FAQ: 1) The spitfires are used as they closely match the top speed of the the period-accurate BF-109E1-4 fighters(which are not in game) 2) Lots of people saying the A-10 can fly faster and higher than the warbirds. That is only correct if the A-10s are not carrying high weapons/fuel.
Why in the hell are you attacking them across their formation and not in line with them??? That makes no sense at all...You are wasting 50% of your ordinance. Use some common sense dude!!!
I'm cussing my monitor because of the dumb way that you are attacking their formations. I've flown A10s on DCS for over 10 years and you're killing me lol
With all due respect, this was not really a test of how well the A-10 would do in a WWII scenario; but how well you and your team fly the plane. AI might have done better, since many of you simply did not know how to use the weapon's systems. But it was fun to watch anyways, and thanks for this.
While the AI comments have some merit, I'm with you, B. It's not just the lack of ability with the platform, it's the complete lack of any air combat discipline and doctrine. The plan was apparently to have everyone load up as they liked, and freelanced from there. Then there's the problem of putting a flight of them up there alone against what's likely an armored regiment with full air cover support. Would a full squadron of Hurricanes flying top cover be too much to ask? Hell, any other available AI-driven platform would be an improvement. But I also agree that while as a simulation, this proves nothing, it was a great excuse for them to get together and have fun, while entertaining us, as well. Keep up the good work, Reapers!
I think two things would help this mission a lot: 1) Two planes start with a full Aim-9 loadout to clear the defending aircraft at the start. 2) Dropping the bomblets seems to work much better if you're lined up with the column as most of the bomblets miss entirely when you're dropping across the column.
It would also help if they actually knew the required dive angle to use the -97. I think on the -10 it has to be damn near -50 degrees to get a solid CCIP solution. What we do see is that if a proficient group of A-10 pilots were running this, there's a damn good chance that it would succeed. Not saying I don't enjoy the chaos, but still... lol
GR's lack of discipline is almost a thing of beauty. After doing a number of these sorties and getting wrecked by WW2 fighters, one would think GR would dedicate 2 jets to air-to-air. To you know...not get shit mixed by Fritz.
Or learn to fly together in order to defend each other. That's a lesson every military pilot has been taught since 1915 and one every air combat sim pilot should know.
I don’t recall if you can hang 4 AIM-9’s on the A-10, and yeah, have two of them, with no other ordnance and maybe reduced fuel, dedicated to counter air. But 6 against 60+ ground targets and a steady dozen near peer fighters is going to be tough all the time, isn’t it? Maybe GR should invite one of the DCS squadrons out there to lead this. That way maybe there could be a team of somewhat proficient pilots? Are there any? 🙂
Probably thinking its faster to drop bombs to different columns than flying 8's and using gun that has between 38 and 19 seconds of firing in total depending where rate of fire is adjusted, but it would have given more accurate results since you only need to look one direction. If you miss you loss ordinance and time. Thinking strategically flying perpendicularly on enemy colums does have benefit of avoiding to fly deep behind enemy line where there is most definitely heavy AA following main columns, though this does not apply to this scenario. Personally i would have probably dropped ordinance to start of the column and then open with gun to rest if there was still time, do the loop and finish the strugglers with gun since you are already in the area. Though this depends on how much enemy fighters there is and in this case there is plenty, so biggest problem here was not to have any airsuperiority fighters taking care of Luftwaffe fighters
@@Hellsong89 These old tanks can't withstand the GAU-8, only short squirts of it are enough to disable them. You can literally go for hours with the fuel economy of the A10 and 1150 rounds. Add a load of 2x3x7 guided M282 and two or 3 CBUs and you're the king of the sky. These poor MGs will never reach you and you can strafe from a mile out and throw missiles like a Stalin organ.. The A10 is absolutely superior in this environment if flown correctly and using its capabilities... including the T-Pod :D btw, the DCS A10 can only fire the gun in fast setup.
The Panzer III tank the Germans used had a cross-country range was 95 km (59 mi). This means they are very dependent on the ability to refuel. Kill the refueling capacity first and you can take your time destroying everything else.
The Sidewinders would make a big difference indeed. In modern warfare, you require to take down SAM radars before you can get very close but in WW2 that'd be your best chance against this scenario. The Gatling gun with how slow this plane is, not nearly good enough.
The British lost most of their field guns at Dunkirk, but these were old pre war tech and were quickly replaced by the Royal Ordnance Factory. The 57mm Six Pounder anti tank gun was used to good effect throughout the remainder of the war. One gun actually took out two Tiger tanks and was effective against Panther and Panzer 4. The same gun was used in a Tsetse Mosquito but unguided rockets were cheaper and easier to fit to almost any aircraft. SO impressive but not needed.
if you have a weapon that provides a long line of damage why are you not adjusting your flight path to drop the weapons along the path of the armor division.
Like I said in the last debacle. You must gain air superiority first. The shocking unwillingness to just go headlong as a squadron and missile spam is mind boggling. You don't need to outturn them! You have sidewinders!
The map at the beginning actually shows the Schlieffen plan from the 1890's, not the Blitzkrieg in 1940. The blitzkrieg in 1940 travelled through a few roads in the Ardennes, which would tend to encourage the idea that a few airstrikes could have changed the historical result, simply because of the traffic jam.
18:10 Without marking a target on the ground, you need to use CCIP mode (Continuously computed Impact Point) - that means you dive bomb and put the pipper on the target. It's also why you have the dotted line when flying level. With the TGP, or other means of marking a ground target, you can switch the bombs to CCRP (Continuously computed Release Point) mode and drop flying level.
Basic tactics, 2x birds missile and gun running air cover only, remainder missile and gun, carpet bombing ineffective as proved during WWII, low reward high risk Missile engagement more effective, good lock six missiles six kills. To use gau locat targets dive behind full throttle level out tree top level engage from rear, Reduces lead in , increases effective fire, saves ammo, less chance of being hit
Thanks for doing this. It is close to what I suggested days ago when I wondered how 1 A10 would do at the Battle of the Bulge hen all other aircraft were unable to fly. Easy company needs you.I should ass that I am new to this channel but am loving the diversion from the real miserable world. I love watching these and thank you for the entertainment.
