Could A Coordinated US Strike Beat A Modern Russian IADS SAM Network? (WarGames 35) | DCS

[@Kevin-hb7yq]

Whats the radar cross-section of a Mossy?

[@grimreapers]

We tried Mossie in this one: kzbin.info/www/bejne/anXYlIBmdqiZZsk

[@palanthis]

The real modern day problem is that RADAR systems can work out that a bird flying at mach 1.5 is probably not a bird.

[@thelmaviaduct]

@@palanthis I used to say this in my guided weapon days, the engineers would look on perplexed.

[@DirkDeadeye_]

What about the radar cross-section of a swallow?

[@adamdejesus4017]

@@DirkDeadeye_ African or European swallow?

[@ClericChris]

The radar techs thought that no humans would aimlessly meander around in the middle of an air fight like the strike team did. It's was through confusion that they were able to get through. The get lost and wonder around like a bafoon strategy worked flawlessly.

[@rogerb3654]

The WWII "Battle of Midway" comes to mind. Navy squadrons "wandering" all over the place trying to find the Japanese carriers. The US Torpedo Squadrons arrived 1st. Bringing the Japanese Air Cap down on the 'deck' to deal with the torpedo planes (Still debated to this day....if the Zeros had remained up high, they would have been overwhelmed by the US dive-bombers arriving almost at the same time...there just wasn't enough Zeros in the air) By sheer "dumb luck" the dive-bombers arrived within a few minutes. Sinking 3 of the 4 Japanese carriers.

[@chrisinstasis7986]

GR is what you would get if you remade the Police Academy films, but in the air force.

[@herptek]

You have to have the ability to confuse the guy at the radar screen into thinking this must be just another glitch.

[@heylegomylego6776]

Kortana and Simba had some top notch flying on the exfill

[@terpdx]

Always considered them the top aces of the GR crew. They make it all look so easy.

[@briglad5274]

B-2's don't fly at 20,000 feet except to tank. They fly well above 40K so they do not contrail. Also I think that the actual RCS of a B-2 is waaaayyyy less than what is "published"

[@singular9]

Well it depends who you listen to because some publish 0.1 some 0.0001 which both are borderline absurd because those are "best case scenario at a particular angle". No one ever quotes the true AVERAGE rcs which from the rear it would probably be 3-5m. This is why RCS data modeling in a game is BS because you would need a super computer to accurately model something like that in real time.

[@blowmeyotbweknowugoodfklit2549]

A hummingbird I do believe.

[@semajniffirg230]

b2's fly higher, more like 50k feet. jdam has a longgggg glide path from that altitude.

[@alexandermoorehead3200]

@@singular9 Rear aspect stealth is a problem for getting out, not getting in. The front aspect stealth is much stronger. That said we did see how the missiles fired from the B-52's did, the IADS countermeasures held up well. But flying at 50k or at ground level, they absolutely could penetrate deep enough to fire. It's the in between heights that's the problem.

[@gooner72]

You have to remember that the B-2 Is an old design, she actually dates back to 1989 when she first flew so she was actually designed and built in the mid 80's...... that's old in aviation terms. It'll be interesting to see how the B-21 stacks up against her older sister and the modern radar systems.

[@cochacopen]

I wonder, if DCS had a proper working mod for the EA-18G Growler, would you have had one of those escorting the strike package as well. For those who don't know the Growler is essentially an F-18 airframe built around ECM work rather then air superiority or bombing. It replaced the EA-6B Prowler which had done the job previously. This was very entertaining to watch good jobs should be handed out all around. Thank you Kortana for the IADS setup and the F-16 supplemental footage. Thank you Simba for the tour of the countryside.

[@override367]

Yep, EA-18g growlers throwing up an electrical storm combined with F-18s hurling masses of decoys while F-35s with their radars off sneak up

[@stevanwofse1378]

We’ll

[@ussiowa8393]

I'm glad you're getting good content out of my scenario suggestion! It's been really interesting to watch you guys go up against Cortanas (extremely well set up) IADS net, it's almost become the Russian version of the carrier group. I have another question for you guys though: While I was researching the RCS of the B-2, and I found estimates varied wildly from 0.1 m^2 (Air Force Magazine) on the high end all the way down to .0001m (Global Security and the US Navy). How much of a survivability difference would there be if you used the high vs the low estimates? P.S. Honored to be one of your valued viewers!

[@MaxIsStrange1]

I was asking myself a similar question. And I might be wrong, but logically speaking it would seem that because F-22s need to be more maneuverable, it wouldn’t be possible for them to sacrifice as much in terms of aerodynamics as the B-2 in order to reduce the RCS and that would mean that in reality the lower estimates might be correct and B-2s might actually have a similar RCS to F-22s or maybe smaller.

[@grimreapers]

Thanks Iowa, wonderful suggestion and info.

