life has to take priority over gaming, but it was good to see you back in the mix even if it's the only chance we'll have for a while.
YJ-21 doesn't follow normal ballistics it follows Sanger ballistics, SM3 would not be able to intercept them, only SM6 could.
Also, the carrier around Guam would be hit by DF-26 from the mainland, funny that you didn't include that.
I agree with you.
I’m pretty sure that Guam is slated to get Aegis Ashore system by that time. Also, perhaps some of the unused VLS cell have Tomahawks or Asrocs in them.
Roger that was the idea of the picket ships, best I could do for an analogue of shore AEGIS. Still not working properly, they have a big weird pause in the middle of their firing. Real annoying.
0H YEAH AMER!CAN LGBTQ GENERAT!0NS, ARE Y0U SURES?!!
CH!NA ICBM, L0NG RANGES STAND 0FF HYPERS0N!C, SUPERS0N!C M!SS!LE W!TH VAR!ETY WARHEADS INCLUD!NG FUEL B0MB, BUNKER BUSTER CAN FLATTEN ANY US M!LL!TARY BASE EAS!LY!!!
US EQU!PMENT IT JUNKS, IT'S JUST C0RRUPT!0NS AND BR!BER!ES PR0JECT MADE BY US B!LL!0NA!RES DEEP STATES F0R LARGE PR0F!TS!!!
G00D LUCK P00R AMER!CA TAXPAYERS🤭🤭🤭☺🤣🤣!!!
@@grimreapersIm pretty that pause was them running out of SM-2s. For any Aegis system, it would need a combination of SM-2s/3s/6s. When a ship runs out of SM-2s its very vulnerable to CMs and low flying aircraft. Not even SM-6s can supplement for a lack of SM-2s. Atleast not at the ranges in the video. The SM-2MR is a MR-SAM, but at the same time can operate very efficiently as a SR-SAM. The SM-3/6 can do neither of those things.
Hope this helps.
That’s a decent price on avocados…. A moon pie has marshmallow between soft cookies dipped in chocolate. It should come with a side of insulin
The J-35 is supposed to be able to carry 6 missiles, it’s intended designated WS-19 engines should provide a maximum take off weight that’s almost 5/3 of the F-35 and it’s weapon’s bay appears way larger by the leaked photos
There is ALWAYS at least one attack submarine ready to go to sea there. Don't forget the coast guard assets there (they might be able to do a suicide run). Guam, likely has more than one Patriot battery, I know that they have a THAAD battery there.
Is it there full time?
Also as far a subs, obviously its the same for both sides, and the AD would be abserloutely overwhelmed, i dont know alot about anti-submarine warfare, but i have a good understanding of a submarine squadrons contribution to BM warfare. And i think the ships on both sides would be overwhelmed depending on how many subs or sub squadrons are sent though
You forgot the Los Angeles class attack subs that are usually out there.
Exactly. These "simulations" are fatally flawed from the lack of submarines and, nowadays, orbital reconnaissance assets. A Chinese task force wouldn't get near Guam without eating a bunch of Mark 48 ADCAPs.
They are not modelled in DCS unfortunately.
I just finished a WESTPAC onboard the NIMITZ... It's awesome to see you've created this video.
You should do the same/similar mission but with wake island
Keep up the great work Super Cap!!!! and all the GR folk.
Every single simulation is firing bee-line missiles instead of broad waves of missiles. No dummies, either, or other counter measures.
Thank you Capt.
Dude treated it as a sparring match. He just matched the smaller dudes energy when he could've ko'd him in the first round easily. I almost think the dad set this up. 😅
Moon pie is like a cookie, no ice cream involved. But it has a creamy filling.
Marshmallow filling
We were stationed at Anderson when I was little. :)
Missile Macross Massacre
How nice of Simba to gift the Americans a J-35 by landing on their airfield to be captured by a horde of angry ground personnel with many guns.
It’s a Great Day!
32:45 I actually think the irl loadout would be 4 PL-15s. The overall design of J-35 (lack of gun port and side missile bays) suggests it is designed to snipe at long range while the lock is provided by frontline fighters via data link. Without a side bay it also means PL-10 would have to acquire the thermal lock from the fighter itself. However, this capability is unconfirmed afaik.
