2020's Hypersonic Version: Red Storm Rising - The Dance Of The Vampires (Naval Battle 105b) | DCS

[@TheStormpilgrim]

Hard to imagine a "stealth" attack from that many supersonic Backfires. Hell, submarines probably could have heard those things flying overhead.

[@anarchyandempires5452]

while I can't say almost anything because my contract isn't over and I don't want to go the way of war thundering my self, I will say that it would have been easier to hear them at a hundred miles than it would have been To see Godzilla destroying Tokyo while visiting the Tokyo Tower. I mean don't get me wrong You don't exactly need specialty equipment for it, put 40 supersonic bombers on the air flying really close to one another And you are going to be leaving Sonic booms on the sound level of a small nuclear bomb behind them. Seriously almost nobody talks about acoustics By the aircraft are not exactly stealthy when it comes to sound unless it's B2 that thing is fuckin scary.

[@LimitBeamng]

They were detected, but the American fighters in the book were misguided at the drones.

[@jasonosmond6896]

23:09 Cap, SM-3 is not radar guided, it uses an infrared seeker for terminal homing. AEGIS provides mid-course updates to the missile until it goes terminal, and then the missile is on its own.

[@grimreapers]

thx

[@nomorerainbows]

@@grimreapers SM-2MRIIIB, which is the primary missile in US service, also uses a terminal IIR seeker. It has dual mode SARH and IIR guidance.

[@amizaur3marcinostrowski186]

The first thing to consider about SM-3 in DCS should be the fact, that SM-3 was designed to be anti-TBMs weapon, and because of the way it works it can only work against targets that are effectively outside of Earth's atmosphere - so it couldn't be used against Kinzhau at all! IIRC an SM-3 missile is really a big booster for getting payload high and fast (several km/s) and out of Earth's atmosphere into the space, where the payload - small EKV (egzoatmospheric kill vehicle) is released and the EKV intercepts target (ballistic missile or warhead) using IIR seeker and rocket side thrusters to set itself precisely on collision course. The EKV can't work in the atmosphere, it has totally non-aerodynamic shape, if released inside the atmosphere at hipersonic speeds it would just desintegrate and burn from aerodynamic forces and the friction, also IIR seeker would not work if even thin atmosphere is present as the heat caused by air friction would heat up the seeker window and it could not detect targets anymore. Navy's primary weapon against endoatmospheric (aeroballistic, hypersonic) currently is the SM-6 missile. With aerodynamic steering, active radar seeker and terminal accuracy good-enough to be used against TBMs, it should also work fairly well against Kinzhau. Lately the Patriot PAC-3 was tested from naval VLS launchers and if the navy decides to integrate it with AEGIS it could be alternative, very good medium/close range (10-20nm) defence against very fast targets at the edge of the atmosphere. With proven combat record against Kinzhaus. PAC-3 has ARH seeker and with combined (aerodynamic & side-thrusters) controls it achieves direct-hit accuracy. Which SM-6 (which has only aerodynamic controls AFAIK?) is not capable of - instead relying on low miss-distance and proximity fusing to kill targets with it's big HE warhead (just like the older Patriot PAC-2 but with more modern guidance and fusing). Both missiles (SM-6 and PAC-3) could have their places in "defence envelope" where they perform best. SM-3 should be in game restricted to use against ballistic, egzoatmospheric targets (is it possible to set minimum target altitude or minimum intercept altitude for SM-3 to at least 50km?) Also an idea tor CAP - if you want to test anti-swarm capabilities of a carrier battle group - so a scenario where they would use cheaper med range ESSMs and not expensive, heavy, long range SM-6s) then in some cases maybe it would be better to just remove SM-6s (or both SM-6s and SM-2s) completely from ship's loadouts, then they would have to use ESSMs only for ship defence and we could see how effective they are. P.S. Is it possible to set a minimum launch range for SM-6s in a way that they are not used inside ESSMs envelope ? I know it would mean that a ship which spent all it's ESSMs can't continue defece using SM-6s, but such situation would rather not happen very often and in some scenarios such setting could be preferred and result in more logical SAM chose behaviour: Very Long range or long range over the horizon or difficult/advanced targets - use SM-6, long-med range, standard targets, moderate number of them - use SM-2s, med-close range and anti-swarm - use ESSMs.

[@nomorerainbows]

@@amizaur3marcinostrowski186 ESSM Block II is already better than Patriot for what you are describing, and can be quadpacked. As far as I know, you are correct about SM-3, it cannot be used in the atmosphere.

[@RailRoad188]

​@nomorerainbows Cool, but the max altitude seems very wrong on the otherwise very cool Tico load out image, it's the same as the max horizontal range (27nm) which is twice that of the SM2MR (13nm) and still much higher than the SM 6 (18nm), I would expect it is more like 9nm (couldn't find anything quickly but a 15,000m max altitude stat).

[@cassius_eu5970]

Mass naval attacks like these are always beautiful to watch.

[@Bruhvernor]

During one of the badass scenes I need cap to yell, “Are you not entertained?!” 🤣

[@ck12ms]

We asked and you delivered! Simba might be the people´s champ, But Cap is most definitely a man of the people!

[@grimreapers]

awww

[@solomongray6352]

Modern day version, love it, ready to start watching NOW

[@emmata98]

28:12 It also could make it easier, because the SAM's don't have to turn that much, since the intercept arc is basically the arc the asm is already going

[@toasteroven6761]

So this is more of a hypersonic anti-ship cruise missile [i.e. the US planned scramjet powered Hypersonic Attack Cruise Missile (HACM)] test than an anti-ship ALBM (Kinzhal) test.

[@pike100]

​@@flashgordon6670That is an end of the world scenario you nimrod!

[@valuedhumanoid6574]

As good as this is there are some other Clancy books with some stellar sounding battles to be recreated. From Executive Orders, Bear & Dragon, Debt of Honor...hell, even the Hunt For Red October has some cool scenarios included. With Clancy, the sky is the limit.