The "A" means Attack, the A-10 isn't for dogfight, you need support and team work to take that fighters out, you doesn't have the agility to lose them and your only hope is to accelerate to go near a buddy having AAM to help puting them right at 12 for him.
After watching both attempts at this scenario, might I suggest this attack approach - Equip most of the Hog group with bomblet ordinance to attack ground targets. Set aside a few (two?) to fly CAP with an air-to-air rocket load to work on enemy flying targets and cover the battlefield mostly to spot targets. The attack group operates thusly: Once a column of enemy vehicles is spotted, line up on them from the most convenient direction. Fly what I call a Dive, Strafe, Immelmann, Dive, Bomb, (DSIDB) pattern ONCE on a given target from opposite directions. This DSIDB pattern offers the following advantages: it is a simple-to-fly pattern by a novice with a little practice. The Immelmann maneuver, when properly performed, quickly puts the airplane back on the target from the opposite direction. Quickly returning for an attack makes it hard for the target to react in time to return fire. Strafing first spreads out the ordinance usage and applies maximum effect for that particular ordinance. The bomblet drop allows coverage of a wide area around the target column as individual units in the column invariably will scatter after a strafe. It is important to only perform the DSIDB only ONCE on a given target as a repeat (DSIDB) pass will present an even harder-to-hit set of targets and give the enemy time to set up better for a killing return fire. Because the DSIDB approach is laid out in a vertical single plane of flight, if a bandit gets on your tail, you only need to immediately establish level flight, firewall the throttles then outrun the enemy as suggested in the second video of the series. Once you are clear, obtain a bearing to another target either from CAP or by your own visual spotting skills then repeat the DSIDB attack once lined up on the NEW target. Wash, rinse, repeat until the targets are neutralized.
I neglected to mention (it was 2am Christmas Day) that by "lining up on the target" I meant to fly directly in line with target's column movement - not at an angle - as the target presents an easier-to-hit profile than to try flying at the target from a side angle. I think it would be fun and educational if you tried this scenario again with a bit more pre-planning!
a better question: if the native Americans had the USS Battle Ship Missouri. could they have driven off Christopher Columbus and his invasion of North America. That's the question: The USS Missouri vs The Nina The Pinta and The Santa Maria
I know A-10 would have no issue destroy the armor or aircraft of the era with it's weapons but I think it will encounter some issues with the fighters of the era. The countermeasures on an A-10 are designed for modern weapons that use radar or infared tracking, I think WWII fighters only had guns. However an A-10 is much faster and would out manouver and is capable of high speed low altitude flight than any WW-II era plane. In a senario like this, some A-10's would likely run a fully air to air loadout.
TPGs would have changed this dramatically. A-10s could have just lased CBUs into the columns unmolested from high altitude. Would definitely suggest re-doing it using the A-10s to drop munitions with precision from high up.
If this happened IRL my grandfathers would think they are being attacked by Dragons. A-10 Warthog is the closest thing to mechanical dragons ever built. It's kind of favors one especially when it's spitting fire at the enemy.
I tend to agree with other comments. 74 kills out of 256 is roughly 28%. or 57% of the 128 you needed to kill. Pretty good for amateurs. Other comments are standard tactics which are flying in pairs, dedicating 2 planes for CAP and so on. Direction of attack is important. A-10's are quite durable and I've seen planes come back from sorties with shredded tails and bodies and still flying. No Disrespect, but the fact you don't train in them plays a big role in why you didn't do as well as you wanted....still you did good
Against the PzKpfw I, II and III, plus other assorted half-tracks, command cars and trucks, it would have been a massacre. The light armor of most 1940 German vehicles would offer virtually no protection against the A-10's 30 mm. Like all dedicated ground attack planes, a fully armed A-10 would be vulnerable to air superiority fighters like the Bf109. If the allied air forces of France and Britain could provide effective air cover for the attacking A-10s, I envision that a full wing of A-10s (three to four squadrons of 20 to 30 aircraft each, or 60 to 120 total aircraft) could turn the tide of battle in northern France. And in a pinch, the A-10 wing could provide its own air cover, by only arming half of its planes for ground attack, and sending the other half on CAP overhead armed only with 30 mm cannon and Sidewinder AAMs. Its speed and maneuverability would compare very favorably with the Luftwaffe's 1940 version of the Bf109, and would completely outclass the Germans' ground attack mainstay, the Stuka. The impact on the morale of both Wehrmacht and Allied army personnel would be a game changer, and Allied ground forces would immediately begin to believe they could actually defeat the Germans. If the A-10 air wing magically appeared in northern France with a full complement of ordnance and fuel, 60 to 120 A-10s could literally change the tide of battle on the western front.
This just proves that no one can "just" go and fly/use the A10 - it takes many hours to learn to use that plane properly. But had it been used properly and with a planned tactic against the spits, the destruction would have been at least double up. Those nice straight lines of tanks are excellent targets for the GAU, so save the GBU97's for when they spread out (and may be stop).
The battle of France was won through a bold movement thought the Ardennes forest, with very high concentration of panzer on small roads, with limited to inexistent off road option. It was made possible through a total local air superiority and air to ground support. With the right timing, the A-10 attack would have turned this masterpiece into a giant traffic jam. But with very high losses.
Perhaps most importantly, the french military's intelligence branch was terribly organized. A lot of the intel on the German concntration in the Ardennes (from recon planes and such) never made it to their high command.
