I don't think they'd be using their AA directors against surface targets, and I'm not sure how capable the surface directors would be in that respect. Although they should still be able to hit a broadside on target at two miles.
Add these ridiculous speedboats to the long and growing list of weapon systems that are wildly over-modeled in these games. There is no way an unguided rocket could be fired from a small speed boat with any kind of accuracy---wouldn't even land in the same ocean. Perhaps if they slowed way down and the seas were exceptionally calm; but even then they'd have a very low hit rate.
Yep. I haven't played in a couple of weeks and won't until we get a major update or modders get more access to do what they do best. It is crazy to me that this game was advertised as being so modder friendly and reliant but then it is impossible to even import custom models.
Thank you. Rocket salvos are designed to be AoE weapons and land over a large area with a big dispersion. And that is for static targets. A ship moving at 30+ knots cannot be led by boats bouncing in seas at 40+ knots. Maybe if the gunboats got within a couple hundreds yards they might get some hits by acting like a shotgun.
Tell that to the tankers that the IRGC attacked during the Tanker War, often if I remember correctly with MLRS systems or handheld rocket launchers from small boats, although at relatively short ranges - presumably much shorter than in this video.
There is very specific data on the accuracy and burst radius of Iowa's 16" HC shells on navweps. If a shell hits within even 200 yds of a Boghammer or other small FAC it is going to get absolutely shredded with splinters. This is just a fact. Also, the 5"/38 prox shells would be incredibly effective against a FAC or boghammer at 40 knots.
The problem is not all weapon effects are fully modeled for all weapon types yet. Proximity effect for projectiles only works against airborne targets currently.
Though the 5 inch director should be able to create a firing solution for something which does 45 knots (the french super destroyers were able to do more than 40 knots..)
Does the game modeling HE fillers in water correctly? The Hydroshockwave from an 16inch HE shell landing 10 meters next to such a small boat should still wreck such a flimsy hull.
Would the HE fuze under those circumstances? My understanding is only the French and Germans specifically designed their shells to go off if they hit water.
yeah it would literally be impossible to get a hit. I wonder if the fusing would make a shell go off when it hits the water though? Might not be any area damage at all.
All you folks discussing reality vs. sim. All I know is that 1,000 years from now, kids (like me at 66 😜) will still look at the Iowa class and make like Cap: "Jeezzzz". So unbelievably impressive!
What type of shells was the Iowa using? AP or HE, HE air burst. Concusion from that sized shell would play havoc with the soft squashy things in the FACs.
1. The Iowa would have used drones for AEW (been doing it for decades. 2. Her 5 in. shells used proximity fuses. 3. The damage she would have taken to her hull, from the armament fired, would have been superficial.
The 5inch guns are dual purpose, they should be able to track those boghammers no matter how fast they are, also it should have a cpl different types of rounds to fire.
@@Wayoutthere The Japanese had something similar for their main battery guns, Yamato even engaged TF 58 carrier aircraft with her 18.1" beehive anti aircraft shells during her final battle... albeit to dubious effectiveness at best
The funny thing about this scenario is that I’m pretty confident the Iowa could just tank all these ships. Their best weapons are just unguided rockets. Even if they got point blank I don’t feel like the Grads would be able to actually get into anything important on an Iowa. Not that Grads can’t possibly damage a ship, but I can’t help recalling the time Ukraine pretty confidently said they struck a Russian corvette with a Grad salvo and it showed up in port with a single scorch mark visible. I would genuinely be interested in seeing you test this in game. Take a few different warships and let a group of these FACs actually get in close to attack. Just to see how much damage they might be capable of IF they actually get through. I’d guess an Iowa would be lightly inconvenienced at most, but perhaps something more modern and lighter might not be able to shake off those rockets.
The antenna and radar dishes would be absolutely wrecked by the rockets and the super structure isn't armored thickly enough to deflect the rockets. The only issue I see is the fire. There's no way the Iowa would get that kind of damage from a few dozen rockets.
@ it’d be expensive for all the sensitive equipment and maybe you might lose the secondary guns, but I can’t imagine that the ships would actually sink. The wild card is how badly fires might spread.
Firing and unguided rocket, using an instabilities mount from a small craft bouncing around doing 48 knots in the sea is not going to be accurate at all. And the firing at a range of 8 miles you would have to zoom the map way out to see the splashes. No way would a Grad come close from that type of platform. I own a 3 ton 26ft boat. It is hard to move around on it when I am doing just 25 knots in The Puget Sound.
I'd be curious to see a recreation of this, except you never manually mark the targets as hostile from the outset (i.e. let Iowa/Kirov decide from their own ECM that the targets are indeed hostile before opening fire). Would be interesting to see how close they get, and how much more damage they could potentially do (on one hand I can see the Boghammers being too small/fast for Iowa's radars being able to accurately track, a larger vessel would have been in serious trouble, on the other, there may be "early access game" issues going on lol)
does Sea Power allow for the CIWS to fire on surface targets? I'd have thought that once they began their turning duel, the CIWS would make short work of those speed boats.
