I second that nomination, they retired the U.S.S. Enterprise as well right?., I wonder if it'll just be a starship from now on. Ooh maybe they'll have a new starship U.S.S. Missouri as part of the Galactic Federations' Starfleet Command as well in the future! Missouri loves company, Charlie-company, that is.., in 'Other' "News"... - Service Guarantee's Citizenship... - Would You Like To Know More?..
@@anatolilukanov7675 US aircraft would takeoff 100 miles sooner and committed for straight. Return to the aircraft carrier we arm and reload and then commit to 2nd Strike. Stealth is an advantage that the Russians could not overcome with their air cap. Just like in a land war AirPower is king. See what happened in Syria 300+ casualties with no US casualties because the US rules the skies.
@@noidontthinksolol Yeah, lol, the F-35s just flew right past the fighters and sat in crossfire from SAMs and more agile aircraft. It is what it is when AI runs the show.
@@AquaStevae It is pretty realistic. When the soviets shot down passenger plane near Kmachatka, fighter jet had to use 2 rockets because the first one missed.
@@heistherussian Sorry, but no it's not. There are so many missing technologies, that it could NEVER be realistic. How could it be realistic without some of the most important factors included, like maybe submarines. There are many others as well, but I haven't the time or inclination to go into them.
Iranian Combined armed forces defending against US/British Carrier invasion force attempting to transit the strait of Hormuz.... All the boghammers + revolutionary guards navy, helicopters, drones and especially lots of land based SAM and Anti-Ship missiles... Use the Iranian F14s and a Russian A50 "observing" So many fun things could be done with this parent Idea
@@simong5960 they are not murdered in the game so these are as good as they get in the game okay they are tasked with heading out not just charging at the enemy carrier but fanning out to the flanks and just shooting any reds they can see simple as that and then if they survive if they can be in return but it's
@@grimreapers only if you're sending in ships never designed FOR a practically point-blank naval gunfight. You send ONE built-for-purpose battleship in there with 14, 15, 16 or 18 inch guns? And also ARMOUR designed to take shells from the above? Say an Iowa-class like USS Missouri? That fight wouldn't have lasted five bloody minutes
An idea for this confrontation. The Us Navy decided after much wargaming that they need more firepower in the carrier group when it comes to a gun duel. They decide to recommission an Iowa Class BB to make up for the lack of boom boom. So it would be great to see this played out! Thanks! I am loving this channel.
And if the 16" Guns can modelled with ap and he shells along with the ships built in redundancy systems supported by it incomparable ammunition capacity. BVR destruction of the hostile force. With the highest value assets being sailors a carrier fleet should have always included a BB also probably the greatest recruitment tool never fully utilized IMO.
Reds win when the fight is just go until its a mess at 50ft, USN would never get close enough for the guns to go off they would move around or lead enemy ships away and into an attack. The strategy of drive me closer I want to hit them with my sword isn't really a naval tactic. But it's hella fun to watch even if my patriotism hurts XD
Drive closer I want to hit them with a sword! That's the phrase I was looking for! Cool video but a scenario that would never ever occur. Unless the current regime makes Xi jinping head of the joint chiefs....
The anti-ship aircraft would've gotten a lot more ordnance off if they were set to "Restrict jettison stores". The moment any aircraft paints them, they'll jettison all loads even if the threat was only for a half-second. Also, there is precedence for the Tarawa's being configured in a Sea Control Ship configuration of 20 Harriers. I've done a similar battle, except I also involved the Air Force for both sides and set the engagement range to 400 miles. The Tu-22M's and B-52's really hit hard with their anti-ship missiles. Ultimately the Western coalition would gain air superiority due to their higher numbers of aircraft, but I could never get a good coordinated ToT saturation attack from the F/A-18's, F-16's, AV-8B's, SH-60's and B-52's.... thus REDFOR would survive and stalemate the battle.
Yeah your really need to restrict their stores jettison cause otherwise they all just drop them well before even getting close to launching and they're wasted.