[@singular9]

The difference between high and low estimates varies based on how many radars are tracking it. If it is a single sam, like a moble s400 system with a single radar aray, big difference. A sam site like the one in this video? No difference, it would be all about the coordination of several radar sources to confirm or deny the plane is in the air, which they would confirm. At that point its more of a jury scenario, how many vote yes and how many vote no, and knowing military equipment, it would most likely vote yes and fire to be sure.

[@deanboy2416]

Another thing to consider is that RCS can vary with aspect, and most importantly, radar frequency. And at this point you need to be an ELINT/EW expert to make sense of all the variables and how they affect each other, which I am not. All I know is that RCS is a lot more complex than just a single number.

[@bluemarlin8138]

@@MaxIsStrange1 Supposedly the B-2 is much less susceptible to detection by the low-wavelength radars that the Russians and Chinese are attempting to use to detect (but not track) stealth aircraft. If I'm not mistaken, it has to do with the fact that the radio waves are reflected more easily by surfaces that are shorter than their own wavelength. The F-22, F-35, and F-117 are/were smaller aircraft and have many more of these small surfaces. However, the B-2 is huge, and most of its surfaces are far longer than any of the wavelengths being used, or which could be used in any practically-sized radar, and therefore cannot be detected in this way. It can still be detected at very close range by conventional radars, but it effectively evades the enemy's so-called countermeasure to stealth.

[@AdamBoothUK]

Feels like C&C Yuri’s Revenge where you just spam the gattling cannons with hundreds of missiles or planes until they can’t cope. Loved the low level flying, very impressive.

[@CombatIneffective]

I think another way this could have worked...if your server could handle it, is if the strike package was timed to go in at the same time as a Naval VLS Cruise Missile strike on the IADS. The Cruise missiles would work like the decoys. But the difference would be if they were aimed for the radar sites and any sneak through, they could provide some SEAD along with draining off the missiles. If they don't, well they still do the same effect as the decoys did in this. The other possibility to use would be a SEAD package and the decoys going in with a B-1 and B-2 raid, especially if the SEAD goes feet dry and Magnums before the B-2s get in missile range. The B-1s would naturally just go straight in with their speed and low flying ability. I wouldn't try any of those methods using the B-52. I don't think DCS AI can model the JASSM firings correctly. They just ripple fire them in such a small area that the SAMs have an easy time picking them off. If they were more spread out, the variety of angles might make it way more difficult for the IADS to take them down. Otherwise, that was a great video and 2 of the main strike package got out after hitting the primary targets. I have no idea how much damage that would have done, but to reload all of those missiles and buy new radars for some of those sites? The money trade off would be incredibly expensive for the IAD side.

[@qhack]

I question DCS's accuracy of the SAM's ability to be able to see and engage something with the radar signature of a chicken.

[@shawngremm3226]

I agree. I don’t think we would throw bombers against a certain death. If we was at this point other means would be in play

[@davidmacy411]

Something else to consider is that the most likely first wave would be hitting radar stations with Tomahawks, not aircraft. After that is done, they may be left with only their lowest quality radar, which would probably be even less likely to detect stealth, making the S300/400 even less effective.

[@fgialcgorge7392]

@@davidmacy411 Absolutely. A relentless Tomahawk barrage is kind of SOP before and while sending in aircraft.

[@deanboy2416]

@Christian Perry do you have a link to a credible source in regards to russian sams doing badly in the ukraine?

[@deanboy2416]

The F-117 over Serbia also questioned their ability to target stealth aircraft... look how well that turned out xD

[@bruce4623]

Wow, that was so intense just watching 😵‍💫.. That was awesome Kortana!

[@KortanaDCS]

😊

[@stoptellingmewhattowrite]

Do SA-10/20 have SA-15 or SA-17 in their group? From some of the layouts I have seen the long-range SA10/20/21 have multi-layer shorter range SA15/17/22 and etc. around and close to their location, not just randomly positioned as what appears to be the case as in this setup. Flying low looks like the best strategy but of course due to MANPADs and other close-in air defense machinery it can be a risky endeavor, especially if their location is unknown.

[@grimreapers]

All large sites had SA-15. Main target city has 2 x SA-17 sites and and some SA-15 sites. On reflection, MANPADs would have been a great addition yes.

[@alinmeleandra3175]

@@grimreapers I don't think MANPAD are worth your time in this scenario... since you were flying fast and MANPADs are generally designed to take out slow fixed wing or helicopters...

[@alexandermoorehead3200]

@@alinmeleandra3175 MANPADs are more effective for slow fixed wing/helicopters specifically because they fly at lower altitude, it's not about the speed. The missiles used for Stingers and the like have short ranges that can be defeated by altitude because they need to be small enough to carry, but the missile still flies way too fast to outrun. If you know the jet is coming and it's flying low it's still vulnerable.

