Not nitpicking but the RB-15 was a fire-and-forget missile with a range just shy of 40 miles. It's pretty insane considering the Viggen is from the late 60's (I know the missile isn't tho) The AJS 37 still used the CK computer from the 60's. It's amazing when you think about it
Still some way to go in simulating the effectiveness of CIWS. In real life those things demolish everything and the best chance for a successful attack is if you engage them from multiple directions. Not to mention a carrier is never by itself but accompanied by a number of the outstanding Arleigh Burke's. That layered system is pretty hard to saturate, and you'd probably need dozens of missiles. Sorry for the long text.
I can guarantee you that nowadays you can't kill anything with a CIWS using Harpoons. Not even sure how you would actually, they indeed magic shield anything flying at them
Ignoring the fact that it took said sub multiple times to do so and its achievement of it is laughable if you compare it to a very noisy november class sub doing the same thing to a US carrier.
XO: Captain! Incoming long-range ASM! Shall we begin Phoenix Fire? Captain: Commander, can the computer identify? XO: Computer identifies enemy ASM as an American AGM-84 Harpoon, sir! Captain: Negative on the Phoenix Fire Commander. It would take one hundred Harpoon hits to sink us, it's just not worth the ammunition. Don't worry, it'll buff out. XO: Aye sir! Stand down CWIS! And THAT is why the Harpoon doesn't trigger CWIS. :D
The reason ciws doesnt shoot at harpoon is the iff built in to each of the american systems. There is of course a manual override in the ciws that will allow it to fire but in dcs your the pilot firing the harpoon not the fc running the ciws board. So you only get the results of an american ciws in auto seeing a no shoot tagged harpoon.
Wow, this still uses the old Mk I of RBS-15 and we are now at Mk IV (nickname Gungnir - the name of Odins spear). In addition its main features are actually its capabilities to operate in complicated geometries (over mixed land and sea terrain in archipelagoes) and complicated weather (sleet, different types of fog, rain, etc).
There might be a bug with how ships track and shoot missiles atm. I've noticed with the Viggen, playing the exact same mission several times in a row, the same ship would sometimes fire at the RB-15 with its CIWS and sometimes it would not even try. I haven't nailed down the exact circumstances but the times it did fire were when I fired my missiles at the very extreme edge of maximum range.
I noticed that the damage on Harpoons was minimal. However due to them having to fly higher until they see their target, I found they were easy to be shot down by missiles by Russian Frigates.
lamboman yea I think that the harpoon will not need to cruise so close if it’s directed by a ground radar. I’m imagining it being able to skim the surface the whole flight which would make it go much lower to the ground. It still may be easy to shoot down for some ships but I’d imagine cruisers and destroyers would really require a big attack with multiple missiles from different launch platforms to have a high chance of destroying their target.
You are getting very scientific Cap, I approve... Sea Eagle = development of the Martel that the lovely Buccaneers used, sort of anyway. Used inertial autopilot to get in the general area of the target ship ( little bit like DCS implementation ) then terminal guidance by it's own radar seeker
One key advantage of the Harpoon is that you can carry four of them on a Hornet vs only two Rb 15 on a Viggen. But that advantage is currently nullified by the fact that not even four Harpoons does as much damage as one Rb 15. It takes three Harpoons just to sink one Molniya.
You could do a Deck attack on the Stennis by guiding it in manually :p don't let it off the rails and fly that thing in yourself. Also, watching the RB15 weaving and the CWIS desperately trying to shoot it down was epic.
I thought of another comparison you guys could do. Terrain following. I was just testing the terrain following of the Sea Eagle and it was pretty impressive. Although, not perfect. Just wondering how it stacked up to the other anti-ship missiles.
Cool video as far as i can understand the reason the RB-15F has such a low alt is because it was designed to be dropped at a low alt (at least during the Viggen era). planes would use land to hide their approach then launch the missiles at the designated waypoint and then return fast towards land...letting the missiles use it's navigation system plus the missile started off as a ship born missile then converted for air plane use can't find any info on the RB-15F having a pop-up function....AI version bug?