The equipment doesn't think, but people do. I believe they will have loadouts based on the scenario. I mean, why force yourself into a disadvantage when you have alternatives?
Problem is the PL-15's arn;t really working against the US stealth planes. Really need IR missiles.
IRL the J35 has an EOTS like the F35 and J20, both can detect and track stealth aircraft further than radars can.
IRL this would probably be a tactical nuke situation.
The Chinese wouldn't be that stupid.
@@Chilly_Billy I meant we would use tactical nukes against their invasion fleet.
@@Stinger522 The U.S. has no first strike policy. Otherwise the nuclear exchange would escalate.
@@crusher8017 Forgive me for not being trusting of words on paper. Anyone can move the goalposts if the pinch is tight enough.
US should place more NASMS there, one gets too easily overwhelmed, just like S300 needs some Pansirs.
americans are just starting to figure out soviet air defense strategy 50 years later.
Thanks!
F-35s vs J-35s both with star and bars style roundels... I genuinely didn't know who I was looking at most of the time
They are implementing an IRON DOME type defense system around Guam now..
12:32 that is a fire everything moment
In order to prevent the carriers from being jammed by aircraft. At the beginning of each battle, place a stationary fighter on the flight deck the island that you can enter into at will, and fire upon any aircraft that cause traffic jams. Food for thought!
Cap you need to change the YJ-21, since you can't model the extremely powerful ECM systems on the US ships you need to lower the YJ-21 accuracy to replicate what would be happening to the seekers on the missiles. It reduces the chance that a missile can hit.
Especially with the new ecm suite on the Burke’s
I'd imagine the Growlers could also degrade incoming missiles.
This. People often forget that warships around the world have very potent ECM systems. The modern V5-V7 AN/SLQ-32 is a beast! Add to that Mk36 Chaff and Flares, Mk59 floating decoys, Mk234 Nulka decoys, and on some ships the AN/SLQ-59 jammer and you have a vessel that is seriously hard to hit even if it isn't shooting back.
The YJ2E has an optical seeker head. Not sure if it's a backup or a replacement, but ECM wouldn't affect it.
None of the ships in game have any decoys or countermeasures at all. If you want the chinese missiles to be nerfed because of US ECM then the US missiles need to be nerfed because of chinese ECM. And the same for every other country.
It was a little funny, when Fire said he hit the carrier but not the plane, the first thought in my head was that at least he could hit the barn with that gun.😊 Love all the work you all do, thanks for the fun! Peace.
It's great to see real scenarios back again.
"real scenarios"
superior realism. chad demonetized modern scenarios vs virgin WW2 goofy who cares nonflicts. Remember the first china vs Taiwan wargame? How one built ontop of another, well we havent returned that yet but these little ones are a good start @@coreyleander7911
Beige car at 44:49 needs to get that 20-year-old New Jersey plate changed to a Guam plate.
Cap have you gotten anywhere with adding the helmet mounted display to the F-35 for increased situational awareness and the ability to utilize the HOBS aim 9x?
If you're still working on that, I was also wondering if you have seen the new conversation with the F-35 pilot that let it slip the F35 has higher AOA than the F18? Is that something that can be tested?
Looked into it. Pretty sure it's possible. Just havn't got to do it yet.
@Grim Reapers
Lockheed Martin has confirmed that work is progressing on a weapons bay adapter for F-35 Lightning II A and C variants, according to a response by the company to The War Zone’s inquiry. Dubbed Sidekick, the device would increase the amount of AIM-120 Advanced Medium-Range Air-to-Air Missiles (AMRAAM) the stealth jet can carry internally from four to six.
The Sidekick concept has been floating around in the F-35 space for a few years, but it was largely unclear what Lockheed Martin’s exact plan for the adapter was, as well as its developmental status, or if its emergence was at all related to the jet’s ongoing Block 4 modernization effort. The War Zone earlier this month reached out to the company to ask for any updates and was given confirmation that Sidekick now has backing
As noted, Sidekick will only be compatible with F-35As and carrier-capable F-35C variants. This is because the remaining short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) F-35B variants belonging to the U.S. Marine Corps have smaller internal weapons bays on account of the lift fan that it uses to realize its STOVL capabilities.