The A-4E’s are not going to cut it. Would need a hundred of them…and well trained pilots with manual bombing skills. …but it would be fun to try!! 🙂 Or, same scenario with F-16C’s. Again, need pilots proficient with the F-16C’s A-to-G targeting systems. What the F-16 can carry, it can carry faster and get back to base faster to reload…if you can do a hot refuel and reload. Load the M61 with 20mm AP rounds. They should be effective against these tanks, I think…if DCS thinks so. Two squadrons of F-16Cs and a squadron of A-10Cs might do, using about 12 F-16’s, in rotating flights of 4 to trim the 109’s down. And then, how about a wing of Mirage 2000C’s, in place of the F-16’s?
@@Andrew-13579 yeah, but the A-4 can shoot and scoot, so they'd stand a better chance against Spitfires or Bf-109s. Certainly a lighter bombload, but they'd be more maneuverable and have good thrust to put some distance between themselves and bandits.
A4s literally get blown out of the sky by a strong wind gust. (lived in the area when it happened at Hardwood Range in central Wisconsin 1983 - official docs spelled it hartwood if you search it)
More GAU-8/A, less talk. Seriously though, I think the survivability of the A10 is underestimated by this game. It's rated against 23mm shells and so the .303 MGs and 20mm cannons of the Spitfire would not be as effective as they seem here.
Considering how much of a problem the Spitfires were, Do you think it would have helped to load up one plane with as many sidewinders as it can carry and use it to shoot down all of the Spitfires first, then return to base and reload with bombs?
If you read the Stats from the gulf war, A10 basically cleaned the ground. In just under a month they fired 780k 30mm rounds and destroyed almost 1k tanks and 1300 trucks. Thats a tighter timeline of the French invasion and armistice but only by a week.
It would be even faster in a WWII scenario. During the Gulf, there was the always present threat of MANPAD's, SAM's and enemy fighters capable of shooting down A-10's. In WWII, none of those would've been a threat, as none of them existed. Then again, neither did the A-10 lol
@@FuriouslyFurious i think lots of it is everyone thinks the Iraqi military was fielding only top tier equipment. Lots of their stuff was old garbage and they didnt have the training or command to make use of armoured units. The A10s would just orbit the field invisible to the dinosaur soviet and Chinese tanks dug in as artillery. I cant find a source to verify this either. Lots of hate directed at the A10 is more directed at the GAU8 and the depleted uranium slugs that poison everything it comes near. A10 also fired more than 4000 agm65 in the Gulf war, the official combat losses of the Iraqi army correlate pretty well with amount of munitions expended.
The answer to the video's title is probably yes, provided you've got people with proper training with the weapon systems executing a plan developed by ... again ... people with proper planning skills. The GRs had neither in sufficient quantity. But it was still fun to watch.
A-10's would own. If they did so in the first and second Gulf Wars with almost total impunity, no 1940's panzer divisions would survive contact with them. If the Lufftwaffe were covering the tanks then the A10's would still have some loaded out with air-to-air missiles purely for that purpose also.
As a tanker, wasn't it nice of them to not bother keeping a look-out for incoming enemy planes, and carry on in column line ahead as your attack went in? Your planes are great, but these tankers suck.
Question: Capt, why did you bomb in front the convoy rather from behind or infront. Lots of boom boom, but 2 or 3 deaths? Mind you this comment is halfway thru the video 24:52 to be exact.
Interesting premise...but I think this actually shows that it COULD be done. Cortana was taken out almost immediately, two other planes got shot down because the tried to dogfight instead of just pouring on steam and leaving the Spitfires behind, only one plane made any significant attempt at air cover... Two birds with AIM-9s would thin out the German air cover. If the other three-four planes each had a pair of Sidewinders, as well (and used them effectively), that would cut down the air threat even more. Several of the CBU-97s were off-target and hit nothing, several more were released perpendicular to the German columns and only got a couple of tanks. Someone else commented about loading up with Mavericks, which, yes, did have a higher success rate (100% kill rate, according to the comment)--but compare that to Cap's better bombing runs, where he was killing a dozen tanks with a single 97...the Mavericks are a less effective means of inflicting mass casualties. Maybe--MAYBE--put a pair on each plane, but if the CBUs were on target, you wouldn't need Mavericks, at least in a first attack wave. Maybe as a follow-up measure, after the columns had been broken up, but even then, you're probably better off going guns and strafing the column (or what's left of it). Better mission planning, better flight and fire discipline, and better pilot proficiency (familiarity with the systems, proper hardware set-up), and a dedicated GCI from the outset, and this is a totally different mission.
Oh, and I should also note that, yes, a 50% kill rate is high, because even damaged units would be out of action, most likely, not to mention the effect on morale and the collateral effects (machines stopping so their crews could try to help their comrades, etc). This is different from the Pearl Harbor campaign, in that the Germans hadn't been indoctrinated in the same way the Japanese had (we don't talk about the effectiveness of German suicide attacks!) and the Germans had, to this point in the war, never really experienced massive losses on that kind of scale.
Dropping the bombs perpendicular to the column of tanks means you get the minimum chance of damage with the bomblets. Try running parallel to the column.
You wiped out 1/3 of the tanks in that attack group. That will be a "combat ineffective" fighting force. As a proof of concept, it's a success, especially if you had been given at least minimal CAP. Just because you didn't kill 250/250 doesn't mean you failed.
This may be a little off point... But could 3 AH-64 Apache attack helicopters based in south England eliminate every functioning V-1 launching site in Northern France? Also could these same 3 Apaches, one cyclone-class patrol craft as naval support and a company of airborne troops neutralize and retake the Channel Islands?
Realistically, 50% is a high number to "stop" the attack. Any unit that sustains 25% casualties would be considered combat ineffective. The columns would have to halt to take care of casualties, service damaged vehicles, regroup, and reorganize. On second thought, you are doing CAS for the French so maybe 50% is a better number.
Wow, those cluster bombs are an absolute terror weapon especially for WW2. I remember reading about how Hawker Typhoons with their RP-3 rockets scared the crap out of the Germans. The article claimed their effectiveness wasn't due so much to actual destruction of German tanks but what it did to the German tankers morale. They would often abandon their tanks when attacked by Typhoons. Imagine the effect these A-10s with their cluster bombs would have. I bet word would get round fast among the tankers after this attack and even a report of A-10s nearby might cause them to ditch their tanks. Amazing stuff.
