USA vs Russia: Breaking the S-400 (with F-35s)

[@Chironex_Fleckeri]

Dude, I'll see you at a 500k subs in 2 years. You really have something special here. It's rare that I catch these sorts of things before the algorithm goes crazy. I'm going to turn on all notifications for this channel. Can't wait to watch whatever you make. I really like this channel as a way to understand modern military doctrine in action.

[@HypOps]

Wow. Your words make my day. Thank you for the praise. I will try to live up to it.

[@danielinokoba5655]

You’re right on that

[@ImperiumLibertas]

@@HypOps keep on downing exactly what you're doing. It's extrmeley entertaining. Your storytelling is next level. I tried to download CMO but was disappointed when it didn't live up to your videos haha. Consider adding a total engagement cost showing the dollar amount of the fight. Would be interesting bit of context.

[@polduran]

@@ImperiumLibertas Yes, the cost of the engagment would be a great addition.

[@dhiarnugraha]

They'll be 1M in no time

[@piccolo917]

Before the war in Ukraine I felt like you were underestimating the Russian abilities. Now, I feel like you were severely overestimating them.

[@KJ-kn8pg]

Oh yes, always believe the one-sided news, Ukraine is winning.

[@piccolo917]

@@KJ-kn8pg Well, Ukraine won the battles for Kyiv and Kharkiv, are making advances in the south and are overall giving the Russians a VERY bloody nose where on paper they should not have been able to. Do I think they are winning, though? No, not really. They are slowly being pushed out of the Donbass and are suffering a lot of losses, both militarily and civilian, and have had massive damage done to their infrastructure, industry and agriculture as well as basic services such as water and electricity. If you can't distinguish "Russia is doing poorly" from "Ukraine is winning", that's a you problem, not a me problem. Edit: chaged the word they for Ukraine in the first sentence

[@Lomnjac007]

@@piccolo917 Kyiv was a false flag, northern army had 30 000 troops of which 13 000 were even going towards Kiyv itself. As for the advances in the south... What advances? Well Kherson and entire coast from sea of Azov straits to near Odessa is in Russian hands, firmly!

[@piccolo917]

@@Lomnjac007 if kyiv was a false flag, so was the entire invasion. cope, bitch.

[@aaronhuffman8395]

@@Lomnjac007 For now. We thirst for war. Best leave soon

[@DBMaxwell]

"A single F-35, callsign 'Grinch' pushes out ahead of the pack. Grinch has got eight Stormbreaker glide bombs and he is coming to ruin Christmas." that line absolutely killed me. The concept. The Delivery. Just perfect

[@acefighterpilot]

17:45

[@tostadatheviking7828]

Yeah, that'll ruin Christmas alright

[@Felix-ve9hs]

And then hist friends light up the radar like a chrismas tree at 18:40 ^ ^

[@pacient72]

Если не упадет в море еще на подлете

[@PalindromicGaming]

​@@pacient72I put good tax dollars into those things, I sure as shit hope it doesn’t.

[@f.powell8724]

It's astounding just what eight years of technological progression can do to a battlefield, from a near fair fight to an absolute slaughter. Just goes to show the value of high tech weaponry for any military.

[@eliasziad7864]

S-500 is the F22 and F35 killer.

[@f.powell8724]

@@eliasziad7864 All 7 of them (Including the mock-ups)

[@eliasziad7864]

@@f.powell8724 What 7 of them?

[@seanmac1793]

@@eliasziad7864 yeah and then pilots preform a turn and lose the missle because S500 is an ABM platform not meant to engage maneuvering aircraft

[@AdityaKumar-vr9wg]

@@seanmac1793 lets be real this is a game nothing like real war and s-500 is ment to engage f 35 not s400

[@NexusReload]

Turns out all it takes to take out an S400 is a Neptune missile in ground attack mode

[@touchgrass7078]

lol yeah

[@diogobotelho5141]

Yup, S-400 is not that scary all of a sudden tbh 🤣

[@bzipoli]

btw the mode didnt even existed until recently mf just tested on it

[@KotMatrosk1n]

Undisputed achievement of mighty Ukrainian military industry (and totally not Storm Shadows btw)

[@someonesvagabond]

Cope more.

[@ThePaszczaq]

the simulation is good, but it seams it didn't consider that one side is Russia and a quarter of missiles were stolen from the warehouse, 3 launch vehicles were lost due to poor tire maintenance and the radar team was drunk during the fight xd

[@denverflatpackjedithornton]

Drinking vodka now... Nodding head

[@dcs-web-editor]

And the commander thought Saudi Arabia was attacking so most fighters went in the wrong direction, but nobody dared to tell him otherwise.

[@azjatek]

lol

[@dj007twk]

Cool story bro. Hang on to the petrol dollar.

[@OhBee-007]

You forgot about the ones that never made it to the battlefield due to no fuel and stolen by Ukraine's tractor battalion.🤣🍻🥂🍾

[@tuhuar]

"Grinch has got 8 StormBreaker glide bombs, and he's coming to ruin Christmas" Man, I know it's been a while but that's really not how I remember that movie ending lmao

[@name_exe1576]

as heartwarming as the movie was, i think it would end kinda differently if the grinch had cluster bombs to drop on whoville

[@mifune9634]

Yeah. It's in the director's cut.

[@HypOps]

Special thinks to Broke who came up with the Grinch callsign . When I was recording this section nearing Christmas, I just knew I had to work that in there somehow.

[@KoishiVibin]

yeah he gets shot down by Santa in a 6th generation stealth interceptor

[@Fanboy_of_everything]

@@KoishiVibin the nightmare before Christmas. No literally that’s the climax Santa gets shot down

[@IrishCaesar]

I know it might seem daunting getting over 2 million views for a channel under 100k, but we don't need something crazy big, this level of stuff is fantastic. I know I'm not speaking just for myself when I say we miss your content and can't wait to see what more is coming

[@GTRNR]

It is the booby trap... the click bait

[@AtomicTrain]

​@@GTRNR wdym by this?

[@clive_the_fat_cat]

Nato has hired him to help plan attacks in Ukraine

[@cookiecraze1310]

We may not have needed something big but now we're getting it, would have been cool to see more of these mini-indepth videos exploring air defence concepts and stuff but seeing a full scale theoretical war is definitely more exciting.

[@weiwenng8096]

There's a video going around of an S-400 site shooting off 6 interceptors and then getting whacked by a cluster ATACMS. The best interpretation is that the Ukrainians shot 5 ATACMS at that one site, and they hit 4. There's some reporting that 5 ATACMS total were used in that strike. Of course, it could have been at 5 different targets. The worst interpretation, naturally, is that they shot 6 interceptors at one measly ATACMS and they missed all 6.

[@dominuslogik484]

its not impossible that they missed all 6 missiles, the way they fired them looked to be targeting a missile that was already very close and at a bad angle for those missiles to try and intercept.

[@kriegkrieger7068]

​@@dominuslogik484s400 should have detected it with it's range, guess it fell short of expectations and not really as good as it is on paper or the crew were the problem.

[@dominuslogik484]

@@kriegkrieger7068 also the shockingly tightly packed configuration makes me think its possible that the S400 system was not properly setup or was originally planning to move but ran out of time and they kind of setup to try to intercept in a rush or panic.

[@sshumkaer]

Both are correct, it was at an Airfield so there would of been more than One ATACMS with none or close to nothing intercepted.

[@dominatorandwhocaresanyway9617]

There are special decoy missiles witch radar signature tht can be changed to mimic the missiles it escorts

[@scpguy1381]

0:00 Cruise Missles 4:05 Setup 4:32 4th Gen 12:14 Intermission 13:21 5th Gen

[@hazardgoose2352]

21:00 Bruh Moment

[@thenuugaming5082]

@@hazardgoose2352 😂

[@clairelucas7118]

That chemical plant …….. bruh enough with the missiles that like the 30th one The f35s .. LUNCHTIME BOYS the plant OH SH

[@Innominati1]

Where was the Russian group of ships and what kind of work did they do during all these battles?

[@Innominati1]

This video is banal propaganda. It is designed for airplane pilots first and air defense operators second, so that they will be afraid of the аmerican army, which will become so strong in 2024, and immediately leave the army

[@HypOps]

Sorry for the long wait! I had to sort a few things out and figure out how to edit properly. Now that I'm happy with the channel's style, I'm going to focus on video upload frequency and start churning these out faster!

[@cancle6170]

Thanks for the birthday wish man

[@jpank11]

So glad your back!

[@Avidityfps]

Yessss I've been waiting!!!!!!

[@bobtank6318]

Welcome back

[@adaw2d3222]

Your channel is the best I've subscribed to in years.

[@archer1133]

This channel could really take off if you upload consistently, as it provides an unprecedented visualization of modern-day conflicts and policies. The videos are engaging and I can't wait to see some of the upcoming videos you have mentioned in the comments.

[@TheOneWhoMightBe]

"Did I underrate the S-400?" Based on experience in the invasion of Ukraine, I'd say it's been overrated.

[@mso1ps4]

For anyone not up-to-date, two S-400 missile systems in Crimea were largely destroyed by Ukrainian Neptune missiles last August, and at least six S-400 launchers and a S-400 command vehicle have been destroyed by GMLRs in Eastern Ukraine/Russia since January of last year.

[@BillyBob-bd1hj]

@@mso1ps4 Did the ghost of Kiev tell you that personally?😂

[@jheithaus3]

@@BillyBob-bd1hj How do you think they blew up? The SAT pictures are clear. The units are gone.

[@Hexapon1]

@@BillyBob-bd1hj cope and seethe fashie

[@Bill-us3kl]

@@BillyBob-bd1hjthe ghost of Kyiv was real buddy

[@thomasvandijk87]

These simulations do a good job of conveying how complex, expensive, and destructive modern warfare can be. Often we only tend to see how advanced a single modern jet fighter is, without realizing that its opponent is equally advanced. The resulting air-to-air combat evens out and still has the same dynamic as two groups of warriors hurling javelins at each other and then running for cover, only more expensive. I'm quite curious to see an exploration of drone swarms and their cost-effectiveness on the modern battlefield! To what extent will they be able to change the battle space and will they render expensive fighter/carrier tactics obsolete?

[@Tonius126]

smaller drones have no range and very limited EC and thus weak to electronic warfare. Cruise missile borage is the closest allegory, maybe having them stealth, cheaper with higher numbers and smarter to avoid defense and able to maneuver is the future. Not drone swarms. Skyborg program the USAs project wingman have a bigger drones. longer range, heavier electronics, stealth with limited weapon storage and carrier centric. I could see dedicated smaller cheaper carriers carrying these new drones integrated into a navy strike group alongside the Super Carriers with F-35s. Expensive Fighters, semi expensive drones and carrier tactics are here to stay and is the future.

[@bruhmettinmomentogullar4215]

there was a concept of making a wall right next to EWR and TAR radars with really small radio wave emitting drone swarm. They are so small that even aaa would have struggle with it. Maybe they can bild the short range sam systems that engages with harms and stand off weapons

[@HypOps]

I'm always surprised how little content there is on modern warfare that goes beyond a single weapon platform and its capabilities. Often only a robovoice channel spouting propaganda numbers. Any reputable literature is typically geared towards military organizations/think tanks and there is basically nothing addressing/educating the general public. I hope I can do my bit to change this.

[@polduran]

@@HypOps You're doing a great job ! Please keep doing that. I learned so much from your videos and you're right i never found videos like yours in this format.

[@michiel2047]

In a way it's reassuring to see how targeted modern warfare is in comparison to the indiscriminate bombing of 80 years ago.

[@TheJuggtron]

What I've learned from HypOps videos. Have more missles than the enemy.

[@sergeant64]

*_Why would the Russians defend a "dirt road" (air field) in the middle of the desert in the first place??_* If we learned something from the Syrian was it is that Russian are very good to prioritize, to make up of their shortfall. USA could not wipe out ISIS. But Russian bombed the oil trucks at the Turkish border crossings effectively halting the dollar flow. No salaries or new weapons for ISIS. And ISIS started to fall apart.

[@GrayD1ce]

It helps to have more of everything, the good stuff helps

[@Ashadow700]

Russia: "Wait.... you wanna beat anti-air systems using air power"? US: "No... I want to beat _everything_ using air power."

[@saltyfloridaman7163]

America has airpower for its airpower. USA sits at number 1 and 2 for biggest airforce, the US Airforce, and the US Navy in 2nd. Not to mention we have more F-35s than many airforces have fighters of any gen

[@bikibora646]

Also Russia: say it again..

[@kazejah1014]

As great as Russian or any missile defense system is, there is no answer for attrition and exhaustion. All systems can be overcome by merciless attack. Awesome stuff.