The War Zone followed up with Lockheed Martin to clarify if Sidekick will be a part of the Block 4 upgrade effort or if it will be an independent offering that could be retrofitted to older F-35s as well as installed on new-build models.
thank you for this battle.
my daughter is presently stationed on the Emory Land AS39 home ported in Guam.
as a Navy vet, and from what she can tell me without getting into court martial level trouble,
as soon as things with China/Taiwan get hot, her ship and every other sea worthy vessel, will depart enroute to "undisclosed" locations. from dead cold boilers to underway is likely 8 hours or less. a sub tender is not a surface combatant, so not a primary target. but is is a sub support/repair/rearm vessel, so a prime target of opportunity. so likely, in this scenerio,
the navel target area would likely be empty
Simba: “The People’s Shopper” 😂
simba landing and then goes shopping was greatXD
I like to be objective. The logistics involved in this attack is probably beyond China. Pretty sure the first sign of aggressive action would put the entire hemisphere on scramble.
Came for the boom boom, stayed for Simba goes shopping.
This is literally the modern battle of midway
9:00 "Why would they attack Guam?" Good question. Result, regardless of the outcome... Flash message to Pacific Fleet: Conduct unrestricted warfare against all surface and submarine assets of the Chinese Navy.
Saipan, Tinian and Rota have runways that can be used also
Wouldn’t the hornets go after the ships with the LRASM’s??
Yes
Maybe, if they ever got to take off :(
When you get a short return on radar at 80 miles, It's the weapon bay door opening and then closing.
For a high attrition battle like this, I wonder what effect pilot survivability has on things? If your pilots trust their plane to keep them alive, even if the plane it self if falling out of the sky in small bits, will they be more effectively aggressive or more wastefully reckless?
>not sure if there's any missiles left on the ships, because they still have some VLS cells closed but aren't firing
well, it _is_ DCS
Fly saying concrete is expensive after 2 DDGs leave the battle is ridiculous.
The hell that would be payed by the Chinese after this attack would be more brutal than anything seen in the history of the world.
当然美国也一样
@@假的自由言论 小维尼熊太害怕了
@@BravoCheesecake 小丑
@@假的自由言论 动态网自由门 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Free Tibet 六四天安門事件 The Tienanmen Square protests of 1989 天安門大屠殺 The Tienanmen Square Massacre 反右派鬥爭 The Anti-Rightist Struggle 大躍進政策 The Great Leap Forward 文化大革命 The Great Proletarian Cultural Revolution 人權 Human Rights 民運 Democratization 自由 Freedom 獨立 Independence 多黨制 Multi-party system 台灣 臺灣 Taiwan Formosa 中華民國 Republic of China 西藏 土伯特 唐古特 Tibet 達賴喇嘛 Dalai Lama 法輪功 Falun Dafa 新疆維吾爾自治區 The Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region 諾貝爾和平獎 Nobel Peace Prize 劉暁波 Liu Xiaobo 民主 言論 思想 反共 反革命 抗議 運動 騷亂 暴亂 騷擾 擾亂 抗暴 平反 維權 示威游行 李洪志 法輪大法 大法弟子 強制斷種 強制堕胎 民族淨化 人體實驗 肅清 胡耀邦 趙紫陽 魏京生 王丹 還政於民 和平演變 激流中國 北京之春 大紀元時報 九評論共産黨 獨裁 專制 壓制 統一 監視 鎮壓 迫害 侵略 掠奪 破壞 拷問 屠殺 活摘器官 誘拐 買賣人口 遊進 走私 毒品 賣淫 春畫 賭博 六合彩 天安門 天安门 法輪功 李洪志 Winnie the Pooh 劉曉波动态网自由门
Simba "Anderson , Chinese territory since ancient times. Ooo they have a sale on too! "
The description of a "moonpie" that was given, was inaccurate. In British terms, i would describe it as a sandwich made from soft marshmallow filliing, with two digestives as the bun, then dipped and fully covered in semi hard, semi dark chocolate. They're delicious, but contain enough sugar to trigger diabetes.
that random windows disconnect sound scared me. you never really know if it was the video or your pc.
I think with this kind of operation all the defending force would have to do is inflict enough damage on the attacking force to make any further offensive movement/invasion untenable. This also goes far an invasion of Taiwan.