[@parsin4793]

Bear and the Dragon is an awesome book. To bad the neocons turn the Bear & the Dragon in to best friends. now we are f'd.

[@kisscola]

It's really interesting to have the rough cost comparison. Traditionally, the attacker had to bear the larger cost in order to overcome the defenses. But with todays cost intensive defense technology, this appears to turn around. Imagine, that in this case the attacker could use almost 10x the resources to match the defenders cost. Which would 100% result in a successful attack. From a perspective of imposing cost on the adversary, modern defenses does not appear very feasible if confronted with large scale attacks, does they? Very insightful and interesting video. Huge thanks for all the effort you guys put into this content. Much appreciated.

[@92HazelMocha]

Part of the reason that cost isn't a big talking point in warfare is because there is no equivalency. Russia would have already spent that much building those missiles with the intent that they would be expended, and likely already set aside resources to replace them. The carrier on the other hand was not intended to be expendable, not only would the loss of a CSG be a massive strategic blow, but also an unforseen one and it would likely take years to replace it.

[@RonanP12]

you're forgetting russians are only on a 300usd/month salary. So the equipment is "'cheaper" but not comparable, because they can't produce the equipment in x10 the quantity.

[@Thatonedude90]

@@RonanP12or quality

[@lafielanarchy]

@@Thatonedude90 Russia dont even have Kinzhals. Its russian propaganda. Many belive Russia managed steal patriot missiles in Afghansitan and make us belive they have hypersonic missiles. At this point Russia got nothing that can even fly above mach 2-3.

[@dexlab7539]

Yup, this is why US aircraft carriers are quickly become in a thing of the past

[@soupfork2105]

Co-pilot: Komrad Commander! we are under attack! Why are we not firing flares? Pilot: Komrad, see all those burning Blinders going down? Those ARE our flares.

[@theoneneo5024]

Very impressive visually. I still say the Backfires would be picked up at least 100nm further outs and the response time would have been quicker. Throw in ECM and the decoys the fleet would be trailing and the survivability rate goes way up.

[@Michael-rg7mx]

Shoot an air burst nuke at the swarm. If you get a bunch of civilians, deal with it in court.

[@Matt-yg8ub]

What he’s essentially done is taking a 1980s tactic and played it out on the Russian side while giving the Americans the advantage of knowing the tactic in advance, it’s not a realistic scenario in the slightest.

[@trevorday7923]

Great video, always loved the book and it was interesting to see what it'd be like these days. I do have to respectfully correct you though, Cap; in the book of 'Red Storm Rising' only one of the carriers in the Nimitz battlegroup was actually sunk, that being the French carrier Foch. USS Nimitz herself took three hits (because missiles were too close together and it freaked out the CIWS) which wrecked the flightdeck, destroyed the C3 facilities and sent her into emergency repairs in Southampton. USS Saratoga, the third carrier in the battlegroup, actually got off pretty lightly; it took only one hit but it neatly snipped off the various masts and antennae on the carrier's island. The only other major ship destroyed was USS Saipan carrying two thousand Marines, and the USS Ticonderoga herself took a missile in the aft superstructure which shredded it.

[@nomorerainbows]

regardless of what the book said, a 1 metric ton warhead would devastate a Ticonderoga class cruiser.

[@exidy-yt]

DCS can be SO goddam pretty to look at sometimes. All those bombers coming out of the sunrise firing their missiles all at once is...c'est magnifique! *chef's kiss*. Great job expanding on the Dance of the Vampires, Cap and everyone else! Next suggestion: get in on the recent UFO hullabaloo somehow like when you did the Independence Day missions!

[@pike100]

No more scenarios with aliens or UFOs for me, please. I prefer engagements with military assets that are actually available.

[@exidy-yt]

@@pike100 Fair enough. DCS IS a videogame however so I don't mind some fantastic scenarios from time to time. They make some of the funner scenarios to watch, quite often.

[@stuartburgess2409]

Love the book read it when first published , Tom Clancy was the master of millitary actions between the super powers & really did his research to make sure it was as realistic as possible just like you guys do here , however like we found out when the Berlin wall fell the Eastern bloc forces were virtually destroyed by bankrupcy & corruption without even a shot fired , frontline tanks with no engines , ships & submarines unable to go to sea & just rusting in port , aircraft grounded with no spares ! I think that the Russian federation as of now would have great problems mounting an attack anywhere near a quarter of this scale with the resources at hand & the constant updates on Western weapons systems will eventually nullify the hypersonic threat as the balance is eventually restored.

[@Valorius]

Larry Bond researched the battle scenes, and Tom Clancy wrote them based on Bond's research. This is spelled out clearly in the RSR wiki.

[@stuartburgess2409]

@@Valorius True , the two made a great team , but Clancy wove the narrative that held us captivated breathing believability & a realistic action into the story .

[@92HazelMocha]

Cap the reason that the Kinzhal looks so similar to the "YJ21" is because the missile you've modled is actually the CM400 which like the Kinzhal is also derived from a ground launched ballastic missile. The real YJ21's look completely different; they are slimmer and have a very distinct sensor on the nose.

