Sea Power | 1980's US Nimitz Carrier Group vs 1980's Soviet Orel Carrier Group (Naval Battle 142a)

[@grimreapers]

150 Mile Re-Match: kzbin.info/www/bejne/aYWuf4erbrRsetE 450 Mile Tactical Re-Match: kzbin.info/www/bejne/oYHPpIFno9N9oKs

[@geraldaffeldt8228]

There is a reason the US Navy doesn't let the Russian surface forces get that close.

[@Ereshkigal616]

Exactly correct. The Russian "Saturation Missile Doctrine" isn't a joke. Cap starting the groups at ~300+ miles would have been more of a compromise, and would allow for longer positioning/screening, least i think. Can't wait to play this game and work out these situations.

[@armandorodrigues144]

as if IRL the soviet-russian carrier group would be sinking before the US Navy carrier group got in range why? because there's always a attack submarine nearby where the US Navy battle-groups sail

[@PyromaN93]

​@@armandorodrigues144same for US carrier groups.

[@jugganaut33]

@@armandorodrigues144you know the Russians have submarine wolf packs too right? They literally send subs out on previous carrier paths. Sit them on the seabed and wait for them to pass over. Each of the 4 sub wolf pack would hold 10 torps 40 torpedos in a simultaneous attack. A reactor on the seabed with no screw movement just sounds like background noise.

[@ronmka8931]

@@armandorodrigues144 cool we can play pretend and let out biases fly wild, we get it you love america and hate russia but dont you think your baises are making come to unproven conclusions?

[@Cris-xy2gi]

A big part of this game is locating targets. By having the US CSG start in range of those soviet AShMs and having everything be detected right away you gave the soviets a MASSIVE advantage over the US group. Soviet anti-ship missiles are no joke, and there's a reason why you keep ships and aircraft armed with them as far away a possible. Also, I would shake the habit of calling EA-8's 'SEAD' aircraft, because jamming can be used on far more then just air defenses. Not launching them to try and jam out the initial missile strike was a mistake.

[@TheHorzabora]

I agree with almost everything but the ‘start the Soviet’s far away’ it’s pretty much impossible to create a scenario in which the Soviet’s don’t get their Shipwreck’s off first, if they’re halfway competent. Even if they start outside range for both weapons, well, the Soviet’s will be in range first. If they had an actual blue water set of carriers, rather than depending on air arm backfires and bears, then… … I won’t say what would happen in reality, but I think the US in this fiction needs to work really hard with multiple layers of defence explicitly including F-14’s as long range missile defence platforms, to offset the missile loads of the Soviets. HOWEVER: A Soviet Union with Orel’s, plus naval variant Migs, plus Kirov’s and Oscars is really, really bankrupt or really, really into perestroika and glasnost until their command economy is untucked/dead. If you give the Soviet’s fantasy units, then some of the American units proved obsolete (or cost-inefficient/poorly built) seems the only fair balancing act!

[@helzevec]

My understanding is that 80's US carrier defense doctrine very much relied on F-14's launching against the vampires, and then missile defense cleaned up afterwards. Phoenix was very much optimized for that role. In this scenario, you relied on the missile defense system alone. Might get better results if you set it up to where the F-14's could play a role in launching against the vampires.

[@Robert53area]

Correct because the Soviet main air threat to a carrier was not by carrier born aircraft but the long range TU22 and TU24. And then lastly the super long range TU95 bear. So the plan was always a long range carrier born intercept to engage long range bombers from getting to the fleet. The F18 only replaced it because of the collapse of the Soviet Union and lack of cruise missle carrier bombers. And multirole fighters that could do more air to ground missions was more important. And politics was what killed the F14

[@artruisjoew5473]

Realistically the American carrier would likely see the Soviet battle group first, send out a strike force of intruders / hornets and just stayed out of the range of Russian missiles.

[@FleetDefenderRA5]

You took the words right out of my mouth... I was wanting to yell out: engage the tomcats!!!