Firing all the missiles at a tight group of targets would naturally lead to several missiles on a single target. Maybe designate them more spread out and let the first salvo get close before firing another- that way ships that aren’t hit in the first salvo will move closer and be more likely to be picked by subsequent missiles? And letting a huge battleship plod along at 7 knots is just daft- that ship can go four times that speed and a moving target is harder to hit. Take some evasive action! I can understand the 16” guns not being able to aim all that well at tiny 40+ knot targets since they’re intended to hit other battleships rather than speedboats, but the 5” guns were also used for anti-air and torpedo bombers could go five times that speed at low altitude so there’s no excuse for those consistently missing even at close range.
When the Iowa shifts course, the radar rotation angle is no longer level with the sea, when the ship points down to the sea, the radar is pointing down to the sea, when the ship points the radar upward, the radar energy is pointing up away from the sea.
Possible explanation someone else posted on the last round seems to still potentially apply: when the rounds are going consistently long, they're not just consistently long, they're consistently long by almost the same exact amount. And the flight profile looks like it would take them smack into the side/deck of a ship (as opposed to a boat). So possibly they are aiming for a 'standard height' that isn't varied by vessel… even that would be fine (or at least not particularly noticeable in a battle like this) if blast and shrapnel effects were modeled - but they clearly aren't.
Hey Cap! Thanks for the entertainment as always 🤩 Btw. I dont understand why people always complain when the "game result" is not on their favor etc. I dont watch GR videos because i want someone or something spesific (side) to win, its just for good entertainment for gods sake 😂 and you guys always deliver good value for my watch time so i am glad for that and appreciate it. For people who dont agree, i would highly recommend them to watch some more gr videos and they would also hopefully understand the core of this channel. Its just a god damn game folks, get over it, enjoy the content. If you want something or some side or such to win, go play the game on your own and put 50 of your favorite ships or planes etc vs 1 poor enemy and enjoy the results or whatever. I dont give a damn what the results are, i just enjoy the pure entertainment and my lovely Cap's voice, its like a meditation and have always been like that for many years 😂😁 i love you Cap, you know 😂❤
really confused why the 5in DP guns don't have VT shells available. quiet literally the first salvo of 5in using a VT airburst would shred everything. They were intended to shoot at planes, i doubt they would have had any issue.
In Vietnam 16" shells were used to create helicopter landing zones, A single shell would totally clear a 200 meter radius landing zone, and the explosion would defoliate every tree out another 300 meters. Which is another way of saying you are completely correct. (source: navweps)
Once again we see that the game does not model Iowa's armor at all. So many of the guns couldn't pen her armor. As other have said, those rockets seemed a bit too accurate going 45knots in a bumpy sea.
I'm absolutely not making this comment with the mindset of "US is #1, best at everything, this game is BS." With that out of the way, I quite honestly believe this is some sort of bug within the game. Hitting a moving speedboat at maximum range over the horizon, especially when maneuvering, should be amazingly difficult. However, once you get to closer ranges, the speed of the Boghammers should really have no impact on the accuracy of the guns, as the 5" guns are even designed to track and calculate a firing solution for aircraft flying overhead. In addition, the 5" shells are also capable of using proximity fuses (again, as part of their anti-air capability). Then, per some research I posted on another video the other day, the 16" shells were also capable of being fused to explode prior to hitting the water (air burst mode), so in all scenarios, the realistic result should be some very shredded up boats, and it should never even be a possibility to see the battleship missing the speedboat for hundreds of rounds within direct line of sight.
While I am slightly disappointed by the Iowa’s lack of performance. The results aren’t entirely surprising given the fact that the target is tiny and the inability to fire air burst munitions. (I assume they couldn’t fire air burst munition at a ground target). Plus the Boghammers insane speed compared to the rather slow firing 5 inch and 16 inch guns. I know the five inchers are technically anti air so they are designed to hit fast moving targets but they aren’t necessarily designed to get direct hits on something. Being that anti aircraft guns generally are trying to hit an aircraft with shrapnel not the actual shell.
Such cool visuals in SP and DCS. 6 been playing the hell out of both games lately. The comments about the accuracy of the rockets are definitely true, but it's in EA, so we'll see what happens.
the main guns were used against torpedo aircraft in WW2, but I do believe the efficiency was very low. I'm not sure the boghammers were on the radar when they got closer, too low in the water, and no sky behind them from the radar antenna POV.. If so, it was all visual aiming.
Another somewhat unrealistic thing about this is the Iowa scoring multiple direct hits on tiny fast-moving speedboats with its main battery at a range of 20 miles. In real life, the longest range naval gunnery hits occurred at about 14 miles on battleships or aircraft carriers, and even that probably only happened twice.
In this engagement, I bet an OHP would be better than Iowa. The American ships are tailor made for certain roles, while the Soviet ones go for general purpose. OHP with SM-1s should be able to snipe each boat easily I would imagine.