[@alinmeleandra3175]

@@alexandermoorehead3200 completely agree, cannot argue with that... what I was trying to say is that in realist scenarios you might not have a guy with a stinger in waiting for a fast flying F-35/F-16... Yes, you could by accident go over him but that's more to down to luck... Even, assuming that the jets are detected by radar and the message is radioed to Stinger operators to be ready, it does not mean that they be able to get into a good position to launch against a fast moving jet... Just imagine that a jet flying at 700Kmh will do 2Km every 10 seconds and in 40 seconds will be out of the range of the Stinger missiles... So a Stinger operator needs to be on point or he will not have a chance to fire his missile... Ah-64 has only about 365Kmh so a Stinger operator has double the time to get in position... Also, while dangerous an F-35 could go faster than 700kms and at Mach 1 the time to launch a missile drops to about 25seconds... Not to mention that you need to be in the open with perfect line of sight to the jet for this amount of time... This is why I said that MANPAD should not be considered...

[@alinmeleandra3175]

I wonder what would have been the cost of the entire operation... and also the cost of the SAM sites vs the cost of the jets... So, we have 6 x S-300 @ $120million per unit and 6 x S-400 @ $300million per unit. The BUKs are also in the $100Million range while the TORs are (from what I could gather) at around $20 million per system. These prices are per system and not per missile launched....so the defenders spent around 3 Billion US dollars. The attackers used: 2 x F35 (@ $100 million per unit) and 8 x F-16 @ $70 million per unit and 4 x F-18 @ $70 million per unit and 12 x F-14's (which I will change to F-15 since there is not accurate way to estimate the cost of the F-14 since they are no longer produced -- @ $100 million per unit). All this amounts to about 2.2 Billion dollars. This implies that a successful attack might be more cost effective than a static defense.... I did not factor in the missiles used, the radar/control units destroyed nor the aircraft that were shot down... Note. I think if would be interesting to see what happens if a full SEAD is "the mission" and IAD cost deployment cost is half of the cost of SEAD force... (i.e. only 2 x S-400 and 2 x S300 are deployed) which could make it more realistic from cost point of view...

[@sys3248]

1 units have 2 battery with one battery at least 8 launchers, 3 to 6 radars and numbers of support vehicles/reload vehicles.

[@solarwizzo8667]

Hey Grim Reapers! Awesome SIM Games! Love it! I am a retired TORNADO WSO. 2200 hours backseat TORNADO experience talking here. 1500 hours GAF ECR plus 700 IDS and multiple Kosovo Campaign HARM shots included. GAF FWIC graduate and 3 years FWIC instructor experience at Holloman AFB, NM. Been to many FLAG exercises and managed the GAF FWIC ME (Mission Employment) exercises at Nellis and Mountain Home for many years. Meaning: I wrote the scenarios, deployed the red GBAD and developed the objectives for the Blue Mission Commanders (FWIC students ) during their final phase of their 6 months course. Having said that, would there be a way to play this scenario with just MRCA TORNADO? 2 RAF GR-4 bomber (Marham) Squadrons with JP233, 2 GAF IDS (Büchel) squadrons with MW-1, 2 RAF (Brüggen) GR-4 squadrons with ALARM maxed out and 2 GAF ECR (Lechfeld) squadrons with HARM maxed out (4 per jet). One squadron 12 jets. All at night, bad weather / rainy / cloudy / foggy... I mean just british, HA. Bombers low TFR Autopilot all the way, 20 seconds spacing over targets, multiple axis, SEAD players low altitude and high speed up timed/ranged pull-up at max HARM or ALARM range with a well timed ARM impact window on major GBAD Threats in relation to strikers VUL time. Doable? I am aware that this is old time but would love to see, how it would come out. I always told my students: A Grumble is not a SAM - just a SCAM - as long you stay low! Would love some feedback from anyone!

[@hotdogdcs2761]

You may know Tim Davies then, He runs a group in DCS called Fast Jet Performance. There is a KZbin channel too. Many of the guys in that group would be really interested in recreating this!

[@scotthulsey8763]

Decoys are the key to defeating Sam sites . Get them to use up their missles and then saturate the target .

[@bigmatthews666]

😿

[@UptownDegree]

SAM sites can use decoys as well...

[@buzzshocker1805]

Modern SAM sites are more then enough capable to differentiate between decoys and real targets therefore the US Military doesn't use them anymore.

[@eustace2c2]

@@buzzshocker1805 Well I'm no expert but isn't the radar jamming, and electronic countermeasures capabilities on the F35, B2, and F22 not to mention support aircraft supposed to be as important if not more important than the RAM materials or geometry used by those planes. DCS I'm assuming can only model so much. Also don't they have cruise missiles now that follow terrain for cover and not just fly straight in from launch? There were reports as I mentioned in another post, of stealth/smart cruise missiles that were supposedly used in Syria against Russian air defenses with great success.