[@helzevec]

@@Robert53area The loss of the F14 always struck me as a serious degradation in carrier defense, until only recently (and maybe still). I'm no aviator, but it seems to me that the legacy F18 didn't have the range, speed, or reach to fill the gap left by the F14. So, there may have been a long period of time that US carriers were quite vulnerable to air attack post-F14. Today, AEGIS systems are vastly improved and with late model AIM-120's, the new AIM-174Bs, the super hornet, and F-35Cs, perhaps that gap has been filled. Of course, this only accounts for air threats. Many maintain that the real threat to carriers is underwater, from subs. In any case, the F14 really was a great plane, perfectly suited for its role.

[@helzevec]

@valorius Good point re the prowlers. I’ve always suspected jammers are the unsung heroes of modern air battles. It’s unfair that they don’t get the glory but I guess the more they are overlooked the better. That means they’re doing their jobs.

[@weeruz]

"we're at an impass" while less than 1km from enemy carrier with a ship loaded with 16 mark 46 torpedos....

[@aaronstaeven312]

I was like what the hell, torpedoes dude

[@SirToby1076]

Mk 46 torpedoes are light anti submarine

[@Madarius7]

@@SirToby1076 16 500lb warheads made for attack subs would still be a major issue for a carrier to deal with. They also increase its surface vessel performance in later mods.

[@subvet3668]

Also I thought SM1s can be used in land attack mode as well.

[@chrisdudley1784]

Yeah, That....

[@frankholub4673]

Getting a couple EW/jammer aircraft up before the F-14s in order to spoof some of the incoming vampires might have made a difference. Realistically the US fleet is automatically on the back foot unless they have CAP and a strike package up and engaging the Soviet fleet before they could get in ASHM range.

[@RFTL]

@@Valorius Yep. I also want to add that the F14s also can attack missiles in flight.

[@phippsies001]

I was gonna say the same thing also help blind the ships when u limch harpoons but I haven't gotten to that part yet

[@mavor101]

AMRAAMs and sparrows can also engage the cruise missiles.

[@MrCoolguy425]

@@mavor101 AMRAAMs are not in the game as of now. AIM-120s are 90s era, meanwhile the game is focused around mid-80s at the latest. (we dont have LAMPS3, Burkes, or VLS)

[@biovorebarrage6860]

I really liked when cap asked what he could do about the flooding on his carrier, and then proceeded to not assign damage control teams to fix the flooding for a good 5 minutes.

[@Lt_Starburst]

Too close for an actual US carrier group engagement, this kind of set up works in favor of the Soviet doctrine. The carrier would launch waay before the Soviets get in range (Exlusion zone?). Plus you need EW aircraft to deal with those missiles before they are in the air. The Naval Institute has some good articles on why EW is mission critical.

[@TheBelrick]

Same as the Iowas vs. Kirovs. Far too close which hurt the soviets

[@nicholasmoore2590]

When you're under missile attack, you go to full ahead and turn your stern towards the missile. When you're about half way through the turn you shoot your chaff. Remember that chaff is there to make a bigger radar contact for the missile than your ship is. I'm a RN vet and have been under missile attack more than once.

[@MandolinMagi]

Issue is the game forces ships to go broadside to allow all weapons to fire.

[@structured_anarchist]

The first production model of the AIM-54 was designed specifically to shoot down Soviet anti-ship missiles. It could shoot down aircraft, but its intended purpose was to kill anti-ship missiles before they got close to a carrier. Like they did in this video. By focusing the Tomcats on the Soviet air wing, the whole point of the Phoenix missile was ignored. The first squadron of Tomcats should have been vectored onto the missiles, the second squadron should have been sent against the air wing. The AIM-54C entered service in 1986, which is when this scenario would have taken place. If the first squadron had been sent after the first missile salvo, odds are you wouldn't have lost the carrier. If you replay it, send the fighters after the missiles first.

[@helzevec]

Agreed. It would be interesting to see if Sea Power allows for the phoenix system to operate as designed for the anti-ship missile defense role. While it is cool in some sense to have such detailed control over all units in this game, it would prove prohibitive here. The phoenix system was designed for simultaneous quick targeting of up to 6 targets with 6 different missiles. Scale that up to a flight of tomcats, and that's a very effective missile defense. I don't know if Sea Power allows for that level of autonomy. If you have to direct individual tomcats against individual missiles when a whole slew of missiles are incoming, it won't take advantage of the phoenix system and will not be as effective. Still, you could reduce the number somewhat, just won't be as realistic.

