RE-MATCH 2026 US Carrier Group vs 2026 Chinese Carrier Group (Naval Battle 114) | DCS 

They would just be shot down given the way the sim has the SAM systems working significantly better than they actually do in real life.

​@@MTBScotlandbut there's lots of them, throw those out with some LRASM to chase up, they're done for

​@@s4ss.m8the problem is in order to do that you're going to have to take space from the LARSM . So in all reality the only way you're going to be able to do that and with a coordinated air and ship strike which is not possible given the limitations of DCs. Or trying to figure out a way to involve the Air Force in this strike and then you're getting Way Beyond the scope of what the actual scenario is

It’s frustrating that we could do multiple time on target strikes across multiple platforms 20 years ago in Harpoon 2, but DCS can’t do it.

@@Wyomingchief attack and ballistic missile subs can also fire tomahawks, don't know of their capabilities in dcs but irl they do they have the ability to do a coordinated air and naval strike. naval f18s, f35s, b1b lancers as well as ships and subs can do a massive tomahawk and LRASM strike which will be very effective, it'll just be super costly. you can launch tomahawks in front then follow it up with LRAMS or mix them in one big salvo and let them deconflict, the tomahawk can loiter around the airspace until it finds a target and the LRASM got its own radar that it can use to detect hostile targets based on priority threat. the ships and planes have enough LRASMS and tomahawks to do such a strike, its the SAMs they'll be taking space away from the strike group will have less defensive missiles to work with but its still over 200

F 35C.....beside the Tomcat and Hornet....I like them all.

Stop coping and I hope cap doesn’t add this bs

@@agnesakioyamen2576 elaborate...?

@@forzaelite1248 Send me where you found this info

@@agnesakioyamen2576 wow, man. There isn't anything even slightly derogatory or negative in this post. I'll assume that you have information I don't which supports your statement.

Question: is there no ship-launched decoy missile? Those would make ASMs much more survivable for the side using them

I don't think you can program the ships to do this in DCS, afaik they just unload every anti-ship missile as soon as they are in it's range to fire.

Yes, but there is no way to simulate this in DCS.

True, but cant do that in game. :(

@@sulyokpeter3941 Cant you have players control the ships and launch on command?

Yup

The "Hollywood" variant.

@@wickbroke2950 cope

American cannot recall carriers and warships from other theatres especially if those theatres are active. American can probably bring four fleet carriers to bare immediately in a pacific war but after the first few months they will likely only have two or three carriers tops at any given point in the pacific and any battle damage taken by the carriers will take years at least to repair and refit. They won’t be able to replace carriers that take battle damage with ships from other theatres because it would leave the US vulnerable in other parts of the world. If the 5th fleet left the Med for the pacific it would leave that entire region vulnerable. If those ships also take battle damage then two fleet capabilities are completely reduced and America may as well have lost the war at that point. America cannot rely on its numbers advantage because they insist on being over extended worldwide in a world police role. They can only rely on their technological edge and logistical advantage both of which are falling behind China specifically leaving America extremely vulnerable in the next pacific war. I think it’s safe to say America will it win against China at least not on their terms.

how long does it take to set up a scenario in CMO?

Its ALOT more automated. And you can do MUCH bigger scenarios.@@mr.puffin7232

It exists already. You will find it on their forums, it's somewhere in the first 8-10 pages. I've seen it a few days ago.

OK

@@grimreaperswhoo hoo! I hope you feel better.

GOOD IDEA! HUGE ONE! :D

hypothetically what can a carrier do against torpedoes launched from the coast if they are less than 20nm away from the shore? They likely wont see them coming until the torpedoes turn on active sonar.

​​@@hughmungus2760with the amount of eyes watching the area there's no way a sub would get close, 2 carriers, 2 LHDs, an MEU and probably 10-15 support ships of different varieties, not to mention the 2-4 subs moving with their respective fleets, that's a very nasty fleet of vessels, there's almost no viable way Russia could launch a conventional strike that wouldn't warrant the litteral apocalypse of earth 😂 (Didn't mention Iran because one Carrier Fleet would flatten the entire country, let alone 2 entire Carrier Fleets, plus an entire MEU. Iran would last all of about 15 minutes)

Yikes! Take care.

Oof, I crushed T-12 and broke my coccyx just before July. Take care of yourself and I hope you get well fast!

Good Lord that sounds terrible. GWS!

I can't get CH to make them and I rely on CH for all this stuff so there's not a lot I can do.