[@buzzshocker1805]

@@eustace2c2 about the Jamming thing It works for a Distance, After a certain distance it has no Effect Called the "Burn through" stage. And about the Cruise missile, Yes they are very good but, Low flying cruise missiles have to travel slow because of increased air Friction. And then it becomes an awesome Target for Short Range air defence (which the russian have invested heavily on) Not to mention cruise missiles are relatively expensive then the missile used to shoot them down. Modern SAM sites are very hard to penetrate, In My opinion Only Hypersonic missiles can have an Impact on them.

[@RohanGillett]

The plan was just like the one used by the Soviets when their bombers attacked a US battlegroup in the Tom Clancy book Red Storm Rising. It worked perfectly. Brilliant video!

[@MG_Steve]

Brilliant book too - love that one!

[@FlyingWithSpurts]

that low level with the F-35s was some mesmerizing flying.

[@robertgelley6454]

Impressive. Excellent scenarios, execution and debrief. Good job

[@jeraldgunderson4349]

The issue I have with this, is that we don't actually know the specifications of everything that is in this video. B-2s and the new B-21s are still an unknown variable as far as what they have in terms of stealth because of new coatings and other factors. Still appreciate the video, it was a lot of fun!

[@Rover200Power]

The RCS of the B-2 is definitely available on wiki, I'm sure the USAF put it there themselves 🙄

[@jeraldgunderson4349]

@@Rover200Power I take anything put on Wikipedia for aircraft that have properties about them still classified with a grain of salt. The rcs on Wikipedia could be right, but I'd be curious to know when that data was taken. If it's data from 10, 15, or 20 years ago, it likely is inaccurate because of advances in radar absorbing materials or paints.

[@blademaster2390]

Well…B-2s _were_ spotted by civilian ATC radar once, but the only reason they knew they were picking up B-2s was because birds dont fly at supersonic speeds.

[@mavrikmavrik3032]

A really great vid! I loved to see the problem solving as it is a lot more realistic of how it might be done. Makes for an interesting watch.

[@obsesivegamer]

Keep these wargames coming love these little scenarios

[@norcatch]

This is like a repeat of the Red Storm Rising attack on Keflavik.

[@lebaoliu9038]

At least this video proved some basic facts in modern air combat: First, all the unstealthy targets will be vulnerable in front of advanced SAM networks, which include long, medium, and short-range missiles that are coordinated effectively under a functional command system. Second, is the importance of long-range precision strike weapons that can penetrate the current defense system which could be hypersonic missiles or ballistic missiles. Third, the strengthing of ¨softer¨ yet more unnoticed capabilities like cyber and electromagnetic warfare couldn't be more important those days.

[@schlitzy-1031]

Very entertaining!! Thanks to all of you involved.

[@Brian1.]

Awesome awesome. This is really a blast to watch. Great job.

[@martinpalmer6203]

INTEGRATRED also includes CAP and AWACS + Sensor drones etc... show how tough the whole system is

[@Xxfireman024xX]

The AGM-86 is the ALCM (Air Launched Cruise Missile), not the JASSM which is the AGM-158

[@grimreapers]

thxx

[@michaelkelly7328]

The AGM-86B is the ALCM which is the nuclear cruise missile, the AGM-86C/D are the CALCM which are the conventional cruise missile.

[@larrysouthern5098]

from 30:00 on I felt all tingly!!!!!! WHAT A RUSH!!!! thanks:)........

[@theoryaction]

Most exciting and fascinating video you've made. Kortana is impressive.

[@billisaacs702]

It appears as though at least Kortana read the chapter "Dance of the Vampires" from "Red Storm Rising". ;)

[@KortanaDCS]

Might have done 😉. Been a while since I read any Clancy, but Red Storm Rising is one of my favorites

[@oscarzheng9902]

The best way would be to use Wild Wesselers with AGM 88s, take out as much SAMS as possible then start the bombing. Realistically, America would use F35s equipped with AGM 158s and smart bombs alongside B2s. To make it as chaotic as possible for the Russians, America would throw in non-stealth aircraft, and they would attack from all 360° Maybe US ships can throw in some Tomahawks as well

[@Eo_Tunun]

That's what I thought: Decoys to keep the SAMs busy, then Tomahawks would knock out SAM sites scuccessively, then the fighters get freedom to move and decoys could launch way deeper in enemy territory. Like that you'd roll up the situation.