I stumbled across this and watched with mild amusement. As a former A-10 pilot with time in the Middle East, I can tell you that your tactics, weapons load, and method of employment were terrible. A-10s fight in pairs. They do not engage a ground force with a significant air-to-air threat as single flights. Also with no radar SAM threat, the A-10s would use high altitudedive bombing for free fall ordinance deliveries. Since the armored targets were relatively thin skinned, a better tactic may have been to have 2 A-10s attack the force while 2 others flew CAP to ward of the enemy fighters. I would cut down the cluster bomb loads and use the gun more employing high angle strafing tactics. You pick off the lead tanks with the gun then drop the CBU's on the formation as they stack up. It was a nice try though.
What happens if you have a number of A-10 with WW2 Escorting fighters? If assets like this where sent back in time there's no way the allies would throw them in unescorted
"Tally" for enemies, "Visual" for friendlies. That is important on a soapy radio... Never say "Tally Friendly" or "VIsual enemy". The single word "Tally" means that the heat is on...
35:00 Yeah, do more hoggy stuff. I used to watch a guy who did hog CAS for a bunch of guys who did regular US marines ops on Arma III. He was an experienced pro hog CAS pilot, and it was just great --- goosebumpy great --- watching him do his thing: the comms with the FAC on the ground; using the pod to find and track stuff on the ground; Mavericks to take out ground units (danger close); the Avenger, with its iconic sound; evading things like Shilkas and Tunguskas firing back (angrily). So cool.
There’s a similar scene in the Harry Turtledove novel WorldWar: in the balance where a German tank unit is strafed by a jet aircraft similar to the A-10 on the Eastern Front in 1941. It only makes one run but manages to take out half the unit with firstly missiles then a gun run.
Hello guys I must say I've quite enjoyed watching all the videos here on your site as my brother told me about you. What's even wilder is that my daughter's have ALSO sat with me a time or two watching as well. My youngest daughter raised a point saying how cool it would be if you could do a video where one side had either TIE Fighters or X Wings. I know that seems like a bit farfetched but no different than time traveling Modern Fighters going back to WW2. Think of this a single X WING against the Luftwaffe during the battle of Britain OR a TIE Interceptor against the RAF ? KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK!!! MERRY CHRISTMAS From the Winthrop Family
They have two videos off a Carrier Strike Group vs a star destroyer (ruclips.net/video/m_HRrou6Bq0/видео.html , ruclips.net/video/GDHjncjIvRc/видео.html)
@@grimreapers got to say though this series of taking modern technology back to WW2 is really good to watch and the little history lesson at the start is interesting and sets the scene. Really makes you wonder what WW2 German military would have thought seeing and having to face todays tech. Putting aside the smart bombs and missiles the F35 and F22 might have been seen as UFOs.
"That is not a World War 2... that's not a battalion what is that?" That's a lot of scrap metal with pieces of what used to be human beings scattered about, that's what that is.
I always wanted to know " WHAT IF " Sparticus would have had G.A. Custer and the 7th Cav ? The Germans had quad anti aircraft guns . They also went through the Ardennes which gives you great cover . Until you get columns in the open ground , your wasting their effectiveness . A-10 are going to come in low to use that great weapon . If your talking the whole German operation and how many A-10's ? As long as they can be refueled and re armed , it would be something to witness .
The cover provided by the Ardennes could be minimized with IR gear. Forests provide great visual cover, but mechanized equipment, with hot engines in the middle of a relatively cool forest, would be like beacons for IR equipment, and CBUs would still be pretty deadly in a forest setting.
Spartacus would have beaten the combined Sioux forces because he used much better judgment in establishing a field of battle and employed better tactics. And was not such a reckless glory hog.
Why are people so mad about how "they didn't fly good enough?" they just film a fun video, take time to entertain us, and everybody is bitching about "it's not realistic enough". If you wanted a good realistic video on the a-10 performance, maybe don't watch one of the a-10 flying against wwII tanks?
My Old Man (Dad) Passed away 5 Years ago, and the A-10 was his absolute favorite aircraft. Awesome videos as always I think he would've got a kick out of this. Cheers and Merry Christmas folks.
Hey Cap, is there a way to get my hands on the Mission File so I can try it out myself? Thought it would be interesting to test myself first instead of ranting about the "Blah blah bad Hog Pilots" without ever trying it myself. But if you search for some good Hog Pilots I would reccomend Rakuzard. He is a German RUclipsr that makes some good Warthog content and really nice german DCS Tutorials on many modules. He and his Airwing might stand a chance in A10s. NoDak Express Gaming is also skilled in the Warthog and likes to try silly stuff. I do not know if a cooperative Video would be a good idea but just wanted to throw it into the room. I really like your content and apreciate that you give so many crazy scenarios a try thank you so much to everyone who participated in the Video and sorry if the community tends to be a bunch of know it alls, something I am guilty of more often than I want to confess :( see you in the next video ^^ StarStream
The A10 A through C block aircraft has a full inertial nav system. That being said, for this scenario it would be fun if the time travel also sent back a TACAN beacon or two, and a FAC plane that can paint all the incoming armor and issue orders to the combat patrols. And the A10 practice of flying in 2-man groups.
in the hud options you can enable an option to have a piper at the bottom of the HUD in CCIP mode. if you put that on target and then press and hold weapon release, the point will be saved and the weapon will be released so it hits that point. It's a kind of hybrid between ccip and ccrp and would've been handy here.
Maybe a couple of A-12 configured for Air to Air to keep the opposition fighters busy so everyone else could bomb unmolested. I was eyeing some gaming computers and Fight Controls at Micro Center today.
I don't see how you can use the hog if you don't have air superiority. You need at least one dogfighter up there to keep the spitfires off your ass. Oh, and it helps to have a working rudder.
