How Can The US Navy Beat China's New Type 055 Destroyer? | DCS

[@simonsez99]

The lack of a real damage model renders all of this moot. Almost any missile strike on a modern ship would cause massive problems and fires aboard and the fighting effectiveness would be drastically minimized based on systems being down, crew incapacitated, fires, etc. After the first missile hit, it would be very easy for subsequent missiles to hit the ship. That ship still had 100% defense until it's hit point pool was gone. Nothing in the simulation after the first hit can be taken seriously. Still fun to watch though!

[@CtrlAltDlt68]

Look what happened to the Moskva. One missile supposedly hit it and it fell the fuck over due to prolonged fires.

[@oxydoxxo]

@CtrlAltDlt68 Omg they sunk your ship? No, it fell over 😞

[@voidtempering8700]

@@CtrlAltDlt68 The Mostova isn't exactly a good example. The ship was easily salvageable after the initial hit, the crew just bailed the moment it got hit, and those that were left didn't have enough fire extinguishers, because the ship had around 1/5 of the fire extinguishers they were supposed to have. This adds on to all the other subsystems that weren't working when it went out to sea. You should check out the readiness report for the ship.

[@Astutemoose2015]

Also the crews training in damage control should be taken into account. The Chinese have no experience in damage control at all. They haven’t been in a conflict since 1977

[@thomaszhang3101]

@@Astutemoose2015and when was the last time a US ship got hit?

[@hmmjedi]

One thing also to think is that a 1500kg missile smashing into a ship no matter what even without the warhead will seriously screw the ship up...

[@blueberrywilbur315]

Depends on what and where

[@mraviatorboii2510]

@@blueberrywilbur315expect sever flooding and fires onboard the ship. The ship will be 65% combat ineffective..

[@blueberrywilbur315]

@@mraviatorboii2510 Ok what ship where is the impact and with what? 140lb on a carrier deck is a scratch if that

[@mraviatorboii2510]

@@blueberrywilbur315 that might shut down flight operations if some air Aircrafts on the deck are hit… Or will it still be operational ??

[@blueberrywilbur315]

@@mraviatorboii2510 So what the fuck you change shit every time so they hit a aircraft and the ship itself is fine….duh duh duh

[@green_2159]

“Go LRASM! Open your adorable wings and be FREE!”

[@tomamor8330]

Looking at the potential numbers of escort ships that will be available to China, they'll probably have x2 0055 and x4 0052 destroyer's per carrier group. It'll be a tough nut to crack.

[@Davros-vi4qg]

Not with an SSN or an SS 😳 as the Yanks know! Video just came out of HMS Swiftsure photographing the keel of Kiev the Ruski carrier.

[@MrCastodian]

@@Davros-vi4qgYes, and ASW does not exist? Pictures of Carriers and their escorts have been taken from Chinese submarines to. Submarines are good, but they are no magic weapon, they can be killed.

[@Davros-vi4qg]

@@MrCastodian and now ur know why I was a ground hugger 😳😂😂😂

[@thomaszhang3101]

Plus 054B frigates! Usually 2-4 per carrier group

[@Davros-vi4qg]

@@thomaszhang3101 how’s yer crew training going? How many decades of experience in ASW work does yer navy have. (From the country that founded the mission!)

[@The136th]

055 has low frequency radar to detect stealth cruise missiles, so lrasm won't be getting so close without countermeasures

[@sensibledriver933]

Can a low frequency radar provide a firing solution?

[@The136th]

@@sensibledriver933 Doesn't need to, LRASM are subsonic. If you see them coming they are easy to intercept.

[@tonglianheng]

​@@sensibledriver933how are the missiles targeting the ship? Using its own radar or via Datalink from other ships and sensors? If it is the former then it has no stealth the radar on the missile behaves like a giant beacon. If it is latter the Chinese will attempt to jam and it will also limit the amount of missiles each ship can have in air at the same time as each one of missiles will need the ship file control radars to steer them, it won't be fire and forget. Hence the intensity will be a lot lower.

[@sensibledriver933]

My point was, low frequency radar can defect a missile but to target it you need a high frequency radar. Some sam systems can detect an F35 but not lock on.@@tonglianheng

[@johnsilver9338]

@@tonglianheng LRASM is essentially an anti-radiation ARM missile. It don't use active radar but instead use passive RF and infrared homing. So it can't be jammed nor spoofed. Since it has its own terminal guidance it don't need an separate ISR platform for target update.

[@jerryberry3356]

A wired thing is, in previous video, even old Russian ship can detect LRASM and intercept it. How can 055 with new AESA radar don’t even seen it? Is that a bug?

[@spinmaster4348]

14:14 These horns are actually passive radio sensors, the missile will be rotating in flight so that the horns measure radio waves of all planes. Instead of placing them on a rotor this trick helps reduce the cost, complexity and weight. These missiles are for anti-swarm and passive sensors like IR and passive radio ones are the way to do, though some 1950s wave riding missiles do have horns in similar places e.g. RIM-8 Talos but serve completely different purposes.

[@Davros-vi4qg]

Magazine depletion is the way to go… lots of cheap decoys in which lethal. Or send a sub, or worse two.