[@patclark2186]

@@helzevec Agreed. I kinda know the AIM-54 was at least .75% successful in splashing US Talos ( similar sizes and speed as the Soviet shipwreck) missile targets.. at high altitudes. I am uncertain how successful they were at low altitudes.

[@Whatsinanameanyway13]

@@patclark2186 I would imagine even taking down just the high altitude 'spotter' shipwrecks in a salvo would reduce their effectiveness greatly, although again I have no idea how it's modeled in game.

[@TheHorzabora]

However, as an equal response to the Phoenix role, I am… uncertain that anything but an ultra prepared carrier could get off correctly armed F-14’s in the numbers used or suggested in reality. 2 ready birds and two ready plus five, sure. Maybe even double that, I’m not a naval aviator, but everything else should take longer to prepare and even longer to arm if a non-standard strike package is requested.

[@structured_anarchist]

@@TheHorzabora This sort of battle wouldn't be 'all of a sudden'. They'd know that both groups were out there. They might even have satellite imagery (Keyhole for the US, RORSAT for the Russians) of last known positions. Both carriers would have their key planes on deck, already armed, and ready to go. They'd also have CAP, AWACS and jammers already airborne. So they get radar contact from the AWACS and start launching their strikes. US doctrine was to launch everything immediately, then use KA-6D or S-3 with buddy stores to keep their birds in the air and ready. When positive contact is made, the strikes go in. One squadron of Tomcats stays close to the carrier for missile defense, the other escorts the strike aircraft in and hits any Soviet aircraft they come across. What's missing here are the Hornets, which have some air-to-air capability even when carrying an anti-ship loadout. So the US strike should have been two squadrons of Hornets (2 AIM-9s, 4 Harpoons each), one squadron of Intruders (more Harpoons or GBUs), and a detachment of EA-6B Prowlers (with HARMs). HARMS first to kill radars, Harpoons against HVTs, then if there's anything left over, the Intruders could use GBUs if they had them. Repeat until there are no enemy ships left. The other squadron of Tomcats carrying six AIM-54 each can intercept seventy two missiles simultaneously. The Tico with Aegis and any other ship with SAMs handles any missile that gets past the Tomcats on anti-missile duty. This really should have taken place closer to three hundred miles, since both groups would have forward-deployed aircraft searching for the enemy group.

[@Tuning3434]

Won't lie, strong 'I am desperate and I have no clue what my weapons can do' vibes in the last 10 minutes. Even in the tincan era, 76 mm guns are still pretty much pea shooters if having to work against CV armour on their vital area's. They try to build them to take one or two torp hits and /or missile hits and be recoverable.

[@chijohnaok]

At the end, when the Oliver Hazard Perry frigate got close to the Soviet carrier...Grim Reaper failed to initiate a boarding action to take the ship. ;-)

[@floydfarms1578]

No EW aircraft were used, no torpedoes were launched by Tico and destroyers, started too close together which benefited Soviets, used F14 only to attack air wing instead of missile waves. I think you could have a better chance at winning with some of these.

[@mattybob12310]

I think the issue you're having Cap, is that these fights are always like, in the 'terminal' phase, 2 carrier groups within 150nm of eachother, there just simply isn't time to react to anything. I think a better way to do it in this game at least, would be to create a scenario where the battle groups are cat & mousing eachother, trying to pinpoint eachother at a greater range and see if you can get the drop on the Reds. I just don't think this game works as well in the 'turn everything on and let it run' style like DCS does.

[@the_beef4762]

Exactly. Shouldn't just start close to each other where everyone fires everything. In reality they're constantly moving/deceiving where they are.

[@the_beef4762]

Wolfpack345 does great videos of Sea Power of how the game is meant to be played BTW. Very fun to watch.

[@nicolivoldkif9096]

Yeah, unless there is a spectator mode with two AI players, he needs to just play the game and stop trying to make a video. As it currently is the video is basically just the AI beating up on an AFK force.