Not sure how DCS models gunfire exactly, but I think 20mm or even .50 cal might be enough for WW 2 tanks. Often .50 cal was enough to disable the Panzer 4's from top and sides at the right angles. 30mm yes is overkill, and the A-10 is JUST slow enough to be nabbed by enemy fighters. I agree with the posters that say you're better off with something faster like an F-16 or even an AV-8B. Zip in, zip out. CBUs are the same no matter the platform. (We saw this in the recent SU-25 at Kursk mission.)
The answer can only be NO. The problem is purely one of numbers. Germany invaded France with 7,378 artillery guns, 2,445 tanks, 5,638 aircraft, 3,350,000 troops plus a large Italian force attacking from the Alps. Compare that to the total of 716 A10's manufactured and only 218 of them still flying today. To defeat the Nazi invasion would require many more A10's than that.
Fundamental issues with this effort was absence of air to air coverage, protecting air to ground assets. Don't get me started on lack of wingman coverage, both in air-- and ground-- wings. Solo attacks might work for solo flyer-- you had numerous craft.
Very well done Cap, especially for not really flying the A-10c much. I would have loved to have been apart of this ( A-10c is the only jet I fly still since joining Grav ) but unfortunately I was to busy irl to take part. I really hope you do more A-10c missions in the future and I would love to join ( time permitting and I catch it in chat )
FAQ:
1) The spitfires are used as they closely match the top speed of the the period-accurate BF-109E1-4 fighters(which are not in game)
2) Lots of people saying the A-10 can fly faster and higher than the warbirds. That is only correct if the A-10s are not carrying high weapons/fuel.
Why in the hell are you attacking them across their formation and not in line with them??? That makes no sense at all...You are wasting 50% of your ordinance. Use some common sense dude!!!
I'm cussing my monitor because of the dumb way that you are attacking their formations. I've flown A10s on DCS for over 10 years and you're killing me lol
@@ericteipen The frustration...... I felt it......
Good answer
@@ericteipen lol exactly
With all due respect, this was not really a test of how well the A-10 would do in a WWII scenario; but how well you and your team fly the plane. AI might have done better, since many of you simply did not know how to use the weapon's systems. But it was fun to watch anyways, and thanks for this.
AI might have gotten into trouble with the Spitfires.
Yeah, this could have been done better. Didn't even see the guns get used.
Tried AI and they immediately got shot down :(
@@grimreapers The Grim Reapers did great!👍 Very Entertaining👍👍
Lol Spitfire's comin after you?? Did they not get the time travel memo?😆
While the AI comments have some merit, I'm with you, B. It's not just the lack of ability with the platform, it's the complete lack of any air combat discipline and doctrine. The plan was apparently to have everyone load up as they liked, and freelanced from there. Then there's the problem of putting a flight of them up there alone against what's likely an armored regiment with full air cover support. Would a full squadron of Hurricanes flying top cover be too much to ask? Hell, any other available AI-driven platform would be an improvement.
But I also agree that while as a simulation, this proves nothing, it was a great excuse for them to get together and have fun, while entertaining us, as well. Keep up the good work, Reapers!
I think two things would help this mission a lot:
1) Two planes start with a full Aim-9 loadout to clear the defending aircraft at the start.
2) Dropping the bomblets seems to work much better if you're lined up with the column as most of the bomblets miss entirely when you're dropping across the column.
Or a pair of F-15s in full CAP load out.
This is my thoughts too.
It would also help if they actually knew the required dive angle to use the -97. I think on the -10 it has to be damn near -50 degrees to get a solid CCIP solution. What we do see is that if a proficient group of A-10 pilots were running this, there's a damn good chance that it would succeed. Not saying I don't enjoy the chaos, but still... lol
@@calmterror but this vid is about A10...
@@MattDvc yea and you would still see fighters accompanying the a-10’s
Did you folks forget about mutual defense? At least half if not all of the lost A-10's could have been avoided by flying in pairs.
GR's lack of discipline is almost a thing of beauty.
After doing a number of these sorties and getting wrecked by WW2 fighters, one would think GR would dedicate 2 jets to air-to-air. To you know...not get shit mixed by Fritz.
You would think they might have a couple 16's for cap.
Yep, heavily loaded with Fox 2s and HOBS.
Or learn to fly together in order to defend each other. That's a lesson every military pilot has been taught since 1915 and one every air combat sim pilot should know.
"For tactics uhhh... let's just all break up when we get there"
I don’t recall if you can hang 4 AIM-9’s on the A-10, and yeah, have two of them, with no other ordnance and maybe reduced fuel, dedicated to counter air. But 6 against 60+ ground targets and a steady dozen near peer fighters is going to be tough all the time, isn’t it?
Maybe GR should invite one of the DCS squadrons out there to lead this. That way maybe there could be a team of somewhat proficient pilots? Are there any? 🙂
With the tanks in columns, is there any reason why simple strafing runs with the 30mm cannon wasn't done?
The ammo hopper is limited to I think 13-1400 rounds
Why did he always attack in perpendicular fashion. ??? to minimize damage.
@@spudpud-T67
Sorry old chap. don't understand yer banter!
Probably thinking its faster to drop bombs to different columns than flying 8's and using gun that has between 38 and 19 seconds of firing in total depending where rate of fire is adjusted, but it would have given more accurate results since you only need to look one direction. If you miss you loss ordinance and time. Thinking strategically flying perpendicularly on enemy colums does have benefit of avoiding to fly deep behind enemy line where there is most definitely heavy AA following main columns, though this does not apply to this scenario.
Personally i would have probably dropped ordinance to start of the column and then open with gun to rest if there was still time, do the loop and finish the strugglers with gun since you are already in the area.