[@jtom9086]

7:04 LRASM is becoming a ridiculous god-tier weapon in this DCS simulation,I doubt even the US destroyers and cruisers can defend against against this missile :3 What is the point of Type 055 destroyer as a CSG escort ship , if it cannot defend against even a single LRASM If the actual LRASM is as much powerful as this LRASM in DCS i wonder why didn’t the china even try to develop a missile like this I doubt

[@Nr15121]

They probably are but keeping it under wraps, they love stealing stuff from us so god knows they are trying to steal lrasm but our saving grace is Chinese incompetence and inexperience so they can’t effectively duplicate the ram coatings

[@hughmungus2760]

theres something wrong with the DCS coding, we know planes can reliably detect them at 20+ miles out and engage with ease, in theory even if surface radars don't work properly against them, AWACS which would accompany any chinese surface fleet would spot them coming and relay targetting info to the destroyers.

[@thomaszhang3101]

Well they do have the AKF-98A missile that goes onto J-16, but I don’t see them talk much about it.

[@tonglianheng]

The LRASM cannot use its own radar against targets because if they do their own radar signals will act like a giant homing beacon. There won't be any stealth. If they rely on ship sensors to steer them, i.e. the missiles themselves being blind, then each ship cannot fire many and they must keep the missile in line of sight which severely limits the range. Unless the missile uses satellite targeting information or from nearby AWACS. This still puts limit on the number that can be flown at any one point. And it probably will also make the missile more susceptible to jamming. The Chinese ships do have dual band radar and the lower frequency radar will provide advanced warning to stealth targets even if it cannot provide targeting solutions. It will give the Chinese at least ample time for EW countermeasures, and they will know at the very least where the missiles are coming from.

[@edl653]

Just a note about modern war ships. Their exterior structures, except for a few critical areas that would have local armor, are thin steel plates 5/8", 1/2", 3/4" that can be easily penetrated. When the SM-6 warhead goes off it will do lots of damage and on top of that is the huge kinetic energy it has due to its speed. Modern ships are not designed to survive more than a signal significant hit that compromises its watertight integrity. The only real exception are Carriers which are designed and armored to survive multiple weapons effects. The days of heavily armored surface combatants are long gone.

[@khangkt1721]

In the near future, LRASM would be implemented into the MK41 VLS so hopefully an update would reflect in the game. As a matter of fact, Lockheed Martin had successfully tested many launches with the proven MK-114 boosters.

[@bagelmaster2498]

yea i would imagine that they could make that switch soon to balance it out again.

[@michaelmcclain6704]

I'm waiting to see simulation of the new Block V Maritime Strike Tomahawk, and a hypothetical LRASM-XR, based on the JASSM-XR with 1000 nautical mile range carrying a 2000 pound explosive warhead. Sounds like a carrier killer to me...

[@tonglianheng]

Better idea to just invest in hypersonics to be honest. Getting a not so stealthy subsonic missile without fire and forget capability that costs about the same as a hypersonic is not a good deal.

[@rgloria40]

The chinese modeled an entire battle group on the US NAVY. Defeating one type 055 destroyer is a moot point. The question is one chinese carrier battle group will cause problems...

[@byzmack1334]

A-10 warthog low and slow carrying a full load of anti-ship missiles. Distraction force of other fighter and bombers to consume the majority of the enemy missiles.

[@JD-dm1uj]

The 055 would be returning firing with YJ-18s and 21s, it wouldn’t just be in defense mode.

[@llllll-mp1zr]

This idiot just wants to ridicule the Chinese. In all his China-related videos, China is a target for him to hit. Unfortunately, in reality, the invincible American army is being chased like a dog in North Korea. This garbage video is worthless

[@tamimkhan742]

New Arleighbarg destroyer and Type 055 Destroyer both have the most modern AESA radar with new types of semiconducter , so in real life it will surely intercept the stealth missile , i think the game has some problem and this is not my opinion , US navy official named the AESA radar of Type-055 destroyer is called Dragon eye and it is similar to SPY-6 radar of US

[@jtom9086]

Yes the 055 destroyer can’t defend against even a single LRASM in this simulation LOL ,even the Russian frigates can defend against these stealth missiles.Type 055 has so many sensors onboard but can’t even see the incoming subsonic missile which is ridiculous that i believed

[@SlavicCelery]

@@jtom9086 Well something to keep in mind, most of these vessels would not be travelling alone. You're going to have multiple suites of sensors over multiple ships that will help cover any potential weak spots. That said, if you can catch even a larger vessel unsupported, it is vulnerable to something sneaking through. It was true in WW2, it's true today.

[@pahtar7189]

In real life the odds of being directly off the nose of an enemy ship for the whole attack are vanishingly small. Both ships would be maneuvering at speed, so the aspect of the target would be constantly changing. A simple test would be to have the Type 055 steam in a circle at 30 knots during the attack.

[@NisseOhlsen]

Oh, the DICTION! on "Hello Valued Viewers" ! Now, that's what I'm talking about ! Have a GREAT WEEKEND !