@@grimreapers I have an idea well technically it's not my idea the Navy has done it in the past and I believe they could possibly implement it again considering U.S. Navy realizes they are out gund up close, I'm talking about bringing a Battleship out of retirement of course ;) Rematch with The Battleship Missouri placed next to The Carrier for protection!👍 Really anyway you could use this idea would be bad a$$ Modern U.S. Carrier Fleet with One still existing Battleship! Lol acting as a bodyguard for The Nimitz Carrier👍👍
@@Anarchy_420 Yeah, I didn’t have the mod. They probably make it so that every strike package goes through untouched; usually one 12-ship F/A-18 squadron and one 24-ship F-16 squadron have to defend themselves with 50-75% attrition rates.
Carrier defenses are layered to provide in-depth protection. Carrier strike groups arrange their defensive perimeters in layers that reach out hundreds of miles, so that any enemy seeking to get within targeting range must overcome multiple hurdles. That applies to hostile missiles, manned aircraft, submarines or any other potentially threatening system
True allot of brain power from many admirals who's IQ's probably come close to 180 are the ones building the doctrine and strategic defenses. These defenses are no joke.
I Mean it’s in the state of the entire Russian military. 3/4 of its shit was broken and didn’t work. And it’s the flagship. In real life the us group would completely annihilate both groups with ease.
Holy crap that was epic. This was the first one I have watched of this series. I had no idea the ships got into gun battles, and then close range gun fights! Holy shit this just got better and better. Just when I thought it was over, it was only just beginning! Bravo sir!
In that initial bombardment the subsonic missiles need to be launched well before the supersonic ones to have them all arrive at roughly the same time to give them a better chance of getting through. Awesome fight though!
NATO carrier groups rely on aircrafts for anti-ship and anti-air. Russian carriers groups' anti-ship role can be supplemented by cruiser missiles. NATO groups would IRL stay out of the range of Russian anti-ship missiles.
exactly. It is the most likely in the near future. A full carrier group combined with a Taiwan land-based force defending the island. I expect that the carrier group would station 75 to 100 miles to the east of the island with full satellite intel.
@@Saratogan The US wouldn't go to war over Taiwan, ground-based hypersonic anti-ship missiles would completely obliterate anything that the US sends there. Not to mention that the US even betrayed the Kurds against Turkey, and Turkey has a much less capable military than China.
I enjoyed that video very much. Cap was really amusing to listen to. Two problems have been spotted. the number of missiles, not only the obvious fault of never ending Harpoons but the number of defensive missiles as well. Especially the red side seemed to go way beyond any reasonable number. Second problem is also fairly obvious, the landed aircraft never went up again but they should have. I have seen Luftwaffe Tornados have about 20 min turnaround in TACEVAL exercises so I guess an aircraft carrier crew should have a similar time. Sure, 2 catapults may be blocked due to landing planes, but the bow launchers should be able to get something in the air.
and before someone throws out a smart comment, yes, I know there are no subs..I'm just saying that in reality, they would make a huge difference in the fight.
Ukraine has shown how bad the Russian military is & the Chinese are 10 to 20 years behindthe US & don't forget the US has 11 carrier groups compared to China's 1 and Russia's none
This series is always entertaining. Thanks for another great video. Just a small complaint: I think the US fleet needs upgrading. A modern fleet will have a larger airwing. For example, the USS Carl Vinson is currently deployed with 1 F-35 squadron, 3 F/A-18E/F squadrons. That's at least 40+ aircraft, probably closer to 50. That doesn't include the Growlers, who could provide the jamming the US fleet needed as well as additional firepower if necessary. That's where a lot of the strength of the US fleet lies. Also, a US LHD/LHA will typically have 6-8 harriers or F-35s and 4 Cobra's (Whiskey/Vipers). If necessary, it can handle up to 20 F-35s if converted to a small carrier, leaving off the typical helicopters (has been done before).
yeah well a modern upgraded russian fleet would also have hypersonic missiles, s400/500's etc and all sorts of shit that would make quick work of the u.s. carrier group
@@etluxaeterna The Russian navy does not have any operational hypersonic missiles. They have hypersonic ICBMs and air launched hypersonic missiles, but those can’t be fired by the su-33. Their anti ship hypersonic missile is still be tested and is not operational.