The Grads are what? 22kg HE warhead at the best? How many 500 lb bombs did it take to sink the Yamato? 12 bombs and 7 torpedoes! Joe about the Bismarck? About 100 minutes of shelling by 2 battleships and 2 heavy cruisers caused the German to scuttle her! The AI modeling is very poor…
Cap, rocket salvos are designed to be AoE weapons and land over a large area with a big dispersion. And that is against static targets. A ship moving at 30+ knots cannot be accurately aimed at by boats bouncing in seas at 40+ knots. Maybe if the gunboats got within a couple hundred yards they might get some hits by acting like a shotgun. The best move for the Iowa would be to turn about 30 degrees away and run at flank speed. This will allow all the main and secondary guns to fire at the targets while presenting a lower profile and reducing the closure rate. You have to remember that the 5"/38 guns are designed to be multipurpose and can shoot sea and aerial targets. They could shoot down planes that were moving at 300 knots through X, Y, & Z planes. They could also tear apart destroyers moving at 38 knots who were maneuvering to not get hit. These speed boats moving in a straight line at a set speed should be simple target practice.
There is not a single square inch of the Iowa's armored citadel that could be defeated by the rockets the FACs were using in this video. (or the 8 ship gun battle video you did for that matter).
ALWAYS thumbs up! Doing otherwise would be against my best long-term interests! I realize you let the Iowa do Iowa things, but given a mix of fast and slower approaching swarms, I'd personally have considered "running" to separate the speedy boats for priority targeting. That not a thing, question mark?
Looks like a bad PID loop. In theory there should be a loop that takes into account how much it missed by and factor that deviation into the next cycle. The fact that it misses by the same margin repeatedly tells me either there’s a flaw in the loop or they’re just not factoring deviation all.
Possible way to test the "too high" vs. "too fast" theory: set up a group of Boghammers but limit them to progressively lower speeds, and see how the results change. Might be an interesting "for 'science'" video, even if it really shouldn't be your problem to debug the game's behavior here…
Its a game also 19:00 im sure iowa wasnt that bad at accurate gunnery in the 80s maybe the game didnt take into account how accurate she was in the 80s .plus this game is all about missles not shells. Iowa had drones and helicopters to help get accurate fire I feel like they dont do shells or armor correctly since this is a missle game
As Zach de la Rocha might say : "Rally round the fam-ly, check yer pockets for other shells" Just out of curiousity, aren't there 16 inch anti-personnel shells that disperse submunitions? Against a small craft , a few hits would 'clear the decks' of the crew, as they are in the open... or at least cause the on-deck munitions to cook off.
"She's lost her Radar, she's been beaten by a bog hammer" Meanwhile, the Visual fire director crews in main gun turrets 2 and 3 direction all 3 turrets via Visual targetting Not to mention the main battery fire directors doubling visual range finders, with all 6 fire directors having some sort of radar The Iowa's are powerful for their time Yes, visual fire direction won't help much against 40 knot speed boats, however never underestimate the Iowa Classes ability to be pains in the rear Ask the North Koreans, Vietnamese, and Japanese how it feels . Also, to note her design back in WW2 was Anti-air, carrier escort, and the ability to chase down Cruisers and Battle Cruisers in Surface Actions
I think it was unfair to designate target hostile because the FAC will not have the battleship designated as hostile you should have let AI figure it out or use AWACS/Patrol plane
". . . and she's all smashed up." No, Cap. For an Iowa-class, that's barely a scratch. There's no way those pea-shooters could damage Iowa's citadel. Remember, at the time Iowa was laid down, ship-borne radar was very new. Iowa also had several main visual range-finders, plus each turret would have its own, smaller, range-finder. And you can bet your donkey that there'd be several guys in each turret who can do the maths to produce a firing solution. What I don't know is whether the five-inch mounts can independently compute firing solutions.
Or, didnt you use to be sponsored why winwing? Im sure im not the first to think of it surely if you could you would but it would be nice if you could get that again
Would it not work better if you didn’t use all your missiles at once so the boats that are dead will fall behind the rest of the ships so I have less of a chance of hitting it
why wasn't CIWS shooting the rockets? none of the small rockets should actually do major damage to an Iowa class, superficial damage to exterior and mast mounted radars and external weapons (5" is lightly armoured, and Harpoons mk141 launchers and CIWS mounts)
Iowa looks pretty alright. just looks like very minimal superficial damage, and the radar getting tagged by a lucky rocket lol. Other than that those small rockets probably couldn't do anymore more but to damage exposed systems and cause a fire or two. the Grads def had more of a chance to do superstructure damage but probably wouldn't go beyond that. strange how the 5 inch didn't make some kinda firing solution for the little guy, wasn't looking either but CIWS is also capable of destroying small craft is is kinda better for it. Also towards the end, little shocking that I saw rudder and weapon magazine in damage lmfao. Those Grads def didn't go through Iowa's armored deck, they cant even do much against russian naval ships in Ukraine irl. ANother comment actually mentioned it but Ukraine did land hits using Grad on a russian ship and it was seen in port with just a scortch mark. Kinda crazy. But as far as exposed senors, etc that have to be- yeah it could totally smack those up a bit. They are not as armored. Time to see what Kirov does.
the iowa being damaged by 105-122mm rockets is very unrealistic, these weapons simply do not penetrate and everything important on the iowa is inside armor the reason the 16inch guns were not accurate at close range could be the rotation speed of the guns and the fast relative movement of the ship and the boats the 5inch guns of the iowa would most likely deal with these boats much much faster, they were designed to shoot at aircraft coming towards the ship, they had better turn speeds, fire rate and were equipped with high capacity shells and proximity fuses
Look I don't think I'm crazy, but the buffs for Soviet craft and the nerfs for USA craft is pretty absurd. It just seems to me that the devs are taking all the USSR stats and taking them at face value, while ignoring all of the USA stats.
