Gulf War: F-14 Tomcat TARPS Mission vs Heavily Defended Al Qa’im Uranium Plant | DCS Reenactment

[@kosher4418]

- Hey, Cap, I think I forgot the film in the camera. -Mig pilot: we seem to have forgotten to hang the missiles

[@Duvstep910]

a little info on the drogue refuelling system cap; the green light only comes on because you have to physically push the hose a bit further in for fuel to flow; it's not used to judge distance from the pod. The red light lets you know fuel isn't flowing and you need to move a bit closer to push the hose in

[@grimreapers]

thx

[@AxlePlaysGames]

The last “nooooooo” got me 😂

[@mikeck4609]

Thanks for taking out the Tomcat for a spin Cap!

[@turktownblue70]

They are sexy planes, not so sure about the pilot's 😊

[@Vayl-q9i]

Needless nitpicking time: -The F14's could have set up link4 datalink with each other and see each others radars, which might've been helpful in that engagement seeing as you had no awacs. -There was a few moments cap was squinting at hostiles trying to visually IFF, you can turn your VDI (top screen) over to the tomcat's built in camera and catch them lackin' in 4k.

[@Mobius118]

This one was a blast to watch, thanks again Cap!

[@Wyomingchief]

Another fantastic Mission Cap and the rest of GR 👍👍 I heard you comment on one of the recent videos that you were trying to keep up with fresh ideas. I've got a couple battles that might make for good simulations. I'll try to post them on Discord here in the next day or so

[@komradkolonel]

It's kind of a side note but still interesting. In 1977 an IIAF Tomcat became the only aircraft that's ever managed to shoot down a MiG-25 when the Foxbat was flying at high speed and altitude. The Soviets were flying high altitude and speed reconnaissance missions over Iran with MiG-25Rs. One day a Tomcat was in the air and got the order to shoot the big MiG down. The Foxbat pilot realized it was a Tomcat and aborted the mission. He climbed to over 70,000 feet and accelerated to Mach 2.8 according to Iranian radar. The F-14 went into full afterburners and climbed to over 50,000 feet where it then fired an AIM-54 Phoenix missile at the Foxbat. The missile knocked out one of the Foxbat's engines and severely damaged the taileron and one of the tails. The MiG was fatally wounded but managed to get back over the Soviet border and crashed in the mountains north of Iran. Since the Soviets denied any such missions were being done they claimed it "never happened." Since the fall of the Soviet Union things have been declassified and it appears that what the Iranians claimed was truthful after all.

[@xpk0228]

is there a source for this? what a great piece of history

[@agamemnonn1]

No, the Tomcat never shot down a MiG-25 before the Iran-Iraq War. The Iranians shot down a remotely piloted aircraft from distance to let the Soviets know they could shoot down their recon aircraft but they never shot down any Soviet Aircraft.

[@komradkolonel]

@@agamemnonn1 For years it was disputed and denied by the Soviets but since the fall of the Soviet Union the Russian government did admit they lost a Foxbat over Iran. The IIAF did shoot down a drone but the Soviets more or less scoffed at it. Stories like this are hard to verify but it does look like this one is true.

[@komradkolonel]

@@xpk0228 It is mentioned or at least alluded to in some books about the Tomcat. IRIAF Tomcat pilots talk about it. I think that the Iranians even recovered some debris that was clearly off a Soviet MiG-25 and have it on display. Of course you can't force someone to believe or disbelieve something and many of the stories from the Iran/Iraq war are suspect but this one seems to be legitimate.

[@ravneiv]

Loving the first gulf war videos!

[@optisailor1000]

First like, then watch the video - thanks for your work reapers!

[@SuperAd1980]

11:30 - Thanks Dark! Also, thanks to SuperMilo and Bendy for help with formation flying and Carrier landings. See you in Stoneburners!

[@Istandby666]

@29:52 We forgot to put film in the camera. That's a GR thing....ROFLMAO

[@manjisaipoe517]

Really enjoy your milsim missions everyone, thanks for the entertainment. Peace.