What’s so good about the tomahawk? I thought it was pretty old

​@@christopherchartier3017it's plentiful

@@christopherchartier3017 Saturation missile. Basicly same idea as with drone swarm, you launch ship-ton of those old low cost missiles to distract and eat away sam's to let LRAMS to get through underneath at the same time :)

Old but the Block Va are newest versions with plenty of range, payload, some stealth coating, and improved seekers meant to hitting moving targets, with a loitering capability you got something to distract the enemy and let the USN have ship to ship long range strike. We won't get into the b and c versions with the tandem warheads and thermobaric secondaries.@@christopherchartier3017

CEP on YJ21s will pretty much ensure they nail carrier sized targets 9/10 times. And their use would only really be restricted to that role anyway.

@@hughmungus2760 yup

Then the viewers will request more modification and nerf the Chinese side so the US side can win.

Got a source for that? The claimed speed are mach 6 during flight and mach 10 in the terminal phase. It doesnt make sense for a weapon to go slower in the terminal phase. The YJ21 is not just a ballistic missile, it has a powered flight at least on partialy if not completely. The attack is mostly vertical, the time it spends in the deep atmosphere is very very short (2-3 seconds), it doesnt slow down during that time because it might actually be accelerating using it's engine.

@@billwhoever2830 the thing is that a scramjet engine does not work how to speed slower than five times the speed of sound , so if it isn’t a scramjet then it’s a solid fuel booster which is terribly inefficient and would limit severely the YJ 21 is payload. Also, turning uses up a lot of energy so turning the YJ 21 is going to slow it down even further By the way, what you are saying, is that it takes three seconds for the YJ 21 to get through the deep part of the atmosphere, that would mean that the YJ 21 manages to accomplish around mach 18 while going through the deepest part of the atmosphere, at a realistic angle. It also doesn’t make sense to me why the YJ 21 would go in at a higher speed when is decelerating in the thick part of the atmosphere, it might also burn its sensors . The YJ 21 is based on an American design for a hypersonic missile that didn’t get enough funding to be completed. That’s because of hypersonic weapons were not considered a priority and also, because, even though it was a good weapon, it didn’t bring any super ability to the table, of course, there are hypersonic’s that glide in the upper part of the atmosphere at giant speeds, but the YJ 21 is not one of them.

By the way, the way the YJ 21 is incredibly similar to the failed American weapon I just talked about, and it is similar to the Russian kinjal ,using this information, my sources on those two missiles one of them being part of an actual patriot unit crew, and of course, my common sense ,critical thinking and my knowledge I have concluded along with many other individuals that the YJ 21 is a threat, but only if used in large numbers, hypersonic’s can be intercepted, but a lot of them like 32 hypersonic missiles is a pretty big threat, but that’s 4 055 class destroyers worth of hypersonic missiles.

​​​​@@Dimitris_Datseriswith that terminal velocity it doesn't need a warhead. The kinetic energy is already enough to destroys carriers. K. E. = m*v^2 And just like in m*c^2 the "^2" makes a number very very big. So mach 10 is roughly 8000 km/h and because in physics we use m/s That 8000 will become (8000*1000) /3600 m/s => roughly 2222 m/s So even if the missile has a mass of 1 kg it will cause 5million joules of damage. Wich I just realizer isn't a lot... I might have done something wrong so if anyone can correct it I would really appreciate it. 🤔 Edit: I used 1 kilogram but 1 kilogram is 9.81 N so you need to multiply is by 10. Wich makes more sense cause usually ballistic missiles are a couple Tons.

@@yuning8045 I am amazed and happy that we have someone that is smart enough to do the math, most people don’t do that they just believe everything someone says, but what I want to say is that a hypersonic missile will take an aircraft carrier out of action, but it will not sink any modern american aircraft carrier, here’s where the warhead comes in, you see most of the damage is done on the upper part of the carrier, but warheads can damage areas of the ship that would otherwise not be damaged. Anyway, I am proud to see someone doing maths instead of believing everything he sees on the Internet

Would be awesome but don't think so.

Hmm that´s an interesting thought. Another thing im wondering about is wouldn´t the Chinese push the big red button and send everything at once instead of salvos`? If so then spawn double ships with only one salvo on each ship so that everything fires at once, then despawn half of them after they fired. Is this possible?

yeah a time on target strike with YJ18s and YJ21s will be nearly impossible to stop.

@@grimreapers missile launch timing could be triggered by keeping them out of max range until you want them in range to fire. Absolutely changes end location and arrangement of the fleet when facing enemy salvo.

​@@ck12msyeah but in that case you would also want to time those the resumes to go in at the same time of a massive Harpoon strikes at Sea would probably also utilize.

the only possible explanation is the loss of AWACs but yeah point defense and CWIS not shooting F35s at rifle range is pretty silly. I half expect guys on the deck of the ships to start unloading small arms at F35s.

m8, half the world falls asleep halfway through movies so why not make it 4 hours?

@@giupiete6536 Half the world has the attention span of a gnat, Seems more like their problem then mine.