[@Anticheat2011]

Yes but the concealment of f35 is absolutely astonisthing … enemy radar is practicaly useless to the moment when the attack begins …

[@ТимофейОстрогляд]

Or two Mi-24s

[@randyeduo]

he can talk all he wants, thats not the real thing-- the Russians prepare their systems for all these scenarios. if the Russian plane takes into the air, they have electronic systems with them

[@randyeduo]

THE AMERICANS CAN NEVER GAIN AIR SUPERIORITY OVER RUSSIA'S DEFENCE SYSTEMS. --THE RUSSIANS DO NOT RELY ON JUST s300. THEY HAVE THE BEST ELECTRONICS SYSTEMS IN THE WORLD AND THEY HAVE USED IT AGAINST AMERICAN SHIPS WITH GREAT SUCCESS They have also used it in Stria against the F35 and caused a lot of problems for them

[@ТимофейОстрогляд]

@@randyeduo they can’t shoot down two Hinds, what are you talking about?

[@dodobird679]

This has to be the best demonstration of an integrated air defense system, and the methods to penetrate and break one. I think the coolest part is how this demonstrates the importance of electronic warfare in a modern battlefield. It's always been tough to learn and understand it, but this video does a great job at showing and explaining it!

[@OleDiaBole]

This is logical only to someone completely ignorant. After 3 months of continuos bombing during invasion on Serbia, only 25% of relict radar systems were destroyed. (pore American public are unaware of super cheap radar wave emiter decoys with far stronger emissions than actual radars) In Serbia we lured thousants of super- expensive loiter weapons with 20/$ microwawe ovens. 😂. Ignorance is truly bliss.

[@dodobird679]

@@OleDiaBole That's true, the Yugoslavians were incredibly clever at keeping their assets alive even in the face of technological and material superiority. On top of the microwave decoys (which I heard were even combined with fake radars to fool visual observers), the Yugoslavs also had a number of other tricks. For one, their decoys were remarkably effective. After the ceasefire, NATO observers would still have difficulty telling a fake from a real one, even if they knew there was a fake. Their decoys would go so far as to cover fake MiGs in foil to simulate the radar return, as well as putting in a little bit of burning fuel to simulate a idling engine. Another trick they made extensive use of was camouflage. On top of conventionally hiding their radar and missile sites when they weren't in use, the Yugoslavs would also use other clever applications of camouflage, such as stretching black material over bridges to make them look like roads so they wouldn't be bombed In addition, some Yugoslav commanders were very careful with their assets, most famously Dani Zoltan, the same commander who led the unit that shot down the F-117. Using lessons learned from the 1982 Lebanon war as well as many of the methods mentioned above, his unit avoided 23 anti radiation missiles with only minimal losses. Of course, while being so careful was good for staying alive, it wasn't as useful for downing enemy planes. Throughout the 78 day action, Yugoslavians as a whole could only claim 5 manned aircraft kills in total. It's a good example of how even if SEAD doesn't kill enemy installations, it can still stifle and mitigate their presence.

[@jefferyzhang1851]

This is really a saturation attack against a vastly outnumbered air defense unit. They are using $3B worth of aircraft in the 4G scenario to attack an air defense unit that cost less than $400M. The S-400 unit ran out of missiles against the saturation attack and got hit as a result. In the 5G scenario they are using over $5B of aircraft to attack an outnumbered air defense unit from an earlier generation. If the other side had even half the budget of the attacker, things would have been very different.

[@dodobird679]

​@@jefferyzhang1851 For the record, redfor has closer to 1.3B in assets, since redfor also has ~700m worth of air assets on top of their ground based launchers and radars worth roughly 600m. Blufor also spent approx. 200m worth of tomahawks in the initial strike before the main engagement Regardless, I think that's a good observation: one of the main reasons why 5th gen was so much more successful was that they brought more munitions, and kept more of their aircraft alive to deliver their payloads. Really shows how spending just a little bit more can turn 20% losses into 0% losses.

[@jefferyzhang1851]

@Russell's Brand To be fair this was a fairly contrived attack-defense scenario. Involving Russian counter strike options would have complicated the scenario beyond its central purpose: test a USN carrier battle group's strike capabilities against a single S-400 battery. As I mentioned in my comment, it's a vastly lopsided fight when you use $30B of hardware to hit $300M worth of defenses. In the 4G scenario, the defenders would have basically incurred no ground casualties if they had even 2 S-400 batteries.

[@vme1111]

Fast forward to now, and we see that 30-40 year old missiles work just fine against not only the S400, but the S500 as well it’s looking like LMAO

[@fluppet2350]

In reality, scenario 1 would likely play out closer to scenario 2.

[@eeygore9150]

America developed its technology to match what the Russians said on paper- it's not our fault that the Russians are just now putting into practice what they wrote down decades ago

[@Cleon851]

@@eeygore9150most people don’t grasp that, Russia over exaggerates their equipment, while the USA treats it like fact and makes actual dominant systems. The f15 is the best example of the USA treating Russian hype as fact and finding out it’s nonsense. Russia has always been the nation of mediocrity

[@pancytryna9378]

​@@fluppet2350 Scenario 1 was stil very sucesfull when you consider its an air attack on strong AA defense

[@Gold_Roberto]

Absolutely, SA-17, SA-22 and S-400 are all insanely good SAMs from russia, as a falcon bms player myself (sim about the F-16) I can't even imagine taking one of them down with two flights of four, let alone by myself 😂

[@Luxai]

I like how when you talk about the second engagement and you're opening with the stealth attack, led by the reconnaissance, your voice is notably lower. It really gives that air of talking about the importance of surprise and keeping a low profile, and as soon as the jig is up, much more dramatic again. Being able to carry the mood of whats going on on the screen with your voice is a good talent to have, and you do have it.

[@NonsenseFabricator]

First off: Great work making this. :) Second... It is kind of crazy how much we overestimated Russian air defenses. Turns out all you need to score kills is to bolt a few HARMs from the early 90s to a MiG and set them to autonomous mode. IRL, it's not a "shoot 90 missiles and they shoot down 70" situation. It's one where you shoot 1 missile and it stands a moderate chance of hitting.

[@tylerclayton6081]

Russian propaganda is second to none. All of their stuff is overhyped. If Russia was as good at military operations as they are at propaganda, they would’ve conquered half the world by now

[@oldfashionedwrx3574]

Russian military stuff is junk lol

[@ko-Daegu]

in real life the retaliation is the real issue right now US could absolutely wipe russia not just syria but would russia just wait and see and not use their 10k+ nukes ???

[@thedausthed]

@@ko-Daegu They do not have even close to that numbet

[@ko-Daegu]

@@thedausthed according to the CIA they do regardless a 10'th of amount is enough to deter

[@SkyWKing]

Despite this seems like an unfair bully of the S400 system, this video shows exactly the strategic value of the S400: to make the attack so costly and complex that the attacker has to escalate the situation to achieve a minor tactical objective. The countries that buy those systems get their money's worth, assuming they can keep readiness high (which we know is the hard part).

[@stevedavenport1202]

Destroying red teams SAM system is not a minor tactical objective. Assuming they cannot be easily replaced, you have just created a scenario where other strategically important targets can be eliminated inside the theater of operations.

[@joaomaxado65]

Less costly than having russians there ? Without the putilanders there it will less costly to beat syrians, no? And the weapon stockpiles are full...

[@tocu9808]

Minor tactical objective ? If the S-400 systems were to protect something of strategic significance, often they would probably do, rendering them useless means breaking the cover wide open to destroy those dangerously exposed high value targets. Quite a major win, actually.

[@LLAALALA]

Everyone says that destroying the S400 system is a major win keep in mind that the second test is done with weapons operational in 2023, at which point the S400 is likely an out-of-date system and not likely be defending high-value targets, not alone anyway. So take out an S400 system in 2023 is only a minor victory. For the first test let face it all those lost aircraft are just not worth it.

[@tocu9808]

@@LLAALALA - What would replace S-400 by then ? Would they be capable to survive an overwhelming attack similar to the 2nd sim scenario ?

[@YippingFox]

"It is almost as if somebody set this up to explore SEAD". That is indeed exceptionally curious...

[@Just_A_Random_Desk]

I like to come back to this video every now and then for a good laugh. All I gotta do is sort comments by newest to find all the Vatniks.

[@v0id683]

Yup :D

[@katastenu8216]

I be doing that rn😂

[@jimmcneal5292]

Interesting to return here after Ukrainian strikes on Crimea, who could have known that drones and old AA missiles would be enough to breach the S-400 AA. It however probably means that US ships are in big danger from chinese anti-ship missiles

[@fancy1929]

​@@jimmcneal5292 What a fool you have to be to shoot down a slow and cheap drone with specialized and very expensive air defense for cruise missiles and S-400 aircraft. And the funny thing is that the patriot in Kiev did not shoot down a single shahid, but the patriot was destroyed

[@jimmcneal5292]

@@fancy1929 well, drones can be directed to destroy the AA systems. However I haven't seen the evidence of the Patriot destroyed, so it probably is not true

[@notamingebag]

Everyone comments about severely overestimating Russia's capabilities but I just keep coming back to read the comments of the general anti-us crowd desperately trying to cling onto the old days when we didn't know how incompetent Russia actually is. I'm not sure if schadenfreude is the correct word. Great video btw, looking forward to the next one.

[@uninvestigated]

Hey to be fair to Russia they are sending in junk to Ukraine. A lot of the videos of captured Russian soldiers they are all prisoners given reduced sentences to fight in Ukraine. So they are even sending junk soldiers. Either way economically Russia wouldn't have a chance against NATO. China is the threat. Especially in about 5 years time. Power shift for sure.

[@yaya_is_real]

Aged like shit

[@cedevitaholic5084]

I'm just gonna join the army of people recognizing the "wining cues" for this YT channel. You've done a good job of finding a format that absolutely works. Realistic modern warfare with the right dose of technical data combined with a "movie-like" structure that keeps the viewer glued to the content until the very end. With continued work I'd expect to see you up there with The Operations Room or even better in a year or two. Good luck. Subbed.

[@HypOps]

Wow, thank you for your praise. I will try to live up to the them. I am surprised there are not people already doing what I am attempting, modern warfare/near future conflict is very interesting and yet the audience seems underserved to me.

[@ScorpionXXXVII]

@@HypOps there are a few, but you have a good combo of things that they don't have. Some are good story tellers, some are good at running Sims, some are intelligent, and some have good production value. You've put it all together. I just hope you can take the criticism...because even if you made perfect sims, people are going to pick them apart. Obviously you can't make a perfect representation of reality, but people are going to complain no matter what. Just do your best and try to not let any bias get to you. Grim Reapers are a DCS group that does some similar simulations if you want to check out competition. But they are heavily focused on the game itself.

[@Usual_crypto_guy]

This is a game made by russians. Lol. Digital Combat Simulator.

[@BattleOrder]

Very cool

[@HypOps]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@Leo-mp9nl]

I'd say the same, I haven't seen such quality content in a while

[@narzullayev8907]

@@HypOps very cool in dream. It is Us dream. Just dream. They frightened by S-400. Hahaha. That's why they united with all Eu. Otherwise America would be vanished long ago

[@humanitychangers3846]

@@narzullayev8907 you just fish haft of the video right 😒 😑.

[@MrBen527]

Yes, nice job!

[@Jim87_36]

The biggest flaw in this whole scenario is assuming the S400 works properly and that any Russian jets wouldn’t explode or disintegrate after take off

[@Horible4]

Overestimating the enemy and preparing for them at their theoretical best is doctrinal in the US Military. With countries like China and Russia, they have to keep things looking perfect. When they reveal a new weapon, they have to show it off at a parade. They have to show how strong they are, they don't need to improve. The United States might have a reveal for something to please shareholders, but they never assume something is perfect. They have the largest defense budget in the world for a reason. They're ALWAYS 7 steps ahead. While military advisors in Russia and China keep telling themselves that everything is perfect and no improvements are needed, the United States is constantly underestimating itself. Constantly finding ways to get better so when they do eventually see combat, they can assure that it will be as one sided of a fight as possible. This hasn't helped the pre-Ukraine war narrative that Russia is strong by basically everyone on the internet (myself and a few others excluded, I can prove it by going back through my comment history), but it has made for a spectacle the last couple of years.

[@bikibora646]

the biggest flaw in this whole scenario is assuming the blue team didn't got jammed by Russian EW right after takeoff.

[@andro3455]

Just need to send in 30 Ukrainian farmers on tractors to tow away all the Russian SAMS.

[@JanCordes]

You win my friend 😁

[@surfdocer103]

There is a meme with a tractor on the seabed attached to the stern of the cruiser pulling it under😂

[@darkonojic7494]

Whilst you trust in Ukraine advancing, Russia is burning soil and larg scale surrendering is happening at the moment. Azov is done.

[@56ctconger]

@@darkonojic7494 Does burnt soil taste good?

