AIM-174B (SM-6), LRASM & MAKO Coordinated Strike vs Chinese Carrier Group (WarGames 231) | DCS 

@@grimreapers I love the naval battles. Is there a contact where I can suggest a scenario? Thanks!

They already did a reenactment of that on this channel. It was awesome seeing the book come to life.

I think in the book they also turned a Tarawa class LHA and the several thousand marines onboard destined for Iceland into a giant fireball, thus leading to the extended soviet occupation of Iceland.

@@22steve5150 Yep and the French aircraft carrier Foch was destroyed as well. They said it was the worst defeat in the history of the U.S. Navy.

That’s what I was thinking too!

Oh, that one's easy. The Chinese win, because reasons (i.e, the scenario would be stacked like this one to handcuff the Americans).

Yup can do that.

China doesn't have hypersonic missiles yet ._. Would be cool to see with Russia though, as they have an obscene variety of missile weaponry.

I like how you think…

plus, it indicates that you wouldn't' need many more missiles sent at once to overwhelm it

@@delphy2478 That was my first thought. For the cost of the attack vs the risk of the attack vs the reward of the attack, five more hornets firing SM-6s means more LORASM & Mako on target.

@@MichelVaillancourt exactly. 25% more of each type of missiles and you'd probably have consistent hits, 50% more of each missile and you'd likely have substantial destruction of the task force. plus, humans won't perfectly make the same targeting priorities or responses, they won't notice the larasm's the instant they cross the horizon, nor will they immediately grasp the significance that he subsonic missiles are also the ones with the largest payload when they are busy shooting down incoming super/hypersonics. in a real situation with even this many, they are likely to focus on the faster missiles more, becuas eof human nature, and only try to handle the larasm's once all others are gone, to the destruction of their ships.

The answer is decoys like MALD absorbing some of those volleys

SM 6 was placed into operation recently I believe.

SM-3 cannot achieve Mach 13.5 so I very much doubt the SM-6 could - in the anti-satellite test they carried out in Feb 2008 the USS Lake Erie fired a modified SM3 missile that hit the USA-193 satellite at a closing speed of just over 22,700 mph - which is around Mach 29.5, however, the satellite was already travelling at 17,800 mph which is ~mach 23 - thus, the missle would only have been travelling at about Mach 6.5 at impact. Whilst the SM-6 is about half the mass of an SM3, the velocity difference is not significantly different, when you plug the numbers on you get about mach 8.9 as the peak velocity, which gels well with information so far gleaned from USAF/US Navy sources. There is no need for missiles to achieve mach speeds over Mach 10 unless they intend to reach low earth orbit - and the SM6 cannot get that high. The USA-193 test was only successful because the satellite had failed and was dropping in orbit, being only just above where atmospheric drag would bring it in naturally - it had dropped from around 240 miles to around 133 miles AMSL. Now i know if you look at the range you might think the SM6 should reach a satellite in orbit - but it is not that simple, the rocket equation makes life very difficult, especially when you add in things like gravity. Many missiles that have ranges of over 300 miles cannot reach satellites - to get to the lowest stable orbital altitude, around 180 nautical miles - your missile needs to hit about Mach 15 as a minimum or you are extremely lucky. The Chinese launched an anti-satellite missile from a Mig 29 (I think) at very high altitude, and that missle was effectively am air launched rocket that took the aircraft to its max take off weight - it hit mach 25 within about 3 minutes and hit it's target, but the Chinese have not tried this again because it was logistically a nightmare and the debris field created was a diplomatic headache too.

​@@jim.franklinit's starting to annoy me that Americans are getting all of these Wonder weapons that may or may not enter service. The amount of Chinese in Russian Wonder weapons that aren't used in the simulations is crazy

@@jim.franklin Still a satellite has no friction and just orbits around the Earth. Also the ISS, passes by with the nearly the same speed. In order for any ground missile to hit it you need to have at least the same speed, in relation to the ground.

Our weapons exist.

One thing I'm enjoying is as the sim continues to improve it seems it can run more assets on screen so as time goes on I'm hoping we see more and more situations like that without a server crash. I was surprised the last fleet battle didn't cause a crash to be honest.

:) IN a real fight it would be over in the first wave, the US may take a hit or two, but the "enemy" fleet would just disappear. Along with what you speak of would be Buff's at long range, F-22s refueled, and a crap ton of other stuff. The money counter is fun, but in a real fight - the cash register dont count, its DUMP IT ALL and let Neptune sort them out.