[@damonevansii8431]

I agree, our country is great at making up a system of weapons systems, so basically every aircraft plays a new role in a overall attack strategy, just look how effective wild weasels were in Vietnam and the golf wars, our military is so complex on so many levels, that we could a plethora of different attack strategies to attack a target. Also I believe that if a war were to break out we would bring battleships back as well, so we would literally be attacking from everywhere at one time, literally overwhelming the enemy with firepower, it’s what we’ve always done. Firepower wins wars

[@oscarzheng9902]

@@damonevansii8431maybe modified ones, Battleships are basically huge artillery guns on water but won't do good in modern naval warfare. Make it more modern like add missiles with a powerful radar on it and it's lethal

[@damonevansii8431]

@@oscarzheng9902 most modern missiles aren’t designed to penetrate the heavy armor of the battleships, a nuke couldn’t even sink the USS Nevada look it up

[@gdrriley420]

@@oscarzheng9902 you don't need a battleship for a missile platform. hell all the missiles make it way more of a risk. if you wanted a modern coastal shelling platform you'd bring back a BB or BC modern anti ship missiles would really struggle if we went back to 10-15in of steel armor, they just aren't designed to deal with it. you'd likely go 12-16in with sabo rounds. modern fire computers would have an easy time making them extremely actuate given how well the mk8 range keeper did. the modern mk 160 gave us some of the most actuate shooting for a gun that size. and that was with 40-50 year old ammo stocks. the 12/50 or 15/50 both gave us about 20nm or 35-38km, you make that a 60-70 caliber and with modern metal blends allowing even more pressure you could likely bring that upto 25-30nm This was the Alaska class had we made the 6 planned and decided to modernize them. 6 would give us 2-3 active at a time.

[@theymusthatetesla3186]

....That ws some IMPRESSIVE low-flying, guys!

[@alansnyder4104]

Nice one. Wonder if you could have luanched a bunch of cruice missiles from right behind the Tomcats with the coordinates of the missle/radar sites in them, to take out some of the sites just before you get to them on the way in.

[@grimreapers]

agree

[@camh2227]

This video randomly starts playing. Me to myself 2 mins into the video - “I’m too high for this right now” 😂😂

[@21Walls]

28:28 JESUS Simba took a few hits from the ol' S-1 Grassblades there

[@chadshangraw8121]

Super impressive flying ... I think I might have to give this game a try !!!!

[@rileyfitzsimons8875]

Now maybe a non realistic Russian strike on the IADS site?? 👀

[@Lukkas2000ify]

loved the low flight in formation until target, very entertaning.

[@obiwankenobi28]

Always fun to watch, well played guys!

[@jammylaw]

This scenario was one of the best yet!

[@arpioisme]

I love cortana's brain

[@MrGig16]

I would love to pick Kortana’s brain. Just to share knowledge and gain some more knowledge. Being in service and what I know and gaining more is great.

[@damonevansii8431]

I agree, our country is great at making up a system of weapons systems, so basically every aircraft plays a new role in a overall attack strategy, just look how effective wild weasels were in Vietnam and the golf wars, our military is so complex on so many levels, that we could a plethora of different attack strategies to attack a target. Also I believe that if a war were to break out we would bring battleships back as well, so we would literally be attacking from everywhere at one time, literally overwhelming the enemy with firepower, it’s what we’ve always done. Firepower wins wars for America

[@Bulletoc]

Ah the golf wars... I remember trying to taxi down the fairway, avoiding bunkers, only to fall short of the green

[@strambino1]

I wonder how effective a tomahawk barrage from the USN Ticonderoga vessels would be at the start of the attack?

[@pahtar7189]

Tomahawks are far too easy to shoot down. It would be ineffective. The decoys do the same thing, but cost a whole lot less than $1 million + cruise missiles.

[@LaikaTheG]

@@pahtar7189 they are built to fly so low and slow that most anti missile weapons don’t bother and they tend to notch the radars. But who knows how could they are irl? They worked with Sa2s but you never know what’s gonna happen until it happens Also don’t forget about EW

[@strambino1]

Yes the tald is very effective to soak up missiles for a cheaper price I agree. But some of the tomohawks might help to neutralize some of the Sam sites or radars. It’s just a fun hypothetical to consider because we haven’t seen it on the channel yet.

[@alansnyder4104]

I was thinking the exact same thing, but would think the Tomcat would come in low while the drones were high. You would think a satellite pass over the site would provide all of the GPS coordinates for all components of the site, so the start by taking out the outer ring and then work inwards. Then if the aircraft could follow the cruise missiles in and clean-up anything them might have survived. It would make the exfill easier. I want to see a version 2 of this. Thought this was great.

[@grimreapers]

CAn try but I imagine same effectiveness as the B-52 strike.

[@JoeSmith-xp5ll]

Oh hey, just as I go to look at the channel. Neat! This oughta be good.

[@paulh5027]

Paul H 1 second ago Try one more time, only this time use Nukes to take down IADS. Low level toss attacks on each SAM site or any other atomic weapon in the game. Then one on main target. See how small of a force is needed.

[@Dylan-oq8zf]

Really miss the old days of weeks long campaigns, found those so interesting to watch. Sad they're not really a thing anymore.

[@keep22]

Herr Cap has been bought by zee Je... has gone commercial und somewhat woke.

[@grimreapers]

So do I. I really miss the properly dynamic campaigns where you had to properly plan a mission to help the war. I think you need a really special kind of person behind one of those campaigns.

[@grimreapers]

Sadly this is all that seems to be rewarded in this business.