[@TechandTools1]

Best comment 👌

[@JZ909]

As they say, flexibility is the key to air power. The most obvious issue with the American 4th gen attack is that they don't use the mountain range to the east of the SAM site. Flying low on the eastern side of the mountain range, the attackers should be able to deny all the ground-based air defenses the ability to shoot at the aircraft, leaving them the same weapon saturation attack they faced in the 5th gen strike. They may have needed tanker support and overflight into Israel and Jordan to pull that off, but I think it's fair to give them that. The only real threat would have been the fighters, and they could have either been saturated with MALDs or perhaps picked off with MALD/Prowler supported Hornets before they even get the chance to shoot.

[@pamagujar183]

I guess we don't send out a lot of flares to confuse the heat seeking missiles ?

[@iamwepty8986]

Please make more of these. This is such a niche topic to cover but you’re doing them incredibly well and the format is super realistic and informative keep up the great work!

[@snarkygnome619]

I would argue about the "niche", at least from the point of how much money in the world is put into doing exactly this. ;)

[@iamwepty8986]

@@snarkygnome619 it’s a niche topic for the common public is more what I’m going along with. I’m well aware it a massive industry, however outside of people who are directly involved this sort of stuff isn’t talked about super in-depth

[@snarkygnome619]

@@iamwepty8986 Yeah I understand. :) Author is hitting just the right spot by bringing new content about stuff that interests a lot of people but is very difficult to talk argumentatively about or to bring content about - by using a simulator that is very niche (and bringing more attention to this simulator on the side).

[@iamwepty8986]

@@snarkygnome619 precisely

[@HypOps]

I plan to really ramp up this year! And to join the discussion, I think part of the reason is that so few creators in the space seem to do it well. Modern warfare is incredibly exciting if it is explained and presented well and there are only a few creators able to do that. As a counterpoint, Tom Clancy managed to do a very good job in the fictional novel space and gained a sizable audience for it. I hope to channel a bit of him for HypOps.

[@_DigitalDave_]

I find this video a bit funnier now that the war has been in full swing for awhile now and has shown the Anti Air and general use of the S-400 has been proven to be completely useless. Consistently destroyed, taken out and unable to intercept most projectiles. But regardless still a great video with the information provided at the time, but in reality around the time stamp of 2:15 nearly 60% / over half of those s-400 missiles would vastly miss their targets or some not even properly launch out of the tube as they are now days also showing consistent lack of quality. 2:57 there is absolutely no way a jet let alone Russian Pilots are catching up to a Tomahawk missile mid flight let alone ever actually make contact just firing their guns at it. A lot of this video for some reason shows these all having like a 100% accuracy rating.

[@sabundus590]

The video was made under the assumption that Russia is not lying about the capabilities of the S400, which was a mistake from the start 😂

[@bikibora646]

This is exactly what happens when you totally rely on YT videos to make judgements. It's not your fault considering the majority of West are overwhelmed by the Informational Warefare System dominated by West.

[@numericbin9983]

Awesome work, I've been looking lately for a realistic modern encounter between 2 different technologies & glad you're here !

[@HypOps]

Welcome aboard!

[@billjones7223]

@@CloneDAnon it’s silly to speculate anyway. He had a whole drawn out air battle to take out a US carrier when reality is they’ll just nuke the whole fleet if it got anywhere near them during war time

[@ScorpionXXXVII]

@@billjones7223 they're still going to have to hide a nuke launch with a barrage like this.

[@tomnguyen8546]

This issue here is you're highly overestimating the Air Defense capability of Russia's personnel. It's one thing for the S-400 to engage, but now you're asking for ground controllers to "walk on" fighters for engagement on cruise missiles. CMs have very small RCS and it's extremely difficult to find and engage them. We do exercises all the time with cruise missile defense and most times a fighter might be able to take out 2 cruise missiles before the rest get through and you can't chase them down.

[@parallax9084]

Yeah russian personel are so useless when a serb ground officer took down an American F117 with an outdated Anti Air. You are very nationalistic.

[@Butter_Warrior99]

Still, it’s better to overestimate than underestimate right?

[@tomnguyen8546]

@@Butter_Warrior99 Sure, but only up to a degree. At some point it's gross overestimation. From what I've seen in my career trying to target aircraft to cruise missiles, this is a high overestimation.

[@SovereignTroll]

That means no training.

[@NonsenseFabricator]

@@Butter_Warrior99 If that were always true, Russian propaganda wouldn't have worked so hard to make us overestimate them.

[@vaevictis3612]

I like that in CMO you had to utilize the entire might of a carrier strike group to suppress \ destroy the S-400 battalion here. All it took in Ukraine to knock down several batteries (part of a large AD network) were a few ancient MiG-29 tweaked to carry ancient AGM-88B, coupled with some decoys \ drones. This illustrates just how hard it is to emulate actual readiness and gaps in coverage \ efficiency in a software that just reads the (declared) specifications and assumes the system's full posture and maximum readiness. SEAD operations are more intricate than just a large head on strike, and are often planned with a more careful approach in mind, distributing the strike to attrite, degrade the capability of the AD system, and/or use other operational means \ methods to suppress it. I am sure that AFTTP 3-1 and related manuals have a lot to say about it, no wonder it is classified.

[@Hectillion]

Yeah these simulations are based on if you have mildly competent leaders/generals lol

[@NonsenseFabricator]

@@Hectillion It's not just the Russians. Air defense is really really difficult even for good militaries. The USS Stark didn't manage to fire a single shot in self defense before being struck by Exocets. In CMANO it would've been flinging SM-1s the whole while, blasting the Phalanx, and probably had sailors shooting .50 cals at the missiles, lol.

[@Sirius1914]

@@NonsenseFabricator Stark's air defence systems and phalanx were all turned off.

[@NonsenseFabricator]

@@Sirius1914 Yeah, because they didn't detect the launch. Phalanx is normally switched off to avoid friendly fire.

[@Sirius1914]

@@NonsenseFabricator Because all of the systems were off.

[@OptiPopulus]

3:12 The callsign is a subtle joke. There is a shop called "Sneed's Feed & Seed", where feed and seed both end in the sound "-eed", thus rhyming with the name of the owner, Sneed. The shop sign says that the shop was "Formerly Chuck's", implying that the two words beginning with "F" and "S" would have ended with "-uck", rhyming with "Chuck". So, when Chuck owned the shop, it would have been called "Chuck's Fuck and Suck".

[@Joseph-xj4ex]

Discovered you the other day, so glad I did. Not many other channels do these simulations. You have so much potential.

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

nice one!

[@HypOps]

Oh wow! I've followed your work for years!

[@russellhall1756]

Wow surprising to see you here!

[@MilitaryHistoryVisualized]

@@HypOps thank you, glad you enjoyed it!

[@filipbedy1124]

Bullshit

[@aidegrod]

Where russian anti-ship salvo from blacksea?

[@maxcorder2211]

As someone who attacked targets and SAM systems in N Vietnam, I can agree with you that even in those ancient days, ECM was a life-saver.

[@HypOps]

Thank you for your service! Something I find fascinating: the ALQ-99 jammers used in the 4th gen scenario was first introduced late in the Vietnam war. Perhaps you saw one in your time there? Even these older jammers are still classified technology 50 years onwards.

[@nikogrujic6807]

Yeah I remember those SAM system in Vietnam!!!! The American jets were dropping like birds out of the sky dey didn't have a chance against those SAM system. Greetings from LAS Vegas

[@abunchofiguanaswithinterne2186]

@@nikogrujic6807 Since you guys were over there, was it true that US pilots weren’t allowed to engage the very thing (the SAM sites) that was taking them out due to fear of killing soviet advisors?

[@danielharshman796]

based commie slayer

[@RoyChartier]

Iron Hand

[@deilusi]

This did not age well. Adding to the scenario state of "moscva" ship, and that this would be in similar disrepair, we can safely assume the first salvo would do at least twice the damage, with some of the AA not even loaded with ammo, or in a broken state for no reason, or malfunctioning halfway because of poor mainentenance.

[@stuarthamilton5112]

I greatly appreciate what you have done here. You have visualized and simulated what I have been trying to explain to people for the past three years now, that the F-35 is not intended to act alone as an air superiority fighter, that its stats alone do not determine its effectiveness. It is one integrated component in a carefully calculated stratagem to capitalize on American standoff strike capability and compel a defending force to surrender its position by engaging active detection systems regardless for how advanced those systems may be. You are awesome.

[@HypOps]

Glad you enjoyed it! I'm very happy with how the CEC and stealth/perspective sections turned out. These aspects are difficult to explain to the general public and I think this video did a reasonable job showcasing why they are so important on the modern battlefield.

[@KoishiVibin]

In layman's terms: The F-35 is intended to act as part of a network, and kek at enemy IADS by doing SEAD from outside their pew pew capabilities

[@yaz2928]

@@KoishiVibin Fortunately for the defender their radars have no problems detecting the F35 at long distances and so any miscalculation of the depletion of the defender's missile capability will get the attacking side destroyed.

[@strudaren3263]

@@yaz2928 it meen that Israel have huge looses in Syria. I can not remember Israel have any of it's F35 shoot down in Syria. Am I wrong or?

[@yaz2928]

@@strudaren3263 First of all, Israel does not fly its jets over Syria. It fires its missiles from Lebanese airspace towards Syria because of Syrian AA defense. The one time Israel did enter Syrian airspace its jet (F16) was destroyed at the Golan Heights. Secondly, Russia has been intentionally turning off the S400 and allowing Israel to bomb Syria. Lots of Syrians are angry about this and it has strained ties between Syria and Russia.

[@hristiyankolev9228]

The Ukrainian conflict is currently teaching us that the Russian air and ground assets are incapable of combined operations. It's either all plane or all air defenses, this means they are very poorly integrated with one another.

[@francmarcus8433]

Russian military is 95% psyops and 5% actual experience I have no doubt a fucking transgender drone operator could wipe out an entire Russian battalion tactical group

[@jont2576]

All air defence is good enough,it proved to be very effective in Yom Kippur war and Vietnam war.

[@nahlasenienahlasenie5273]

@@jont2576 I agree Russians are weak there is no need for NATO.

[@KKSuited]

@@jont2576 air defense is just that. It isn't projecting power. It isn't winning a war. It's simply air defense, and it's useless once tomahawks and radiation seeking missiles start hitting the command and control units.

[@jont2576]

@@KKSuited that's what the buk M2 is for and tell that to the Israelis in 1973

[@chaz__]

"Grinch has got eight Stormbreaker glide bombs and he’s coming to ruin Christmas" 🤣🤣🤣

[@HypOps]

This counts as a Christmas special!

[@Just_A_Random_Desk]

It gets even more funny when you realize S-400 was "protecting" a Russian boat that just got vaporized lmao

[@gerdipediaTV]

As we now know from the Ukraine, a few storm shadows are enough to switch off an S 400 battery. In reality, Russian air defense is much worse than we had imagined.

[@_Void_Archive_]

@@gerdipediaTV What is it about? The patriots couldn't shoot down a single missile, unless of course you believe the Ukrainian reformers, also with the S400 and other air defense systems. The Russian air defense is showing itself perfectly

[@Skoodelly]

@@_Void_Archive_ Didn't russia also kill 200 himars, 700 million patriot systems and 26 zelenskys

[@gerdipediaTV]

@@_Void_Archive_ blabla

[@ant-i6g]

​@@gerdipediaTV Despite the Russian showing in Ukraine the system itself is still very capable But much like the US first uses of the patriot they don't exactly have all the experience to work out the kinks

[@jamclancy9335]

I think the Russia-Ukraine war somewhat demonstrated just how unreliable at times even modern SAM systems (S-300 & S-400) could be. Didn't Ukraine, at several times, successfully hit Russian airbases (heavy bomber bases) at the heart of Russian land mass using 1980's era drones which are subsonic? So where were the S-300/400, Pantsirs & Tors which are supposed to intercept & shotdown those drones? Then there was that Russian battle cruiser Moskva which was hit by Ukrainian anti-ship missile which caused the warship to sink eventually. The Moskva was equipped with sophisticated SAM & CIWS system which were rendered useless against Ukrainian Neptune anti-ship missiles flying at sub-sonic speed. Now, US air to ground munitions like JASSM/JASSM-ER & SDB's are low observable weapons. While the HARM-ER is said to be flying at Mach-3 which would be difficult to intercept. I think it would be harder for SAM's & CIWS to shotdown those munitions especially if you factor in saturation & electronic jamming. I say in an actual battle/war, only about 50% to 60% of enemy munitions would be shotdown by S-300/400, Buk, Pantsir, Tor.

[@B-52H]

Most failures are due to lack of maintenance or radar failures for example the Moskva's radar interfered with communication and was turned off the hydraulics on the main gun were damaged the CWIS only had 1/7 working

[@jamclancy9335]

@@B-52H Which goes to show how difficult & challenging it is to maintain all these high-tech war machines at 100% (or close to that) readiness & efficiency. Maintenance means money. As they say, war is mainly about economics.

[@MrMichaelDorian]

@@jamclancy9335 its not so difficult to maintain if you have engeneers who can read and generals who would not steal maintaince money.