Do you mean some kinda 'shock and awe'? Be so effective, efficient, lethal and above all overwhelming for one battle so that you have to fight no more?
@@rileymorrisroe6743 no not so much shock and awe, but being able to damage the invading so much that their original mission is untenable. Not necessarily winning but damaging them enough that they have to withdraw.
@@Pablo668 Oh i get you, i thought you meant a deterence by abserloute annihilation upon first contact. But you mean outright destruction upin foest contact.
So, i somewhat agree, but not exactly with the way you described.
I think the way you described would work against a nation that isnt an industrial and technological powerhouse like China/Russia (Their production capabilites dwarf even those of China currently). So mabye is North Korea attack South Korea. But against China, lets say, that wouldnt work as its military is so big and production so strong that a strictly defensive action wouldnt work, an offensive action however? That might, but that would be very difficult aswell, as it would have to beat Chinese air/missile def, and then hit numerous targets, ranging from military to industrial targets aswell as likely critical infrastructure and governance buildings to completely and effectively neutralise the country. So itd be difficult to say the least.
Its possible that if the defenders completely wipe out the attacking force it will discourage future assualts (what i was referencing initially) but that then depends on the resolve of the nation attacking and how much they need that victory.
I think though, in a large theatre war, completelt destroying an enemy assault on a specific area will deter a secondary follow up assault in the same manner, but it wouldnt end a war or remove the attacking force ability to fight.
To summarise, what you say is possible but only from a strictly offensive stand point. But as far as deterring future assaults on an area, this theory could work. But it wouldnt remove the militaristic capabilities of a nation.
Sorry for the rant but i hope this helps.
@@rileymorrisroe6743 all good, sounds pretty good to me.
@@Pablo668 Glad i could help.
Not expected so many cruise missiles used as the first wave attack. Perhaps Chinese will prefer using ballistic missiles if attack.
At welding school and now I gotta stop welding to watch this
My apologies.
@grimreapers u should be ashamed at the quality content u put out the nerve of u to do so
Gaum also has a THAAD battery
Burke vls will need time to cool down after rapid firing of many missiles, probably the reason they stopped firing 👍
Please, Cap! Its Guy-er Falcon. It hearts my soul every time you say jee-ar falcon.
1st June, 2026. Amidst the historic battle of Guam a brave J-35 pilot defects to the nearly destroyed Anderson AFB where Air Force personnel later state he was amazed at the variety of sweets available for sate at the base.
Entertainment at high quality! Thanks guys!
Great video cap sorry it took so long for me to watch work ugh
Should be titled "How to spend a Billion dollars in just 5min"
Thanks for another great video Cap! I would be curious to see if you just did the attack with missiles, would the human pilots stationed at Guam be able to eliminate enough of the cruise missile to prevent the destruction of the base?
ooof that's a all order :)
My only complaint with this sim..... The humans are able to spawn in, with j-35s even after all the j-35s had been destroyed. To make it better. They should have only been able to use planes that are available. Cause then it's unlimited number of lightning vs j-35. You don't magically reload the cwis or ABs after they have fired all missiles. Why allow magic planes. Great video as always though
As a US Navy Veteran who served both on Guam and 7th Fleet, I find this interesting. They also didn't add NCTS Guam that I was stationed at. *Sadface*
GR, how about recreating Operation Mercury, the Battle of Crete?
BTW, I really enjoyed today's video. I was surprised that the US doesn't have a stronger missile defensive system on Guam. Considering its importance in the Pacific, I would think they would invest a bit more to defend themselves. Granted 250 missiles was a little crazy. But it seems that swarms are now a major part of military doctrine so you need to invest more in defensive systems to counter such strategies.
Back in March the DoD announced a 1.5 billion dollar overhaul of Gaums air defenses , it should get Aegis Ashore, IFPC (similar to iron dome) more THAAD, Patriot and I think some C-RAM.
@@gundamator4709thank you for the information
Guam is currently in the process of getting 20 new air defense sites. AEGIS weapon system SM-3 block IIA SM-6, AN/SPY-6, THAAD, Patriot, Iron Dome, TYPHON, Avenger air defense systems, mobile launch platforms with SM-6 & Tomahawk cruise missiles.
that 250 number would probably be made up in part by chinese MALD equivalents to soak up SAMs.