@@rpmturbo6 WRONG. Russia currently does have an operational hypersonic missile called the KH47m2 Kinzhal. it has a range of upwards of 2000m and a speed of Mach 10. It is unstoppable and would absolutely WRECK any u.s. carrier group very easily
Russian type aircraft cannot launch with a full tank of fuel or a full compliment of weapons. It's one or the other as they have a ramp system rather than a catapult assist. The catapult makes a huge difference when it comes to mission capability. The Russians were able to launch a fully loaded Su-33 with 15knots of natural wind while moving at max speed to generate a huge amount of headwind. This means the carrier has to be heading into the wind at speed to do what catapult carriers can do at anytime in almost any condition. That's not very practical at all. So in most cases the Su-33 had to run with a substantially lower payload unless there was air to air refueling available. This also made carrier based refueling aircraft a near impossibility.
Don't forget that the UK Carrier Strike Group also has the QE Class Carriers with both AH-64 Apaches and Wildcats carrying 20 Martlet lightweight missiles each and Merlin AW101 with Lightweight Spearfish torpedoes as well as MART-ER air launched anti ship missiles too on its aircraft.
Well that was awesome! Surprised you didn't know that type 45s are actually made up entirely of harpoon missiles and launchers though? They just get smaller and smaller as they fire until there's just a guy in a rowing boat left..... 🤣
@@grimreapers why the hell didn't the main guns on the Type 45's work?! All they fired with was the 30mm either side, intended to fight small attack-boats
Love the fact that we can see war scenarios without loss of life, or use of resources. These are great! What went wrong? You play wars of attrition, and we should all know by now those are often at best pyrrhic victories.
A USN Nimitz class carrier has an aircraft compliment of 85-90 fixed wing and rotary aircraft. You woefully under equipped the USN CVN. Also, in the open ocean the Russians and Chinese wouldn't have the luxury of an AWACS. Initial engagements would be by airborne ASM missiles by aircraft launched way before ships would come into range to launch their surface launched ASM missiles. This is a poor simulation of what would actually happen IRL.
Yes! A refit Battleship Missouri as seen in the Gulf War would be awesome for this. Stay in the rear, protected from incoming missiles. As soon as they run out, push full speed 34 knots and start using those huge turrets!
@@Uriel77200 The p700 granit was designed to deal with the battleships. This is why the 4 battleships of the US werent used in extend during the cold war. The p700 granits used to have nuclear warheads. They targeted carriers and battleships. The Kirov, the russian ship disabled early on in the video had 24 of those missiles. There is no way the US fleet could shoot them all down in time to avoid massive damage, at least on the electronics on the softer ships. The battleship would be sunk with only one of them (direct hit).
@@billwhoever2830 A direct hit with a nuke might do it but this has been physically tested on multiple vessels and battleships tend to survive even near misses. A 2000 pound warhead, however, it's not going to kill a battleship with a single hit or even multiple hits, barring Hood level rotten luck. The ship is built to be a punching bag, it was designed to survive it's own gunfire. This means it can take a hit from a similarly sized warhead in an armour piercing shell travelling at similiar speeds.
This battle is very unrealistic. Can’t believe a whole carrier group with full set of aircraft on the aircraft carrier just sat there and never took off. That would never happen. The Hornets never even engaged. Piss poor AI…
You could have cut your planning and production time in half had you eliminated the US/Brit support fleet and simply inserted the Chuck Norris of US destroyers, yes, the USS Johnston. Missiles or not, the carriers wouldn't even had the need to launch. imho.