You could have controlled the release rate and direction of fire of harpoons a lot better rather than just let AI salvo fire wastefully. A real crew would have known it’s risks
Seriously not on you Cap… Naval gunnery is not that daft… The ranging algorithm is repeat recalculating the same error… Naval gunners have a multitude of ways to correct for such a thing… Anyway, it’s lazy programming with poor qc and should be a very simple patch!!
Waited two years for this game to come out, literally a ship simulator and they can’t even get the iowas armor right as well as correct damage models for the 16 inch shells… what’s the point of this game if they can’t even get that right
Hey CAP... I know you are doing with without helos... I THINK the Iowa's 5 inch mounts are semi-active laser homing and a range of 45 miles. And thank you, as always.
No SALH on the 5"/38. That's a new capability for the OTO Melara 127mm/64. Depending on which Kirov we're modeling, AK-130 does supposedly have an SALH round.
Sadly it would be near impossible for Iowa to hit a fac. CEP of the main guns were 254 yards the minimum CEP were still about 80 yards which is 240 feet.
Those are the WW2/Korea figures given with some rather wild testing parameters. Post refit accuracy was improved by over 29%. According to those who sailed on them they were capable of tracking their own shells in flight as well as the splashes with radar and make adjustments on the fly. Not to mention the spectating effect of a 16in HE round exploding in the water would do immense damage to non armored boats. Also what isn’t modeled in game is that each turret had its own radar system and could fire independently of each other instead of all turrets attacking one target.
Consider the 5inch guns were anti aircraft guns for WWII engaging aircraft going over 300 mph. They should be able to engage a surface vessel at 45.
I think the AA rounds are flak with prox fuse, not kinetic/HE.
@@vibrolax agreed but the turrets could track the target to get the shell within its proximity fuse envelope.
I don't think they'd be using their AA directors against surface targets, and I'm not sure how capable the surface directors would be in that respect. Although they should still be able to hit a broadside on target at two miles.
@@vibrolax A 5"/38 shell weighs about 25Kg (55lbs), so a proximity fuse would still shred those fast boats.
@@vibrolax not really a problem against FAC's, which have no armor.
Add these ridiculous speedboats to the long and growing list of weapon systems that are wildly over-modeled in these games. There is no way an unguided rocket could be fired from a small speed boat with any kind of accuracy---wouldn't even land in the same ocean. Perhaps if they slowed way down and the seas were exceptionally calm; but even then they'd have a very low hit rate.
True, plus theyre not gonna detect the iowa at their max range, much less come up with a firing solution
Yep. I haven't played in a couple of weeks and won't until we get a major update or modders get more access to do what they do best. It is crazy to me that this game was advertised as being so modder friendly and reliant but then it is impossible to even import custom models.
Thank you. Rocket salvos are designed to be AoE weapons and land over a large area with a big dispersion. And that is for static targets. A ship moving at 30+ knots cannot be led by boats bouncing in seas at 40+ knots. Maybe if the gunboats got within a couple hundreds yards they might get some hits by acting like a shotgun.
*laughing in broadside*
Tell that to the tankers that the IRGC attacked during the Tanker War, often if I remember correctly with MLRS systems or handheld rocket launchers from small boats, although at relatively short ranges - presumably much shorter than in this video.
There is very specific data on the accuracy and burst radius of Iowa's 16" HC shells on navweps. If a shell hits within even 200 yds of a Boghammer or other small FAC it is going to get absolutely shredded with splinters. This is just a fact.
Also, the 5"/38 prox shells would be incredibly effective against a FAC or boghammer at 40 knots.
AI is stupid. The 5” 38’s directors could track aircraft. Where are the VT type fuses for the 5”?
The problem is not all weapon effects are fully modeled for all weapon types yet. Proximity effect for projectiles only works against airborne targets currently.
I was getting upset watching this as well knowing info, glad that @Yaivenov explained why this was happening despite the reality of things in rl.
“Never thought i’d die fighting side by side with an American”
“How about side by side with a friend?”
Though the 5 inch director should be able to create a firing solution for something which does 45 knots (the french super destroyers were able to do more than 40 knots..)
bro, they were dual purpose for AA duty also.
@@TheStefanskoglund1 Yeah, definitely an omission. The 5" and CIWS should definitely be able to engage. The 25mm Bushmasters too, if they're modeled.
Does the game modeling HE fillers in water correctly?
The Hydroshockwave from an 16inch HE shell landing 10 meters next to such a small boat should still wreck such a flimsy hull.
It doesn't yet, but it's still just Early Access, so it might get integrated later.
Would the HE fuze under those circumstances? My understanding is only the French and Germans specifically designed their shells to go off if they hit water.
@@NemoGraynameA8 HE should, hitting water at that velocity would provide quite the shock to the fuse. IIRC some AP fuses can be armed by water.