[@jtom9086]

HHQ-9B can shot down incoming sea skimming missile from what i saw.PLAN always practiced by shooting YJ-803 antiship sea skimming missile against the type 055 destroyer.HHQ-9B missile also has a data-link so that they can be blindly shoot and guided via AWACS data-link.

[@gorflunk]

The first missile hits would have left the destroyer DIW and defenseless. No missiles would have been fired after that and they would have eventually been destroyed in their launchers/silos as the remainder of the SM-6s made impact. My 2c.

[@LondonSteveLee]

Yep. Modern systems are very fragile, an SM6 hitting you anywhere is going to do enough damage to systems to render the ship defenceless.

[@jiaxizhang3295]

Well bring your Zumwalt DDG1000 out to compare with 055

[@kelvinchung6506]

The positioning of your ship towards incoming strike is very important. The Chinese 055 destroyer in DCS has weakness, the air defense Missile launcher located at stern has a blind spot towards ship bow. Therefore, it would be better for the destroyer to let its port or starboard side face incoming strike. This was a short-range anti-air technique used in WWII, by a US Gearing class destroyer (I forgot the name) to defend itself against relentless Japanese Kamikazi planes near Okinawa. The US Gearing class was tasked to set a parameter with other destroyers and give a early warning of Kamikaze strike to the US landing force at Okinawa. The US destroyer faced Kamikaze planes with its side so that most of her anti-aircraft guns could open up. The destroyer survived.

[@ricardosmythe2548]

"Were never going to know" that's optimistic

[@timoalger131]

@Grim Reapers The SM-6 is a not intended as a stop-gap or interim solution for a modern anti-ship missile. Its only intent is to provide additional last resort options.

[@markonw6661]

Rapid Dragon - C-17 dump trucks, 45 missiles each load arriving back to back, semi-stealthed.

[@andrewhirsch6472]

Allegedly, current doctrine for SM-6 use against surface ships has them arriving less than a minute before the first salvo of cruise missiles, with the twin aims of making the defending vessel electronically blind and forcing the defenders and their computers to prioritize their targets under stressful circumstances. Therefore, I would like to see a simulation in which the SM-6 is used in tandem with the LRASM or even non-stealthy cruise missiles such as the Harpoon and the Naval Strike missile.

[@红杏出墙-c7g]

Which is more stealthy, F-22 or LRASM? Which's radar is more powerful, Type 055 or J-20? In my opinion even the LRASM is as stealthy as the F-22, the radar on the Type 055 can detect and lock the LRASM at a far enough distance. Because the radar on the Type 055 simply is much more bigger and has much more TR units.

[@jeffstuart2723]

I love watching the sausage make! DO 5 of these a day and I'll watch them all!!

[@grimreapers]

Agree.

[@jasonc5781]

"No one in public will know the true capabilities of these weapons..." Have you tried the War Thunder forums? 😆

[@jyralnadreth4442]

Combine a Gun Cruiser with 6 inch guns and armour with a full air defence system and VLS. Moderns warships are SAM heavy to protect against Anti Ship Missiles and Aircraft but completely lack any real assets for an up close engagement. Also such a design would cover NGFS for the Marines which is currently a major lacking after the Iowas were retired US Naval SAMs have had a secondary Anti Ship capability since the Three T missiles (Terrier, Tartar and Talos) in the 1950s. ESSM, SM2 and SM-6 can be used this way...not SM-3 though. Royal Navy Sea Ceptor can too

[@lohrtom]

Of course it looks like a RAM missile and launcher. Where do you think they got the tech and plans from?

[@montys420-]

The SM6 anti -ship test I watched which is available on open source, it stays low 1000ft at max before it starts its downward trajectory and striking the ship.

[@hughmungus2760]

at that altitude the effective range would be quite garbage. as soon as the thrusters burn out it would lose so much speed it would struggle to even outrange harpoons.

[@claytonhatfield1827]

Love the videos guys! Could you set up the next naval battle like the Taiwan war games?? Love going back to watch those videos! Keep up the great work guys and gals.

[@tomamor8330]

You'll be able to watch it for real in about 8-12 years.

[@michalanglobear]

@@tomamor8330 3years top

[@velavanlaack9134]

Easy, commission the Chinese shipyard to build some for US Nav

[@timbaskett6299]

Former US Navy sailor here (Aviation) and I do have to say the Type 055 looks better than the Tico. RAM, rolling airframe missile.

[@AtlanticCanadianAstronomy]

Now try it with a bunch of these Chinese modern ships together. You won't likely find 1 alone

[@aa1944-k2r]

a lot of people over estimated the impact an average anti ship missile could do, go on google and check out what happened to HMS boxer a medium size frigate with displacement of less than 5000 tons after taking 2 harpoon missiles in SINKEX, much smaller damage than you may think, but of course critical hit is always different

[@lordsqueak]

hmm, one parameter for the missiles, is that if they detect and react to the incoming missile too close to the ship , it would be inside the arming range so to speak. maybe?

[@mikeck4609]

Seems like a Virginia /improved LA class sub and a few mk-48 torpedoes are the most cost effective way to take out any destroyer/cruiser

[@TraditionalAnglican]

Agreed, but subs can’t be modeled in game.