Horribly inaccurate... Arleigh Burkes and cruiser payloads of tomahawks can be employed anywhere on any target, formations are wrong, "you aren't going to have formations with cruisers out in front of destroyers. Formations are layered in threat, and payload in rings that correlate to roles. This means a cruiser isn't going to sit in an outer ring from the carrier to in relation to a destroyer or frigate. Ships also don't just drive straight lines firing. Modern ships with Link and laser ring gyro systems allow high accuracy while pulling figure 8's or zigs. The list goes on, but I think that is enough.
Charge until we're knife fighting 🤣....no. As a veteran United States Sailor I can definitely say that these tactics and strategies are nothing close to how we would engage enemy fleets in combat. How we would is quite sensitive, and falls under "means and methods"...which we don't talk about, because prison isn't fun I hear. In any case, fun to see...and intended to be nothing more. Would be cool to see some unclassified tactics employed. A couple Seawolf and Virginia class attack subs, and the Chinese/Russians may be left with throwing rocks from fishing trawlers....IF the Russian carrier could stop catching fire, getting holes ripped in it...etc....before it even gets there. Hell, it may sink itself to spare us the weapons...lol. Bravo...good fun my friend!
Overconfidence is always a good thing to see In a military person! Can't let morale falter. tho.. tbf, I don't know about the Chinese, But the Russians definitely wouldn't be trying to get up close... there's a reason they obsessively make long range missiles.
I love these simulations. The only thing i would like to see is a more accurate simulation of how each piece of military equipment would use their weaponry.The F-35 and F-22s have incredible range on their weapons systems and would fire their air to air missiles hundreds miles away from their targets. If necessary, they could launch, fire, circle around and land to reload. The saturation coming from the US aircraft carriers would be that of missiles before the jets themselves. Same as the helicopters took flight. Also, the massive strength of the US submarine section of the Navy was not mentioned, nor was the laser defense system they have. Although this was solely about the attack on Taiwan, it would not stay on the island. The mainland of China would be invaded; on multiple fronts. N Korea would probably attack S Korea, the old SSR countries would align with Russia and defend China's backside, India and Tibet would see this as an opportunity for themselves, etc. We would align with them as well as supply them. When it comes down to an actual all out war featuring all available soldiers, weaponry, intelligence, technology, and the ability to resupply those items in battle, China and Russia, even together, would be no match for Nato or even the US alone. The economic and environmental impact of this war, would probably be great enough that no actually wins, and even the countries that "win" might eventually end up dissolving as we know it as a consequence of this.
My father served on the Tarowa and I got to take a tour of the ship with him as a kid. Not only does it carry Helo's, but it also has the ability to send out hover landing craft things that themselves can carry two M1 tanks or like a shit load of pissed off Marines.
Kinda interesting to see. Modern naval doctrine has developed to where guns are sort of an after thought since everyone expects missiles and aircraft to end any engagement way before guns come into play. But maybe missile defense has also evolved to the point where guns might be important. I mean, consider what a turret of 460mm guns with modern ballistics computers could have done in the end game here.
I don't see why the US/UK would fight during the day at all. US ships can easily outrun Chinese fleets while keeping a full time CAP above the CSG, not to mention the attack subs lurking under the surface. Full flight loads with continuous intelligence on the location of enemy fleets, and wing group attacks while well out of VFR, much less in range of enemy guns. The whole reason the carrier took the place of the battleship was because a few aircraft can render them combat ineffective. It's a cool looking battle, but naval guns for surface warfare went out before WWII even ended. The only thing we used big guns for was island bombardment.
Very entertaining to watch but in the real world completely unrealistic. But that’s what makes this channel addictive to watch. Sending modern aircraft back to WW2 is a fantasy situation everyone thinks about. This channel kind of makes that happen. Great job.
I've seen the updated version of this carrier group battle, which involves US, China, Russia, and UK with 2020s tech. He also mentioned in the new simulation that this old scenario (this video) was using 1990s tech, if I remembered correctly. Which should be a bit more realistic irl since technically Soviet Union still barely existed into the early 90s, so there is closer technology gap.