Good example of how far the AI model still has to go. Currently, Sea Power is closer to “Arcade” gameplay than “Simulation”.
I'm surprised CWIS didn't start at close range, saying that it reminded me of The Expanse were 5 fast small ships beat up the Donnager
Time for the Iowa's gunners to have their eyes checked. Can't hit a little speedboat that was almost in CWIS range? Loved the video!
She isn't all smashed up. It's just superficial damage other than the radar.
Scratched the paint as far as the hull is concerned.
just imagine if the small boats had been evading rather than making it easy by driving a straight course
Do iowa guns stay elevated when loaded
@@JerrySeriatos yes
yeah it would literally be impossible to get a hit. I wonder if the fusing would make a shell go off when it hits the water though? Might not be any area damage at all.
Shouldn't the facts zig zag
All you folks discussing reality vs. sim. All I know is that 1,000 years from now, kids (like me at 66 😜) will still look at the Iowa class and make like Cap: "Jeezzzz". So unbelievably impressive!
"There seems to be something wrong with our bloody guns today" - Captain of the USS Iowa
What type of shells was the Iowa using? AP or HE, HE air burst.
Concusion from that sized shell would play havoc with the soft squashy things in the FACs.
I will still take the job of Chief Cook on an Iowa rather than a Boghammer. Thanks Cap, and Happy Holidays, Sir!
1. The Iowa would have used drones for AEW (been doing it for decades.
2. Her 5 in. shells used proximity fuses.
3. The damage she would have taken to her hull, from the armament fired, would have been superficial.
The 5inch guns are dual purpose, they should be able to track those boghammers no matter how fast they are, also it should have a cpl different types of rounds to fire.
Did the High Explosive mark 13 shell ever get proximity fuzes ?
The 5 inch had by 1944, so.
No proxy fuses for the main guns. That's what the 5 inch/escorts were for.
Imagine Air-Bursting sixteen inch shells...
@@Wayoutthere The Japanese had something similar for their main battery guns, Yamato even engaged TF 58 carrier aircraft with her 18.1" beehive anti aircraft shells during her final battle... albeit to dubious effectiveness at best
The funny thing about this scenario is that I’m pretty confident the Iowa could just tank all these ships. Their best weapons are just unguided rockets. Even if they got point blank I don’t feel like the Grads would be able to actually get into anything important on an Iowa.
Not that Grads can’t possibly damage a ship, but I can’t help recalling the time Ukraine pretty confidently said they struck a Russian corvette with a Grad salvo and it showed up in port with a single scorch mark visible.
I would genuinely be interested in seeing you test this in game. Take a few different warships and let a group of these FACs actually get in close to attack. Just to see how much damage they might be capable of IF they actually get through. I’d guess an Iowa would be lightly inconvenienced at most, but perhaps something more modern and lighter might not be able to shake off those rockets.
The antenna and radar dishes would be absolutely wrecked by the rockets and the super structure isn't armored thickly enough to deflect the rockets.
The only issue I see is the fire. There's no way the Iowa would get that kind of damage from a few dozen rockets.
@ it’d be expensive for all the sensitive equipment and maybe you might lose the secondary guns, but I can’t imagine that the ships would actually sink. The wild card is how badly fires might spread.
Firing and unguided rocket, using an instabilities mount from a small craft bouncing around doing 48 knots in the sea is not going to be accurate at all. And the firing at a range of 8 miles you would have to zoom the map way out to see the splashes. No way would a Grad come close from that type of platform. I own a 3 ton 26ft boat. It is hard to move around on it when I am doing just 25 knots in The Puget Sound.
I'd be curious to see a recreation of this, except you never manually mark the targets as hostile from the outset (i.e. let Iowa/Kirov decide from their own ECM that the targets are indeed hostile before opening fire). Would be interesting to see how close they get, and how much more damage they could potentially do
(on one hand I can see the Boghammers being too small/fast for Iowa's radars being able to accurately track, a larger vessel would have been in serious trouble, on the other, there may be "early access game" issues going on lol)
The AI in it's current incarnation is so bad that honestly none of these battles are worth more than amusement value.
Another awesome video
does Sea Power allow for the CIWS to fire on surface targets? I'd have thought that once they began their turning duel, the CIWS would make short work of those speed boats.
I was hoping to see knobheads and bell ends put their differences aside and stick their bell heads and knob ends together
Excellent idea V, but I still can't understand why you haven't made me a scoreboard yet?
Firing all the missiles at a tight group of targets would naturally lead to several missiles on a single target. Maybe designate them more spread out and let the first salvo get close before firing another- that way ships that aren’t hit in the first salvo will move closer and be more likely to be picked by subsequent missiles?
And letting a huge battleship plod along at 7 knots is just daft- that ship can go four times that speed and a moving target is harder to hit. Take some evasive action!
I can understand the 16” guns not being able to aim all that well at tiny 40+ knot targets since they’re intended to hit other battleships rather than speedboats, but the 5” guns were also used for anti-air and torpedo bombers could go five times that speed at low altitude so there’s no excuse for those consistently missing even at close range.
When the Iowa shifts course, the radar rotation angle is no longer level with the sea, when the ship points down to the sea, the radar is pointing down to the sea, when the ship points the radar upward, the radar energy is pointing up away from the sea.