@@americanpatriot4227 Never underestimate your enemy, or overestimate yourself. "USA INVINCIBLE" is a fun meme, but in a real fight you have to assume the enemy can and will kick your arse.

@@kimjonglongdong3158 😂 after nearly 20 years in the military, I may know a bit about fighting. Do you know the average experience of a Chinese or Russian pilot? I thought not. Wow look at the javelin 🤣 that's amazing, err nope it's nearly as old as dirt. Wow patriot's can stop hypersonics , err yeah 👍 knew that 10 years ago. Huh I didn't know jammers were that strong....wanna see fried rabbit at 300 miles? 😲 You have no idea. Nope I know we would take some hits, no question about it. That said it's over before it starts. The final score is the question.😜 Basically it's r2d2 against the Terminator. The death Star is on the Terminator's side....sucks to be r2d2.

@americanpatriot4227 depends do you mean combat experience or flight experience? If flight experience China has Russia beat mainly because of economics. If in terms of combat experience by this point a lot of Russian pilots (the ones that haven't been shot down, captured, killed, defected or any combination of the above) likely have more hours flying in combat than the average American pilot. But you seem to have missed my point. I'm not suggesting China and Russia are anything more than paper tigers. For all we know Chinese stealth tech is behind that of the F117 and Russia has to change their engines after every 20 flight hours. Just because we're fairly certain they'll be useless, we shouldn't assume they will be. That's how disastrous defeats happen.

Yup next week :)

@@grimreapers nice one

I believe that is the idea of a hypersonic exchange?

Isn’t that the idea of any missile exchange?

We canand have done TOT attacks like this since 1991. Nothing new here, AI only expedites planning abit

@@user-og4vk6mc9i Getting AI to do all the planning in a couple of minutes is more than a bit faster. Huge difference.

Working on it for a carrier battle coming up.

Awesome! Would there be any way to include a "land battle" as well using F15 EX and B21? Thanks for all you do!

Will do.

@@grimreapers any plans to mess around with ship-launched LRASM or JASSM at some point in the near future?

This is correct; DCS massively overestimates the effectiveness of missile defense, even on systems that we know in the real world do not perform as well.

Not really, totally different in a warship simulator or if that warship is tied up alongside plugged into a multiship CIC simulator. Missiles fired have all different characteristics that were not evident on the Grim reaper simulator, besides the Allies have different RADAR and trying to detect a sea skimmer missile is virtually impossible until it is almost visible.

​@@boredatseayou got a lot of things right there, and you actually grasped to the fact that this is not a naval combat simulator. It's literally an aircraft simulation with Naval assets included. But it's funny to see people get so bent out of shape when they don't realize that this is number one an aircraft simulation and two a civilian one at that so yeah

See the Boeing hypersonic revolver launch system designed for c17’s

In real life YES but I'm struggling to get it working in game.

I'm all over it!

To be fair, the ECM Spear 3 is likely the only varient that would be able to reliably function the way it is shown in DCS.

Yes! I would also love to see the Indian navy in a fleet battle now that they're managing to get so many new mods and assets in DCS!

They need the Indian escorts and assets, caps addressed this several times

Will do at some point in future.

it's an artifact of the AI tending to "double tap" or "triple tap" everything just because it has more launchers than targets. in the TOT variant, there are essentially as many targets as launchers all the time, so that DT/TT isn't happening.

That's how Iran penetrated the world's most expensively defended spot in Israel. Even with Iran warning Israel the attack was coming, and using a decade old tech to do it.

​@@svensvensson2724 Iran didnt warn anyone nor did it do damege while useing hudreds of drones and dosens of balistic missiles The damege was an injured kid and a hole near a runway For as per reports a large part of irans arsenal

@@nikolaideianov5092 Iran warned Turkey, who they know will pass it along. Only 2 of 7 missiles were defended, the rest were decoys. There were no children at the military base they attacked.

@@svensvensson2724 what are you on ? Becose i want it I will reply again when im drunk enough to deal with you (never)

​@@svensvensson2724show me the particulars that he stated were wrong, but the fact Still Remains Iran didn't accomplish anything. Now I understand you like to Fanboy over them but maybe rein it in a bit so you have a little bit of credibility😂

hmm interesting.