"I had to scale back the attacking force!!" But did you do the same for the defenders?
12:38 is the CIWS shooting *through* the bridge? xD
Tico's are more than likely not available. Looking at US Navy doctrine it's likely that smaller ships only will be there.
I thought anyone knows that If it's just an attack from an offshore platform, If you want to completely paralyze Guam, at least three carrier strike groups.
My only question is how do we know those cruise missiles aren't full of water?
If you fire 100 more cruise missiles than defensive missiles.... what did you think was going to happen? Seriously, you act all surprised but there was no doubt in the beginning.
Why is it like those SM-3 and SM-6 missiles apparently can only be fired from ships? I mean, this might sound like a stupid question, but why not litter the entire island of Guam with arrays of SM-3 and SM-6 launching tubes on hidden locations, giving the island like 500 or up to a 1,000 of these missiles? We know that the Chinese rely heavily on supersonic and hypersonic missiles anyway, thus raising the question, of putting just loads and loads of SM-3 and SM-6 launching facilities on the island? The Awacs is already there to guide them.
Fox Four used to be the brevity code for guns but I think we stopped using it after the Vietnam War.
If the B-52s got involved, they would've been launching LRASMs, not JASSMs. JASSM can't hit moving targets.
The Super Hornets could've stayed home. The F-35s really carried the day in the air battle.
thadds would be employed i believe
Nice scenario! This reminds me of Germany considering invading Iceland in WWII. Yes, they may have been able to take Iceland, but they could never hold Iceland thus they decided against any Iceland attack. Thanks for putting this together! An interesting idea for China to buy standoff distance between Chinese forces invading Taiwan and supporting US forces.
realistically I suspect china will do long range attack on guam regularly to keep it out of operation and forgo attempting to invade at all.
After the initial strike, guam would take weeks to repair at best and follow up strikes would be much easier.
Probably a server load issue but wouldn't jamming on the attacking side be a valuable asset in this scenario?
And defensive aswell, but DCS doesn't really model ECM not to mention all that stuff is classified out of the wazoo.
@@gundamator4709 I figured as much but it's important to keep in mind. Suppose just for the sake of argument the jamming on both sides cancel out.
@@gundamator4709 jamming would be kind of useless against cruise missiles hitting large static targets. They are likely hitting pre-designated targets.
I wonder if aegis decided that essm's weren't worth defending another target with. So it only used them to destroy missiles deemed too be targeting specific targets.
Welcome back Fly! You are one of my favorite GR's.
thanks man😁
The 1st line of defense would've been the air wing shooting down the cruise missiles. To conserve air power, perhaps only the Hornets could've flown out to meet the initial barrage of cruise missiles. The F-35 could've been reserved for OCA/DCA. This way the Aegis ships and other IADS could've conserved their magazines better
I imagine there's no way to implement it currently, but it would be interesting to see how the rumored multimode seeker of the AIM-260 would change these engagements.
And maybe we can add the iron dome to
I wonder if a air burst nuclear missile would take out a cruise missile barrage like this one 🤔
Nope. Unless nuke warheads are placed SAM's. Otherwise it would have to be a ballistic missile which has minimal course correction.
Not sure who put this together for you, but there is a 1B upgrade to the air defense in Guam including THAAD. THAAD is already on the island. You do realize that after 250 missiles and 1/2 a Billion the only thing that happens at Andersen is ... the Seabee's get excited.
realistically I wonder how many missiles china can fire at guam before defenses get saturated. There isn't an unlimited supply of interceptors on the island.
Hell, china could to shaheed type swarm attack on guam from neutrally flagged containerships 1000km away and just deplete defenses that way.
@@hughmungus2760 Any place on earth can be saturated including Beijing. These SAMS just raise the cost. And I am only talking conventional weapons. I think I read that after 7-days of full up fighting both the USA and China would be out of all the "nice stuff." Then like before in the Pacific, it would be an industrial slog. The difference is that on day 1 there (most likely) would not be Chinese bombers over America, but the reverse would be true. Repairing Guam may actually be easier than defending it from missiles. Concrete is not "that" expensive.