[@Mgl1206]

@@jamclancy9335 it’s not a difficulty of maintaining them so much as Russian military corruption

[@flyboymike111357]

Surface to air weapons are always a last line of defense. As the strike package gets to choose when and where they will attack, have height and mobility on their side, and even get to use gravity itself to power their weapons while the defending side has to work against gravity. Each attack aircraft can carry as many glide bombs, which might be low observable, as each SAM launching vehicle can carry missiles. And what happens if these glide bombs are just cluster munitions launchers like the JSOW? They could be adapted to deploy smaller glide bomblets or loiter bombs like switchblade.

[@kjohnston4846]

Brilliant video man. Definitely worth the wait and extra time for polishing. For those of you who are new, joining the discord is a major win. Definitely join it.

[@HypOps]

Sup KJohnston! Glad you liked it! (:

[@luminescentlion]

Significant overestimation of the capabilities of the S400 and significant underestimation of the capabilities of American tech and countermeasures...... The EW on the F18 and F35 would mean a S400 wouldn't even come close, no need for defensive maneuvering.

[@hoot1025]

Both were overestimated, Russian air defenses wouldn't respond as that with that much effectiveness and the amount of aircraft that were deployed on the American side was way too much. It's like mag dumping a civilian. Furthermore, the F18 would be struck without maneuvering due to the speed of the S400 missiles. The S400 would pick the F18s off one by one because of the radar and range advantages before the F18s could fire a missile. To prove this, an S400 missile goes 17,280 kilometres an hour whereas the top speed of the F18 is 1,915 kilometres an hour. You can do the math. (Also not sure about the F35, I'm mostly focused on older American aircraft)

[@sshumkaer]

It's all FAKE. America hasn't loss or ever used that many missiles to take out a location in any country since Vitneam, the last time America was somewhat close to everyone else in AIR POWER. It's Literally ALL FAKE. Even in Desert Storm on the Opening NIGHT of FIGHTING AMERICA NAVY/ AIRFORCE never loss that many aircraft. Maybe the Greater Western Countries combined did but NOT AMERICA.

[@MultiVeeta]

​​​​​​​​@@hoot1025 you need to do the maths, the S400 missile doesn't go that fast, 17,280kmh is the max speed of the target it can intercept not the missile itself. The max speed of the missile is between 3500 to 6500 kmh. That is typical of most anti air missiles. Dedicated Electronic Warfare aircraft degrade how effective SAMs are. The Israelis used over 100 aircraft in 2 hour operation to decimate Russian made SA6 in Syria back in the 80s and they also used drones to draw missiles, it's not mag dumping a civilian like you say (are you a gamer by any chance) it's making sure you remove the primary threat before striking the real targets. Games are not real life nor do they do good at replicating real life. It's not about scoring points it's about getting the job done. This game is far and away closer to reality than anything else but still can't replicate pilot decisions, co-ordination, force multipliers, command + control amongst many other things.

[@Modelstl063]

You know that from your decades of experience right

[@sshumkaer]

@@Modelstl063 YES

[@aidanabregov1412]

Sneed, Ligma, Moonman??? WTF are these call signs!?!?!?! (I love them)

[@ДмитроПрищепа-д3я]

I think those are nicknames from HypOps patreon or something like that.

[@anavioniclynx8338]

Also, IRL callsigns typically aren't cool like in movies. They're usually jokes based on name, personality, or something the pilot did during training. I wouldn't be surprised is Ligma was someone's callsign out there.

[@adamjbryant]

Piling on with others' praise. Just found this and am blown away by the quality of content - great setup, storytelling, and humor to boot. Instant sub! Another point: I have a few hundred hours in DCS, but despite nerding out on that a lot, I've always struggled to grasp the "big picture" of larger campaigns. Things like what role the EW/support aircraft are really playing, why SEAD/DEAD/CAP packages are structured and ordered the way they are, etc. I kind of just went through the motions and pushed the buttons; had a good time but never really 'got it'. I know this vid is just a sim-based simplification but I still feel like I learned more from this than anything else before! Keep up the great work!

[@tonas1997]

Looks like you'd enjoy Falcon BMS, then. That thing has an unmatched campaign engine :D

[@jimbob100-d3l]

You are never going to grasp that just by playing a game and listening to people who are just throwing out guesses...

[@mrhandyman3105]

Guess you will need to update this considering how bad Russia has performed in Ukraine.

[@ogbonnasam9997]

🤡🤡

[@LivebythecodeVJLEE]

Says the media. You tell me why western journalist are getting arrested in their own countries for spreading "misinformation" because they say good about Russia? It's because Russia is winning. Hands down. Also hope you don't live in Western Europe cause it's getting cold!!!!!

[@braxtonpaetz9535]

@@ogbonnasam9997 no no, handy man's got a point XD

[@Greasy__Bear]

Yea their propaganda wasnt near as good as ukraines. I guess we'll have to wait and see if propaganda is enough to win a war.

[@lemieux-z8933]

No, it's still a capable system, why do you think there's literally barely any Ukrainian flights? Because most were destroyed in the air by SAMs in Russia and airborne fighters and interceptors during the first hours and days and weeks

[@Poowderboy1]

Во всех сценариях русские только обороняются и отстреливают летящие в них ракеты. А почему нет ни одного варианта когда русские используют РЭБ и одновременно наносят удар по АУГ?

[@Yarik_1866]

Потому что режиссер американец

[@i.i.301]

Becouss russian too drunk at thus time

[@petrutm]

Don't ruin his computer game... F-35 looks very good on paper except those over 900 serious issues which forbids them to fly securely. And sometimes, at all.

[@heriv4671]

@@Yarik_1866 🤣🤣🤣👍

[@IO-tr3vr]

Россия лучше всех, и может раздавить врага особенно сша, может растопить всю америку

[@marshallb5210]

meanwhile, in real life: S-400 gets blown up by an FPV drone

[@_Void_Archive_]

A patriot, by the way, too. It's not their job. Just as the Patriots could not shoot down a single hypersonic Kinozal, so the S 400 cannot shoot down low-flying storm shadow (although usually almost all are shot down) and FPVdrones

[@eraserstp]

Not really. Some old Ukrainian S-300 launchers were destroyed by the Russian Lancet drone though

[@vincentphan5097]

@@_Void_Archive_ OSINT has already confirmed the Kinzhal wreckage in Kyiv to the one crashed in Crimea, where they both share the same parts from Iskander-M and the same unitary warhead. It’s not a FAB-500 either, as when was the last time a Russian jet flew over Kyiv? Kinzhal is literally an air-launched Iskander-M as well, with the US having similar system called the GAM-87 since the 1960s that went Mach 12. Patriot has been well-optimized to deal with ballistic missiles including hypersonic MIRVs and MARVs, with BMD being its primary mission since the 1991 Gulf War. From 2015 to today, the Patriot has already shot down 300+ ballistic missiles. What source said Russia shoots down down storm shadows as well?

[@chaosXP3RT]

@@_Void_Archive_ The Patriot shot down several Kinzhals because 1) they were fired directly at the Patriot and 2) they aren't hypersonic

[@chaosXP3RT]

@@eraserstp How are those lone S400's doing in Crimea? Not very well it seems. Russia lost another ship in Feodosia

[@SamtheIrishexan]

In hindsight we know that nearly all Russian equipment is sub par compared to stated specs by far, and is so poorly maintained again because of corruption that the Russian assets probably couldn't stop the tomahawk strike. Russia flying Sukhois with any sort of guided munitions is exceedingly rare. I am fairly convinced a carrier strike group could destroy the entire Russian military.

[@HypOps]

Yeah. I suspected I overrated the Russian side, just not by this much. This video shows 'theoretical' capability and not 'practical' capability This simulation also doesn't attempt to simulate anything like morale (Both sides have perfect morale). I also did not realize the Russian side has trouble supplying PGMs even at the beginning of a war.

[@Enkarashaddam]

@@HypOps please upload your take on the current situation. I studied this simulation a few months ago, blow by blow, I just had no idea the Russians were THAT incompetent. Seriously they can't even stop a bunch of drone strikes much less a carrier group

[@Ryo-sd9rx]

Russia acts like everything they have is superior when in truth we know it's anything but. Equipment and training is nothing like ours

[@shooter7a]

@@Ryo-sd9rx training and maintenance most importantly.

[@nicko978]

Came back to this video after recent developments, I think we were all overestimating the bear.

[@VV-iz3jn]

Interesting video. The Russian side seems to be missing some integral assets of its own - where is the Polyana? Where are the electronic warfare assets? The 2024 scenario is a deliberate mismatch of course, given a US force dependent entirely on drawing board missiles while leaving the Russians with the exact same weapons. It would be interesting to run it a third time giving the Russians their own next generation weapons (the Su-57, the S-350 Vityaz, newer editions of all these SAMs)

[@kevincomai3735]

They are attacking Syria not Russia….

[@naceks]

@@kevincomai3735 if they go for russian instalation in syria - they attack russia.

[@kevincomai3735]

@@naceks ok let me rephrase this they are attacking a different countries land not the actual land that makes up the country of Russia. Syrias land won’t have the same defenses and in the same quantities that Russias land does. Syrias land doesn’t have the same number of Russian fighters on it as Russians land does. Syrias land doesn’t have the same number of missile silos for anti ship weapons, electronic warfare, SAMs amongst many other things as Russias land does. So like I said they’re attacking Syria not Russia

[@naceks]

@@kevincomai3735 yes and no. they would be attacking RUSSIAN military in Syria...so they would be attacking russia... lets reverse the situation - if Russians would attack USA compound in Afghanistan (when USA was there) would USA count that as attack on Afghanistan or USA? also - S450/S500 systems have satellite in polar orbit destruction capabilities (GPS navigation satellites)...what do you think would happen at the moment Russians would figure out that USA has attacked them in Syria? Russians also have tech for turning USA (and others as well) electronics off - they demonstrated that in 2014 (could be wrong year, google it) when two unarmed Su24s turned off USA navy destroyer from cca 30km away... or why do you think that nobody touches them in Crimea&Ukraine with a pole?

[@kevincomai3735]

@@naceks first, no one is saying this wouldn’t start a war between USA and Russia I never said nor has anyone, that I have seen, in the comments section say that this wouldn’t cause war with Russia but we are talking about a single battle with specific circumstances not what would happen after it or what would. Second the claim about shutting off electronics was about the aegis combat systems which was originally posted from a Russian state run network and was denied by the us Gvmt so we actually have no way of knowing what really happened there beyond the fact of that if they did in fact shut down aegis the USA would have fixed the hole that let them do it as there’s no way they would let a security risk like that exist. Also what’s a satellite “in polar orbit destruction capabilities” if you’re saying that Russia would see the attack on Syria using a satellite then sure I could see that being a thing but if you’re saying Russia has weapons in space then you’re wrong or you wouldn’t know about it as Russia is part of a treaty which prohibits weapons in space along with on the moon. If you know of a Russian weapons platform in space then the USA certainly would and they 100% would not let that happen.

[@shouryasanjeev9284]

Cool simulation but I gotta say, a carrier strike group costs >25 billion with escort and aircraft and an s400 batallion is less than a billion

[@freddarau]

this s-400 with the missiles its was using would cost 5.8 billion

[@HypOps]

fellow viewer came up with these calculations: Here's the numbers: "4th gen: Red losses/expenditure S400 battery: 48x~$1.5mil (estimate) for the missiles, destroyed radars & launcher probably cost >$100m for a total of ~$172m Buk, Tor, Pantsir: Couldn't find any specific numbers on any of these but the Pantsir which is $13 mil a pop. Considering this, I don't think all of them combined total much more than $50m, including ammunitions. Su35: $85 mil a pop * 6 = $510mil Su34: $42 mil a pop * 4 = $188mil A2A missiles: 60x R77 ($500k-$1 mil estimate each, let's say $500k), 20x R73 ($200k each estimate), 24 R27 variants ($200k estimate each). Total for all of that of ~$39mil Total for everything: $959mil Blue losses/expenditure (I'm assuming they fired all their munitions except sidewiners): Prowlers: 3x Prowlers lost for $52mil each, total $156mil Hornets: 1x Hornet at ~$30mil Super Hornets: 5x Super Hornet at $70mil a pop = $350mil ADM-160C MALD-J: ~$400k24=~$10mil AMRAAM: 72~$1mil=$72mil JSOW: $282k32=~$9mil AARGMs: 48$870k=~$42mil Grand total: $669mil (probably overestimate as well as not close to all AMRAAMs were fired, also ~1/4 of the losses were Prowlers which aren't even in use anymore and thus the replacement cost of $52mil isn't really the value of the aircraft) If we just take the air-to-ground missiles fired vs. the interceptors, Blue team's costs are still lower at ~$51mil vs ~$72mil, and that's not even including the expenditure of all the Buk, Tor, and Pantsir batteries. (edited) [1:06 AM] The 5th gen scenario expenditure by Blue team on missiles is ~$200k64 for the glide bombs + $1.3mil16 for the AARGM-ERs for a total of ~$33.6mil. If we include all the destruction wrought on the Red team in the 5th gen scenario, the Blue team expended less than $75mil in munitions and killed somewhere in the range of $1.5bil in Red team equipment."