[@grimreapers]

Thanks

[@johnmatthewrafols2897]

​​@@grimreapersoh hey cap can you make a russian attack to the 🇺🇸 7th or 6th fleet (sorry for the lack of naulage i don't really study much about the 🇺🇸 navy) Here are the ai ( im making it as realistic a possible😊) Russian units: All of their TU22 bombers ( with HYPERSONIC missiles) 3/4 or 100% of their su 34 fleet All of their TU160 with cruise missiles 1/2 su 24 fleet An unkown number of tu95 (i dont really know how many they have) 36 or more mig 31s with r37m And to test out the modern russian costal defences from your last vid Just put 1/2 or all of them (again lack of naulage😢) And probably some su57 with r77m and r74 with steath coting (if possible) And the whole 7th fleet or what ever fleet the americans have oh and fpr their aircraft mabye the majority of the is f18 with aim 120 and a small number of them will be f35 with the same weapons (Im trying to make it as fun/realistic as possible😊😊😊) Sorry if this is mosty russian bias

[@pahtar7189]

I suspect the true ballistic flight of the Kinzhals would be easier to intercept as the defending missiles wouldn't be arcing over them and trying to hit them from the side; they'd just go straight toward them, only having to make small lateral adjustments. You could easily test this by having the Kinzhals spawn in at 80,000 feet while 20 miles away and see if the fleet can defend itself.

[@vegabond5362]

That's something odd I have noticed as well with CH's PAC-2/3 Patriot, and SM-2, SM-6, SM-3 missiles....they always arc way over the incoming missiles and then dive down on them making the intercept more difficult.

[@gundamator4709]

@@vegabond5362 Core game limitations are my understanding, they would not do this in real life.

[@Rednax42]

In previous video you asked how Clancy did his simulation: His co-author (Larry Bond) is an ex-USN officer and creator of the tabletop modern naval wargame "Harpoon" - they used that for all the battles in RSR.

[@Rednax42]

I think there's a scenario book for "Harpoon" covering RSR. I'll post the link if I can

[@johnpatz8395]

Yeah, I love and miss the Harpoon video game, back in the day I had bought several versions of it as each version came with additional expansions.

[@mandoreforger6999]

There was always a fatal problem with Clancy’s scenario. In reality, if the carrier group is really in a battle area where massed bomber attacks are possible, you would see a constant rotation CAP of 12-16 aircraft in a radius extending 400-500 miles in each direction from the carrier. They are not going to just wait for bombers to show up. The CAP will be ready to fire almost as soon as Hawkeyes see the bombers. They would probably eliminate 18-20 bombers very quickly and harass remaining with guns. Almost any formation is likely to break up in that scenario. Clancy needed a scenario where the US Navy acts rashly and gets clobbered, which is fine. Wartime Doctrine was always to have numerous Tomcats aloft so that 5-6 could begin firing almost as soon as the Hawkeyes saw them. That is 30-35 missiles with 80-90% kill rate, plus 10-15 gun kills before they could fire. It was always going to cost the Soviets 40 bombers just to get to the launch point. From there, your ready relief crews launching from the carrier can intercept most of what gets off the rails. The ship defense can probably handle whatever leaks.

[@Notbigbird]

The backfires went around far outside AWACS detection range to attack from the south where there were no AWACS. There were two E-2’s in front of the group about 60 miles ahead of them, which is what cap got wrong with it because he thought there were AWACS towards the back, in the book there weren’t. They had zero idea that there was a second group until it was too late and then detected them soon after they realized. And before anyone brings up the fuel question, the backfires did a big aerial refueling operation before going around the group. It’s completely possible for this to happen.

[@xxxautopsy99xxx]

Made for good - and plausible - scenario and great storyteling

[@nomorerainbows]

The carrier group only had 48 tomcats, there is no way they could keep a CAP of 12-16 aircraft up 400-500 miles from the group. That's complete fantasy. If you read the book, they KNEW the attack was coming, and had every single fighter in the fleet up and waiting for them.

[@Notbigbird]

@@nomorerainbows exactly!

[@5Andysalive]

there are many reality issues with the plot. Some he just has to make to get it started (the russian plan is completely bananas to start with!) and some he uses to get the story moving. No US spies in Moscow who uncover the whole thing? But like in movies i can forgive some for a good story. And he's got that definitely covered. It's like the Martian, book and movie, where the plot starting storm is completely unrealistic, fully acknowledged by the author.

[@Echowhiskeyone]

One thing about Soviet anti-ship missiles, they were/are big, fast and armored. Hard to kill, but not impossible. And if Electronic Warfare worked in DCS, the US would increase the kill rate by miles. And the entire Group would have been in EMCON Alpha(no radar/radio emissions), so finding the Group would be hard and targeting near impossible. And a nitpick, Russia most likely does not have 160 Kinzhal missiles in inventory. But this is a DCS scenario, so all is good.

[@dexlab7539]

US ran out of 155mm artillery too irl. So, nobody has unlimited anything including US

[@Synthmilk]

@@dexlab7539 When did that happen?

[@92HazelMocha]

​@@SynthmilkNot entirely depleted, but down to bare minimum for our own use. This is old news, basically Ukraine and Russia fire thousands and thousands of artillery shells every single day so it's more of a global shortage than anything. Last I heard Russia was trying to talk the DPRK into giving them some of theirs before they run completely dry.

[@HauntedXXXPancake]

I somehow doubt the 'armored' part. Sure, they're probably build very sturdy to keep all that mass from folding in on itself at those speeds, but proper, actually useful Armor against SAMs / CIWS would be so heavy ...

[@SteveConrad-l9j]

​@@dexlab7539 not in this world. Ukraine ran out USA has plenty 😊

[@paulspahn4529]

Sulfur burns blue kerosene burns yellow. It's absolutely the high sulfur content in the fuel. Remember, kerosene is distilled pretty colse to diesels in a fuel distillation tower, (Which is why you can sub it for diesel in a pinch). Sulfer acks like lead dose to gasoline. It improves combustion, but for more "heavier" (oilyer) fuels. Also, sulfur burns off quiker than kerosene, which is why the entire flame isn't blue. The kerosene is the last thing to burn. Here is a like to different fuel types.kzbin.info/www/bejne/bZ-vYmN5bKuGmKc

[@rattlerlead]

I re-listened to this chapter tonight, these videos spurred me to redo the whole book. This would apply to both videos, just a fun thing I caught. They mention several times near the start of the chapter that there are several tankers and other aircraft up with buddy stores from the carrier to follow the 14s. So it wouldn't be a one way mission for them, I think they head to Scotland after the carrier is hit. I think the Russians had tankers too, but haven't got that far in the chapter. Do know the Backfires do attack again a few more times, so very likely it wasn't really a one way for any of them. Love the sims though keep up the great work 🙂.