[@Jaspy524]

@@grimreapers Maybe you could find a middle ground? Like, save some of the interesting concepts people ask about and plan a massively hypothetical, highly ridiculous ace combat style campaign. Have the first couple vids of the campaign be some interesting questions, and then the rest can be dealing with the implications of the questions (i.e. finishing the campaign within the circumstances you establish in the first few vids). Just an idea, I’ve been loving the videos, cheers!

[@theeroyaltgaming]

That was textbook planning! Little hiccup but still completed the mission.

[@Pablo668]

When they were flying over the hills Magnums were being fired off, but Cap didn't fire one off, he's still working on Magnum.

[@BrandoDrum]

Not sure if this is modeled but the B1 does have a relatively low RCS given it's size and speed. But the B2 would certainly fly low for a job like this in a similar fashion and get closer while cobducting electronic warfare with decoys.

[@andyf4292]

surely those big wings at low level would be....uncomfortable?

[@grimreapers]

Yes good point, B1 is certainly not stealth but def small RCS from DCS testing.

[@BrandoDrum]

@@andyf4292 no actually. The reason the B2 has the extra zigzag in the back instead of looking more like the B21 is that it was designed for being able to do low level high speed interdiction. Those are extra control surfaces. Much of what the world knows about the B-2 is classified. It's top speed it's actual full range, it's manuverability. But I'd bet that the B2 would actually be used at low level in a situation like this and probably succeed with the use of decoys and jammers. It's got full EW capabilities onboard which aren't modeld here at all

[@xander395]

@@BrandoDrum "high speed" for a B-2 vs "high speed" for a B-1 are two very different things. I do agree that flying B-2s into that hornets nest at 20K is just asking to die...

[@brutester]

A great advantage of simulators is to test those never to be seen in real world scenarios. Around 10B$ in SAM sites and 1B$ of attack aircraft inventory for dropping two bombs? Neither side will invest that money ;) Still superb planning and execution given the situation.

[@89schofe]

Depends who has the biggest ego not the biggest cheque book

[@barrylinkiewich9688]

You say that no one will invest that type of money but that would depend on what needed to have those two bombs dropped on it. Think of Operation Opera, I believe that if there were more defenses Israel would have sent more aircraft, as many as needed to complete the plan.

[@kenhelmers2603]

That was great! DO it again following the waypoints :)

[@grimreapers]

Yes please Simba!

[@stuartholden2772]

Best Video, could ya make another video of this!!! So brilliant How cool you all kissing the ground, at high speed towards the targets with SAM'S Firing at your squad!!! ❤ 💙

[@choctaw2sticks193]

good one . . . guys and gals earned a drink for that mission

[@craigmichaelcurtice3013]

But I LOVE your videos but DAM the games radar cross section parameters are so off I have personal knowledge of the fact that the stealth bombers would not be detected that quick it'd be more like 10 or 15 miles even with the most powerful radar on the planet. You have to remember the coatings have updated a lot and they haven't been advertised for a reason

[@Omar-df3uk]

I'm pretty certain that the Airforce is a big part of an IADS no?

[@saqibshafin]

It is indeed. Most Russian Ground based air defenses are part of their Aerospace Defense Force, meaning, there will be fighter coverage for the more critical sites. Russian air assets will most likely fight from within their sam defense bubble. IMHO. Except maybe their Mig-31s and Su-57s. Again, IMHO.

[@cassius_eu5970]

Can you do an attack with decoys like this on a US carrier group? I always wondered why you wouldn't mix real missiles with tonnes of decoys when attacking a carrier group.

[@grimreapers]

will try

[@deSloleye]

Aren't decoys just dud missiles? The missiles get shot down are the decoys, the ones that hit are the real ones

[@jacob79001]

It would be interesting to see decoys and cruise missiles being used in waves whilst SEAD aircraft jam and destroy the outer defences and then a final saturating attack on the long range SAM systems, after that HARMS and hammers can clean up the rest.

[@RichardBejtlich]

This is how you do it. It would be nice if GR used the tactics the coalition against the Iraqi IADS if they want to simulate how to beat an IADS for real.

[@Omar-df3uk]

Whos gonna tell him that theres also defensive electronic warfare jammers and Dummy targets

[@martindiver9608]

great video guys im subbed to both channels love your work stay safe

[@mrjava66]

That was cool. Next time add a bunch of sa-18 and sa-8 in the city. And some shilkas as here and there.

[@Eo_Tunun]

This again maks me think Tornados still could be valuable weapon carriers. Still the fastest planes at very low level.

[@willielinks3865]

Great video! I don't think the AGM86 is a JASSM though, pretty sure the JASSM and JASSM-ER replaced the AGM86 for the usaf and the navy is using the JASSM design for its LRASM.