@@rickrude978
Yeah but Beijing is a massive city with 20 million people and land borders to equally densely populated adjacent provinces.
Any damage the US can deal to chinese cities, china can repair fairly quickly because it has the construction crews and resources on hand, as well as infrastructure redundancy.
Guam is in the middle of nowhere, the runways will probably be repaired fairly fast, but whats not going to be easily replaced are the fuel storage facilities, radar installations and aircraft maintenance facilities, port facilities. ect. Those will require specialised machinery to be shipped in from the US mainland which could be destroyed on the runway or while attempting to dock at a makeshift port.
Destroying major civilian infrastructure on the island and causing a massive humanitarian crisis would also add to the complexity of reconstruction. It would be... politically catastrophic if the US let civilians on its own territories die of starvation and dysentery while only shipping in military supplies.
Yes, both sides will probably run out of standoff munitions quite fast and the barrages of missiles will slow to a trickle. But one side clearly has the industrial advantage to wage this kind of sustained war of attrition while the other doesn't
Im not even going to go into detail about the civilian side of industrial capabilities but needless to say, one side is the world's largest exporter of manufactured goods and one side is the world's largest importer.
@@hughmungus2760 You have some points, but no it is not that hard. For example, fuel. The fuel bladders we had in Afghanistan are _giant balloons_. I am serious. They are made of some rubber-like material. Just sitting in giant holes. Blow them up, causes a lot of fire, roll out more giant rubber balloons. It is a lot easier to keep an airfield working then you think. The jets can land on roadways on Guam. All the roads. You are going to destroy all of the airfields and every straight road? It is nearly impossible to remotely destroy Guam or Tawain for that matter. American drop so many bombs, day, after day, after day, during WW2 and we still did not remove the Japanese or German's industrial capability until we ran tanks over it.
Read about the Battle of Guadalcanal in WW2. Basically, to remove the Japanese we had to invade. For the Japanese to remove the US, the Japanese had to invade. Fighters were taking off and landing while bombs were falling. We were rebuilding the airfields within hours / days. And then they were destroyed again. And then the Japanese would do the same thing. Rebuild and start launching sorties.
And if you think that example is "too old" (TLDR it is not) then realize that in Kandahar Afghanistan we were under rocket attack (admittedly not very good attacks, but constant) on a daily basis, and I am unsure it even interrupted flight operations. I will say again, it did not even interrupt flight operations.
In real war, so many safeties stuff, and all of nonsense is just removed. it is just double turning every day. Day and night. The Chinese cannot "take out" Guam without putting boots on the ground. And they can't do that. They can damage it. And anything stupid enough to be on the ground when this thing kicks off is dead. (I am sure the DOD doesn't know that...right) But days after the rockets / missiles stop falling there will be sorties. And of course, the Navy doesn't even need Guam. It is nice, makes things easier, but it does not even need it. it resupplies in the deep blue.
@@rickrude978
I guess this goes into the strategic and political implications of war rather than technical or tactical.
Realistically theres a limit to how much benefit you can get out of rebuilding a base over only to get it blown up over and over.
Protracted strategic bombing will eventually cause society to break down and population to be unable to sustain themselves, places like Taiwan only produce 1/3 of the food it consumes and has to ship in most of it.
With sufficient bombardment of critical logistics infrastructure on the island, you will eventually force a surrender or totally depopulate it.
In the case of guam, Guam produces less than 10% of the food it consumes, any US attempt to rebuild after an attack will be severely hampered by the necessity of addressing humanitarian needs which if the US failed, would cause social order on the island to completely collapse.
Alternatively, a more long term means of denying the use of guam maybe to use air dropped mines which could be fitted to any weapon that can deploy cluster munitions.
Finally, its not the fighters on guam china is concerned about but the bombers, which cannot take off without a dedicated runway.
AIR RAID: GUAM, ANDERSON AFB!
2:24 in other words China has 2 days, until the end is near, and even if they can capture Guam in that time, they will just get kicked out, bc of no supplies
You seem to have forgotten that you're playing a *videogame.* Do you honestly think *anything* in a virtual environment is going to be a direct representation of military equipment that's still in active use?
well, it would have been a good battle . . . what we got to see was good though.