[@skatman3278]

Awesome video. These bomber vs fleet ones are some of my favourites. Would be cool if you could do a hybrid video? F-14 armed with the 260?

[@toddbrewer683]

Great Commentary Cap! Felt like I was there.

[@Valorius]

One important point, even if JATM becomes a reality, it will not be carried by USMC aircraft, based on public info, this is a USN/USAF program only. Given that a large number of the aircraft on any US carrier are USMC jets, that is an important consideration.

[@pahtar7189]

Russia only has about 60 Backfires left, so this attack is at the limit of their ability.

[@ΜικρόΔημοτικο]

Yes

[@Wildfire86872]

Not to mention there's a good chance they don't have enough missiles to do it because they're using all of them in Ukraine.

[@grantgates2931]

Really enjoyed this series. Your comment about the biggst radar return sparked a memory of when the exocets were spoofed by the royal navy using chaff and I think decoy helicopters.. Is there a way you can test ship launched chaff against these things?

[@gotafarmyet4691]

At spending 10x the money the allies still are at a loss, for the resupply. The carrier group might be safe but they will have to retreat. If the resupply takes a month the group if effectively removed from battle. The Russians should fire just out side of range and retreat under full jamers and chaff. The operation should be to deplete resources of the carrier group. Also save some to attack the resupply group, that also cripples the carriers as they carry what 3 days worth of jet fuel?

[@Squirl513]

I see your point but "destroyed" is always better than "mission kill". Good luck trying to resupply a carrier that is sitting on the bottom.

[@gotafarmyet4691]

@@Squirl513 It might be better but to conserve their planes they should fire from just outside the range and turn back sooner. All they have to do is force a reaction, most systems are automatic once the button is pushed. Put in a better battery so it can be fired farther and track a minute longer. The key is to then target the resupply ships from there on.

[@gotafarmyet4691]

@@duanemckinley9353 You are making the assumption that there will be a replacement available and that they can be resupplied. What if neither is possible? The only time the Navy has a no retreat plan is in defense of the US coasts military bases.

[@Squirl513]

@@gotafarmyet4691 you assume that they want to conserve their planes instead of winning a decisive victory. Have you read much about Russian doctrine?

[@gotafarmyet4691]

@@duanemckinley9353 It's why I said they make a show of force to commit the US resources they launch at a longer range to save the bombers and the Escorts that should have been with them. Again with long range missiles. Then attack the resupply ships, as they travel to locations. Carriers only have about 3 days of fuel for flight Ops. It is pretty easy to run them dry without a resupply. Everyone is about the Group but it is the resupply that is key.

[@FunnyQuailMan]

Not that I think it would have necessarily resulted in a different outcome, as at such volume it just doesn't seem like anything could possibly have changed that ending in the second test run, but I just thought I'd mention that the SM-3 Block I was actually a single batch production of 11 missiles for testing purposes and is not in use. The SM-3 Block IB, which incorporates improved attitude control thrusters for increased mobility & accuracy together with a 2-color FLIR seeker (vs. none in Block I and a single-color seeker in Block IA), achieved IOC in 2013 and has been fully operational since 2015. Also, SM-3 Block IIA, which is equipped with 21" diameter booster & rocket stages for an increased range & ceiling of 25% over its predecessor, reaching speeds above 13 Mach, and still further improved FLIR seeker, computing power, and diverter/attitude control motor for even further improved accuracy, made its first operationally-representative intercept of an ICBM in 2021, successful complex ICBM intercepts were conducted by both the Japanese Maritime Defense Force & US Navy in cooperation with the MDA in the first half of 2022, and Raytheon (now RTX) was awarded a nearly $900 million contract for full-production of Block IIA missiles for both Japan & the U.S. in late 2022. Also, improved SM-6 Block II (over Blocks I & IA) are operational as well, with IB coming online in the next few months (Q1 2024).

[@RailRoad188]

Also note they are only capable of out of atmosphere interceptions.

[@fuffoon]

Dude, you're killing me! This is good stuff. I read Clancy as it was put into first printing. Now its a bit overcooked in appearance but 40 years ago it was really hot stuff.

[@emmata98]

25:44 always a good view, when the carrier group does this

[@justinpallies]

One of my all time favorite books! Larry bond was a huge help with it as well! Own 2 in hard cover and had 2 now 1 in paper back!

[@SteveConrad-l9j]

Vortex. Fantastic novel 😊

[@willwozniak2826]

The JATMs are suppose to fly at MACH 5.. if they come out....Nice job! Important lesson here, interesting to see a US CARRIER GROUP defend with out their Jets.....

[@EJ-wo3vu]

This is so badass. And, from one of my favorite books!

[@mandoreforger6999]

Great video. Hypersonics cannot deal with SLQ-32 Jamming, CHAFF and NULKA decoys, as their sensors are too degraded from the high speeds which superheat the missile surface and generate blinding plasma. Too bad that SLQ-32 is not modeled, nor are chaff, Nulka and IR decoys, which would utterly confuse and blind the remaining swarm. DCS needs to integrate jamming, decoys and chaff. Plus every ship would have turned bow into or stern away from the missiles to reduce radar cross section. That is also where the CIWS mounts are, and those would fill that airspace with a cone of shrapnel. The hit rate is vastly reduced if all of these things are happening. The problem with hypersonics is that their sensors work poorly to begin with, and the short time on target does not give their sensors time to “burn through” jamming. They arrive blind….facts. Still, beautiful entertainment!