[@surefresh8412]

Also keep in mind DCS doesn't model electronic warfare for ships

[@strambino1]

That was awesome!! Great Job CH and Cap! I really like the balance of defensive systems, and offensive striking power that you placed on your ships. I look forward to the upcoming GR battle!!!

[@farhanpranto2668]

Do you think one type55 will work alone. Modern warfare according to german general works with one weapon system offsets others weaknesses. And type55 is like a comand ship that comands type52d and type54A. Not engage head on..

[@Gantries]

If it's anything like their concrete, it might just dissolve in the water.

[@hughmungus2760]

the irony its all the new US ships that have massive teething problems and end up getting cancelled.

[@morganargus]

Ciws has two different radars independent of the ships radar. An acquisition and a tracking radar. Being mounted lower it should be able to differentiate between an object and background clutter at shorter ranges. I would imagine that observability could be tailored specifically for cosign and distance of the targets once above the horizon line. Meaning a searching radar not at an expected angle perhaps lower to the ground would not be in the sweet spot of ULO in reference to the Lrasm.

[@bradleyanderson4315]

We have to remember that the SM6 is a ton or so traveling at Mach 3 towards the least armored section of the ship.

[@Gabriel_McMillan]

We should also remember that a strike like this favors the offense, as the missiles can be programmed to all impact the target at once, even if it took a full minute or so to launch them all, which should overwhelm the defender's ability to respond in time with a sufficient number of interceptors.

[@robertopiedimonte2078]

@@7ElevenTruther please pay attention it was along other weapons hits not just an SM-6

[@hughmungus2760]

notice how the type 055 wasn't shooting back, otherwise those SM6 would be spent trying to stop the YJ21s and YJ18s

[@davidconnellan6875]

Hell the French exocet missile could pretty much punch its way through a ship

[@colin5577]

I would guess that any simulation predicting that Chinese tech doesn’t quite work as advertised is spot on.

[@PixxiePlays2024]

This is the most reaching type of content I've seen this channel spew out in a while. Literally not a single plane in a flight sim game/channel. Craaaaaaaaap

[@nekopop8159]

In real life based on this exact scenario, the Chinese Type 055 would have been destroyed or disabled already after the first hit by the American SM-6 missile.

[@7ElevenTruther]

One SM6 was able to outright sink the USS Vandegrift, a 4000 ton Oliver Perry class frigate. Imagine a telephone pole weighing 1 ton that's barreling towards you a mach 3, but it's also strapped with a 130lb warhead and leftover solid rocket fuel that will ignite on impact. So yeah, one can assume that one sm6 would at the very least disable a 11000 ton crusier like the Type 055, provided it hits the right section of the ship.

[@lli8420]

no，please member we have df missiles 25000km range, we don’t need a ship to ship battle at all

[@nekopop8159]

@@lli8420 Don’t forget about American air superiority and stealth. And we have Allies.

[@lli8420]

@@nekopop8159 don’t forget we have CNMD and will improve it soon, it’s much more accurate and effective than your defense. Your missiles will be hit even in the outer space. Never try to fight against China, you will never win. We wish we can get along with each other, my friend, but if you don’t want to and insist the hostility, we can send you to some hot place, with our best bless: go to …

[@lli8420]

@@nekopop8159 Our DF missiles, will fight for peace

[@nolefan87]

I just found this channel Friday. I’ve been watching videos as fast as I can. This is my new favorite channel. I really appreciate the knowledge and effort you put into making these videos as realistic as possible. Keep up the great work! 🙏🏼

[@Gabriel_McMillan]

Excellent simulation! Thank you!

[@joshuafelder2701]

Worth considering that ANY hit on ANY ship is a win for the peoson shooting... the days of armored ships that can absorb damage and push on are long gone. Even if you don't sink the ship, it's gonna be combat ineffective via systems being knocked out, or even just crippling the crew via direct or tertiary effects (think toxic smoke inhallation). There is plenty of history of prioritizing damaging a larger ship (that you cannot sink) over sinking a smaller ship, since that larger ship will be out of action until after it's repaired. That said... you win wars by killing off experienced crews and putting hulls on the ocean floor.

[@rebelliousfew]

That is true, which is why such ships most of the time do not operate alone, especially during wartime.

[@trevorday7923]

I'm guessing the Chinese thought that what with that eleven-barrelled shredmeister pointing forward they wouldn't need anything as dull as a SAM battery there too

[@sulyokpeter3941]

Absolutely AMAZING NEWS! Type 45 is under way!!! I love that Destroyer from all of my hearth. It is sooo beautifull! Funny fact: The Type 45 Destroyer was the FIRST EVER military ship which I have seen in my life. Only one time, many years ago nearby Portsmouth! I was enjoying my day on the beach(It was a very very nice weather, sunny day, summertime in the UK) and I just looking at the sea... And I spotted something very very interesting not really far away but it was far away enough to like "What the actually fying F is that thing over there in the sea?" I had a look on the internet(Ship tracker websites and found nothing. But it was there.) So I was like hmmm It must be a military ship. I was kept watching it and it got closer and closer and then started to turn. It was enough close(I still got the pictures of it in my old phone) until I saw the tail number or ship number or how is it called it was D34(I barely seen that number it was just enough close to see it). Which is actually the HMS Diamond. I went to the google very fast and typed "British Navy Ship D34" and I found it! At that day I was reading hours of hours about the Type 45 Destroyers... And since then Iam in a love with it. In my opinion it is one of the most powerfull and strongest Guided missile destroyers in the world right now.