[@grimreapers]

thx

[@Hitman1978]

I wonder if @CWLemoine might have a different plan. You all should reach out to him on his channel: kzbin.info

[@The340king]

Nice work. You can’t allow the system to just sit and pick you off. Obviously, there weren’t any enemy aircraft to deal with, but that might have been dealt with by fighters. I wonder if the B2’s following the “towds” fake airplanes might have gotten within firing range.

[@markstott6689]

That was excellent planning and execution. I'm pleased Simbà and Kortana survived even if Cap sadly didn't. Please can we have a similar mission and tactics to take out a Russian fleet.

[@grimreapers]

Interesting...

[@markstott6689]

@@grimreapers I didn't know those decoys existed. Now I do I believe they will be a game changer. Flood the defences until they have nothing left. Then kaboom!!!!

[@xander395]

assuming the Russian fleet isn't surrounded by hills... it will be far more sketch.

[@kalashnikovdevil]

Was just aboard a USAF B-1B, wild aircraft.

[@bean5050]

FYI, agm-86s are not JASSMs, JASSMs are agm-158, they much newer and much more advanced than agm-86s

[@DefaultProphet]

Holy shit that nap of the earth flying was intense.

[@fboe68]

Love this episode! Hope to see more like this

[@absolutezero6423]

What do you think of the AN/ALE-55 systems for the F/A-18E/F Super Hornet? Does DCS have anything like that?

[@grimreapers]

Not yet.

[@chrismoule7242]

Excellent work people! Thank you.

[@readhistory2023]

The US sent in drones over Bagdad so the SAM site lit up on those first. Then US in turn took out the aa sites with ARMs. The Brits helped. :) There was alot more to it but the drone swarm the key to killing the aa sites.

[@Aryan-nv9kd]

And also an invitation for Russian hypersonic missiles to strike your little bases around the world if you do it over Russian territory ;). Proxy wars are proxy for a reason.

[@Hail_Full_of_Grace]

@@Aryan-nv9kd obsessed much? People like you are just as bad as our western virtue signalling muppetts who are all wearing the Ukrainian ribbon thing to prove what a good little human they are.

[@dashikashi4734]

@@Aryan-nv9kd I'll take the excuse to drop WP on Russian cities, go ahead Ivan.

[@Aryan-nv9kd]

@@Hail_Full_of_Grace Mate. I am just realistic. Your country loses to Afghanistan and Vietnam, you would be smart to not mess with a nuclear power. Not to mention, one with the largest stockpile on this planet. Sure, you will lose hundreds of thousands of soldiers, but it is not like anyone would miss them. You want to get all patriotic and emotional? First, treat your soldiers with respect who are homeless and living on the streets in their own "brave" country. Land of the Free and home of the "brave" remember? Virtue Signaling is at least better than acting ignorant towards your own men who fought for their country.

[@FunningRast]

@@Aryan-nv9kd says the moron supporting a failed state that is literally trying to annex land from every country it borders….

[@garydickson8883]

The lesson is, like the Maginot Line in 1940, any fixed defense can be defeated by an attacker with enough resources and time to plan.

[@Asimkhan-ne7kz]

The video waited for till now 👌🏻🔥

[@grimreapers]

:)

[@droman608]

Was the iads depleted? Could a follow up assault to destroy the radars be as effective? Were the factories meant to be producing missiles?

[@Draksyl]

Thanks for doing this. Just shows the value of advanced stand off weapons like SPEAR-3 and SPEAR-3 EW due to enter service in the next few years - and will be fitted to the F-35 👍

[@zaowilliams9368]

thanks for the great content and keep up the great in fact amazing work

[@kellywalker9268]

AGM 86 are not JASSMs. They are ALCMs. Air Launched Cruise Missle.

[@grimreapers]

Thanks, got mixed up.

[@simba1113]

AGM-86's have basiclly been replaced by AGM158's. basically they do the same roll.

[@kellywalker9268]

@@simba1113 the AF still uses the ALCMs and still tests them and uses them in training. I work for the Utah Test and Training Range. We run CM tests multiple times a year. They have newer things, and are working on others, but the old ALCM is still in use, mainly because of the range it had over things like JASSM

[@dustykh]

"No ones gone down yet" Aerial 3-5: 😢

[@grimreapers]

Sorry Aerial 3-5. I will send flowers to your wife.

[@angelarch5352]

Amazing work! Quite interesting to watch.

[@acdchook]

Now if only DCS had a simulated theoretical Rods from God system!!

[@Zayackanibal]

What about short range AA with cannons near priority target? Like pantsir or tunguska?

[@barrylinkiewich9688]

There were some in the previous video and they made a few kills. I saw a tunguska moseying around at some point in this mission (recap maybe?) so I assume they're all still there.

[@grimreapers]

On reflection, the main thing we missed out was Igla Manpads in the city, I think that would have made it fully impossible.