[@riskinhos]

good luck jamming inertial guidance. there's no need for that shit. it's hypersonic. 100% will reach the target regardless of jamming. and no worries about the blast as it can carry nukes.

[@Echowhiskeyone]

With SLQ-32 operating in the original scenario, the raid would have failed early on. Same here.

[@Frost-01]

​​​@@riskinhosyeah except its because their hypersonic that so much as moving an inch or doing anything that throws or distracts them is often more than enough to make them miss. Also unless you want full scale nuclear war, you wouldnt risk your self arming them with nukes just for the sake of stopping a single carrier group, let alone using a significant chunk of your stockpile of nuclear warheads over a single fleet, you'd run out of nukes relatively quickly if so... as one nuke is enough but 2 nukes is overkill but due to the advent of them being intercepted your gonna have to waste hundreds of nukes that would overkill a target and get destroyed in the process...

[@mandoreforger6999]

@@riskinhosinertial guidance cannot hit moving targets. It can only navigate to a point in space…where the ship no longer is. It needs an active sensor to hit anything moving, and the fleet would be at 32 knots.

[@mandoreforger6999]

@@Echowhiskeyoneexactly. The system works so well that during Praying Mantis the US Navy relied only on jamming and decoys in several engagements.

[@MaddMattsGarage]

Awesome work. Imagine if the AIM-154 on the F-14 or ST-21 lol....

[@levchusovitin6380]

11:05 some Battlestar Galactica music would fit perfectly here.

[@lippertwe]

For a future video, you can test out the "Arsenal Ship" concept. It would seem that the two issues for fleet air defense are having enough missiles, and launching enough quickly (launch rate). An Arsenal ship (mid-1990's or so concept) might be the solution. It becomes extra capable now with CEC/datasharing; and in the 1990's the problem was affording the missiles, it would seem to me that not having enough becomes more expensive with ship losses.

[@riphopfer5816]

Thanks, fellas! This was an absolute treat for the eyeballs; whole thing had MeV on the edge of my seat. Bummer about the end, but a)it was to be expected, and b) the chance of either Russia OR China being able to expend this many aircraft on a single mission-only for them all to be destroyed-is infinitesimally small.

[@timbaskett6299]

The evolution of US naval aviation shows that not too much has changed (other than the deletion of the cannon). The F-14 had the AIM-54 against bombers. The F/A-18E had a cannon and a medium range missile (AIM-120s), then later a long range (AIM-260). Now we have the F-35C, no cannon and AIM-260s. For a surface vessel, they probably need something like a "proximity flak" missile. Similar to a chaff rocket, but guided and the warhead detonating with some heavy steel balls instead of light aluminum shards.

[@chrisvinicombe9947]

Hypersonic swarm is best swarm 😊

[@dexlab7539]

Yup, too bad US can’t figure them out

[@Nimmermaer]

@@dexlab7539 Hypersonic missiles are expensive, it would be highly optimistic for Russia to shoot 40 Kinzhals at a carrier group, much less 160 missiles. Not to mention Kinzhals are unlikely to achieve Mach 10 in real life.

[@matchesburn]

23:12 This used to be true with early AEGIS SPY radars. With SPY-6, there's enough channels to guide and illuminate the entire fleet's stock of missiles off of a single ship's radar.

[@dexlab7539]

WOWEEE - that was AWESOME! Thx Cap

[@kentgoldings]

It well known that Clancy was fan of conservative politics. In the wake of Vietnam, the US Military was in need of modernization. I think he wrote Red Storm with a intent of generating support for such modernization. I think Clancy is smiling to himself somewhere.

[@aztec0112]

Clancy abandoned a lot of his political views before he died

[@kentgoldings]

Perhaps, we all will do that.

[@5Andysalive]

I think he wanted to write a good (modern) war story. NATO and the US in the book are almost completely (unrealistically) unpolitical. And he took a very clear stand in support of female fighter pilots.

[@kentgoldings]

@@5Andysalive I think conservative meant something different in the 1980’s. Everything you wrote is true. But, that is not inconsistent with a secular philosophy that steered right of center that was typical of the day.

[@kenreckless2757]

Of course, the problem for the fleet is that the Backfires survived, and can come back the next day with another 100+ antiship missiles. While the fleet cannot reload their VLS cells until they reach port. So all this just buys the fleet ~24 hours.

[@Le_Petit_Lapin]

What a spectacle! AMAZING!

[@ryanw1433]

That’s why we do war games - to find out weak spots. Though I have a feeling in real life those bombers would have been detected and neutralized much further out.

[@Yung_pindakaas]

In real life Russia also doesnt even have 140 Kinzhals.

[@dfmrcv862]

"No, one missile got through!" CIWS: ARE YOU SURE ABOUT THAT?

[@sofnsad]

The Aussie camo is ok, it means youll win, and then get to take home The Ashes.......

[@MTBScotland]

the ballistic trajectory makes it simpler to defend against if you have enough computing power. It's a simple arc and radar will detect it earlier than say a sea skimming missile. They don't change direction so predicted position can be worked out with fairly basic physics.

[@freddiejohames8332]

Could we have a follow one from this can have a russian/ Chinese strike against a British and US carrier group?

[@Anarchy_420]

SM-6 Block 1B is much needed lol CH!

[@ryabow]

11:00 front of the pack, one missile gets two bombers. gotta love those two for one specials.

[@BlueGroove7]

Epic battle

[@Valorius]

It is not clear to me that F-35's could have actually caught the backfires after they fired their missiles and turned and ran at mach 2. Shame that couldn't have been left in the simulation. Fat Amy is not much of a sprinter.

[@BlackLiger788]

Can we get a 105c, where you take the leash off? Have the awacs actually detect the aircraft at proper ranges and see if the russians get through at that point?