[@LondonSteveLee]

Best RADAR in the world - a sitting duck against close in threats.

[@sulyokpeter3941]

@@LondonSteveLee If the Type 45 alone probably yes, but its never alone. ;) It is the best when its used together with the Arleigh Burke class destroyers and Ticonderoga-class crusiers. They are way different. Type 45 is better vs missiles. I mean it is way more effective to intercept anti ship missiles than the TICO or the Arleigh Burke. With its radar which is waay more better than this 2 can provide pretty much eveything. This is why it is the best in its class. Type 45 never alone and this is why the UK CSG have different type of ships. Imagine a UK/US CSG with these. Almost unkillable and not to mention the submarines. This is why I think in the US/UK vs RU/CHN CSG the US/UK CSG will be the winner. Doesnt matter if they use the 055 Destroyer. Nothing special there. It is basically a propaganda and an overhyped thingy(Like the Russian Kinzhal missile). They are waay to scared of the WEST tech. Thats why they "classify" their stuff. They try to keep it hidden and overhyped.

[@LondonSteveLee]

@@sulyokpeter3941 {perhaps - but Type 45 is an air defence destroyer it SHOULD be able to defend itself against all attacks regardless of the profile as the American and Chinese equivalents can. Type 42 went into battle in 1982 - previous defence budget cuts had pushed 965>1022 RADAR upgrades down the road as well as Sea Dart modernisation (both tube > solid state projects) - the outcome is we went to war with 1950s computing that didn't work in the rough seas of the south Atlantic - the capability of the ships seriously compromised by previous penny-pinching - we are making the same mistakes with Type 45. The argument behind cutting from 12 to 6 hulls was to promise that they are fully kitted out - as usual - the politicians lied.

[@fqeagles21]

@@LondonSteveLee it's on par with the new AEGIS SPY-6

[@jamesmenefee5519]

Still need to watch the rest of the video, i'm only 2 min in. I agree with the builder that a modern radar can detect a low observable object flying close to the sea. My issue though is (and its probably not modeled nor is there a way to model it in DCS, so it is what it is) its one thing for a radar to detect it, its a completely different thing for a high enough fidelity on the radar to generate a track, a firing solution, and terminal guidance to the missile to hit the target.

[@jamesmenefee5519]

And, at 7 min's in, it was modeled...i'll just up and just enjoy the video lol

[@chrisfloyd1572]

Just curious here. Why wouldn't say, USN just utilizes existing stock piles of older, cheaper and more numerous cruise and anti-shipping missiles in large numbers to deplete the anti missile stores of the PLAN ships before a follow on wave of modern Munitions?

[@hughmungus2760]

limited VLS space, and the fact ships have to go back to port to reload.

[@tonglianheng]

It depends where you fight. If it is a war in Taiwan straight, then China has home advantage. What you described is a tactic that can apply to China not the US, as US ships will be fighting far away from logistics hubs and every single missile it carries count. This is reversed if the war is fought near Californian coastline or Hawaii. But the former is a much more likely scenario.

[@Filo-qn8pj]

I have a bad feeling about this after watching the vid on the Type 055

[@ryanpayne7707]

16:17: Those panels are made out of fiberglass. If they tried to use metal, it would be opaque to the radar waves it emitted.

[@mrlodwick]

Thank you Capt!.

[@sebfettel]

Yall are working very hard lately

[@dwwolf4636]

I expect more coordinated strikes with LRASM and SM6s coming in from different vectors.

[@MattWaller04]

That Type 055 is absolutely mental. A real beast.

[@fatdoi003]

now 055 can do quad pack short to medium range SAMs so a type 055 can literally fire 160-200 missiles from its 112 cells

[@colorblindvids]

Probably won’t perform well irl

[@charlienash1050]

@@colorblindvids I don't see why it wouldn't.

[@charlienash1050]

"TYPE 055 IN MOTION, A BEAST MADE OF STEEL"

[@lukeallison3713]

Tbf im sure even if it didn't have the fire rate to hit, the main gun would be firing at subsonic missiles, certainly has the rotation speed to do so. The russians used to practice using the ak-130 as a ciws against drone subsonic missiles , and the oro 76mm is probably more useful than a phalanx or 1130 with DART despite only having a 120-150 rpm capability, noticed the visby's firing with their main guns

[@bradz9413]

3:09 good boy mentioning it’s displacement is equal to a cruiser. Perhaps we should call it type 55 cruiser

[@kristiandurvin474]

Could it be by the time the destroyer detects the incoming missiles, they are inside the minimum engagement distance? Does the 005 have something like the RIM-116 missiles which would be useful at very short ranges?