[@KoishiVibin]

@@HypOps ...ya might as well shoot a small country at them then. Jesus!

[@galerinha]

The idea is that this s400 is protecting something valuable that needs to be attacked after the s400 battalion is destroyed

[@SoApost]

@@HypOps now I am curious to see an estimate of how many military assets a country would have to lose to lose a war through bankruptcy.

[@khoroshoigra8388]

Now s400 tested as failed against ATACMS

[@bikibora646]

Why there were news of intercepting ATACMS on daily basis?? who were intercepting them?? Well now they are also getting jammed btw.

[@ВасилийКашин-х5ф]

There never been any doubt about the ability of the US forces deployed in the Middle East to destroy the Russian forces in Syria which consist of 2 S-400 battalions (another one is in Tartus) 1-2 fighter squadrons and several ships. Maybe the Russians manage to inflict losses maybe not. It does not matter. The Russian air defenses in Syria are basically playing the same role as the US forces in the Baltic states. They guarantee that the Russian forces in the Middle East cannot be attacked without large scale commitment of the US forces. That means that any such attack will escalate into a large scale conflict and with high likelyhood into a nuclear exchange. So the US are carefully avoiding the possibility of contact with the Russian regular troops and the two sides have regular consultations and a hotline for that. Having said that I should also not that the scenario ignores the presense of the second long range SAM battallion in Syria, the existense of extensive Russian EW capabilities on the theater and the Russian naval force in the area which always includes modern conventional submarines armed with cruise missiles as well as surface combatants with supersonic anthiship missiles and coastal antiship missile batteries.

[@Jakethegoodman]

Lets be honest demonstration of an integrated air defense system is like judging WW2 by the invasion of Poland. If the US was to attempt to destroy Russian assets in Syria or wherever, this battle would be secondary to space. And with that said the use of conventional arms is a little far fetched. Im of the opinion it would immediately go nuclear.

[@digimaks]

@@Jakethegoodman It wouldn't go nuclear, but US knows very well that Russia have all capabilities under its sleave to retaliate, which can causse unmanagable damage. That's why both sides have hotline and doin everything to play nice in Syria.

[@Jakethegoodman]

@@digimaks i dont see how it wouldnt. If either side suffers a catastrophic loss like the US losing a carrier or Russia losing a base theres no way they could retreat without losing international standing.

[@juryfilatov4520]

@@digimaks Do you know what the biggest danger of modern war between nuclear powers is? you never know which missile is nuclear. Therefore, you can consider every missile as nuclear and use your entire nuclear arsenal in response immediately

[@pashtet341]

ох ребята ребята .... ничему вас жизнь не учит. хватит думать что вы самые сильные , вас ребята в тапочках в афганистане мокрыми трусами по носу похлопали и вы ночью сбежали ... и после такого позора вы ещё про русских рассуждаете ))))

[@petergrebenshchikov6350]

Очень интересное видео, спасибо. По-моему, постановка задачи изначально проигрышная для Красных. Локальная система ПВО, защищающая саму себя, неизбежно будет уничтожена; вопрос только во времени. Ваше моделирование показывает, что Авианосная ударная группа США обладает достаточной мощью, чтобы одной атакой подавить систему ПВО России в Сирии в условиях, что в защите НЕ участвуют иные ресурсы Красных. Это впечатляет. Но назначение ПВО - это не самооборона, а задержка уничтожения других видов оружия, (например, противокорабельных ракет, береговых, авиационных и корабельных), чтобы они могли быть применены против атакующих сил. Красные, обнаружив атаку, в ответ атакуют самолеты дальнего обнаружения и РЭБ Синих, и, по моему, с большой вероятностью, выведут их из строя. Одновременно будут атакованы авианосец и корабли сопровождения. Это произойдет на фоне событий, промоделированных в Вашем видео. Интересны действия пилотов F35 в случае прекращения потока данных от самолета дальнего обнаружения и уничтожения авианосца. Другими словами, картина будет реалистичнее, если моделировать бой Авианосной группы не с ПВО, а с атакуемыми базами Красных в целом, когда Красные используют всю боевую мощь своих баз в Сирии (равно как и эскадра Синих использует всю мощь своих кораблей). ----- Следующим этапом будет моделирование боя с привлечением ресурсов с ближайших баз, Синих и Красных. :) У атакующих Синих в этом сценарии должно обнаружиться большое преимущество.

[@digimaks]

ЗАбыл напомнить про Электронное оружие против самих ракет синих, что запутает систему наведения. Потом здесь используется С-400 с данными ЭКСПОРТОГО ВАРИАНТА! Россия не использует экспортный вариант, мягко говоря. Потом - это наивно думать что авианосную группу не заметят как молокососы, и подпустят на такое близкое растояние. Потом же - верить что в Средиземном не будет подводных лодок - слишком наивно.

[@ilyaaveshnikov3988]

I just translated Peter Grebenshchikov comment above and the digimaks one into English) Very interesting video, thanks. In my opinion, the formulation of the problem is initially losing for the Reds. A local air defense system that protects itself will inevitably be destroyed; the only question is time. Your simulation shows that the US Carrier Strike Group is powerful enough to overwhelm Russia's air defenses in Syria with a single attack, with NO other Red resources involved in the defense. It's impressive. But the purpose of air defense is not self-defense, but the delay in the destruction of other types of weapons (for example, anti-ship missiles, coastal, air and ship) so that they can be used against attacking forces. The Reds, having detected the attack, will attack the Blues' early warning aircraft and EW in response, and, in my opinion, with a high probability, will disable them. At the same time, an aircraft carrier and escort ships will be attacked. This will happen against the background of the events simulated in your video. The actions of the F35 pilots are interesting in the event of the termination of the data flow from the early warning aircraft and the destruction of the aircraft carrier. In other words, the picture will be more realistic if you simulate the battle of the Carrier Group not with air defense, but with the attacked Red bases in general, when the Reds use the full combat power of their bases in Syria (as well as the BLU squadron uses the full power of their ships). ----- The next step will be to simulate the battle with the involvement of resources from the nearest bases, Blue and Red. :) The attacking BLUs should have a big advantage in this scenario. ---- I forgot to remind you about the Electronic weapons against the blue missiles themselves, which will confuse the guidance system. Then the S-400 is used here with the data of the EXPORT OPTION! Russia does not use the export option, to put it mildly. Then - it is naive to think that the aircraft carrier group will not be noticed like milk-suckers, and will be allowed to enter such a close range. Then - to believe that there will be no submarines in the Mediterranean - is too naive.

[@NoskillFemale]

Не не не ! Пьяный русский солдат не сможет нормально ответить бравому спецу из сшп ... однозначно . а в целом - прикольный мульт , поржали с отцом (30 лет выслуги однако у мужика ) .

[@Anton-ec1rf]

Peter Grebenshchikov Твой комментарий показывает лишь не далекоё мышление, основанное на количественном превосходстве того или иного оружия.Проще говоря ты не только не понимаешь смысл ПВО,но и даже смысл базирования этой базы(где нет задачи противостоять авианосной эскадре,отсюда и ограниченный количественный состав той или иной техники).К тому же, даже в этой плоской симуляции нет некоторых самолётов которые базировались(базируются) на базе в Хмеймиме,не говоря уже о других недочётах.

[@sergks9464]

Вот-вот, наши подводные лодки тоже не спят …

[@Horesmi]

A lot of modern media, while deeply enjoying violence, often avoids depicting large scale modern engagements, finding it too difficult to make a battle fought with radio waves and computer screens exiting. Either battles are simplified to an earlier tech level, where modern stealth fighters somehow engage in dogfights, or they are portrayed with a few passing mentions, with the focus of the story being something else. This KZbin channel somehow manages to do it all, spectacularly.

[@SirMarshalHaig]

Not to mention the ability of viewers to understand stuff. I remember an article abput an Israelian air raid, where a fighter used a russian helicopter to loose a SAM that then hit the helicopter. People called that anti-semitism as an aircraft could never hide behind another aircraft.

[@aznravechild6i9]

Those russian air defenses sure didn't help iran against the F-35 yesterday.

[@aquilesca5tr0]

actually the assasination was a planted bomb, but f35 flew over teheran a few years ago

[@Wu-Li]

Are you saying that he was bombed by an F35?

[@joeybulford5266]

I think it was a bomb planted there because they knew he was going to be there.

[@breadfahlifebreadfahlife9065]

Iran had maybe 1 or 2 advance missile system at that time maybe a few S-300 at best. They did not have the S-400 or other advanced missiles system

[@gansior4744]

​@@breadfahlifebreadfahlife9065 beg to differ since they lost a S-400 tracking radar to F-35

[@hardy2051]

Hah! That cr*ppy S-400 could not even protect Kursk, Engels, and Dyagilevo air bases despite they are located about 1000 kms deep inside Russia. S-400 with its supposed 400 kms range is only good at their brochures and propaganda. In real life? They are just paper weight 🤣🤣

[@bikibora646]

An YT video gave you enough joy and enlightenment right?? That's what happens when you are inspired by Super Hero movies. Wake up! Wake up 😆😆

[@AK-460Magnurse]

Holy cow. This whole war game scenario is amazing. Also like how you sprinkle in some dry humor as well. Very impressive knowledge of all these combat systems.

[@afisemenaborevlaka48]

Too bad he didn't include Russian air superiority surface naval vessels and submarines. Plus there is high probability the Russians are able to spot the F 35s by now, but who knows. I hope we never have to find out.

[@KevinJohnson-cv2no]

@@afisemenaborevlaka48 Do you still believe this? LMAO

[@LBJ50]

This channel is poised to blow up. If you start putting out videos on a frequent basis KZbins algorithm will promote your videos much more. The quality is outstanding and I’m sure you’ll be recognized for it if u keep at it.

[@HypOps]

I'm almost happy with the video quality in this one. I'll be focusing on upload frequency now.

[@gerdipediaTV]

As we now know from the Ukraine, a few storm shadows are enough to switch off an S 400 battery. In reality, Russian air defense is much worse than we had imagined.

[@ЕвгенийГоршков-ц5л]

Очень не хочется разочаровывать автора но у России тоже есть РЭБ системы а самое обидное что нужно быть полным кретином чтоб в такой ситуации не атаковать авионосец , уж больно привлекательная это цель корабль в данном случае ! И да СУ-34 это фронтовой бомбардировщик предназначеный для поражения наземных и надводных целей а не как не для борьбы с воздушными целями ! Самое главное что не учтено в данном ролике это тот факт что мы понятия не имеем о реальных возможностях тех или иных боевых систем и выступаем тут в роли диванных экспертов ))) Очень не хочется проверить в реальности на сколько вы правы или нет , но если придется мы готовы , А ВЫ?

[@z0ydberg765]

++++++++++++++ с учетом того, что РЭБ система РФ по словам самих же СШАЗНАЧИТЕЛЬНО опережают возможности их систем. И конечно первоочередная задача уничтожить носитель вооружения. Странно, что в этом видео молчат про новейшие ракеты РФ, которые уже давненько на вооружении.

[@АлександрГерман-р9э]

Самое главное что в последнем видео весь успех завязан на то что ракеты воздух воздух появляются из пустоты 🤣,типо самолёты которые в сотни раз больше этих самых ракет не видно, взлёт самолётов небыл замечен и осталось только дёргать катапульты. В видео где атакуют ф-18 обязательно в качестве целей выберут ложные цели,хотя ф-18 тоже видны и обычно на практике истребители сближаются для надёжного опознавания. И ещё один момент,на высоте 12 км радиогоризонт 450 км. Летающий за пределами этой дальности авакс безполезен,а у истребителей первая задача будет завалить этот самолёт,и хорошо если под крылом не окажется дальнобойных ракет,а они там могут появиться вместе с миг-31 вдруг.

[@Otto505]

Seeing as how we overestimated Russian military capabilities, it makes you wonder how their ally, China, would do in a hypothetical war against little Taiwan

[@ajmush3131]

Over estimated? Do you honestly believe for a single second for Russia to show what it's capable of in Ukraine while NATO stands right behind Ukraine drooling like a rabid dog? Russia has chosen not to use anything but 80's tech in Ukraine, and are winning even while NATO is literally running out of weapons to give Ukraine. Russia is holding back so much, you ignorant bafoon

[@Otto505]

@@ajmush3131 I guess you are entitled to your own opinion

[@ajmush3131]

@@Otto505 Thanks, I wasn't aware of being able to have my own opinion, however, think logically. Would you deploy your Queen to kill pawns, or would you save her to checkmate the king? Seriously people who are capable of critical thinking in this country are an endangered spices.