Though this depends on how much enemy fighters there is and in this case there is plenty, so biggest problem here was not to have any airsuperiority fighters taking care of Luftwaffe fighters
@@Hellsong89 These old tanks can't withstand the GAU-8, only short squirts of it are enough to disable them. You can literally go for hours with the fuel economy of the A10 and 1150 rounds. Add a load of 2x3x7 guided M282 and two or 3 CBUs and you're the king of the sky. These poor MGs will never reach you and you can strafe from a mile out and throw missiles like a Stalin organ.. The A10 is absolutely superior in this environment if flown correctly and using its capabilities... including the T-Pod :D btw, the DCS A10 can only fire the gun in fast setup.
Your attack run with cbu's should be in the same direction the armor is traveling instead of at right angles.
The Panzer III tank the Germans used had a cross-country range was 95 km (59 mi). This means they are very dependent on the ability to refuel. Kill the refueling capacity first and you can take your time destroying everything else.
All of the A-10's should have been armed with at least a pair of sidewinders. That was SOP in Desert Storm
makes sense
The Sidewinders would make a big difference indeed. In modern warfare, you require to take down SAM radars before you can get very close but in WW2 that'd be your best chance against this scenario. The Gatling gun with how slow this plane is, not nearly good enough.
The British lost most of their field guns at Dunkirk, but these were old pre war tech and were quickly replaced by the Royal Ordnance Factory. The 57mm Six Pounder anti tank gun was used to good effect throughout the remainder of the war. One gun actually took out two Tiger tanks and was effective against Panther and Panzer 4. The same gun was used in a Tsetse Mosquito but unguided rockets were cheaper and easier to fit to almost any aircraft. SO impressive but not needed.
if you have a weapon that provides a long line of damage why are you not adjusting your flight path to drop the weapons along the path of the armor division.
Lack of planning.
That was the first thing I noticed as well. Every attack run they did seemed to be crossing the column instead along the line.
Like I said in the last debacle. You must gain air superiority first. The shocking unwillingness to just go headlong as a squadron and missile spam is mind boggling. You don't need to outturn them! You have sidewinders!
The map at the beginning actually shows the Schlieffen plan from the 1890's, not the Blitzkrieg in 1940.
The blitzkrieg in 1940 travelled through a few roads in the Ardennes, which would tend to encourage the idea that a few airstrikes could have changed the historical result, simply because of the traffic jam.
18:10 Without marking a target on the ground, you need to use CCIP mode (Continuously computed Impact Point) - that means you dive bomb and put the pipper on the target. It's also why you have the dotted line when flying level.
With the TGP, or other means of marking a ground target, you can switch the bombs to CCRP (Continuously computed Release Point) mode and drop flying level.
Basic tactics, 2x birds missile and gun running air cover only, remainder missile and gun, carpet bombing ineffective as proved during WWII, low reward high risk
Missile engagement more effective, good lock six missiles six kills. To use gau locat targets dive behind full throttle level out tree top level engage from rear,
Reduces lead in , increases effective fire, saves ammo, less chance of being hit
Cbu97’s are great on columns if you bomb in line with the column. If you cross the column, you miss.
Thanks for doing this. It is close to what I suggested days ago when I wondered how 1 A10 would do at the Battle of the Bulge hen all other aircraft were unable to fly. Easy company needs you.I should ass that I am new to this channel but am loving the diversion from the real miserable world. I love watching these and thank you for the entertainment.
Roger thx Dan
The "A" means Attack, the A-10 isn't for dogfight, you need support and team work to take that fighters out, you doesn't have the agility to lose them and your only hope is to accelerate to go near a buddy having AAM to help puting them right at 12 for him.
After watching both attempts at this scenario, might I suggest this attack approach -
Equip most of the Hog group with bomblet ordinance to attack ground targets. Set aside a few (two?) to fly CAP with an air-to-air rocket load to work on enemy flying targets and cover the battlefield mostly to spot targets.
The attack group operates thusly:
Once a column of enemy vehicles is spotted, line up on them from the most convenient direction.
Fly what I call a Dive, Strafe, Immelmann, Dive, Bomb, (DSIDB) pattern ONCE on a given target from opposite directions.
This DSIDB pattern offers the following advantages:
it is a simple-to-fly pattern by a novice with a little practice.
The Immelmann maneuver, when properly performed, quickly puts the airplane back on the target from the opposite direction.
Quickly returning for an attack makes it hard for the target to react in time to return fire.
Strafing first spreads out the ordinance usage and applies maximum effect for that particular ordinance. The bomblet drop allows coverage of a wide area around the target column as individual units in the column invariably will scatter after a strafe.
It is important to only perform the DSIDB only ONCE on a given target as a repeat (DSIDB) pass will present an even harder-to-hit set of targets and give the enemy time to set up better for a killing return fire.
Because the DSIDB approach is laid out in a vertical single plane of flight, if a bandit gets on your tail, you only need to immediately establish level flight, firewall the throttles then outrun the enemy as suggested in the second video of the series.
Once you are clear, obtain a bearing to another target either from CAP or by your own visual spotting skills then repeat the DSIDB attack once lined up on the NEW target.
Wash, rinse, repeat until the targets are neutralized.
thxx
I neglected to mention (it was 2am Christmas Day) that by "lining up on the target" I meant to fly directly in line with target's column movement - not at an angle - as the target presents an easier-to-hit profile than to try flying at the target from a side angle.
I think it would be fun and educational if you tried this scenario again with a bit more pre-planning!
a better question: if the native Americans had the USS Battle Ship Missouri. could they have driven off Christopher Columbus and his invasion of North America. That's the question: The USS Missouri vs The Nina The Pinta and The Santa Maria
I know A-10 would have no issue destroy the armor or aircraft of the era with it's weapons but I think it will encounter some issues with the fighters of the era. The countermeasures on an A-10 are designed for modern weapons that use radar or infared tracking, I think WWII fighters only had guns.
However an A-10 is much faster and would out manouver and is capable of high speed low altitude flight than any WW-II era plane.
In a senario like this, some A-10's would likely run a fully air to air loadout.