[@robertopiedimonte2078]

Bad, bad, bad situation, if it was incoming missile or eventually two from different directions far away each other on Burke destroyers there are the two Phalanx with undeclared 2 nm range (just study the flight path of 20 mm bullet) and declared same distance for chinese 1130 CIWS, which is the minimum launching range of Standard missiles. Yes China have a similar system to RIM-116 with a supposed minimum range of half nautical mile. Bye

[@zlayo_cro]

They literary showed the HHQ-10 (the RIM-116 equivalent) near the end of the video. It allegedly has a range of about 9km.

[@raffayniazi7970]

IRIAF with tomcats and su35s VS PAF with vipers,jeffs and maybe J10?

[@cyronader]

the pk on those hq9s are almost 100% I think that's unrealistic.

[@fqeagles21]

true

[@BrotherRex7567]

Pretty realistic I’d say, although we’d never do that with sm6s

[@Whiteplane]

I don't know what kind of EW/ECM suite the 055 has but it would definingly be jamming and shooting loads of chaff. A lot of Naval defense against missile spam is ECM and EW.

[@kxttd6870]

Dono't worry. It is just PLA's big fish boat. The US only needs to send his ally to fix it.

[@memelephant]

Danb the audio mixing just blasted my ears with jet noise

[@Gabriel_McMillan]

Possible solution, if it is possible. There was a new kind of land attack artillery gun planned for the CG/X cruiser, which was meant to be able to fire 6 artillery rounds from 100 miles away at a target ashore, and to have all 6 rounds impact simultaneously. One of the advantages of firing those SM-6s from so far away, and having them almost make it to the Chinese cruiser before it can react and fire an interceptor, is that it should instead be possible to program the SM-6s to all converge on the Chinese ship simultaneously, by lofting some higher, some lower, etc., which should make it all but impossible for the Chinese to intercept them all, because this will ensure that the US Cruiser could launch at a leisurely 1 missile every few seconds or so, but the Chinese will not react to the US launch until all 12 missiles are so are coming at it at once, so it may not have enough time to launch that many interceptors before they begin to impact...

[@christophero55]

Interesting take.

[@robertopiedimonte2078]

Think three-dimensionally with range in detection and firing distance plus active radar self guidance system there is time and space to intercept as many targets as many ammunition you have from any direction 0-360 and 0-90 all around from sea surface to Zenit, if everything works properly !!!

[@Gabriel_McMillan]

@@christophero55 Pardon my grammar. :) It seems I forgot to edit that one for a while... Apologies.

[@Gabriel_McMillan]

@@robertopiedimonte2078 Maybe with the CIWS, but if the simulation above was accurate, it would take that Type 055 some time to fire 12 interceptors. It looked like the shorter range HQ10 might be set up to fire a volley more rapidly, but from what I've read, there does seem to be an upper limit to the rate of fire of all the missile launchers, and it seems the VLS often takes the most time, while those HQ10 type launchers can be a little faster. It did say that SM-2s could launch ever few seconds, but at Mach 3, a few seconds is a very long time to launch each of 12 interceptors. They say if they have a fore and aft launcher, separate, then they could fire at twice the rate, because apparently the problem is that firing two out of the same launcher at once could cause them to interfere with each, and you certainly don't want a missile crash on take-off. The following is an excerpt from Quora on the best rated answer for an Arleigh Burke's VLS rate of fire (but it won't let me post the link): "In addition to what the other answers have said, it seems very likely possible to fire a missile from both the forward and aft VLS stations at the same or virtually the same time. Since they are not in danger of interfering with each other physically (due to being on opposite end of the ship), the only limit would be something in the software/radars. Here’s an image of the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers USS John S. McCain (DDG 56) and USS Benfold (DDG 65)." "As you can see, one of the ships (I am not sure which is which) appears to be firing SM-2 Standard missiles from the forward and aft sections in rapid succession.[1] Based on the distance between those missiles, I’d estimate they were launched within a couple seconds of one another at most. Here’s another picture of USS Cowpens (CG 63), a Ticonderoga class cruiser, launching two SM-2 missiles." "The SM-2 is guided by passive radar, using illumination from the AN/SPG-62 fire-control radar for terminal guidance. I don’t really know much of anything about radars, but I know that the search radars can track a whole bunch of targets yet, I believe, the AN/SPG-62 can only effectively illuminate one target at a time. The Arleigh Burke class destroyers have three of them, and the Ticonderoga class cruisers have four. And based on their arrangement, each radar seems to effectively have 360 degree coverage." "So if I’m correct, at least three targets can be attacked at the same time by SM-2 missiles. And multiple SM-2 missiles can be fired at the same target if desired. I’m not sure if the RIM-162 ESSM makes use of the same illumination radars, but I would assume so. Meanwhile, the RUM-139 ASROC and BGM-109 Tomahawk missiles do not use the fire control radars, and I suppose there is little limit on how many could be in the air at once." "But I still don’t know with what frequency they can actually be launched. These videos show Tomahawks being launched in 13-15 second intervals (from the same section of VLS), so they can be fired at least that frequently." "Probably at least twice that rate, since they could presumably launch from the forward and aft sections simultaneously."