That's odd, the RB-15 can actually be launched between 50 and 2000 meters (and the Viggen is perfectly capable of doing so) and at a pretty good standoff range. It was also intended for the Gripen, but then was implemented in the Viggen when the Gripen was delayed. It's the RB-04 that can only be dropped at extremely low altitude.
@@TLTeo not only intended for but used by the Gripen i've actually been on a team mounting and dismounting a live RB-15 on a Gripen .....never seen us guys work so quietly and methodically then that time lol specially as the team on the other wing was doing the same but with a live BK 90
Did you leave out the rb-04 on purpose because it takes nothing to set up or because the rb-15f is more modern? Or did you just forget about it? Anyway great video showing the strength of every missile
The Harpoon cruising altitude doesn't seem correct. It's supposed to be a sea-skimming missile like the RB-15 or the Sea Eagle. As the missile is implemented now, it becomes a target for enemy air defenses before the Harpoon's RADAR has a chance to acquire the target and descend to terminal flight. I'm not sure where Eagle Dynamics is getting their information about how this missile behaves, but this just doesn't seem right.
The harpoon is a true sea skimmer as it was made originally made to sink surfaced subs back in the early 70s,that is why the ciws have difficulty seeing them.
I didn't come away watching this feeling like a really good comparison was done. Why not reset the mission after each missile type? Seems like there's too many variables to do a fair comparison when the ship is in a different state after each engagement. And given that the effectiveness of the defenses are in some way chance based, assigning a binary value as to whether they can be targeted or not seems unfounded. Overall, didn't come away with any good sense of what's more effective, the Harpoon or the Rb-15F. (Given the Sea Eagle's limitations in game, this seems like a complete non-starter in multiplayer.)
I believe you missed the part where he said he tested it for hours over multiple scenarios before recording the video. He said the recorded testing in the video was just for fun.
Neither the RB04 or 15 works the same for AI vs player. Probably made it easy on themself when developing it for DCS. Personally I haven't had much luck with programing heights with RB15 BUT if you use preplaned/advanced drop mode it will fly at whatever altitude you drop it at unit it hits its programd descend point. So you can launch it over land and have it descend after going feet wet. Great comparison, mabey zoom in alitle more on the data chart next time 🤓
CAP, I read that in Mulitplayer the DCS software for calculating weapons performance is based on the client's machine, not on the server. So is a "fast" PC more accurate with missles than a "slow" PC in Mulitplayer? You could test with slow machine at "Low" and "High" graphic settings, measured by the FPS and the number of accurate missle hits (use the lame Russian 27ER, it not too accurate to start with). I would also test at
no we are completely full. Lots of days open to all: - - Tues 1800GMT Arma 3 - Thurs 1800GMT IL-2 - Thurs 1930GMT DCS - Fri 1800GMT Arma 3 - Sun 1800GMT DCS This weekly schedule is open to all.
@@grimreapers At this point if ED does not recognize your hard work and tireless promotion of this game and give you the viper then there is no justice in this world!
Those missiles would not be able to make it through the dense spray kicked up by the CIWS, which is something that perhaps they were not allowed to model. It effectively blinds IR sensors as well as on board radars. Salt water is very good at absorbing radar signals. The density of the spray would also be enough to disrupt the effectiveness of lift surfaces as well, just as exploding shells are creating massive air pressure differences. They tumble into the sea.
@68K true enough. The radar has to be able to see the missile in sea swells, and it seems the Russian fire control radar was not being actively monitored. Positively identifying and isolating a track among the false noise requires some skill. I suspect the most updated systems use AI to assist with this. The Moskva almost certainly lacked this capability. A focused human radar operator is required, along with well functioning radar. Neither is a certainty in the Russian Navy
@68K well, the Russian CIWS systems (Kashtan) has a multi-band all-weather radar that should quickly move from search to track, but my guess is that someone needs to manually put it in fully automatic mode to let the fire control radar take over. Someone needs to recognize the threat, and I doubt anyone knew the ship was under attack until the missile struck.
Can't tell about Harpoons, but Robot 15 will simply stay on the previous intercept course if the lock is lost, until it either finds a target again or hits something.
6:48 its called American Bios. In War thunder and World of tanks its Russian Bios. But in DCS we got the upperhand you can see that with Planes and Missiles in the game very often.