I was flying KC-135's in Desert Storm and our busiest day we refueled 19 A-10s in one mission.
Wow!
The A10 didn't fail this mission, the pilots and mission planners did.
But based on the salt content, I'm assuming they knew it already.
Yeah, I feel kinda bad when 20 other people have already mentioned it. So I just stuck to commenting on the plane/weapon choice =-)
TPGs would have changed this dramatically. A-10s could have just lased CBUs into the columns unmolested from high altitude. Would definitely suggest re-doing it using the A-10s to drop munitions with precision from high up.
If this happened IRL my grandfathers would think they are being attacked by Dragons. A-10 Warthog is the closest thing to mechanical dragons ever built. It's kind of favors one especially when it's spitting fire at the enemy.
I tend to agree with other comments. 74 kills out of 256 is roughly 28%. or 57% of the 128 you needed to kill. Pretty good for amateurs. Other comments are standard tactics which are flying in pairs, dedicating 2 planes for CAP and so on. Direction of attack is important. A-10's are quite durable and I've seen planes come back from sorties with shredded tails and bodies and still flying. No Disrespect, but the fact you don't train in them plays a big role in why you didn't do as well as you wanted....still you did good
Against the PzKpfw I, II and III, plus other assorted half-tracks, command cars and trucks, it would have been a massacre. The light armor of most 1940 German vehicles would offer virtually no protection against the A-10's 30 mm. Like all dedicated ground attack planes, a fully armed A-10 would be vulnerable to air superiority fighters like the Bf109. If the allied air forces of France and Britain could provide effective air cover for the attacking A-10s, I envision that a full wing of A-10s (three to four squadrons of 20 to 30 aircraft each, or 60 to 120 total aircraft) could turn the tide of battle in northern France. And in a pinch, the A-10 wing could provide its own air cover, by only arming half of its planes for ground attack, and sending the other half on CAP overhead armed only with 30 mm cannon and Sidewinder AAMs. Its speed and maneuverability would compare very favorably with the Luftwaffe's 1940 version of the Bf109, and would completely outclass the Germans' ground attack mainstay, the Stuka.
The impact on the morale of both Wehrmacht and Allied army personnel would be a game changer, and Allied ground forces would immediately begin to believe they could actually defeat the Germans. If the A-10 air wing magically appeared in northern France with a full complement of ordnance and fuel, 60 to 120 A-10s could literally change the tide of battle on the western front.
This just proves that no one can "just" go and fly/use the A10 - it takes many hours to learn to use that plane properly. But had it been used properly and with a planned tactic against the spits, the destruction would have been at least double up. Those nice straight lines of tanks are excellent targets for the GAU, so save the GBU97's for when they spread out (and may be stop).
it doesn't take that much practice...what is more important for these guys was knowing proper tactics -- you mow WITH the columns, not across them.
@@timq6224 Agre not to flying perpendicular to the colums - but to be good with that gun still takes a lot of practise.
The battle of France was won through a bold movement thought the Ardennes forest, with very high concentration of panzer on small roads, with limited to inexistent off road option. It was made possible through a total local air superiority and air to ground support. With the right timing, the A-10 attack would have turned this masterpiece into a giant traffic jam. But with very high losses.
Perhaps most importantly, the french military's intelligence branch was terribly organized. A lot of the intel on the German concntration in the Ardennes (from recon planes and such) never made it to their high command.
I agree it would have been just one big bottleneck. Then attack German airfields and let other aircraft kill the armor and supply columns.
I'd love to to get in on your next A10 war game. By far the plane I'm most competent with.
Kind of the same
Only plane I'm competent with 😂
Would be interesting to see this same scenario but with a flight of A-4’s.
The A-4E’s are not going to cut it. Would need a hundred of them…and well trained pilots with manual bombing skills. …but it would be fun to try!! 🙂
Or, same scenario with F-16C’s. Again, need pilots proficient with the F-16C’s A-to-G targeting systems. What the F-16 can carry, it can carry faster and get back to base faster to reload…if you can do a hot refuel and reload. Load the M61 with 20mm AP rounds. They should be effective against these tanks, I think…if DCS thinks so.
Two squadrons of F-16Cs and a squadron of A-10Cs might do, using about 12 F-16’s, in rotating flights of 4 to trim the 109’s down.
And then, how about a wing of Mirage 2000C’s, in place of the F-16’s?
@@Andrew-13579 yeah, but the A-4 can shoot and scoot, so they'd stand a better chance against Spitfires or Bf-109s. Certainly a lighter bombload, but they'd be more maneuverable and have good thrust to put some distance between themselves and bandits.
A1 Skyraiders .
@@jeffreyhutchins6527 We don’t have any. So the P-47D will have to stand in.
A4s literally get blown out of the sky by a strong wind gust. (lived in the area when it happened at Hardwood Range in central Wisconsin 1983 - official docs spelled it hartwood if you search it)
I was cracking up toward the end.... "ICH BIN EIN....BOMBLET!"
More GAU-8/A, less talk.
Seriously though, I think the survivability of the A10 is underestimated by this game. It's rated against 23mm shells and so the .303 MGs and 20mm cannons of the Spitfire would not be as effective as they seem here.
Imagine being a WW2 pilot shooting the ever loving shit out of an A-10 and it just keeps flying away like WOOOO
Trying to figure out just what cockpit this is using as the A-10 is a SINGLE seat attack aircraft. Why is there a RIO (Radar Intercept Officer) seat?
Next week: Fairey Battles try to stop Desert Storm.
Considering how much of a problem the Spitfires were, Do you think it would have helped to load up one plane with as many sidewinders as it can carry and use it to shoot down all of the Spitfires first, then return to base and reload with bombs?
agree
That and precision bombing from altitude with one A10 designated as the FAC
If you read the Stats from the gulf war, A10 basically cleaned the ground. In just under a month they fired 780k 30mm rounds and destroyed almost 1k tanks and 1300 trucks. Thats a tighter timeline of the French invasion and armistice but only by a week.