[@bacco0447]

hey cap, you can use SEAD against ships, shrikes will home for any radar including those on ships (also leaving damage control in auto might be the best idea)

[@KimLind]

Yes! Hell yes. Best battle of many others creators of Sea Power. Feel like u step up an level - so greatful. Many Thanks for all hard work.

[@JesusGzus]

That's what I was waiting for, perfect ❤

[@Four9sFineJewelry]

I’m digging these sealer videos. It opens up a whole new line of videos for you guys.

[@99IronDuke]

This is the best game I have seen in a long while.

[@TFY-v8l]

AEGIS is a bit underpowered in this game.. considering the first VLS version of the Tico came out in 1986 i hope they add it to the game. The MK-26 twin arm launcher just isnt good enough to get the job done, guess thats why they only made 5 of that version

[@papatango2362]

I do think SAM’s need to be buffed on both sides. Particularly US but even soviet SAM’s seem unreliable.

[@christopherchartier3017]

The game takes place in 1983 the latest I think

[@TFY-v8l]

@papatango2362 yeah hopefully they get it figured out in the full release

[@TFY-v8l]

@@christopherchartier3017 oh ok.. well maybe they'll buff the Tico lol it was state of the art back in the 80s

[@jkhusky]

Sp current cut off date is 1985

[@fagalon9152]

Brilliant video cap and a nice look at the same DCS Scenarios but run in other games. Very refreshing!

[@surrounded8637]

When it comes to your damage control in these games you put it on what is on fire and flooding first then move on to critical systems that need repair and with more dc parties on the area faster it is fixed

[@bracsols]

I wanna give my two cents about this scenario. The Americans would always have BARCAP up at 150nm+ out from the carrier. 2-4 F14s at station with 2 AIM-54s, 3 AIM-7s and 2 AIM-9s. In a high threat enviroment that would be 4+ F14s with 4 AIM-54s, 2 AIM-7s and 2 AIM-9s. These F14s would try to shoot down AShM. Also you would immediately scramble EA-6B Prowlers with AN/ALQ-99s to jam incoming missiles. After that additional BARCAP F14s would scramble to support, long range F14s without AIM-54s would be scrambled for AAW.

[@bpop2148]

Been looking forward for this!

[@nullterm]

This game has way more of a tension to it than DCS naval simulations. Think I need this in my life.

[@TankmasterPlayz2009]

Thank you for making my request come true, I hope to see you make another one of these when the game is fully released

[@DavidWilliams-ig5ec]

Another Soviet fantasy comes into play. Iinventive as always, Cap! I never miss an episode!

[@Chaackaviationandtrainvideos]

I can’t wait for the full release of this game

[@brandonbarnett6520]

You should redo this scenario and player control both sides because the EW aircraft are essential for jamming incoming missiles

[@adamtruong1759]

I never thought I would say this, but I never realized how close 150 nmi actually was. I feel like this distance between the fleets should've been increased, oh well I suppose that can wait for the "real" wargame scenarios. Also, the fact that the AI at this time still can't perform carrier ops properly is an issue. No to mention how ineffective damage control seems to be (there's no way almost all her damage control teams died in those two hits, considering the entire crew knows DC).

[@otetechie]

Only one country has a working navy…

[@RedTSquared]

As a former USN Sailor in the 70s/80s, those big flying telephone poles the Soviets would throw at us were a huge concern! That's why we would never let them get that close irl. Nerve wracking to watch!

[@redgriffindiver7740]

I think CAP is a descendant of the commanders of the Light Brigade. :)

[@apollo4619]

As much as I love these videos anything involving ships he always puts that at point blank range relatively speaking.