[@raiderdare7462]

@@ajmush3131 what ever

[@ajmush3131]

​@@raiderdare7462 The argument of someone who knows he's dead wrong - WW3 "Like WHAT-EVER, "

[@captsprite6059]

Excellent, entertaining and detailed. By far the best combat scenarios I've seen on KZbin. Please make more!

[@ferry602]

KZbin at war

[@theemissary1313]

Only just watched this, but the start of video simulation is the best visual demonstration of how this type of operation works, that I've ever seen. Excellent video!

[@P-G-77]

The simulations ... like the statistics ... have validity in the basic data they use, I find it difficult to think that this simulation has ALL the necessary data ... there are many parameters that "unless you have the official technical data "are impossible to simulate, if anything probably this is a representation with a validity ... difficult to quantify ...

[@jamesleadley7872]

This simulator, Command Modern Operations, is what the US Military uses to train it's commanders in strike operations and combined asset use. There is no known 'better' simulator...so given the assumed assets in the sim and their responses this really IS the best known result of a fake situation.

[@NonsenseFabricator]

@@jamesleadley7872 That doesn't make him wrong. Now we've seen Russian SAMs in action and they're nowhere near this good. Ukraine, in an impressive feat of jury rigging, managed to mount some old AGM-88s to their MiGs, they're knocking out SAMs with them. The jets can't even feed tracking data to the missiles first because they're from opposite sides of the cold war. They're stuck using a pre-programmed attack mode.

[@georgedavidson957]

2 storm shadows flew right by a s300/400 battery and even the Russian crew were laughing.

[@germanboy7673]

And proceeded to hit right into an admirals office.

[@nelsonking]

2 out of how many fired? Russia has shot down and jammed numerous storm shadows. This is why you don't hear of them anymore.

[@golamazammazumder]

Most of it was intercepted by pantsir and the admiral is still alive Russia literally paved the entire Ukraine 😂😂

[@Just_A_Random_Desk]

@@nelsonking The Su-24 can only carry 2 so probably only 2.

[@ChucksSEADnDEAD]

​@@golamazammazumder There's also video of Pantsir crews filming the tracking system losing lock on Storm Shadows. Obviously Pantsir crews were blamed for strikes so they had to share it wasn't their fault but the system being hindered by stealth

[@user-ee9jq3um6f]

You forgot to include 'Bastion P' Coastal Defense System, also employed in Syria, by Russia. While those obsolete and slow tomahawk missiles are trying to reach Syrian land, warships from where they have been launched from, would already be fully destroyed by Russian hypersonic missiles (Zircon 3M 22). F35 can fly? For real?

[@asjash3411]

what the range of Bastion and what stand for the reconnaissance for russians there? (retorical question)

[@heymotivator2231]

I’m so fucking HYPED for these OPS, congrats on the viral video

[@ZIZUFA]

Тут обсуждается только воздушный удар, но забыли про корабли, и подводные лодки, думаю флот синей команды будет уничтожен после первой же агрессий, забыли также про РЭБ со стороны красной команды, она выведите из строя часть ракет и самолётов.

[@wero6277]

Это сказки для детей. Ониксы,калибры ,граниты, а теперь уже и цирконы никто не отменял. Такая смоделированная ситуация нереальна. Пока они с миллионной гарантией не будут знать, что ни одна встречная ракета не попадет в их круизный лайнер под названием авианосец АГ с 5000 тясячами людей на борту, они будут побеждать только в компьютерных играх, хваля свое оружие.Это удел "победителей" в Афганистане.

[@kevincomai3735]

You forget that this is an attack on Syria not Russia using specific circumstances as all war games are set there are easily circumstances where Russia would easily overwhelm an US carrier group along with circumstances where they couldn’t even scratch a single ship. The situation at the end was using 5th gen fighters against air defense systems and aircraft that are in the airbase today and which would then be outdated as they were built before 5th gen fighters where in production. You can see that against 4th gen fighters the anti air and Russian fighters perform significantly better effectively causing enough losses effectively make it a US defeat despite partial success in destroying the anti air defenses. If the F35s where to go up against next gen Russian anti air or the Russian 5th gen fighters the outcome could and probably would be different but that’s irrelevant as that’s not the situation they are in.

[@MrTurboDima]

@@wero6277 бгггг... типичный свидетель "аналоговнетов"

[@dave8598]

@@noidontthinksolol they using their military AS terrorism and their fathers mathers and brothers supporting war against Ukraine (a least most of them),so yeah, they nothing like normal people they are bloodthirsty brainwashed will-less basterds.

[@АнтонПрохоренко-й3б]

@@dave8598 Кровожадные ублюдки, воюющие с Украиной - это про всех Русских?

[@singular9]

There are a lot of issues with this scenario. Not that the sim is wrong, but not realistic. 1) A single US Carrier group wouldn't go up against a single S400 SAM. Its just not cost effective and would leave the carrier pretty much undefended from the air, leaving it vulnerable. 2) The Russians would know where the carrier is and would be shadowing it with long range ground based and air based radar. You literally couldn't launch that many planes without giving away your intent. Stealth or not, when a plane is being launched is when its most vulnerable, and there would be no hiding this. Also, most US carrier groups are always shadowed by "enemy" subs. Don't think that the US is omnipotent and is actually capable of making an entire carrier group "vanish". 3) The US only has 2 carriers operational at any given time. Sure, they have 10-11, but most are constantly under maintenance. Operating more than 2 is expensive, which is why the US doesn't do so. Operating an extra group for this operation would be better to get the job done, but also double the risk and cost. Wars are won with money, not fighting power. 4) There would be significantly more russian jets in the area. 5) Neighboring sams and radars could move in to replace the damage. This is why the S400 is deadly, not because of its capability to search and track nearly anything and have a 99.9% chance of success, but the fact that it is MOBILE. The same would simply disengage before the planes got there. Why bother? Bomb the airbase all you want. Why the large S400 systems are being wrapped up and moved to a better safer location, the smaller sams would launch missiles and wrap up too. The radars especially. 6) The s400 is easy to get up and running. The moment an event like this would happen russia would have already started loading and shipping replacement radars which can be up and running and networked into the existing system in minutes. Its a fully automated system. The soldiers just need to press a few buttons. 7) The s400 can link into modern russian fighter aircrafts data links. Any Su30 series and mig 30 series can provide firing solutions for the S400 without the S400 showing its own radar. This makes it nearly impossible to fight directly. 8) We haven't even talked about a cruise missile sub retaliation. 9)Politically this would make the US seem like the aggressors, and would be a net loss for the US in money, planes, munitions, and potentially an aircraft carrier, and then face retaliation from the world. 10) F35's are not nearly as stealthy as it seems. They are only a marginal upgrade over an f18, and can't go supersonic without after burner, which will show up on infrared. 11) We haven't even mentioned infrared systems which russia has pretty much perfected as the alternative to radar. IRST systems are pretty much impossible to ID when on the ground. Its not a radar system. As a pure one on one sandbox experiment, this gets the job done, but still too expensive to bother doing.

[@Q_82]

Eine Simulation ist komplett Sinnfrei. Da viele Faktoren nicht berücksichtigt werden und viele Daten unter Verschluss sind. So ist es einfach nur ne Vermutung oder ein Wunschergebnis. Je nach dem auf welcher Seite man sich befindet.

[@vicwaberub5297]

Es beruhigt die Amerikaner, wenn sie sehen, dass das viele Geld für die Rüstung gut angelegt ist. Aus taktischer und strategischer Sicht ist diese Studie wertlos. Ein massiver Angriff mit Tomahawks im Werte von mehr als 100 Mio $ würde mglw Erfolg haben, aber danach wäre die Munition der Kampfgruppe auch stark reduziert. Die Studie kann ich auf diese Weise immer zum Erfolg führen, ich setzen dann eben 200, 400 oder 1000 Tomahawks ein, was deren Unsinn aufzeigt. Die anderen Szenarien gehen ebenfalls davon aus, dass ein statisches Ziel angegriffen wird und der Russe keine aktiven Gegenaktionen gegen den Ursprung des Angriffes startet. Das darf man kaum erwarten. Weiterhin ist Überraschung eine der wesentlichen Kampftaktiken - was ist, wenn der Russe eine weitere S-400 und Flugnahabwehr vor Ort hat? Was ist, wenn er stark befestigte Stellungen nutzt? Was ist mit dem Gegenschlag?

[@Andreas-gh6is]

@@vicwaberub5297 wie der Autor schon sagt ist es ein vereinfachtes Szenario und zeigt eine Möglichkeit. Wenn es mehr als ein Aktives SA 400 gibt, dann wissen die Amis das. Durch Satellitenbilder und Radaremissionen. Wenn es Plattformen gibt, welche der CSG gefährlich werden können, dann werden die zuerst ausgeschaltet. Sind ja nicht dumm, die Amis. Die russische Marine ist nicht in der Lage, der amerikanischen Marine in die Nähe zu kommen, im Kriegsfall, aufgrund der Lufthoheit. Hier geht es aber um Stealth Technologie gegen die SA 400, nicht um Marine gegen Marine...

[@vicwaberub5297]

@@Andreas-gh6is Die Russen wissen das ja auch, daher wird eine zweite S400 nicht vorab enttarnt. Letztlich haben auch die Russen Satelliten und werden den Carrier seit seinem Auslaufen verfolgen und auch die Flugbewegungen automatisiert verfolgen. Ich denke so einfach wie in der Simulation ist es nicht. Die Russen haben ja extra Anticarrier-Strategien entwickelt.

[@Andreas-gh6is]

@@vicwaberub5297 Nope, ein getarntes SA-400 ist nutzlos. Erstens handelt es sich um ein aus Dutzenden Fahrzeugen zusammengesetztes System, dass man erstmal vor aller Welt versteckt halten muss, das ist nicht so einfach. Zweitens können die jeweiligen Fahrzeuge nicht einfach irgendwo stehen um effektiv zu sein. Drittens sind diese Radarsysteme so starke Sender, dass man sie aus hunderten Kilometer Entfernung bequem orten kann. Also ja, man weiß immer genau wie viele davon im Einsatz sind. Flugzeuge kann man über Satellit nicht verfolgen, dafür sind Kampfflugzeuge zu klein, zu schnell und zu viele. Stealth Fighter schon gar nicht. Und ja, die Russen haben Strategien gegen Flugzeugträger, sagen sie zumindest. Ob die dann auch funktionieren und die Amerikaner nicht auch Strategien gegen die Strategien haben, ist die andere Frage. Ich habe eher Zweifel, dass die russischen Raketen im Falle des Falles noch so funktionieren wie sie eigentlich sollen...

[@vicwaberub5297]

​@@Andreas-gh6is Naja, das zweite S-400 wäre m.E. nicht im Betrieb, das wird nur aktiviert wenn der Angriff läuft oder nach dem Angriff, wenn der Hauptangriff gegen die beabsichtigten Ziele erfolgt. Aber natürlich ist es ein sehr komplexes System. Was die Satelliten können: Ich bin mir da nicht so sicher. Aber letztlich werden die Russen einen solchen Angriff durchgespielt haben. Wenn wir etwas aus der Wehrtechnik kennen, dann doch die schnelle Reaktion der Abwehr. Schon Hitler hatte das Konzept, dass jedes Jahr Krieg eine neue Generation von Waffen erforderlich macht, d.h. die Planungen der Waffensysteme überschneidet sich und mit dem Erscheinen ist diese bereits wieder veraltet.

[@jonahholmes3193]

This was absolutely fantastic, just wish your channel had more content because Wow this video was good. I’m not sure where HypOps has been the last 2 years of my life but I’m glad to have found you now. Keep it up brother!!

[@pashapasovski5860]

What's stopping Russia from attacking aircraft carriers or airports with hypersonic missiles!?

[@Google_Does_Evil_Now]

That's what I was thinking also.

[@vicgason6585]

The strong belief in US superiority and it would be unfair. As the RU Minister of Defense said: Aircraft carrier is a welcome gift for us. One missile is enough. BTW: Thats the reason, they do not develop aircraft carriers.

[@elcocodriloazul]

All you need is one hit with hypersonic missile and bye bye. Carriers nowhere to hide. Going after the airplanes is the target after but the carrier will always be first target. Its the biggest and most important target. Taking out carriers means no resupply and no power projection. Airplanes cant do much after a little while. They will have fuel issues and ammunition.

[@Xalexalexale]

It would represent an escalation of the conflict

[@Gauntlet_Videos]

The Russians first need a targeting solution on the carrier (easier said than done). Then they need to break past the air defenses. However, if they send enough hypersonic missiles with a clear targeting solution, they could probably hit the carrier.

[@damshek]

Well I mean, your simulation seems to show that the S400 can mount an extremely formidable defense against pretty much anything short of a massive strike using the most advanced weapons on planet earth... Don't know how much more one can expect of a SAM battery :-) Fantastic videos man, keep up the good work!

[@HypOps]

Thumbnail is clickbait. Gotta get em to click. I do agree the defends was formidable even in 5th gen.