[@sky_feyd9581]

Could guys recreate the shooting down of an houtis drone using the side mounted gun on a chopper like the French did you can use the gazelle module and the shaded 136 mod

[@grimreapers]

OK

[@erickleven1712]

POOSH!!! FLAWLESS VICTORY!!! FATALITY!!! (I think Cap's aneurism finally broke there at the end)

[@shveylien7401]

Talking to yourself is OK, Answering yourself is OK, Asking yourself to repeat the question because you weren't paying attention is Not OK.

[@SealedSun]

Such an interesting mission setup. Love it!

[@Rhinozherous]

Awesome mission! Love the reenactments!

[@christopherjohnson529]

1. Cap - appreciate the time commitment to fly these long missions. I'm sure the transit is boring for you and the guys, but there's a realistic fatigue in your voices when you're coming up on the tanker or taking on the MiGs. Feels a lot more real hearing the stress when you've already been flying for a long time. 2. The AGM-45 Shrike on the Skyhawk seems to be bugged at the moment. My crew and I just returned to the Skyhawk to fly a Liberation campaign, and all of our Shrikes were nose-diving like you saw in your mission. It seems that ED is tweaking the Shrike for the upcoming Phantom, and it broke it in the Skyhawk mod. However, there is a workaround. If you get a lock with the Shrike (the shrill tone), then bunt the nose down to where the Shrike tone is about to drop (so gunsight pipper below the target), it will guide on launch. Weird, but it works until ED and the Skyhawk mod guys fix it.

[@colinboneham7387]

Picking the wrong Radar must be a GR thing.

[@mk6315]

Just like the drunk takeoffs

[@Lost_BANDAID]

True GR style!

[@FleetDefenderRA5]

Cap as things go south: I hate EVERYTHING!!! Laugh. GrimReapers: thank you. I love cooperative missions. And I think you for not scripting these missions.

[@davidhuss2301]

Cap and team, Need to bring back the Sunday Funday Carrier landings. Idea: same as always but have Manpads as well? maybe with some AAA as well? Sure the boys would love that. Keep up the grat content!

[@valuedhumanoid6574]

The HARM's will lock onto ANY signal in it's parameters. It has no way of knowing it's the wrong one. I always thought that to beat a HARM attack, just place a dummy transmitter a few hundred yards away and let it soak up all the incoming. To the HARM, a signal is a signal. I think in the F-16C the HADS mode will allow you to choose specific transmitters and if your solution is 2 or 1, it will pluck out individual targets. These earlier versions of Shrikes and the HARMS cannot. But even if they lose a signal by shutting them down, it will still home on last location to give you a chance of hitting it. Good effort tho. Hell, just the fact you all successfully refueled in short order is a huge win in my book. And thinking both Fansongs were down is totally acceptable. You SAW the impact x2. Just that one little problem tho...

[@Orieni]

I used to tell my soldiers that I was ok with them talking to themselves. I was even ok with them arguing with themselves. When they argued with themselves, and lost, I was going to have an issue.

[@fuller9x]

Some might say you were entering a zone of Danger

[@RossOneEyed]

The A-4 Shrikes haven't worked since...oh, a while. One of the updates scrambled them. Since the A-4 is the only plane that uses them (until the F-4 comes out) it isn't a priority for ED to work on.

[@kindasupersonic7114]

i feel like this test was severely gimped.. missing the extensive Prowler electronic warfare package or even the growler package on the hornet.

[@falcon9983]

Electronic warfare simulation in dcs is poorly modeled/nonexistent. It isnt GRs fault. TBH most EW stuff is classified and kept really hush hush making it hard to model

[@gerardpullen9449]

Yes but the way I understand jamming(could be wrong) is that it fills enemy radars with the radar equivelent of TV static but within a certain range (varies based on radar and jammer used) a Radar can "burn through" or over power the jamming and get a solid lock. And while I'm certain the actual ranges are still classified, I'm pretty sure there's publicly available figures too. Also fun fact, according to my old man. who was a Prowler maintainer, they could carry 3 jamming pods, had a built-in jammer as well as carry two harms

[@gerardpullen9449]

Yes but the way I understand jamming(could be wrong) is that it fills enemy radars with the radar equivelent of TV static but within a certain range (varies based on radar and jammer used) a Radar can "burn through" or over power the jamming and get a solid lock. And while I'm certain the actual ranges are still classified, I'm pretty sure there's publicly available figures too. Also fun fact, according to my old man. who was a Prowler maintainer, they could carry 3 jamming pods, had a built-in jammer as well as carry two harms

[@Wyomingchief]

​@@gerardpullen9449again this is not something that can be accurately modeled or simulated in the current DCS programming . Possibly though if someone had way better grasp of the programming they might be able to approximate something, but again that's really not something that Cap himself can do, no disrespect to him. But I guess I would suggest if you know how to program that maybe you should attempt that?