[@walterlemieux5573]

You spent a minute right at the start just watching the Russian missiles launch. Then you spent 5 minutes just chitchatting before actually setting up the US ships. The Russian missiles are halfway here. Then you started launching F14s. Other than a basic CAP, which should have been in place BEFORE the Russian missiles launch, the F14s were secondary, because any threat from Russian planes would be second to arrive. Remember those Russian ship-killing missiles launched right at the start? They're going to arrive before you even start launching the A6s, which are your only anti-ship response. So you should have been launching A6s FIRST, so that you at least have a counterstrike in the air even if the soon-to-arrive missile disable your carrier. Send up the Prowlers with them--that's what they're for. Then the rest of your F14s, followed by S3s (which can also launch Harpoons). If your carrier's still capable, launch the A7s with any mix of air-to-surface weapons to finish off damaged ships. Lack of Harpoons doesn't make them useless. It does suck that you have to set up each plane individually. Are you sure you can't assign instructions to each flight of aircraft, at least? And can you do so during a pause? That would be realistic, since you are the task force commander, not the many junior officers issuing the detail instructions.

[@biovorebarrage6860]

You can assign instructions based on a flight-by-flight basis. You can see him do it when he sets the altitudes and airsearch radar for the first flights of the 14s.

[@MandolinMagi]

A-7Es with AGM-45s are useful for suppressing radars, and they're faster than the AGM-84. A-6s and S-3s with Harpoon, then A-7 and EA-6 press the attack. EA-6's Offensive ECM is, from what I've seen, hilariously OP and basically shuts down the enemy radar. And there doesn't seem to be a burn-through range, so even at close range they still can't see.

[@countbuggula]

It was infuriating seeing how long it took from the scenario starting before you even started launching planes from the carrier. Gave the other team an enormous advantage. Can you not pause the game to issue a bunch of commands before going to watch the red missile launches?

[@chrisstopher2277]

Any video of yours is an enjoyable experience, my friend. It's nice watching you learn this game.

[@Fastphil007]

You absolutely should have had your prowlers in the air jamming radars. Still good stuff and fun to see. Keep it goin!!

[@jimmaccauley]

"Watch this!" .... says admiral sacrificing all his ships.

[@TheLastPhoen1x]

Finally, someone uploaded carrier vs carrier gameplay.

[@MrMarksch]

Why does the Kidd class DDG have SM-1MR? It had SM-2MR, same as the Ticonderogas. Same Mk-26 launcher and magazine too. Same Hull and machinery in fact. Until the arrival of the Arleigh Burkes, it was the most powerful USN destroyer there was.

[@abuuba653]

I chuckled greatly when you realized that they were just reloading and not with broken guns! Genuine

[@flare9757]

The Frigate arrives. Russian Carrier: “Why am I hearing boss music?”

[@Jamguy429]

Next time should do one where there distance is vast and it’s down to the aircraft to find each others fleet

[@dobster5819]

“We might hit the carrier” I Lied!. Nice one Cap , great entertainment thanks.

[@jimfrazier8104]

It's not every day you set a record, not that "Worst CBG Commander Ever" is something to aspire to. Phoenix AIM-54 vs P-700 Granit for the win.

[@FleetDefenderRA5]

In the first Harpoon game, MANY was the battle settled by cannons... and when there was a battleship in the group, it was the battleship that carried the day.

[@scott1711]

"What the hell was that?" Something tells me many of us playing this for the first time will be saying that. 😄 When I find myself entertained by videos of a pre-release game like this, I put it on my wish list. November 12th...I'll be downloading it.

[@tetraxis3011]

I love how the Soviets crammed missiles into every ship, even carriers had super potent missiles

[@Fury-161]

That's because the planes sucked.

[@tetraxis3011]

@ Yea the Mig23 was kinda lacking. Although that’s mostly cause only Cuban and Soviet pilots knew how to use it. Everyone else tried to turn right with it and paid the price.

[@Fury-161]

@@tetraxis3011 The Soviets never had a naval Mig-23 in reality though. They had Forgers, which were really just manned inflight targets for Tomcats and Hornets. ;)

[@barbarapitenthusiast7103]

​@@Fury-161 by that logic AV-8s were just S-300F bait. Yak-38 had the same performance as early harriers.

[@Fury-161]

@@barbarapitenthusiast7103 The USMC AV-8B had superior payload and performance to the Yak-38, but of course the AV-8 was a ground attack aircraft, it was *never* intended to take on soviet battlegroups because it would, in fact, be SA-N-6 bait.