That was a silly yet entertaining battle.
Possible explanation someone else posted on the last round seems to still potentially apply: when the rounds are going consistently long, they're not just consistently long, they're consistently long by almost the same exact amount. And the flight profile looks like it would take them smack into the side/deck of a ship (as opposed to a boat). So possibly they are aiming for a 'standard height' that isn't varied by vessel… even that would be fine (or at least not particularly noticeable in a battle like this) if blast and shrapnel effects were modeled - but they clearly aren't.
Hey Cap! Thanks for the entertainment as always 🤩
Btw. I dont understand why people always complain when the "game result" is not on their favor etc. I dont watch GR videos because i want someone or something spesific (side) to win, its just for good entertainment for gods sake 😂 and you guys always deliver good value for my watch time so i am glad for that and appreciate it. For people who dont agree, i would highly recommend them to watch some more gr videos and they would also hopefully understand the core of this channel. Its just a god damn game folks, get over it, enjoy the content. If you want something or some side or such to win, go play the game on your own and put 50 of your favorite ships or planes etc vs 1 poor enemy and enjoy the results or whatever. I dont give a damn what the results are, i just enjoy the pure entertainment and my lovely Cap's voice, its like a meditation and have always been like that for many years 😂😁 i love you Cap, you know 😂❤
This is the type of scenario that makes me want see the HIMARS tungsten munition adapted to the 16" guns.
Thanks!
really confused why the 5in DP guns don't have VT shells available. quiet literally the first salvo of 5in using a VT airburst would shred everything. They were intended to shoot at planes, i doubt they would have had any issue.
i think it’s far more accurate to refer to the kirov as a soviet boat rather than a russian one.
Ship.
@ oh yeah, mb
Thanks cap
I can’t wait to see the new Zumwalt in a fleet battle
Are you just streaming on you tube now?
Twitch only for stream.
Cap, the Yamato had behive 18 in shells. Could they be used against small fast boats? Or any of the proximity fused shells?
The beehives shells on Yamato and Musashi didn't work too well. Musashi fired one of these shells and disabled one of her main guns.
This is my favorite war games scenarios
Something wrong here as a 16 inch shell landing next to a speedboat would obliterate it. Model needs work.
In Vietnam 16" shells were used to create helicopter landing zones, A single shell would totally clear a 200 meter radius landing zone, and the explosion would defoliate every tree out another 300 meters.
Which is another way of saying you are completely correct. (source: navweps)
I'd love to k own where the devs got the idea the ASM Tomahawk has that massive a minimum engagement zone.
Once again we see that the game does not model Iowa's armor at all. So many of the guns couldn't pen her armor. As other have said, those rockets seemed a bit too accurate going 45knots in a bumpy sea.
I'm absolutely not making this comment with the mindset of "US is #1, best at everything, this game is BS."
With that out of the way, I quite honestly believe this is some sort of bug within the game. Hitting a moving speedboat at maximum range over the horizon, especially when maneuvering, should be amazingly difficult. However, once you get to closer ranges, the speed of the Boghammers should really have no impact on the accuracy of the guns, as the 5" guns are even designed to track and calculate a firing solution for aircraft flying overhead.
In addition, the 5" shells are also capable of using proximity fuses (again, as part of their anti-air capability). Then, per some research I posted on another video the other day, the 16" shells were also capable of being fused to explode prior to hitting the water (air burst mode), so in all scenarios, the realistic result should be some very shredded up boats, and it should never even be a possibility to see the battleship missing the speedboat for hundreds of rounds within direct line of sight.
fires seem to be a bit too dangerous in sea power. not helped by the greatly simplified compartmentalization and subdivisioning.
While I am slightly disappointed by the Iowa’s lack of performance. The results aren’t entirely surprising given the fact that the target is tiny and the inability to fire air burst munitions. (I assume they couldn’t fire air burst munition at a ground target). Plus the Boghammers insane speed compared to the rather slow firing 5 inch and 16 inch guns. I know the five inchers are technically anti air so they are designed to hit fast moving targets but they aren’t necessarily designed to get direct hits on something. Being that anti aircraft guns generally are trying to hit an aircraft with shrapnel not the actual shell.
Torpedo boats in ww2 were pretty fast. Do we have historical data on large guns vs fast boats?
Stop calling it a battlecruiser. Its neither one in construction nor in doctrine. Seriously. Its just a big guided missile cruiser.
CGN.
Such cool visuals in SP and DCS. 6 been playing the hell out of both games lately. The comments about the accuracy of the rockets are definitely true, but it's in EA, so we'll see what happens.
the main guns were used against torpedo aircraft in WW2, but I do believe the efficiency was very low. I'm not sure the boghammers were on the radar when they got closer, too low in the water, and no sky behind them from the radar antenna POV.. If so, it was all visual aiming.
Two of the best looking ships XD
Thats a bit of asymetric warfare there i suppose...
Another somewhat unrealistic thing about this is the Iowa scoring multiple direct hits on tiny fast-moving speedboats with its main battery at a range of 20 miles. In real life, the longest range naval gunnery hits occurred at about 14 miles on battleships or aircraft carriers, and even that probably only happened twice.