[@grimreapers]

The Tu-22's would be intercepted 400 miles out. The only way to make it happen like in the book is to make the Tu-22's invisible until the 0634Z point.

[@BlackLiger788]

@@grimreapers A cool idea, possibly to throw at Kortana or similar, if she's still around, would be how to actually make this realisticly workable - it seems like her wheelhouse given previous videos by her design.

[@badwolftx2139]

In reality, with a range of well over 500km and travelling at 2-3 miles per second, the carrier group might not even know they were being attacked until the Kinzhal missles actually started to hit.

[@5Andysalive]

hard to imagine the US would have no intel that that many planes were prepared and got off. If they all existed of course. This isn't something set up in a few days. Tom Clancy left that very same topic (intel from spying) out of the book. It's ok because he wanted to write about the military aspect of such a war and surprises make drama (bit like GR wargames) . His NATO had (mostly) good battlefield inte butl not no political one. Especially if we assume that some sort of war is going on and they expect something. But if such an attack was expected and could be prepared for, what would US/Nato do in real life? Probably get more ships or gtfo towards the biggest SAM network reachable. And probably NOT miss the second group of bombers until the last minute.

[@Valorius]

LOL, what? What are you basing that on? They're not stealth, and they fly high. They also have an IR signature that can be seen from space/satellite.

[@trentvlak]

Satellite surveillance would give the Russians away from the moment they took off.

[@Valorius]

@@trentvlak Maybe. The fog of war is still a thing. Comms still go down, intel is still sat on, and mis-interpreted. Ideally, that would happen though.

[@Valorius]

@@5Andysalive He did not leave spying or intel out of the book at all. The US was made aware the moment the backfires took off by intel (specifically a submarine), and it was verified by HUMINT on Iceland. The carrier knew hours in advance they were coming. And russia knew where the carriers were to begin with by intel, namely their RORSATs. Have you read the book?

[@pahtar7189]

Could the Lightnings have caught the supersonic Backfires as they fled the scene?

[@Ovall_]

Only thing is, how the hell are the Russians gonna get 160 working kinzhals 😂.Half of them would miss anyway and modern radar would detect them way before the bombers fired

[@jameshisself9324]

Think of this as a proxy for the Chinese. Probably can get that many to fly, but US EAD is another matter. The US will optimize tactics, and we have no idea what that will be until it happens. And the real thing is never really simulatable as far as secret weapon performance from either side. Good fun to watch, and should probably be watched by the US congress, that will get the funding flowing.

[@grimreapers]

Have they even made 160??

[@dexlab7539]

Well at least one Kinzhal destroyed a Patriot battery already. Not a good sign for US

[@Yung_pindakaas]

@@dexlab7539 Patriot in Ukraine is in its 1980s variant has intercepted multiple Kinzhals. One Kinzhal lightly damaged a patriot launcher which was back in commission within two weeks. Idk how thats impressive by any stretch to you.

[@joshuaanderson4090]

​@@dexlab7539the patriots in Ukraine are like 40 years old aren't they? What's impressive to me is that it is intercepting the modern stuff and the damage the one unit sustained was minor and it was back in service pretty quick. Yes I'm impressed, at how freaking amazing 40 year old US tech is and how inept modern Russian tech is

[@jamesfletcher9032]

nice video cap :)

[@blueskiestrevor5200]

There is something wrong with the defensive missiles in the last scenario. It looks to me like most of them missed because they arced way over the incoming Kinzhal before diving down. That mode of attack works on slower cruise missiles but clearly takes too much time and makes the intercept angle worse on hypersonic missiles. I am sure that in reality the defensive missiles would be programed to go straight for their target in this scenario rather than arcing up first.

[@romain5967]

Loved this, looked like flak when the SM-3s were going in there were that many of them

[@ziggystardink9389]

Are the naval version of the Kinzhal faster than the ground attack version? As the ones RU has been lobbing into UA struggle to get to Mach 4 so they would be slightly faster than the Kingfish missiles from the first test. I get you have to use the " official RU numbers " but in reality those missiles are not as good as they are claimed to be. At least the ones being currently fired.

[@chesterhiggens]

I disagree, the Russians have been striking ukraine whenever and wherever they want with the tu95 firing cruise missiles, I see new videos daily.

[@ecbst6]

Now do the Dance of the Sugarplum Fairies. You know... Marines 😂

[@Notmeeeeeee69]

Cap did you just say we should be impressed by a fictional attack where the Russians have more Tu-22m than they do irl in their entire aerospace forces😂😂😂😂

[@ΜικρόΔημοτικο]

Yeah exactly

[@grimreapers]

Yeh you have to use your imagination a bit lol.

[@5Andysalive]

visually impressed. I think most people struggle to be impressed by the real russian military these days. King Charles missiles or not.

[@doohan12345]

Awesome video's, probably been asked before, but have any of your crew had a go at a real fighter at somewhere like Migflug? I bet you'd all own it 🙂

[@deanroberts2021]

Once the carrier groups Sam's have been used up is that a mission kill? , Would they have to retreat until rearmed?

[@mandoreforger6999]

Yep, of course if the enemy bomber force is destroyed in the process, the would have nothing to fear except submarines. They probably would have charged ahead relying on aircraft, CIWS, jamming, chaff and decoys to augment their defense. If the Backfires are largely destroyed, they can handle anything else they might encounter.

[@usem_and_losem937]

Wish we had info on the us laser systems, then he could add it in here

[@dongilleo9743]

Since I first read Red Storm Rising, I've wondered what professional U.S. Navy people thought of this attack in the book when it first came out. I imagine the initial reaction was that "it could never succeed", and then a slow wondering of "could it?" It certainly added to the narrative of the storyline, that the Soviets weren't completely incompetent, and the NATO forces wouldn't always have everything go their way.