[@tjh8402]

I still need to finish the battle, but a couple of comments already from the start. I have to imagine US carrier battle group would’ve already had its planes in the air. By the time it was 150 nautical miles from the Soviet carrier group. The AWACs would’ve already seen the ships and the Nimitz have already launched a strike package against the Soviet group. An A6 intruder has an over 800 nautical mile range and then the harpoons go even further. The Soviet carriers group should have already been subjected to multiple waves of American attack air aircraft by now. The American task force would’ve tried everything it could to stay outside the Soviet missile range and hit it with planes from further away, never mind that there would have been an F14 cap up already. finally, a repeat complaint from the Iowa versus Kirov battle: start ordering your American ships when the game is paused at the beginning. The US is losing precious minutes at the start while all the orders are issued. Meanwhile, the Soviets have already launched their attacks because they aren’t waiting for a human to tell them what to do. “ why can’t the Americans have bigger guns?” My brother in Christ, you seem to have forgotten that an Iowa could have been put with this TF. Also can the MK 46 torpedoes be used against surface ships? Maybe could’ve tried firing those.

[@ЯдНадголовой]

А в старенькой "Опасные Воды" можно было в редакторе хоть зрителем себя сделать, хоть конфликт кучи стран разыграть, да и морская фауна там тоже была, что могло усложнить определение цели, можно было всё рандомить. Увы авторы Сеа павр наступают на всё те же грабли, как и многие до них, итог - быстро наскучит всем

[@Angel33Demon666]

I prefer the battles where both sides are more or less AI since they reduces the element of human skill. Hopefully there’ll be a spectator mode soon?

[@omega_hannibal5766]

Incredible job Cap! You’re doing an excellent job running these. Once you get more experienced a larger carrier on carrier battle with iowas and Kirov class escorts plus submarines would be the ultimate carrier battle

[@BamaCSX83]

Hey Cap @GrimReapers. The F-14s should have also been able to intercept those anti-ship missiles. Perhaps send one squadron of Tomcats into a MigCap and the second could have been sent to counter the incoming ASW missiles.

[@adrianbujang248]

Cap electronic warfare are important in this game.

[@Fury-161]

Incredibly important.

[@jamison884]

Oh, also, from watching some other Sea Power videos. It appears, at least in the current version of the game, that ships hit with ASMs are basically dead no matter what. I've yet to see a missile hit that was turned around by the damage control teams. It appears even one missile will generally cause secondary explosions and the fires spread before they can be stopped from taking down the ship.

[@EeZ3-808]

I think you should have used an actual carrier group the Soviets had during that period. I’m 52 and grew up in the 70’-80’s with the “real” threat of war with the Soviets. Funny enough, since I was a young boy I always wanted to join the USAF. By the time I graduated High School in 1990, Soviets weren’t a threat anymore, I started basic training on Aug.2 1990, the day Iraq invaded Kuwait. FML! 🤦‍♂️

[@scottcole7282]

In the early 80s all US carrier groups included 2 Nuke cruisers. For the Nimitz it was usually the Texas and the California.

[@fennixshark2584]

I love watching these videos! I know that you often get demonised, have you thought about taking on sponsorships?

[@kosomolsk]

This episode actually shows one of the reasons why the Soviets may have favoured "aviation cruisers" rather than full fledged carriers in the 70s when they might have been able to crank out an Orel. A MiG-23 just isn't competitive against an F-14, so even if they build one carrier, it'd be significantly inferior to its American counterpart. And then any anti-ship aircraft, even if they have them, would be massacred. Any carrier will need to be backed by substantial numbers of land based aircraft to match the combat potential of a single American carrier. If this Orel had a heavier set of P-700s instead of those vulnerable anti-ship aircraft, at least according to Sea Power your carrier might have gone down completely, along with the escorts. In the 80s with the introduction of the Flanker series, there's more hope of equality, and the Soviet carrier program began to move towards bigger and better ships. Then the USSR ran out of time and broke up. Had that not happened, we might actually have considered that whole sequence a sound move.

[@IetsgoBrandon]

Is that possible to use ECM to counter offensive ASM or jam the SAM from the enemy side, please? I am curious about what role can those EA-6 play if they were shown up.