[@Gabriel_McMillan]

@@christophero55 I believe the key to determining if this will work or not, and how well it will work, is to determine the rate of fire of the enemy interceptors, to allow you to calculate how many missiles have to arrive in what amount of time, between the moment of detection and the moment of launching the last interceptor in time to still be able to intercept. I'm sure the Type 055 launch rate is a closely guarded secret, but the Quora answer below should give you an idea of how this rate of fire might be calculated for the Type 055, based on how the example below calculates it for an Arleigh Burke. Essentially, the person used a video of a rapid fire exercise to then gauge the rate of fire, or at least that it could fire at least that fast. He found that, if there was a VLS cell on both the fore and aft, this would double the maximum rate of fire on a ship, because apparently the problem which limits rate of fire is that the missiles interfere with each other when launching if launched too close together, which makes perfect sense. You can google this and read it on Quora, with other answers, but unfortunately I can't post a link in a KZbin comment. This was the best rated answer for an Arleigh Burke's VLS rate of fire: "In addition to what the other answers have said, it seems very likely possible to fire a missile from both the forward and aft VLS stations at the same or virtually the same time. Since they are not in danger of interfering with each other physically (due to being on opposite end of the ship), the only limit would be something in the software/radars. Here’s an image of the Arleigh Burke-class destroyers USS John S. McCain (DDG 56) and USS Benfold (DDG 65)." "As you can see, one of the ships (I am not sure which is which) appears to be firing SM-2 Standard missiles from the forward and aft sections in rapid succession.[1] Based on the distance between those missiles, I’d estimate they were launched within a couple seconds of one another at most. Here’s another picture of USS Cowpens (CG 63), a Ticonderoga class cruiser, launching two SM-2 missiles." "The SM-2 is guided by passive radar, using illumination from the AN/SPG-62 fire-control radar for terminal guidance. I don’t really know much of anything about radars, but I know that the search radars can track a whole bunch of targets yet, I believe, the AN/SPG-62 can only effectively illuminate one target at a time. The Arleigh Burke class destroyers have three of them, and the Ticonderoga class cruisers have four. And based on their arrangement, each radar seems to effectively have 360 degree coverage." "So if I’m correct, at least three targets can be attacked at the same time by SM-2 missiles. And multiple SM-2 missiles can be fired at the same target if desired. I’m not sure if the RIM-162 ESSM makes use of the same illumination radars, but I would assume so. Meanwhile, the RUM-139 ASROC and BGM-109 Tomahawk missiles do not use the fire control radars, and I suppose there is little limit on how many could be in the air at once." "But I still don’t know with what frequency they can actually be launched. These videos show Tomahawks being launched in 13-15 second intervals (from the same section of VLS), so they can be fired at least that frequently." "Probably at least twice that rate, since they could presumably launch from the forward and aft sections simultaneously."

[@stang2291]

since the American stealth technology and the concept were shown to the Chinese military, they have been studying to penetrate this for nearly 30 years. They must have some purposes of building such a big mount of these morden ships. If you are familiar with the radar "s" or "x" on all the new ships including the carrier

[@jonathantoymaker]

In real life YJ-21 is ready anytime on any day...say hello to the fishes 😁

[@LondonSteveLee]

Type 45 would see this threat perfectly fine - but reacting to it? Not without Sea Ceptor. Type 45s ASTER suffers the same issue as many VLS based missile systems, when the threat is spotted late it is already inside the minimum engagement profile of the short range missiles. ASTER 15 for instance needs a good couple of miles before it can engage anything at sea level. Good old Sea Dart would have been better. Some of the Russian VLS missiles can turn after ejection using compressed air thrusters before the burn phase starts. Rotating barrel type CWIZ systems are way over-powered in DCS - the reality is they scatter rounds too much making engagement unlikely before the missile is so close, the collateral damage of it is going to be massive whether it detonates or not (though damage inflicted by a CWIZ round or two). I do hope you use your modelling of Type 45 to embarrass the UK MoD (hopefully applying pressure to fund them properly) Type 45 status: They have removed Harpoon (given them to Ukr) no replacements. Sea Ceptor fitment has been put on hold (permanently?) to build Sky Sabre systems for the Polish/Ukr border instead. The project to guide the 4.5" gun by RADAR against subsonic threats has been canned (madness given that ASTER is not replenishable at sea!), we have not bought into ASTER NT (anti ballistic missile version) - in essence Type 45 is only effective against threats seen in good time at medium range. Close in it's practically defenceless. The Type 45 needs a frigate escort for point defence with Sea Ceptor! Resorting to Falklands type tactics which caused at least one loss due to ships getting in each other's way during target acquisition. Have we learned nothing about penny-pinching on air defence destroyers?

[@timblack6422]

It’s an Awesome day!

[@jacktwinkie2869]

The chaff is an interesting concept, but having it be a 100% affective against the harpoons in the last one is a little unrealistic, cause US ships also have chaff right? Its a pretty old tech all things considered.

[@jonathanpfeffer3716]

Not just a little unrealistic, modern harpoon variants should be very good at not getting distracted by chaff. Even very very old ASMs shouldn’t be affected that much, strange.

[@tonglianheng]

Jamming isn't all about chaff. These modern destroyers on both sides are packed with advanced jammers.