[@gerardpullen9449]

@Wyomingchief Tracking it wouldn't be a perfect replica, but it would be a step in the right direction. If I had the knowledge of coding to do it I would. However I unfortunately don't.

[@paulybassman7311]

I do have a soft spot for the A7 Corsair II.

[@deadmeat8754]

Nice sim, fellas! It wouldn't be GR if it didn't go sideways at some point...😉

[@jamesmcd71]

Are you going to do a training series on the F4? I like a lot of others have found myself depending on your training. About 14 months ago, I was getting so discouraged I was seriously considering walking away from DCS. I had watched Waggs videos, but it's clear I didn't know enough to keep up with him. Then, I found your CCIP video. It changed everything. Your video brought all the stuff I read to a place where it all made sense. Now, without bragging, im very good at everything, but AA refueling and dog fighting. I recently bought the Apache and of course you are my trainer.

[@grimreapers]

Probably, when it comes out to the public.

[@falcon9983]

Hey CAP, after a bit of discussion with some of the other viewers, perhaps it is possible to simulate radar jamming in DCS. Ive had an Idea using the trigger zones. If a growler AI remains in a certain trigger zone you should be able to set the sam sites off for a period of time. Ill look into this and get back to you on the discord.

[@tanksoldier]

Would be interesting to see you try the USAF mission.

[@chrismcghee1987]

Try the New Zealand A4 inverted refuel

[@jeremytarter889]

I haven't gotten on the tomcat in awhile since the last few updates but what's up with all the safety wire on the front panel?

[@grimreapers]

It stopped the button falling out when taking off (true story)

[@jeremytarter889]

@@grimreapers thanks.. makes sense.

[@JeffBreyer]

TOMCATS!

[@zepedrofd]

Admit it... this video was just an excuse to get a shot of the F14 in the sunrise!

[@grimreapers]

maybe...

[@AlanBlumenstock]

At about 17:00 bandits appear, all could think about was "did Cap but the wing back to auto?"

[@grimreapers]

ooo I think I may have forgotten to :(

[@Redemptorchapter]

Just think, in a couple of years you'll be redoing this with A7s and A6s

[@martinjones12]

BTw, when you join you should present yourself slowly in view of the tanker Captain so well foward , not too close, probe extended ( showing your intentions) and depart after showing yourself similarily to the co-pilot's side, ( all silent comms stuff) , as for 3 hoses being available ( some VC10's carried 4 !!! ( 1 per wing, 2 in the centre line housing)...... although 3 hoses COULD be trailed simultaneously............... only 2 aircraft would NORMALLY be refuelled simultaneously.... and the big jets ONLY used the centre hose/s ...hope this helps.....

[@hotfightinghistory9224]

Cap made mid-air refueling look easy.

[@readhistory2023]

Why didn't they use satelites for the photo recon? As often as we're in the middle east you'd think the US would have put a satelite in stationary orbit over the area.

[@thomasafb]

my thought as well. A stationary satellite wont work however - at 36,000 kilometers up it would be too far away for any meaningful photos

[@rubiconnn]

You can't use geostationary satellites for optical recon. You need low earth orbit satellites and those are nearly impossible to change the orbit so they are very predictable when they will fly over places.

[@millercommamatt]

Geostationary orbit is 36,000 km altitude. Too far for good photo recon.

[@thomasafb]

anyone know, why the Navy had to do the recon? Just to do it the hard way, or was there a reason they could not get any overheads from the NRO?

[@xenaguy01]

The Intruder could carry AIM-9 Sidewinders, but not (as far as I know) AIM-7 Sparrows. Ditto the Corsair II and A-4 Skyhawk. None of them had the correct radar set to use a radar-guided AA missile.