[@ryanmgill]

As others noted. 1. Have an alert flight of F-14s up. 2. Have 2 AWACS up. 3. Have a tanker or two up (S-3s) 4. Have A6's and A7s setup for ASU AND SEAD (Surface ships have radar, eliminating that is what the A7s can do with their HARMs) 5. Have the F-14s ready to engage the Vampires 6. Position a frigage FORWARDS a good way, it's both missile bait AND forward eyes. The blundering in face to face is the problem for these scenarios. The forces should have to work for where the opponent is.

[@ericworst]

I have seen one of these content creators know to use jamming. Clearly never plated Harpoon.

[@alexchivilev]

Man those p-700 are scary af

[@damekkoDASHkun]

6:26 That should be 1 Slava (strike/aa) + 2 Sovremenny(aa/strike) + 1 Udaloi(asw). Or 2 Kara (asw/aa) + 3 Sovremenny (aa/strike). Or, if went completely mad, 1 Kirov(strike/aa/asw) + 1 Udaloi(asw) + 2 Krivak(asw)

[@BoraHorzaGobuchul]

It would be nice to have the devs join you in reviewing this battle and showing you how to do it right. I've seen them participating in videos on other channels do it's doable. That would make a great video

[@grimreapers]

Tried but time zones don't align annoyingly.

[@kevinsasaki775]

Day 5 GR MUST continue!

[@jt6581]

Love these massive size scenarios

[@jameshewitt8828]

God I love 80s and below naval aircraft, Tomcats, prowlers, vikings etc… so cool

[@jesperkarlbom2400]

didnt they fix the auto repair thingy when the ship move the teams to most crid spots

[@robandcheryls]

I enjoy the option to pause and think. For those old guys, just like me.

[@tysonpaskett6365]

I guess we know why the navy went the way they did with Ticos and ABs

[@exidy-yt]

I LOVE naval combat games that get into gun range that are handled this well. Beats the piss out of DCS at this, and so it should. Cap still has alot to learn (like launching anti-ship choppers and firing his own torpedoes) but that will come with time. So happy to see this game getting prominence.

[@BEANLORD6-9]

love how chaotic this was hahaha

[@jimreynolds2837]

The 1980’s US Navy had legacy Hornets too.

[@Fazbear-qy8mo]

I love these sea power battles

[@dooomberg]

Hey Cap! I’ve been really enjoying the recent naval battles on Sea Power-seeing those classic battleships in action is awesome. I’ve been diving into Napoleonic naval battles lately, especially Admiral Nelson’s battles at Cape St. Vincent and the Nile, and of course the Battle of Waterloo. It got me wondering: how would these iconic tactics play out if we reenacted them with more modern battleships like in sea power, while limiting them to similar short-range combat as in Nelson’s day? Imagine recreating these classic battles, but with your modern fleet constrained to close-quarters, no advanced long-range weapons. Could we expect similar outcomes, or would the modern ships shift the balance, even with those restrictions? It could make for an amazing video series!

[@shockwave6213]

With those 2 Granit missile impacts, I wonder how many aircraft inside the hangars would have been destroyed or rendered unflyable until they could be repaired.

[@TheSwegBucket]

>spams 76mm cannons at Carrier >gets destroyed by cannons from different ship Very interesting stragety lol

[@tarran6176]

ELINT is a must, I didn't know enough on how to use it setting up DCS missions. I play a lot of CMO's, there I learned very fast to use it to protect the fleet. Seems in Sea Power is going to be a must with supporting AWAC's

[@jamison884]