[@xander395]

@@grimreapers they may have made your reattack suicidal (more suicidal?) but would have done nothing for the run in and initial drop. You were far too low and fast Having said that... I thought it was an extremely cool vid to watch. Also, you owe lead a beer. He didn't get lost at 27:10... going that was what part of the plan according to the brief. But then, he really did get lost later... so he also owes you and Kortana a beer.

[@rickjames18]

Can't wait until the AARGM-ER, AIM-260s, and EA-18G Growlers with Next Gen jammer are out in 2023. Those would have made this scenario easier along with some cheaper SDB-II Stormbreakers glide bombers. I like the decoys but I'm wondering if they are cheaper than the missiles used to take them out. If so, why not use more? Or why not use more planes with cheaper munitions like glide bombers to overwhelm and strike the target from a distance?

[@ryanhooper4660]

Throw the whole Imperial Japanese Navy at them and see how the IADS handles 300 Zeros.

[@paulheitkemper1559]

The moral of the story is that you don't want to go up against Kortana.

[@grimreapers]

agree

[@doogleticker5183]

SWARMing is a defense found in nature. I assume that is because it works.

[@punch442]

Did you guys remove the latest cuba mission? Said id watch it later and it's now later and can't find it

[@grimreapers]

Nothing removed. Probably just YT been stupid.

[@grimreapers]

*being

[@punch442]

@@grimreapers yes indeed, it just showed up now lol smh

[@Name-ps9fx]

A thought: At first I was thinking to "just nuke it", but IRL that would escalate things. So...how about if they remove the MIRV warhead, and install 10 JDAMs, guided by GPS? They can't shoot down JDAMs once deployed, so it should be a guaranteed KIA. Edit: Of course DCS wouldn't simulate this, but maybe a mod...?

[@austinpak2302]

The problem is the Russian’s would just pick it up as a ICBM launch and assume it’s nuclear and respond in kind.

[@darkprometheus]

@@austinpak2302 There is a type of system like this that does exist. It's called the Rapid Dragon system. The idea is to use a large platform like a C-130, Fill it with a bunch of guided missiles that would typically be on an aircraft and essentially drop a large frame device that holds 10s of missiles. the idea is that you would only need a 10 or 20 C-130s and have them drop 4 or 5 boxes of these a piece and essentially launch hundreds of ordnance at the same time in conjunction with other strikes. So imagine that C-130 is essentially the ICBM of sorts.

[@tranbachuyen6655]

using ICBM missile with non-nuclear warhead to attack nuclear power nation is the most stupid tactics ever exist because the other side don't know or don't bother to know what inside your ICBM . they will counter attack with nuclear ICBM ASAP

[@rogerb3654]

The WWII "Battle of Midway" comes to mind. Navy squadrons "wandering" all over the place trying to find the Japanese carriers. The US Torpedo Squadrons arrived 1st. Bringing the Japanese Air Cap down on the 'deck' to deal with the torpedo planes (Still debated to this day....if the Zeros had remained up high, they would have been overwhelmed by the US dive-bombers arriving almost at the same time...there just wasn't enough Zeros in the air) By sheer "dumb luck" the dive-bombers arrived within a few minutes. Sinking 3 of the 4 Japanese carriers.

[@gail_blue]

You ought to start calling Simba "Lost" (until he uses a waypoint.)

[@grimreapers]

agree

[@gail_blue]

@@grimreapers In a nice way. Everybody likes Simba.

so in this situation wouldn't the russians also use the 53T6 endoatmospheric interceptor nuclear armed missiles from the A-135 anti-ballistic missile system or the new A-235 also nuclear anti ballistic missiles? can't anti ballistic missiles be targeted at jets?

[@gregelliott2165]

Noob question, but what is the difference between 'dirt' and 'nails', and 'mud' and 'spike'? Is one A2A and the other G2A?

[@grimreapers]

Correct! Dirt/Nailed = search radar Mud/Spike = track radar Ground source/Air source

[@brandonhamilton833]

Best video yet! That was intense!!!

[@muick979]

I heard Quagmire say "Gigity Gigity" when he said Daisy Chain lmao

[@ojaspatki772]

Well done Kortana and Simba!!

[@benelgar-white1174]

That was awesome, do you think it would be possible to do the same thing again if the enemy also had CAP/AWACS

[@grimreapers]

Good idea

[@lutfullahkarahanli]

Cap, this was soooo tactical and such a well calculated and carried out successful strike! Amazing Amazing amazing! I had so much joy watching this, better than James Bond movie's :D

[@daren6489]

Love these types of scenarios.

[@semajniffirg230]

B2 bomber flies at 45-50k feet, no contrails, much longer standoff distance with guided bombs. A good spread of f22's super cruising would have got you in.

[@grimreapers]

Yup my error.

[@paulybassman7311]

Is the phrase... Topiary ??? Tree triming ... Roger Roger. Well done GR

[@lancer2204]

29:39 I kept expecting death by squirrel FOD.

[@grimreapers]

bad way to die man...