[@uNorwegianguy]

Great videos, don't play myself, but love the videos you make. But when we will see the Naval strike missile in DCS? And the upcoming Joint strike missile that is just around the corner.

[@tom23rd]

1:50 i wonder if that means they could shoot down a bird using a missile intentionally 🤔

[@NE-Explorer]

Historically the US has maintained that missile warheads do not have to be large enough to sink a ship, just large enough to make it ineffective....loss of power to combat center...degradation of radar....rather than sinking

[@hughmungus2760]

Ahh some ideas for the distant future if you guys ever get the resources, but maybe consider a 2035 wargame, where the russians get their Lider class, China gets their Type 057 and Type 055A class with railguns, and the US get their DDGx and upgraded zumwalts with hypersonic missiles, and the UK gets their Type 032s and whatever else they have in the works.

[@TinfoilHatWearer]

I wonder if the Russian navy would be as badly prepared as their ground forces on Ukraine... I have been hearing some pretty disturbing rumors about the Russian military... Their moral and equipment is not great... I wonder how much truth there is to it.

[@virginccyy7645]

Yes because first they are behind US technology at least 2 generations and worst is that they all steal funding from the military. $65 billion goes in $40 billion probably makes.

[@nissekarlsson3172]

That should be encircled and targeted from several directions in a synchronized attack first with subs, then missiles fron aircraft...

[@dougabrahamsen2952]

Dcs needs to seriously step it up! When their shortcomings are obvious to the average players they failed!

[@rhenry7949]

Running detection when it is FAC is one thing, does the simulation allow you to launch missiles at these ships when the sea state is not FAC and when it is in a rain squal with a confused sea state which is actually more common with ship at sea?

[@chrisinstasis7986]

Sounds like every ship in Cap's navy has an accountant who can countermand the Captain's orders if it's too expensive. Maybe the suppliers have a contract where you get your money back if your ships blows up before you get to launch missiles.

[@deanmickiewicz495]

They can program 2 Naval Strike Missiles to move 180 degrees from each other and hit the ship at the same time. I'm sure the LRASM will spread apart then hit the ship from different angles at the same time. The chances are good that 8 missiles attacking at once will have 2-3 hits.

[@xsu-is7vq]

not that much of difference with 055. It’s radar is all phased arrays which doesn’t care how many directions attacks come from. There isn’t a limit on how many directions it can handle at one time. Only limit is how many missiles it has, and how far it can see the targets.

[@louisbabycos106]

Combine lrsam and sm6 . Fire LRSAM first so the SM6 and LRASM come into weapons envelope of the 055 at the same time .

[@ryangraber7929]

The Russian fleet had a massive sensor net, whereas the 055 was all alone, I'd be curious to see if a cluster of 055s had an easier time of it

[@hallo84]

The model of YJ 21 needs to be changed now. PLA just publicly announced that the missile flies at mach 6 average speed with a terminal velocity of mach 10. The missile does not slow down mid flight. So currently there is nothing in the USN arsenal that can take the YJ21 down...

[@josephsansevero4099]

I don't know if that ship could shoot it down. The trade off for radar is frequencies. The lower the frequency the better it can see closer to the ship. Most missile systems are higher in frequency than surface radar. Cwis was designed to shoot anything within 3 to 5 miles away. Once you turn it on it decides what to shoot and doesn't ask permission. You can't track any target that close with higher frequency.

[@josephsansevero4099]

If you look at navel ships they use wave guides not cables. The bigger the waveguide the lower the frequency is thus you can assume it's surface search radar. A surface search radar waveguide is huge.

[@barretmarshall]

You should run a rapid dragon assault on Chinese carrier group. Use rapid dragon with quicksink bombs.

[@elementaleighteight]

I see where you're going with this..ty

[@iankphone]

Block III Virginia SSN enters the chat. MK48 goes brrrrrt.

[@l.s8404]

Trying attacking the type 55 from multiple directions!

[@charlietheunicorn5383]

And then GR adds LASERS to the simulation!

[@yasyasamoun9960]

Awesome 👏 Well Prepared! Keep Up Yours Hard Work, Wishing All Heroes Safety and Peaceful Anywhere Mission. Yours Insane Sacrifices As Miracle. Long Healthy Peaceful Life.

[@gregbrown3764]

PSA: Don't cross your own T.

[@Cadenkellner23]

ticonderoga cmps and flight 1 and flight 2 arleigh burkes still have harpoon missiles and they the lrasm a can be launched by ship or plane and the lrasm b was a supersonic missile that was being planned but i dont know if they will make it or not.

[@henryverdugo9889]

Every time I hear you narrate I'm picturing Michael Bisping.

[@Rover200Power]

"A chink in its armour", somewhere an alarm goes off at KZbin HQ and a strongly worded email is prepared for GR.

[@grimreapers]

de-$?

[@Rover200Power]

@@grimreapers at least a spanked bottom.

[@LondonSteveLee]

I definitely detected a few slopes on Type 055 too - for stealth I presume...

[@connerfarr8072]

I believe ships would go broadside to optimaly utilize all of their radars and point defense systems.