[@dark7element]

Even in the first scenario with 2015 era equipment though, the fighter aircraft did most of the work in shooting down Super Hornets. The SAM battery was still mostly destroyed.

[@captaron]

It more highlights their weakness against swarm missiles which can be made cheap and in high yields.

[@user-not-found-really]

Just saying that US will never attack S400 and others from russian side. If they do then bye bye world. Russia have the right to use nuclear weapons on US since that is war. plus Russia have Bastion missiles and Caliber. they have the range and the numbers to destroy the US carrier group. just saying :)

[@MDP1702]

@@user-not-found-really If Russia takes out US missiles not aimed at Russian assets (as is the case in this scenario), Russia would be the one making the first step and the US taking out the Russian weapon platform responsible would be an appropriate response. Also no country is going to use nuclear weapons as anything but extreme last resort and even then there must be good justification for it, considering any nuclear launch strike will be met with equal retaliation.

[@mariusmioc3045]

All with the assumptions that the S-400 stay there and mount just reactive defense by themselves. But as the attacking F-35 are a part of an attacking force, the S-400 are a part of a whole defensive force including fighter jets and anti aircraft carrier hypersonic missiles.

[@jonathanpfeffer3716]

This is just a comparison video, not meant to literally simulate a conflict. Also what anti-ship hypersonic missiles are you referring to? The Russians have the Oniks, Alfa, and the Kalibr, all of which are not hypersonic. They have the Zircon in development, but not operational yet.

[@mariusmioc3045]

@@jonathanpfeffer3716 Exactly!

[@efamtaylor3580]

@@jonathanpfeffer3716 Zircon is operational dumbass.

[@jonathanpfeffer3716]

@@efamtaylor3580 The Commander in Chief of the Russian Navy literally said a year ago that the Zircon would be IOC in a few years. It has not been a few years, and the MOD has said it is still in testing.

[@NaprostoRetardovany]

This is absolutelly stupid! Everyone knows that in the first engagement against Tomahawks S-400 would target Su-34 and Su-35 and shoot them down in friend fire!

[@TiramisuCorleone]

In real life team red would behave more intelligent. In the first fight they prematurely started firing and in the second fight the red jets could have waited on their own ground before intercepting those bombs instead of getting in the range of the blue Fox-3 missiles. Also they might have been able to scramble more fighters in time, especially when they know that a hostile carrier is nearby. I am not saying that the Russian airbase cannot be defeated, but the thumbnail of this video was a clickbait, because the S-400's are surely not useless, when the US would have to to spend a lot of expensive weapons in order to crack Russian defenses. Besides, such a massive attack would probably only happen in WW3. I am sure the Russian airbase in Syria is not meant to survive WW3. I think its purpose is rather to increase the Russian influence in the region during a peace time or during a second cold war.

[@singular9]

@@CloneDAnon There are a lot of issues with this scenario. Not that the sim is wrong, but not realistic. 1) A single US Carrier group wouldn't go up against a single S400 SAM. Its just not cost effective and would leave the carrier pretty much undefended from the air, leaving it vulnerable. 2) The Russians would know where the carrier is and would be shadowing it with long range ground based and air based radar. You literally couldn't launch that many planes without giving away your intent. Stealth or not, when a plane is being launched is when its most vulnerable, and there would be no hiding this. Also, most US carrier groups are always shadowed by "enemy" subs. Don't think that the US is omnipotent and is actually capable of making an entire carrier group "vanish". 3) The US only has 2 carriers operational at any given time. Sure, they have 10-11, but most are constantly under maintenance. Operating more than 2 is expensive, which is why the US doesn't do so. Operating an extra group for this operation would be better to get the job done, but also double the risk and cost. Wars are won with money, not fighting power. 4) There would be significantly more russian jets in the area. 5) Neighboring sams and radars could move in to replace the damage. This is why the S400 is deadly, not because of its capability to search and track nearly anything and have a 99.9% chance of success, but the fact that it is MOBILE. The same would simply disengage before the planes got there. Why bother? Bomb the airbase all you want. Why the large S400 systems are being wrapped up and moved to a better safer location, the smaller sams would launch missiles and wrap up too. The radars especially. 6) The s400 is easy to get up and running. The moment an event like this would happen russia would have already started loading and shipping replacement radars which can be up and running and networked into the existing system in minutes. Its a fully automated system. The soldiers just need to press a few buttons. 7) The s400 can link into modern russian fighter aircrafts data links. Any Su30 series and mig 30 series can provide firing solutions for the S400 without the S400 showing its own radar. This makes it nearly impossible to fight directly. 8) We haven't even talked about a cruise missile sub retaliation. 9)Politically this would make the US seem like the aggressors, and would be a net loss for the US in money, planes, munitions, and potentially an aircraft carrier, and then face retaliation from the world. 10) F35's are not nearly as stealthy as it seems. They are only a marginal upgrade over an f18, and can't go supersonic without after burner, which will show up on infrared. 11) We haven't even mentioned infrared systems which russia has pretty much perfected as the alternative to radar. IRST systems are pretty much impossible to ID when on the ground. Its not a radar system. As a pure one on one sandbox experiment, this gets the job done, but still too expensive to bother doing.

[@sango_wilko851]

​@@CloneDAnon As mentioned in the video, the hypothetical scenario presented here that by definition qualifies as fantasy represents real world analysis of equipment based on satellite imagery of what Russia currently has deployed operationally in Syria as well as what the U.S. is known to have deployed nearby. If Russia was expecting an attack such as this one, they could and almost certainly would deploy significantly more defensive and S-400 related resources to the area. But the fact is that those resources don't exist in Syria today. This scenario was based on what is on the ground today, not what Russia could deploy if they had a significant advanced knowledge of the attack. In such a situation you are suggesting the U.S. would certainly deploy more attacking assets as well, and with the ability to field 11 carrier battle groups versus the 1 featured in this scenario could bring an entirely different playbook.

[@sango_wilko851]

@@singular9 "The US only has 2 carriers operational at any given time. Sure, they have 10-11, but most are constantly under maintenance. Operating more than 2 is expensive, which is why the US doesn't do so. Operating an extra group for this operation would be better to get the job done, but also double the risk and cost. Wars are won with money, not fighting power." I agree and this is really the crux of the entire thing. The entire U.S. strategy is based on having carriers in reserve that can be activated (with extra spend of course) during wartime. With a GDP of ~21 trillion dollars compared to less than ~1.5, Russia stands no chance in any protracted or conventional fight against the economic powerhouse that the U.S. has become. If you add in the EU with it's own GDP barely under that of the U.S. it's almost a joke. The U.S. and the EU have no interest in invading or occupying Russia, which would likely be an impossible task even if the entire world was aligned with them against it. But could Russia launch a nuclear attack and ensure the destruction of the entire world? certainly.... but there is really no reason to believe they could win a conventional fight against the E.U. or the U.S., much less a combined NATO.

[@juliuszkocinski7478]

I've seen many claims that due to excellent sensors and networking few F-35s can really benefit entire 4th gen-based strike package as its eyes. Is there a plan to explore some scenario with mix of these two? Seems both plausible and interesting. Could be both air to air or ground strike mission.

[@InsaneThacker]

This is exactly what KZbin needed, a more intelligent simulation of what “could” happen in this kind of scenario rather than some info graphic/ Wikipedia poop. Well done sir 👍

[@lesseirgpapers9245]

not realistic. Woke US will pee in the pants.

[@300spartan2222]

@@lesseirgpapers9245 xD go back to your cave you Russian troll... Soviet union... broke up Russia ? well just give it time ;)

[@InsaneThacker]

@@lesseirgpapers9245 when did I mention realistic?

[@lesseirgpapers9245]

@@300spartan2222 Wow that is getting kind of old with the troll thing. Woke US military needs to be dissolved. They can not even win against a few goat herders in Afghanistan..why pay taxes for these SJW? And Russia did not take away our jobs like Cina. China has bribed lets go Brandon with 1,5 billion dollars. So he wants us to destoy Russia for their benefit. And there are enough morons who are doing the bidding for China.

[@WordToMomsYo]

"UNSAFE WORKING CONDITIONS" 😆 I almost screamed at my screen, I lol'd so hard

[@pseudonymsam]

I've been on the hunt for realistic modern warfare simulations, and your channel scratches that itch. Excellent work! If you're still accepting callsigns from your previous video, I'd like to offer this themed list for any scenario featuring the UK: Blackadder, Baldrick, George, Darling, Melchett, Flashheart.

[@HypOps]

Yeah. I'm surprised no one else has really tried for this sort of niche. Always taking new callsigns!

[@masol3726]

@@HypOps can you add footage like make it look like a mashup of reality and simulator please

[@grujicdanijel7963]

Realistic, yeah right...

[@DNS-Freakz]

@@masol3726 Would be hard to do. Maybe Arma 3, Wargame or some other similiar games could be used.

[@fulcrum2951]

@@grujicdanijel7963 do point out the problems then

[@weatengoungato]

You forgot to mention that when the f-35 fires, it's open his arms bays and then all that stealth goes to waste giving position of where they are.

[@rocketman1058]

he also forgot that S-400 can't see anything, as during the biological weapon factory in 2017, no tomahawks were intercepted, in the russian media the official excuse was that russian radars don't see below the line of horizon, not to mention that usually russian pantzirs can't defend themselves and so on and on and on. plus we saw that russian drones can penetrate any russian defense system with no casualties. there's russian propaganda and the biggest blow to it is the conflicts where russian engages, like syria and nagorn-karabach.

[@weatengoungato]

@@rocketman1058 that attack was told to Russians, it was a show for US public, 70 tomhaws I think and on the next week the airfield was repaired. None was intercepted because there were no point in waste thousands of dollars in a anti-air missile to intercept a missile that isn't gonna cause any mayor harm... As for the pantshirs, the ones destroyed have been proved to being during reload, or not working or deployed would say. And Russian air base has came under attack numerous times against little drones and noone as caused any damage. Not that we can say that about patriot sistem and houtis drones

[@rocketman1058]

@@weatengoungato stop eating shit, I speak russian and monitored all russian media: officially kremlin stood up for assad and declared that would intercept ALL missiles, afterwards, they gave excuses, and it was actually a very funny one, they said that "the curvature of the the earth prevented their S-400 from seeing the missiles," this is actually real🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣P.S. you're eating soo much so much shit, can't stop laughing at you, please check official russian loses in siria, it's about 26 aircraft, of which about half on the ground from drones including Su33 and Su35: "The Russian news agency Kommersant reported that at least seven Russian planes were destroyed or damaged by rebel shelling of Hmeymim air base and that two Russian soldiers died in the attack and another 10 were wounded.[160][161] At least four Su-24 bombers, two Su-35S fighters and an An-72 transport plane, as well as an ammunition depot, were destroyed by the shelling, Kommersant said on its website, citing two "military-diplomatic" sources.[162] Russian MoD later denied information about planes destruction.[163] Leaked photos showed the planes were damaged .[164][165]" from wiki

[@stan_k]

there are a lot of russian ships there with their own aa and even anti carrier weapons. they are structural components of defense system.

[@nisicdragutin7976]

Nooo! They will miss, if they are team red...dont you follow the theme in his videos? It is on point with blues, but reds?! Omg they are all sleeping and blind and stupid

[@ArtificialDreams-i1z]

@@nisicdragutin7976 I understand nationalism and partisan, but the reality is that whoever in the world really think to have a single shot to hold the line against the US is completly detach from reality. Numbers like national gdp, industial index, available tech... do not lie. If, in the future there will be a real confrontation between the US and Russia than we will know for sure. For know, one must assume that there is nothing you can do to stop the US army. Nothing. Thinking otherwise is wishful thinking.

[@nisicdragutin7976]

@@ArtificialDreams-i1z You are confused. Or unable to read properly. Go do it again and answer with some sense about what i wrote.

[@stormkrs7454]

@@ArtificialDreams-i1z Russian Zirkon rockets will made this strategy obsolete. Because main part of plan will be nullified.

[@kuperskonsteisen4661]

@@ArtificialDreams-i1z You forgot about such a thing as nuclear parity. If someone starts losing in a big war, he will launch his entire nuclear arsenal. Even if the US intercepts 90% of intercontinental ballistic missiles, the rest will be enough for the world to suffer badly enough. The same goes in the opposite direction. It is impossible to regard the forces of the United States and the Russian Federation as in Soviet times. There will be no total war because of the nuclear weapons on board the countries.

[@derpderka3688]

Gen5 sounds terrifying... Imagine what kind of damage a strike like this can do to a unsuspecting highly populated city.... The beautifully engineered carnage.