[@Matt-yg8ub]

Actually, if there’s one thing you can guarantee in Clancy’s writing things will always go the Americans way no matter what. In the actual dance of the vampires, the Ticonderoga expended all of her defensive missiles but luckily….. the Russians ran out as well so it didn’t matter that the fleet was basically defenseless the Russians couldn’t capitalize on it. If a single one of those Soviet bombers had fired 30 seconds later, they probably would have sank the Nimitz

[@ek55nxs]

Pretty spectatcular videos Cap Im glad you did modern v2 as the americans seemed to have the latest tech and the russians still 80s tech - though i do appreciate they still use same airframes just seemed uneven In the previous video you said the bears turned back after the decoys launch - was this not too putt the missiles in front as primary targets as its seems to be the bears at front are taken first - might just be my watching . But you are also correct about the bears being classed as dispensible. In the book a lot more emphasis is put on conserving airframes as the allies are running pretty low at this point so the f14s were rained in more in the book As for crusaders I believe the max load out on these was 2 sidewinder per fuselage hard point and 1 matra for each wing hardpoint (2) or 4 matras 2 underwing & 2 fuselage With an aircraft range of about as far as you could throw one

[@wonlop469]

This may be why the Navy is testing Patriot for vertical launch on ships. Proven Khinzal intercept.

[@alanconway94]

Well, however it might turn out; this is way better than Napoleon having a modern MBT at Waterloo. 😂

[@clinthein4496]

Rereading the book now. Thanks for the great videos.

[@solomongray6352]

I realize they are the ones launching the decoy attack but if they were in serious chance of being intercepted would they turn and run, abort the mission? Losing 80 bombers is a big price.

[@paladamashkin8981]

In this particular case I think the f-35 might actually be a downgrade. The Rafael is much faster much better acceleration and carries the meteor missile which as we know is just as good if not better than the American

[@92HazelMocha]

Especially because JTAM isn't even in service yet, let alone integrated into any F35 variant. French Rafale's would be superior in this scenario.

[@MostlyPennyCat]

Can the illumination radars not time slice between targets though? I thought they could, especially with the new AESA radars that can generate virtual illumination channels. They hop between targets, sending mid course guidance to each missile. As for which date active and semi active: RIM-67 Standard ER (SM-1ER/SM-2ER): INS/Semi-Active Radar Homing (SARH) RIM-161(SM-3): GPS, INS, SARH/Passive IR/Mid course guidance RIM-174 Standard ERAM(SM-6): INS/ARH/SARH

[@nomorerainbows]

I am quite convinced that when we see the "Fleet" breaking down under massive missile swarm attacks, that what we see breaking is actually DCS. Also there is some extremely bizarre missile behavior, on the after action replay, you can see SM-6 missiles turning 180 degrees after missing and trying to tail chase the Kinzhals. I am pretty sure those missiles could not possibly execute such a manuever, and would just plow into the sea or, more likely, self destruct.

[@dexlab7539]

On the other hand, the Kinzhal missiles maneuver too. So, SM-6 may not track in real life either

[@nomorerainbows]

@@dexlab7539 At it's operational speed of mach 3.35, an SR-71 took an area the size of montana to make a 90 degree turn. At mach 10, I suspect the Kinzhal would require an area the size of the North Atlantic. There is no way that a Kinzhal is outmanuevering any modern high performance area air defense SAM.

[@grimreapers]

There seems to be a tipping point at which game just breaks down.

[@nomorerainbows]

@@grimreapers Grim Reapers seem to have found it. Well done Cap. :) It would be interesting (and time consuming, I know) to run that kinzhal repeatedly, starting with 10 planes (40x missiles)- or whatever number you are confident DCS can handle, and then increasing in 5 plane increments (+20 missiles) with each re-run, to see at what point DCS just breaks down (Not a few leakers, but rather mass failure like we saw in this scenario). Then run that failure point scenario in single player, to see if you still get the cascade failure. That would take a lot of time, but it would save you the time in the future of bothering to make gigantic scenarios where we already know in advance that DCS is just going to fall flat.

[@trentvlak]

That was great. SM3 a frickin rock star. ESSMs great too.

[@juanisosa22]

The Tu-22M3 carrying 4 of those missiles out to the middle of the Atlantic seems like a bit if a long shot. I would think that 1 or 2 is a more realistic payload when they can only carry two Kh-22.

[@jasonosmond6896]

The Russians managing to scrape together 40 working Tu-22M3s and 160 Kinzhals is a long shot.

[@Valorius]

They had tanker support, as spelled out clearly in the book.

[@jasonosmond6896]

@@Valorius In the book, they used Badgers as tankers. Presently Russia has about 20 Il-78 tankers, and probably less than that operational. The Tu-22M3 has had its refueling probes removed. Even if the Backfires had their refueling equipment reinstalled and every Il-78 was operational, it's pretty doubtful Russia would be able to support 40 fully loaded Backfires at that range with only 20 tankers.

[@Valorius]

@@jasonosmond6896 They could've done it in 1985, today, not so much. But Cap was just sticking to the plot.

[@juanisosa22]

They used tankers in the book and barely made it with a payload of 2 Kh-22. No way they make it with four of these and so many bombers. Tanker capacity would never have held up. Too many refueling sessions.

[@TheR4360]

Hi Cap great vid...they use a lot of sulpher in the Tu-22 because sulpher is a lubricant and burns cobalt blue

[@hughgreentree]

I will forward this to Tom Clancy's co-author, Larry Bond

[@JohnL2112]

I don’t suppose you can take the warhead from the mig-21’s nuclear bomb and put it in the SM-3 or something. Kinda brings us back to the AIR-2 Genie/AIM-26 days. I know there aren’t graphics for the explosions so it won’t be high fidelity video wise, It’d kinda show a carrier group could make fast work of the missiles.

[@grimreapers]

Agreed would be cool.