Technically they already did, an equal carrier group on two sides with PvP action and player admirals... Cap's fleet won that one, but they never closed to gun range though.
My friends and I keep saying we are waiting for Arma 4 to play some realistic military combat, really thinking im just in the wrong game. I have never played DCS but this is actually amazing
Not that either side would ever let their carrier task forces get within gun range in real life, but the missing deciding factor here would have been the subs that most surely would be involved. Fun scenario tho.
Given what we now know and the New Jersey recommisoning time for a rematch.Hard to factor in over a century of US carrier experience and general war fighting expertise vs incompetence and zero experience .
I love this channel, and probably get more enjoyment from watching your videos than I would if I tried to play the game! Huge kudos to the time, expertise and enthusiasm on display in all of these videos, it's amazing.
For more realism, Consider the Chinese only have the J15 for carrier jets. They have an inferior engines and cant take off with a full load out or full fuel.
@@grimreapers yes, (I enjoy the discussion) if their mission is several hundred miles they must sacrifice ordinance. In a immediate reaction situation its very unlikely the planes would be in a beast mode configuration. They would need 2-3 hours to change over. You know it's bad when Chinese state media constantly criticizes the plane for its short comings.
@@JohnKuang-rf6fb They never had any intention of running the AL-31F engine on the carrier based J-15's. The WS-10 engine was supposed to be a superior engine but the failure rate was too high in naval applications. Hence the AL-31F being inferior in this situation. The J15 is a reverse engineered SU-33. They aren't real SU-33's. The crash rate is a clear indication.
It could be that the red had way to many Anti-Air missiles... I think that Russian doctrine requires that their ships have more missiles but I think there were way to many missiles... Also, some F-35s should have been in stealth mode trying to flank and take out their AWACS and F-18s should have had some at least 2 AMRAAMs and 2 AIM-9X beside the Harpoons... If stealth is not an option for F35s some of them should have some anti-ship bombs or missiles. One more thing, I think that the modern USN CV group no longer uses Perry's. Instead of the Perry's just add one more Burke and one more Ticonderoga. This would have added more Harpoons and more SM2s to the equation and probably would have reduced the overall damage taken by the blues. As far as I know, P700 Granit can not be reloaded during battle so you get a salvo of 20 from Kirov's and that's pretty much it... The Reds had a better strategy also, keeping their Anti-ship jets in reserve until all the blue air defenses where all but depleted...
Love the sound effect sir!!! "My God.. Bzzeurrrrr.. a bzzeeurrrrr..bzzeeurrrrr..bzzeeurrrrr.. boosh" hahahaha I had to roll that back and listen again.. Thanks for the exciting content and love the squad!! I play and I am nowhere near your level. Its so freaking difficult and you make it look so simple.
a good NATO soldier is a dead NATO soldier! From Russia with love, we have not forgiven the West and have not forgotten anything! As soon as, so immediately!
T45s aren't the most powerful destroyers in the world, their air defence radar and Sea Viper are extremely powerful AAW, but they're relatively weak for antisubmarine and Anti Surface warfare.
@@grimreapers wouldn't say "weak" is the word exactly, it's just not what the ship's speciality is, but with Mk8 guns and twin 30mm along with 8 Harpoons they can certainly still hold their own in most kinds of surface fight a lot better than they were shown doing here, and of course in a realistic fight they'd never get that close anyway; and as for anti-sub work, that's simply a matter of how in the modern Royal Navy that's the job of the frigates, helicopters and our OWN submarines rather than the destroyers. Type 23 Frigates are excellent sub-hunters for example
@@Arvivez yes my point is there are other destroyers that are almost as capable antiaircraft ships and have much stronger ASW and ASV capabilities. Particularly in ASV - only 4 of them carry the Harpoons which were salvaged from the scrapped T22s and are being removed next year... The RN badly needs some sort of ASV weapon although it's currently looking like it wont get one until the 2030s... if FCASW goes well. Until then the RN will have a hard time sinking ships with anything other than Submarines or brave F35s.