[@sebastienhardinger4149]

Incredible work, as always. I find it hard to grasp just how fast and enormously lethal modern peer warfare is And the munitions expenditure! A single full strike from a carrier required something like 200 missiles or guided bombs. How many of those strike packages in munitions does a carrier group carry before it has to go home for replenishment? I can't imagine that even the United States or Russia has the production capability or stockpiles for a few months of any sort of operational tempo, perhaps even weeks! For the 4th gen strike - are those launchers able to do anything without their radars, or would that part of Syria just be buzzing with US airpower for the next few days as they try to hunt down the new defenseless launchers?

[@bobtank6318]

Not quite 200 missiles, here's what HypOps said in another comment: "Forty or so AARGMs were chucked in the first attack of the 4th Gen. About 64 SDBs and 16 AARGMERs in 5th gen I think it was." Still, a high-intensity conflict would burn through smart munitions very quickly. I believe the US Air Force estimated it would use its entire stock of JASSMs in 9 days in a peer conflict. The lethality and effectiveness of modern weapons are insane, but the latest air defenses are also very capable. As for the S-400 launchers, without the fire control radar (the other radar is a search radar) the launchers are useless. They are pretty much big trucks with explosive cargo until Russia can get a new set of radars down there.

[@HypOps]

Indeed. If the world ever enters another high-tech war. I also feel like munition counts are far inadequate of what will be needed. Older cheaper weapons like JDAMs will increasingly carry the day if a war drags on (and I feel like if it stays conventional it might even if the final result may no longer be in doubt).

[@stephenfowler4115]

@@bobtank6318 first target in this scenario are the AWACS and search radars.

[@verdebusterAP]

It wouldn't be that much The S-400 only missile capable of dealing with the F-35 is 9M96E , the rest of its missiles are not optimized for stealth targets Even if the S-400 did detect it, Sending up fighters would put them at risk from other F-35s or F-22s flying CAP The F-35 can easily close to 100 miles and use AARGM-ER against the S-400 . Defensive systems like Tor, Buk, Panstir and Tunguska radar are not strong enough to resist jamming. The Morfey can but it can still be suppressed for short period The F-35 just needs precision jamming at certain times so that S-400 radars is blinded long enough for the AARGM-ER to reach it Thats combination of the EA-18G and MALDs Ironically if the USAF gets the ARRW and USN NGJ operational , then the S-400 and S-500 becomes moot Launched from 350 miles away, the ARRW only needs 1 min 23 secs of jamming Getting 350 away , its relatively easy as again sending fighter up outside S-400 range, puts them at risk from the USAF and USN CAP

[@jamclancy9335]

@@bobtank6318 As in the last paragraph, I understand why military analysts & officials use the analogy of "chain" in describing how SAM's work. You get rid of one chain & everything else would be futile. You take out the search radar (the radar that would alert the air defense that hostile aircraft are out there in the sky) & air defense would be useless. You take out the fire control radar (the radar that would guide the SAMs to the target aircraft), and everything would be useless.

[@colinkennedy1718]

Any chance we could get a number of just how many munitions it took to take out the S-400? Sure it was destroyed in both times, but it seems an absolutely astounding number of highly advanced and expensive munitions were used in the process. An expensive victory for the US.

[@HypOps]

Forty or so AARGMs were chucked in the first attack of the 4th Gen. About 64 SDBs and 16 AARGMERs in 5th gen I think it was.

[@wannabecriminalman]

Long range SAMs usually cost as much or more than the weapons they're shooting down.

[@jamclancy9335]

@@wannabecriminalman Yeah, and that's something the US would be more than willing to trade off. Imagine 1 SDB being needed to be intercepted by 1 S-400 missile.

[@HarvickOne]

Amazing simulation with integration of latest weapons. The question is would US risk a carrier and a significant number of F-35s to defeat 1 S-400 site without losses.

[@HypOps]

The Russians attempting to sink an American CSG in the Mediterranean seems fairly out there in terms of likelihood. American SEAD on Syrian assets is something that has been done time and again. The Russian high-tech missile interception is the only exceptional decision I made here.

[@DOI_ARTS]

Well Israel F35 are just coming in and out of Syria but I think the Growler will be a big help and the Hawkeye.

[@rhodium1096]

@@DOI_ARTS Israel just fire cruise missile out of Syrian airspace!..they dont risk F-35 over Syria because they know 2 things..1º the F-117 shot down in Serbia by an old soviet SAM..2º a tecnical failure is possible and F-35 crashed in Syria will be a great gift for Russia and Iran.. and 3º No proofs of F-35 flying over Syria..

[@ade_adeg005]

@@rhodium1096 F117 shit down was a lucky one. Weapons bay was open and the flight path was the same for several missions. Israel fly over Syria and jam the hell out of the Russian radars.

[@isioemuodeke8488]

@@ade_adeg005 Naija man,where are you getting your info from? You are just talking without proof?! Be careful oo! When it comes to reality,even the Israelis would wish 2% of the achievement you ascribe to them in Syria were true.The reality is ALWAYS different from this computer game/simulation you so obviously enjoyed and wish for!

[@hetzer5926]

And to think, the US military sometimes underplays their admitted capabilities

[@yujinhikita5611]

Thats what classified means

[@hetzer5926]

@@yujinhikita5611 ….ummmm, not the same thing really. What I’m talking about is available knowledge, stuff that isn’t classified. The military makes the claim that the system can for example, target enemies 4 miles away accurately. But in practice the system can target enemies 6 miles away but not as accurately. In short, they’re not over stating the systems ability but their not mentioning it’s maximum strength. Some military’s (cough cough Russia and China) say that their radar can hit targets 10 miles out with this missile system, but in practice it can hit a target 10 miles out, some of the time, but can only reliably hit targets 5 miles away.

[@fransdav5573]

Would be interesting if you include red u-boats and more S-400 units along the coast in your simulation.

[@beastman1927]

Yes at least 1 regiment of S-400 makes sense in front of a carrier strike group.

[@louisgivella5577]

US F-22 raptor EATS THE S-400'S FOR BREKFEAST LUNCH AND DINNER

[@Ifraneljadida]

All I can say is this is an excellent video. Completely new way of viewing the modern battlefield for a armchair general like myself. Thank you. I'd support a Patreon for more of this

[@leoncampa]

Ironically, Israel conducts such air raids on almost a monthly basis. They have been using their F35s and their F16s with mainly 4th gen conventional weaponry and do precisely what this video claims to do. They tend to target non-Russian sites manned mainly by Syrians, Iranians, and their Lebanese proxies. There are plenty of videos that have surfaced over the last two years showing what appears to be Syrian missile responses as they attempt to shoot down these long range drones Israel sends at them. They have done pretty well, managing to down up to 80% of munitions, even with their older missiles according to local sources.

[@cedriceric9730]

They shoot many down because israel is playing nice to avoid much collateral. Sympathy is difficult to rebuild once one caught on the wrong side. Iran and syria have to remain the criminals ,if Israel overreacts and blunders significantly they will take advantage of the PR.

[@sisyphusvasilias3943]

like Damascus Airport and other CIVILIAN ports, infrastructure and residential buildings. While using Civilian Airliners as shields.

[@GRIM_MOD]

Isreal are welfare hungry and only rely on america lol they wouldnt stand a chance against russia let alone getting rekt by lebanon in 2006.

[@juntingiee2602]

@@GRIM_MOD lebanon do you mean the country where they blew up their own port

[@justinpetersen5273]

And as we come to find out, the S500 isn’t shit it’s a joke

[@SIG442]

The first team could come out better if they followed the tomahawks at the right distance. This leaves hardly any defensive capabilities for the defending team and thus a much higher chance of success. It will make sure there are far less losses then previously and they will have a shot at the main objective. If additional tomahawks were directly send at the air defenses before the aircraft would be coming in, then it would even be more likely to destroy most targets before the first blue aircraft goes down. So best way to what I believe that should work the best (no need to wait a day): 1. Fire tomahawks at the main site 2. Wait for contact with air defenses 3. Fire second wave of tomahawks and launch as many aircraft as possible (prepared before hand as just in case scenario) 4. Let the tomahawks do their jobs on the air defenses 5. Allow the fighters to join in as soon as the last few tomahawks are about to hit 6. mob up the final few targets that remain at the air defenses while the main strike force heads for the main objective to fire everything they have. This should lead to a much better result. It isn't that you need to perform the task the same way, it's about how you use your options the best way.

[@HypOps]

I agree it absolutely makes sense to launch tomahawks alongside the SEAD strikes to help overwhelm. The reasons I staggered the attacks in the way I did are for educational and entertainment reasons. I sacrificed some level of realism and optimization in order to set the stage and introduce the defenses at Khmienmin. And stagger the fight in this way to give me more time to explain different elements, there is a lot to explain and simplifying/reducing a scenario in this manner gives me more time to explain the elements one at a time to the audience in an engaging manner. Each of my videos is a balancing act between geopolitical realism, tactical realism, education, and entertainment and I hope this helps explains why the video was structured in such a manner.

[@jamesleadley7872]

@@HypOps I'm not sure I agree. You would need to check the SAM's launch speeds against the time the strike package takes to move to target after recognition. I'm confident the SAM's launch fast enough to get away all their defenses prior to impact. What ends up happening is a bigger set of fireworks all at the same time instead of being staggered a bit allowing you to explain the strike package.

[@aleksnight5406]

Близко. Вот только во второй симуляции вы не учли ряда факторов. 1. При угрозе атаки ракетами типа HARM радары начинают переключаться между собой, в процессе меняя место работы (вы заметили, что они тоже мобильные?). Это сильно уменьшает вероятность попадания ракеты. 2. Есть замечательная система "Газетчик". Это система автоматической установки помех боеприпасам воздух-земля. Активные помехи, пассивные помехи, ложные цели. 2 штуки на дивизион, т.е. 6 штук минимум на этой карте. Вы их не учли. 3. "Буки" могут пускать ракеты прямо с ТЗМ. Это не рекомендуется, но в таком бою лучше успеть выстрелить всё, пока есть кому стрелять. Количество готовых к бою ракет "Бук" нужно удвоить. 4. Не забываем, что у ВС РФ есть свои системы активной РЭБ. Их эффективность уж точно не ниже устаревших систем на "Проулерах". Главное - САСШ не могли стрелять по целям, связанным с химическим оружием в Сирии, так как в Сирии давно уже нет химического оружия. Его уничтожили под контролем РФ и ОЗХО. Следовательно - Северо-Американские Соединённые Штаты нанесли удар по случайным целям на территории страны, с которой у них не было войны. Без объявления войны и санкции ООН. За такое автоматом положены международные санкции и отключение от SWIFT. Или вы не согласны? ))) Более того - в таком случае эта страна имеет полное законное право нанести ответный удар. Противокорабельные ракеты достанут с побережья Сирии до US NAVY. 24 ракеты несёт дивизион БРК "Бастион", 32 ракеты БРК "Бал". Хватит, чтобы вывести из строя авианосец и большую часть эсминцев. Третьей части не будет - F-35 не умеют взлетать с искорёженной накрененной палубы. Ну и последнее - вы в курсе, что все самолёты типа F-117, F-22, F-35, малозаметные в дециметровых волнах, прекрасно видны в метровых и сантиметровых диапазонах? Их форма уменьшает их заметность, но не делает их невидимыми. И работающий радар "Печоры" прекрасно светит ваши F-35 на дистанции в пару сотен км. Да, он не может навести древнюю ракету, но залпа из темноты не будет. Не надейтесь. Более того, те же комплексы "Тор" и "Панцирь" прекрасно умеют работать вообще без радаров. Из темноты, незаметные для вас.

[@dundonrl]

The AGM-88 HARM will remember where the radar was and still destroy it, even if it's switched off as long as it doesn't move. Considering that it's coming in at 2500+ km/h good luck in evading it.

[@jaimearredondo787]

Very true but very well known to American planners and this is meant to be a surprise attack. The US invented swift (really it was the globalist) Breton Woods. Anyhow good analysis.

[@aleksnight5406]

@@dundonrl )) Мы научились с этим бороться ещё во Вьетнаме.

[@aleksnight5406]

@ Они видны достаточно, чтобы опытный оператор их заметил и навёл на них истребители. И если F-22 ещё способен что-то показать в ближнем бою, то F-35 просто сидячая утка для русских машин. Что касается первых невидимок, то их ещё мой отец отслеживал за экраном "Печоры", когда служил в ГДР.

[@VadimGlazov]

@@dundonrl What is the accuracy of memorizing the location of the radar? Detonation at a distance of 100 meters is completely safe for radar.

[@lshepherd5859]

no sir , not useless . those s-400 fully functioning exactly as they were designed for , as beautiful statues & expensive landmarks

[@bobtank6318]

lmao

[@Hollow_Aty]

is it thats why they are the best sams in the world? is it thats why even nato member (turkey) buyed them?

[@guruxara7994]

@@Hollow_Aty Not the best anymore... The Prometheus is even more capable...

[@HypOps]

My thumbnails are not to be taken too seriously. I must play the clickbait game.

[@Hollow_Aty]

@@guruxara7994 the s500?

[@Nothingishereyo]

SUBSCRIBED. What a well done video with great commentary.