[@stevenreddy6842]

I think the interceptors diving down on their targets is making them miss more than they should. They don’t behave like this in reality from what I understand, they go straight to the intercept point unless the target is at the edge of their range, in which case they need to loft higher for thinner air, but considering the SM-3 can go over 1000+ km, that wasn’t the edge of their range. Also, SM-3 uses IR terminal guidance, SM-6 uses active radar terminal guidance. SM-2 uses the ship’s radar for terminal guidance, except SM-2MR block IIIB, which can use IR terminal guidance (all of that is publicly available information). So if you’re using the most current versions of the missiles, none of them rely solely on the ship to guide them to the target in terminal phase.

[@tbe0116]

It’s pretty much at the point where big ships are like tanks. Useful in some situations, but just big targets for missiles in others. The days of big carrier groups are numbered.

[@mfreed40k]

What isn't modeled that completely changes this is countermeasures on ships. They have really powerful jammers, decoys, all that fun stuff that DCS can't model.

[@gregbrown3764]

@@mfreed40k Not too mention other goodies being developed, both on the active and passive fronts.

[@mfreed40k]

@@gregbrown3764 pew pew zap!!

[@Valorius]

@@mfreed40k DCS could, they just don't. I mean there are chaff and flares on fighters.

[@mfreed40k]

@Valorius i agree. But I recognize ED had to pick a lane and so puts limitations on other aspects. SO! A redesign is necessary from the ground up as an all-purpose combat sim. It is built on very old architecture that JUST got multi-core functionality.

[@kenhelmers2603]

Impressive! and scary. Thanks for the nightmares Cap

[@jpracing893]

Woooo I requested this on the last video!

[@neil168]

I wonder if an F-22 with AIM 260 could intercept those Backfires in time? I guess it would be like simulating the future NGAD.

[@riskinhos]

in time? no.

[@neil168]

@@riskinhos yeah, the F-35's were pretty close. I guess I'd like to see at what range different interceptors could get there in time.

[@Valorius]

F-22 is much faster than F-35. Given that the F-35s had missiles just 30 miles from Impact when the Backfires launched, im thinking yes. And honestly, it's entirely possible that F-14D's with JATMs couldve intercepted a lot of them in time too.

[@neil168]

@@Valorius exactly. They don't need to kill all the bombers even. Just enough to give the fleet a chance.

[@Valorius]

@@neil168 spoiling shots to break up an attack are definitely a thing IRL.

[@mrhedgebull1658]

Just curious, the Badgers had 2 Kelts each but only fired 1 each, why?

[@grimreapers]

Either bugged or I'm doing something wrong.

[@Stinger522]

Finally, a battle where the F-35s are carrying a 3 by three loadout of fox thress. When the Badgers went down in the first round, I said Macross Missile Massacre. Cue Japanese background music. The mass missile launches from the bombers in both rounds were wonderful displays of beautiful violence. That hypersonic missile hit on the carrier was brutal. Would a hit at Mach eight rip the ship apart IRL?

[@ryanerickson8138]

I have to say I would’ve preferred seeing Rafale, we don’t get to see French gear too often. Otherwise great video once again.

[@chrisstopher2277]

"it's really hotting up now" that's definitely a capism.

[@notagooglesimp8722]

So if this became a legitimate problem. Bring back battleships. Just bigger than carriers, use small disposable escort carriers full of drones or missle pods or vtols. And then have a massive armored compartmentalized AA platform in the sea to soak up the first hit on the missle wave.

[@mrlodwick]

Brill - Thank you.

[@maxlin3442]

The lightenings have superior ECM and ECCM than the bombers

[@angerissues69626]

20:59 just on uncle Sam's credit card. He gets points

[@RichWiltshir]

Fun fun fun. How about a 1000 bomber raid against the fleet that attacked Pearl Harbour, all contemporary stuff, of course?

[@nomorerainbows]

Why? They took out the pearl harbor fleet with a single B21.

[@RichWiltshir]

@@nomorerainbows Fun

[@xenaguy01]

6:00 After firing their decoys, the Badgers turned tail and headed back to Iceland. There was no reason for them to continue toward the carrier group. Their mission was only to launch the decoys, each of which broadcast the radar image of a Badger. That's how the female F-15 ferry pilot saw and reported to the fleet, Badgers headed north, and shot down (I think) two of them. 16:50 Just like the Badgers, as soon as the Backfires fired their missile load, they turned tail and ran for safety. There's absolutely no need for them to continue toward the fleet once they've launched. So cleaning them off the screen is realistic. They would've high-tailed it out of there with afterburners blazing.

[@xenaguy01]

@@duanemckinley9353 No, cause they arial refuled over Iceland. Both Badgers and Backfires have plenty of fuel for that round trip. Remember, the carrier fleet was headed to Iceland carrying an invasion force, so it wasn't that far.

[@xenaguy01]

@@duanemckinley9353 How far is South of Iceland was the CTF when the attack was sprung?

[@xenaguy01]

@@duanemckinley9353 So they don't use burner. They launch, turn and leave. The fighters will be busy with the missiles.

[@xenaguy01]

@@duanemckinley9353 _"but why would they?"_ Because they would be better used by shooting down the missiles.

[@xenaguy01]

​@@duanemckinley9353 I'm certain the 4,000-5,000 sailors on the sunk carrier will be pleased to know the fleet can defend itself.

[@stephen_1987]

Why do I have doubts about the whole context of the chapter being absorbed? The Badgers dropped and turned around except for a small number of Jamming aircraft. From memory detection of incoming was restricted due to Jamming and due to EMCON.

[@renecyberspaced1286]

Nice cliffhanger (:

[@tdprange]

Nice video. On critique is that the russian air force could probably never generate that big of a bomber formation, and if it could would likely not go undetected long enough get a full Salvo off.

[@5Andysalive]

Really mean that the Russians fire King Charles Missiles! Am i the only one always mishearing this?!