The F-35 were spotted, the Harriers and helos had to contend against a Su-33 and the aircraft didn’t bother to return and rearm. I also agree on the kiting of enemy vessels. Failing that, RAM THEM. #damnthetorpedoes #fullspeedahead
Erm, the AI for the blue naval guns didn't activate correctly it looks like, and the Moscava appeared to have about 50 tons of sea whizz rounds. But most disatisfying is the fact that the 4.5's weren't firing at 20 miles out. They're extremely accurate and would have put pay to several red ships before they got to 15 miles. Lots of issues with the AI as one would expect. But a couple of Astute class subs and things would have been very different. I also don't believe the Chinese or Russians have the fire control systems to dispense as they did to avoid the EWS of a NATO battle group. There seems to be a lot to fix, but its still a good basis to build on. Enjoyable watch until the last quarter, where it just got really silly.
Outranging the enemy isnt as important when your firepower is that much lower. The 130mm guns have 14-15nm maximum range while the 4.5inch mark8 has 17nm maximum range. Wasting your ammo is not a smart move when you know that the enemy has much more of it. If the mark 8 had started firing at 17nm it would waste a big percentance of the ammo with very low hit probability. The 130mm guns have a much bigger projectile, a decent 14nm range and a stupidly higher fire rate, especialy the double barrel version on the cruisers. The payload delivery would be multiple times higher coming from the russian side. If we add to this the fact that the US cruisers use aluminum towers (which can easily melt on a fire) the US and UK are outgunned at 14nm and bellow.
@@billwhoever2830 But doesn't that mean the blue team would never have engaged in that profile in the first place? I saw zero 4.5's sent from Duncan, and I expect there were others in the blue team not firing their guns. But for a carrier to be blindly wandering through the middle of the enemy is really the best example of how the AI needs more work. As does the Russian and Chinese fire control, along with the missile failure rate shown countless times in videos due to post x shelf stock.
Gentlemen, I am watching this video 8 weeks into Russian - Ukrainian War. The Moskva was sunk earlier in the week and frankly the Russians have not done well. I don't know how the the current situation would effect the equation but I can't imagine the same outcome if simulated again.
Greetings from San Diego, Grim Reapers! You are the funniest person on YT I have been watching recently! Hilarious 😂 “THE PENGUINS! THE PENGUINS ARE FIRING!”…Great content as always! Much love my cousin and ally from the UK!
The Infinite missiles while annoying did make up for the F18s not rearming and redeploying ;) Type 45 DDG uses the 4.5inch Mark 8 Mod 1 cannon recycled from the Type 42 Destroyer, Neustrashimyy uses AK-100 100mm gun, China uses Dual 100mm and a single 76mm gun. The Type 45s and the OHPs never fired their Main guns....the US had to fight both fleets
Dang, these videos are so good, especially the commentary. LOL. One thing the sims can't reproduce are things like self preservation. Once one side gets a big upper hand, generally the other will retreat, either individually or en mass. This can make a huge difference in outcomes.
It’s interesting that the Blackhawks landed on destroyers / frigates after delivering their payloads. Is it possible to have each destroyer / frigate start out with an embarked helo, as these are one of their principle ASW / ASuW weapons?
@@grimreapers In addition to you believing in the helicopter, what they could have done mid-game was to rescue the downed pilots, if that has application in the game. Why did our aircraft that made it back not refuel and rearm where there is for that matter? Or theirs for that matter? Also, I think that even among standard missile, there are shipped to ship options, in addition to VLS launched tomahawks . That said, it does seem that the American antiship missile selection is not that impressive. Not big and not fast either. Torpedoes would have worked a treat, hence submarines. But if your other F-35s had been able to bomb, or if you had stealth mode working, that seemed to be the key edge early on. Having suppressed all air, a second wave of say four F-35s in beast mode could have swept the red fleet.
in reality, half of the Russian fleet would break down halfway, half of the missiles would not take off, and the remaining half of the fleet would shoot each other in a drunken frenzy.