Lol at anything surving within 150' of a 16" shell explosion.
what about seawiz? could it shoot at these rockets?
Cap, pretty so excite, greatest fun, like much bioum-bioum+
🐶
The "AI" in this game was clearly raised on lead paint chips.
In this engagement, I bet an OHP would be better than Iowa. The American ships are tailor made for certain roles, while the Soviet ones go for general purpose.
OHP with SM-1s should be able to snipe each boat easily I would imagine.
The Grads are what? 22kg HE warhead at the best?
How many 500 lb bombs did it take to sink the Yamato? 12 bombs and 7 torpedoes!
Joe about the Bismarck? About 100 minutes of shelling by 2 battleships and 2 heavy cruisers caused the German to scuttle her!
The AI modeling is very poor…
An Iowa would probably use 16" Mk144 or Mk146 submunition rounds for this particular battle. It would be a very short battle.
Cap, rocket salvos are designed to be AoE weapons and land over a large area with a big dispersion. And that is against static targets. A ship moving at 30+ knots cannot be accurately aimed at by boats bouncing in seas at 40+ knots. Maybe if the gunboats got within a couple hundred yards they might get some hits by acting like a shotgun.
The best move for the Iowa would be to turn about 30 degrees away and run at flank speed. This will allow all the main and secondary guns to fire at the targets while presenting a lower profile and reducing the closure rate. You have to remember that the 5"/38 guns are designed to be multipurpose and can shoot sea and aerial targets. They could shoot down planes that were moving at 300 knots through X, Y, & Z planes. They could also tear apart destroyers moving at 38 knots who were maneuvering to not get hit. These speed boats moving in a straight line at a set speed should be simple target practice.
The CIWS should have engaged the rockets. It's the exact same fire control radar that is used by land-based C-RAM.
There is not a single square inch of the Iowa's armored citadel that could be defeated by the rockets the FACs were using in this video. (or the 8 ship gun battle video you did for that matter).
Why can't Iowa use its CWIS against the incoming rockets?
"The Little Boghammer That Could"
ALWAYS thumbs up! Doing otherwise would be against my best long-term interests!
I realize you let the Iowa do Iowa things, but given a mix of fast and slower approaching swarms, I'd personally have considered "running" to separate the speedy boats for priority targeting. That not a thing, question mark?
Would an igla be able to shoot down a harpoon I wonder
Thank you for your videos! They are always so high quality and interesting. I can see that you are professionals.🐣🌸🐻
Iowa's trying to swat a mosquito with a shot put.
Looks like a bad PID loop. In theory there should be a loop that takes into account how much it missed by and factor that deviation into the next cycle. The fact that it misses by the same margin repeatedly tells me either there’s a flaw in the loop or they’re just not factoring deviation all.
Prox fuse / aerial burst shells would solve all of the problems with fast movers. (Mod hint)
can you do 4 iowas and 4 kirovs vs the VLS ticos how ever many you think would be fair
Possible way to test the "too high" vs. "too fast" theory: set up a group of Boghammers but limit them to progressively lower speeds, and see how the results change. Might be an interesting "for 'science'" video, even if it really shouldn't be your problem to debug the game's behavior here…
UA-cam keepa deleting my comments :(
Cap, try Destroyer: U-Boat hunter. Its a simulator of 1940s destroyer hunting U-Boats
thx
Its a game also 19:00 im sure iowa wasnt that bad at accurate gunnery in the 80s maybe the game didnt take into account how accurate she was in the 80s .plus this game is all about missles not shells. Iowa had drones and helicopters to help get accurate fire
I feel like they dont do shells or armor correctly since this is a missle game
As Zach de la Rocha might say : "Rally round the fam-ly, check yer pockets for other shells"
Just out of curiousity, aren't there 16 inch anti-personnel shells that disperse submunitions?
Against a small craft , a few hits would 'clear the decks' of the crew, as they are in the open... or at least cause the on-deck munitions to cook off.
VT fuzes for the high explosive round - 1 ton of shrapnel from a height of 10 m.....
The 16-inch shells don't have an air burst function like you are talking about, but the 5-inch would.
Cap, I've noticed while playing the game there always seems to be one aircraft or ship almost impossible to hit.
"She's lost her Radar, she's been beaten by a bog hammer"
Meanwhile, the Visual fire director crews in main gun turrets 2 and 3 direction all 3 turrets via Visual targetting
Not to mention the main battery fire directors doubling visual range finders, with all 6 fire directors having some sort of radar
The Iowa's are powerful for their time
Yes, visual fire direction won't help much against 40 knot speed boats, however never underestimate the Iowa Classes ability to be pains in the rear
Ask the North Koreans, Vietnamese, and Japanese how it feels
.
Also, to note her design back in WW2 was Anti-air, carrier escort, and the ability to chase down Cruisers and Battle Cruisers in Surface Actions
Your channel is like a merry carousel that never stops spinning. Continue to delight us with your great content and positive energy!🌙🌍🐻
I think it was unfair to designate target hostile because the FAC will not have the battleship designated as hostile you should have let AI figure it out or use AWACS/Patrol plane
". . . and she's all smashed up."