@@Pimps-R-us I... think perhaps you thought I came across as being critical.

@@giupiete6536 Nah, not at all. Just making a statement about society. You good man

@@Pimps-R-us read half of what u wrote Novel much? LMAO LOL HA HA 😂 🎉 😊

Hundreds or thousands of american pilots aren't going to get killed. China has a huuuuuge problem with both competent pilots, training pilots, flying hours, and training with dissimilar aircraft using western techniques and doctrine. Look no further than the U.S. aircraft that was intercepted in international airspace by a J-15 "Flopping Fish" who almost collided with us, had his speed brake in the full up position and the engines in full afterburner. The "Flying Shark" J-15 is called the Flopping Fish by its own news media in China because it barely makes enough power to take off from a Carrier. Their pilots suck, essentially. It takes 3 Chinese turbines for Helicopters to make the same power as 1 American turbine in a Chinook, hence why they tried to steal one. I promise their missiles don't work like they say...just like everything russian.

thx

Exactly

Closer to 90 I thought?

The Nimitz carry’s on average 75 planes while deployed and the new fords carry 90 on average.

AFAIK it's to model not jets being ready

@@McAllisterCo literally just redid a match to buff the US because too many americans were coping and you're still complaining? Unbelievable

We would probably use mostly tomahawks for such an attack, considering how many we have in inventory and the number of vessels that field it (think of SSGNs). I haven’t seen any physical proof USN DDGs and CGs carrying LRASM, but I would guess they are since most no longer have Harpoon fitted

What about them is underpowered?

@@duanemckinley9353 Weapon and sub systems both seem quite underpowered

​@@mshahmirrazahow would u know if they're underpowered? They've never been used

@@user-ft2zc5or9d What kind of modern destroyer in the world cannot shoot down an F35 within 10 to 15 miles? You can even see the jet at this range with your eyes.

@@user-ft2zc5or9d And how do you know they're not underpowered?

It might be all they have against hypersonics once the hypersonic tech matures. The math just gets too hard to guide a missile or a round with the necessary accuracy. I'm on the outside looking in, but I'd assume you can get a DE weapon on anything you can get a radar lock on, so I'd assume you'd just prime the round to discharge (not sure what the terminology is here) as soon as the lock was obtained. But I'm a civvie who is taking a high-school-physics approach to thinking this through.

I must admit I was too busy talking nonsense so didn;t notice sorry :(

@@grimreapers Did the missiles end up sinking something or did they got shot down by more telephone poles?

+1

yeah they haven't gotten to stealing that yet lol

@@wind_runner6836 Didn't even have to steal it, Clinton literally sold them that tech in the 90s. How do you think chinese ICBMs went for 300m CEP down to 20m in less than a decade?

@@hughmungus2760 bro a president cannot unilaterally sell anything financial powers are the sole domain of Congress. Don't just make stuff up lol especially something that is so clearly wrong. It wasn't Icbm tech it was satellite launch tech an that stuff they had developed. I don't support the move but it's not the same type of rocket. Congress also Approved and it was a transfer no selling.

@@wind_runner6836 the exact controversy was that clinton allowed civilian satellite technology to be transfered to china. This enabled china to greatly improve the reliability and accuracy of their spaceflight capabilities. which had a dual use application of making chinese ballistic missiles more accurate. Furthermore this greatly accelerated the chinese aerospace industry in general allowing for countless other weapons systems to be improved. It defacto was Clinton selling china the tech. That being said, theres no denying that china has at least equivalent tech, their more modern ballistic missiles are entirely capable of hitting targets under 10m in size.

you are my kind of viewer!

It wasn't actually CH, it was core game that's changed. They can now be detected and the RCS can't be made any smaller, or they no longer work at all. It's a weird thing that happened, but I suspect this is just how it is now so we'll just have to accept it :(

@@grimreapers The Type 055s seemed to not defend except with CIWS which was interesting. Regardless of realism, I think not having LRASM be an auto-kill cheat code makes things a bit more interesting to watch.

@@duanemckinley9353 Agreed

@@duanemckinley9353 they were at least shooting SAMs at them this time. but no AWACs and poor performance of HQ9s at close range really hampered them. The HHQ10s should have been firing though.

I have a feeling the only thing that can launch a hypersonic on the US side are strategic bombers, they're far too large to VLS cells and fighters to carry.

Its safe to assume anything under 20nm will be engaged by EOTS rather than radar so unless the F35I has optical stealth its going to get seen and engaged.

LRASM can't be fired from VLS much less fired from underwater.

You sound like a biden voter

@@bval2201I am British and would love to see Britain and America win in these scenarios but not by bending it out of shape.

Are you suggesting that the shrapnel/debris would just continue to the target after being blasted out of the sky 😂