[@JimmyAgent007]

Wooo!

[@fizzbangboom09]

hey Cap and the rest of the Grim Reapers... sorry, this ha nothing to do with this video... but I was just wondering all of a sudden, what is your #1 plane that is NOT in DCS that you really would like to have? I keep thinking of the F-111 Aardvark. Dunno why, I dont even fly. But, what would you love to have in game?

[@nuclearTANK]

15:37 if i answer myself it's a sign that I'm getting expert advice

[@Istandby666]

You can't take a Polaroid without being inverted....lol Oh, you say that @27:51....lol

[@mikeck4609]

If only we could sacrifice whatever is required to the gods of A-6 AI units….we could have some proper 80’s naval action. Can’t wait for 2030 when we have the A-7 and A-6.

[@ariannem8629]

Thats not a A7 but a A4skyhawk

[@plasmalion558]

hell yeah!

[@Slikx666]

Don't shake the photo, just let it do it's thing. 😀👍

[@cazub123]

Can we "record" screen caps from an external camera we aren't viewing to simulate film? Save it to a folder?

[@cg9952]

A-7 wasn't fast but first w CCIP

[@stevenleach9522]

Lots of crazing on those Perspex (Plexiglass) canopies & windscreens when sunlight strikes at the correct angle! Chemical degradation due to improper cleaning solutions & and elements that these aircraft are exposed to during operating conditions on the ground or shipboard. PRIST ACRYLIC AND PLASTIC WINDSCREEN CLEANER & CANOPY COVERS - BOY'S. Give your maintenance guys hell for it...!

[@cmotdibbler4454]

It would be really interesting to see how the Blackburn Buccaneer would do in this mission, fly in with your giant balls dragging along the floor, that said they could have done the strike mission and buddy lased the site with pavespike and paveway in a popup attack.

[@whousley]

The A-4 rocks!

[@andyepix1383]

Pretty sure this mission was flown in an A model by VF 32.

[@Dirtyharry70585]

Polaroid shots spit out on to the desert floor

[@Istandby666]

Cap, this is GR. If GR doesn't get judged. Where will we get our laughs? You know we're only here is watch and judge your mishaps....lol

[@stevelenox152]

I was hoping to see the Tomcats in your purple skin with your Grim Reaper emblem

[@Istandby666]

I'm shocked youtube didn't remove my message for saying judge. youtube is the bully kid.

[@AdsDem0n]

Poor irradiated Poosh.

[@kenbb99]

Correctly simulated mission should = actual result, but every one of your missions seems to end up with a lot of US shot down when the real mission had none shot down. You are consistently doing something / many things wrong apparently. I don't learn anything from poorly simulated missions. I like your channel, please do better!

[@grimreapers]

GR do no script the mission outcomes. There are a couple of other DCS youtubers that script battles for a certain outcomes, I think you would be better suited watching them instead.

[@christophero55]

I disagree that "correctly simulated mission = actual result." I invite you to please look at it from another point of view: Strategic/Tactical simulations should have a multitude of changeable variables altered by chance so that you should never, or very rarely, get the same exact result each time the simulation is run. For War Games purposes this simulates variables outside of the knowledge or control of planners/commanders. This might include changes in weather or simulate variation in human choice (to zig or to zag, take cover or advance, take a risk or avoid one etc.) Since planners can not possibly know/understand or control every variable in the actual real world scenario they must create a system for chance as part of the game that simulates that. Further, this is a video game and also, the video is made mainly for entertainment purposes. A video game, even one that goes to these lengths for realism, is still designed to be fun. Having the AI behave the exact same way every time a sim was run would be really boring (as well as unrealistic). I also believe these videos are more entertaining given that you can not easily predict the outcome based on the scenario (even a real world scenario), you get surprises with every video. That's fun. Having this kind of variation of outcome is both realistic and entertaining. Since you like the channel I hope you will be able to view GR content for what it is, and like it for what it is...unscripted results are part of the product. That's my take. If you read it, then I thank you for giving this reply your time and attention. I hope you have a great weekend! :)

[@omarmahmoudfathymahmoud710]

Unsubscribe after this video 😂