No, Cap. For an Iowa-class, that's barely a scratch. There's no way those pea-shooters could damage Iowa's citadel.
Remember, at the time Iowa was laid down, ship-borne radar was very new. Iowa also had several main visual range-finders, plus each turret would have its own, smaller, range-finder. And you can bet your donkey that there'd be several guys in each turret who can do the maths to produce a firing solution.
What I don't know is whether the five-inch mounts can independently compute firing solutions.
I hope American taxpayers approve this
We was robbed!
5 inch guns were used to hit aircraft as well - so summing wrong.
Or, didnt you use to be sponsored why winwing? Im sure im not the first to think of it surely if you could you would but it would be nice if you could get that again
the sim seems a bit flawed to me. IMO the shrapnel would have destroyed those speed boats a long time before.
Would it not work better if you didn’t use all your missiles at once so the boats that are dead will fall behind the rest of the ships so I have less of a chance of hitting it
why wasn't CIWS shooting the rockets? none of the small rockets should actually do major damage to an Iowa class, superficial damage to exterior and mast mounted radars and external weapons (5" is lightly armoured, and Harpoons mk141 launchers and CIWS mounts)
Anti toxic nerd blocker 🚫
Iowa looks pretty alright. just looks like very minimal superficial damage, and the radar getting tagged by a lucky rocket lol. Other than that those small rockets probably couldn't do anymore more but to damage exposed systems and cause a fire or two. the Grads def had more of a chance to do superstructure damage but probably wouldn't go beyond that.
strange how the 5 inch didn't make some kinda firing solution for the little guy, wasn't looking either but CIWS is also capable of destroying small craft is is kinda better for it.
Also towards the end, little shocking that I saw rudder and weapon magazine in damage lmfao. Those Grads def didn't go through Iowa's armored deck, they cant even do much against russian naval ships in Ukraine irl. ANother comment actually mentioned it but Ukraine did land hits using Grad on a russian ship and it was seen in port with just a scortch mark. Kinda crazy. But as far as exposed senors, etc that have to be- yeah it could totally smack those up a bit. They are not as armored.
Time to see what Kirov does.
the iowa being damaged by 105-122mm rockets is very unrealistic, these weapons simply do not penetrate and everything important on the iowa is inside armor
the reason the 16inch guns were not accurate at close range could be the rotation speed of the guns and the fast relative movement of the ship and the boats
the 5inch guns of the iowa would most likely deal with these boats much much faster, they were designed to shoot at aircraft coming towards the ship, they had better turn speeds, fire rate and were equipped with high capacity shells and proximity fuses
The devs are so dumb they didn't program lead into the mounted guns
Can you play as a Russian carrier group and win against an American carrier group.
Will do the soviet CSG battles early next year. Got a bunch more US stuff to finish first.
Look I don't think I'm crazy, but the buffs for Soviet craft and the nerfs for USA craft is pretty absurd. It just seems to me that the devs are taking all the USSR stats and taking them at face value, while ignoring all of the USA stats.
You could have controlled the release rate and direction of fire of harpoons a lot better rather than just let AI salvo fire wastefully. A real crew would have known it’s risks
Seriously not on you Cap…
Naval gunnery is not that daft…
The ranging algorithm is repeat recalculating the same error…
Naval gunners have a multitude of ways to correct for such a thing…
Anyway, it’s lazy programming with poor qc and should be a very simple patch!!
Also, if armor pen shells is the only ammo this thing loads up with, then they’re missing a whole lot of what an Iowa can do
iowa can hold 32 tomahawk misslies, not 8.
24 x anti-land 8 x anti-ship
Waited two years for this game to come out, literally a ship simulator and they can’t even get the iowas armor right as well as correct damage models for the 16 inch shells… what’s the point of this game if they can’t even get that right
👎 Sorry Cap…..but Iowa would NOT lose to a couple of speedboats with rockets.
It’s the AI of the game
@@aDeathbombyeah I know. Im just being a knobhead.😂
Sadly the ai can’t aim for shi
Yeh seems to be a small glitch in game we've un-covered.
I think it's the size of gunboats. The shells are probably designed in-game to hit something a bit taller above the water
Hey CAP... I know you are doing with without helos... I THINK the Iowa's 5 inch mounts are semi-active laser homing and a range of 45 miles. And thank you, as always.
No SALH on the 5"/38. That's a new capability for the OTO Melara 127mm/64.
Depending on which Kirov we're modeling, AK-130 does supposedly have an SALH round.
@@logansorenssen Then the old Harpoon databases were wrong. Would not be the first time. Thank you for the correction.
Sadly it would be near impossible for Iowa to hit a fac. CEP of the main guns were 254 yards the minimum CEP were still about 80 yards which is 240 feet.
Those are the WW2/Korea figures given with some rather wild testing parameters. Post refit accuracy was improved by over 29%. According to those who sailed on them they were capable of tracking their own shells in flight as well as the splashes with radar and make adjustments on the fly. Not to mention the spectating effect of a 16in HE round exploding in the water would do immense damage to non armored boats.
Also what isn’t modeled in game is that each turret had its own radar system and could fire independently of each other instead of all turrets attacking one target.