Hey Cap, thanks for the video as always. All just amateur guessing/analysis: I believe the game devs selected this era for a bunch of reasons, but one in particular is due to the relative parity between US and Soviet technology prior to the fall of the Soviet Union. Essentially, as you've pointed out the Russians went for these huge fast long-range anti-ship missiles, and the US focused on their air wing virtually exclusively for long-range offense. Where the US gained ground in this era, is their submarine force. And from watching some other Sea Power videos, it appears the devs have modeled US submarines as superior. If the US can't use both its air wing and submarines, I believe the Soviets will end up winning most straight up surface battles. In the 1980's, it appears the USN SAMs simply weren't as up for the fight as they are today, resulting in a pretty fragile balance of power. So, by giving the Soviets their traditional strength in the 1980's of long range ASMs, and adding in a fictional Soviet supercarrier, is sort of stacking the deck against the US within the game. Once the Soviets fell, the US didn't have a big bad enemy, and then they were involved in insurgency wars for decades. That's why you see so much US development recently. They're keeping their edge when it comes to supercarriers and air wings, while also investing in Block Va Maritime Strike Tomahawks, LRASM, Naval Strike Missile to upgrade over the Harpoon (for the shorter range option) inventory, plus SM-6, and ultimately hypersonics like the Mako, hypersonic glide vehicles being installed on the DDG-1000 destroyers first, and they are developing a hypersonic cruise missile (larger warhead an better range than Mako). This is all in response to the fact they will be facing off against a Chinese Navy with some blue-water capabilities in addition to the incoming missile threats. Luckily for NATO, the Soviets/Russians could never afford or develop a supercarrier fleet to be honest, as all we have to do is look at their poor attempts at any sort of carrier to-date. I read a recent article stating the 1,500 men of the Kuznetsov crew were shipped off to Ukraine to fight as infantry while that smoke monster sits in dry dock still unable to deploy.

[@tomdrv9901]

The ships will automatically chaff at the optimal moment.

[@avi8aviate]

There was no MiG-23A, but there was a proposed MiG-23K that never entered service. Correction: there WAS actually a MiG-23A project based on the MiG-23K, which was cancelled for the same reason as the latter.

[@isaaclove1144]

During a catapult launch on a carrier, isn't the aircraft supposed to go off to one side or the other so that if they have to ditch immediately after launch the ship doesn't run over them?

[@neilcarter77]

So many OHP frigates still in service around the world, tough ships!

[@andreamanninfiaschi1679]

As a good briton, you like Sea Power so much. Not surprised at all. So do I, mate!

[@filipearthur5379]

Let the Damage Control do their job automatically; there is no reason to try repair when you still had a heavy fire in two compartments.

[@ivorharden]

Ha, you did read my comment from the previous video 👌

[@xpk0228]

The concept of the USN carrier is the outer air battle, which is why they bought the phoenix in the first place. F14s are supposed to be 200NM away from the CSG and prevent anything to get within that range. Otherwise Kh-22s can down the carrier easily. This is also what they are returning to with the AIM-174B in service.

[@hookedupboer]

haha I was shouting at my monitor with the fires raging on the carrier and not assigning damage control teams to them :D

[@shaphown]

The Soviet ships have radars for the prowlers to jam.

[@KepeskUrthalre-h6r]

Boarding would change the outcome of the last 17.45 minuets of this battle drastically.

[@jorkraven8819]

You should probably stop immediately giving both sides full awacs coverage. Thats a masisve advantage to the soviets especially at the "closer" ranges you already start the battles at

[@Ecrocken]

RNG is gonna RNG! Nice scenario, Cap!

[@Nagato_2020]

So i know im late, but I noticed something with the Tomcats in this video and the longer rematch video: the Tomcats have space for FOUR Phoenix missiles, but only seem to carry only one. Four Fox-3s is better then only one

[@Orieni]

The opposite to snakeeyes is boxcars, round this neck of the woods.

[@nevermindthesky]

as weird as this engagement is/was; it was definitely exciting!

[@madeconomist458]

Just gonna say: I think it's kinda bullshit that we have prototype soviet nuclear aircraft carriers but not F/A-18 hornets, Arleigh Burke Destroyers, or Ohio Class SSBNs.

[@Spendingryan]

I love seeing the CIWS, Royal Navy ships, if they add them are going to be at a huge disadvantage for emergency defence as they lack the Phalanx, we didn't even have them on our current Duke class frigate that first entered service in the 1990's and is still used now, although some of our ships had the Goalkeeper CIWS i think.

[@williamcashman3655]

How badly would the flying cigars done against the Migs ? If they could have intercepted the Soviet aircraft, could direct the F-14s towards the ships.

[@toyrunner87]

Could you have run the carrier ashore, and then concentrated on fixing the catapult's and arresting gear? So that way, at least you could have kept the air wings going