It would be even faster in a WWII scenario. During the Gulf, there was the always present threat of MANPAD's, SAM's and enemy fighters capable of shooting down A-10's. In WWII, none of those would've been a threat, as none of them existed. Then again, neither did the A-10 lol
I watched a show about these stats and how they were most likely fabricated to make the A10 look better.
@@FuriouslyFurious i think lots of it is everyone thinks the Iraqi military was fielding only top tier equipment. Lots of their stuff was old garbage and they didnt have the training or command to make use of armoured units. The A10s would just orbit the field invisible to the dinosaur soviet and Chinese tanks dug in as artillery. I cant find a source to verify this either. Lots of hate directed at the A10 is more directed at the GAU8 and the depleted uranium slugs that poison everything it comes near. A10 also fired more than 4000 agm65 in the Gulf war, the official combat losses of the Iraqi army correlate pretty well with amount of munitions expended.
@@FuriouslyFurious they used the A-10's at night during desert storm even though it had no night vision or ir gear.
F111s killed more tanks then the A10s in desert storm.
The answer to the video's title is probably yes, provided you've got people with proper training with the weapon systems executing a plan developed by ... again ... people with proper planning skills. The GRs had neither in sufficient quantity. But it was still fun to watch.
A-10's would own. If they did so in the first and second Gulf Wars with almost total impunity, no 1940's panzer divisions would survive contact with them.
If the Lufftwaffe were covering the tanks then the A10's would still have some loaded out with air-to-air missiles purely for that purpose also.
A squadron would have ended WW2 before it started.
As a tanker, wasn't it nice of them to not bother keeping a look-out for incoming enemy planes, and carry on in column line ahead as your attack went in? Your planes are great, but these tankers suck.
You do know A-10 pilot learn how to dog fight with their 30mm, right.
You are flying above the Belgian (province of West-Flanders) and French (Département du Nord) border region.
Go at 90% power so we stay in formation before we get shot down by spitfires! *Immediately forgets to power up the engines and gets left behind.*
"idk what i can do to help him" forgets theres this big cannon on the nose of the jet lol
Question: Capt, why did you bomb in front the convoy rather from behind or infront. Lots of boom boom, but 2 or 3 deaths? Mind you this comment is halfway thru the video 24:52 to be exact.
Roger, learned the lessons for Attempt #2
Interesting premise...but I think this actually shows that it COULD be done. Cortana was taken out almost immediately, two other planes got shot down because the tried to dogfight instead of just pouring on steam and leaving the Spitfires behind, only one plane made any significant attempt at air cover...
Two birds with AIM-9s would thin out the German air cover. If the other three-four planes each had a pair of Sidewinders, as well (and used them effectively), that would cut down the air threat even more. Several of the CBU-97s were off-target and hit nothing, several more were released perpendicular to the German columns and only got a couple of tanks. Someone else commented about loading up with Mavericks, which, yes, did have a higher success rate (100% kill rate, according to the comment)--but compare that to Cap's better bombing runs, where he was killing a dozen tanks with a single 97...the Mavericks are a less effective means of inflicting mass casualties. Maybe--MAYBE--put a pair on each plane, but if the CBUs were on target, you wouldn't need Mavericks, at least in a first attack wave. Maybe as a follow-up measure, after the columns had been broken up, but even then, you're probably better off going guns and strafing the column (or what's left of it).
Better mission planning, better flight and fire discipline, and better pilot proficiency (familiarity with the systems, proper hardware set-up), and a dedicated GCI from the outset, and this is a totally different mission.
Oh, and I should also note that, yes, a 50% kill rate is high, because even damaged units would be out of action, most likely, not to mention the effect on morale and the collateral effects (machines stopping so their crews could try to help their comrades, etc). This is different from the Pearl Harbor campaign, in that the Germans hadn't been indoctrinated in the same way the Japanese had (we don't talk about the effectiveness of German suicide attacks!) and the Germans had, to this point in the war, never really experienced massive losses on that kind of scale.
Dropping the bombs perpendicular to the column of tanks means you get the minimum chance of damage with the bomblets. Try running parallel to the column.
You wiped out 1/3 of the tanks in that attack group. That will be a "combat ineffective" fighting force. As a proof of concept, it's a success, especially if you had been given at least minimal CAP. Just because you didn't kill 250/250 doesn't mean you failed.
I love this limey’s commentary. He’s hilarious
I'm a limey!
I'm no expert by crossing the T with those bombs didn't seem to be the most effective, seem like you want to draw a line directly over them ?
You are dropping your ordnance across their line of march. You need to line up in line of them from behind then drop the ordnance.
Thank you, was about to write the same thing. Lots of wasted ordinance.
Thanks!
Merry Christmas Henry
@@jesuschrist7169 Thank you your holiness
Thanks Henry!
This may be a little off point... But could 3 AH-64 Apache attack helicopters based in south England eliminate every functioning V-1 launching site in Northern France? Also could these same 3 Apaches, one cyclone-class patrol craft as naval support and a company of airborne troops neutralize and retake the Channel Islands?
Realistically, 50% is a high number to "stop" the attack. Any unit that sustains 25% casualties would be considered combat ineffective. The columns would have to halt to take care of casualties, service damaged vehicles, regroup, and reorganize. On second thought, you are doing CAS for the French so maybe 50% is a better number.
Damn at the French lol
Wow, those cluster bombs are an absolute terror weapon especially for WW2. I remember reading about how Hawker Typhoons with their RP-3 rockets scared the crap out of the Germans. The article claimed their effectiveness wasn't due so much to actual destruction of German tanks but what it did to the German tankers morale. They would often abandon their tanks when attacked by Typhoons. Imagine the effect these A-10s with their cluster bombs would have. I bet word would get round fast among the tankers after this attack and even a report of A-10s nearby might cause them to ditch their tanks. Amazing stuff.
You didn’t take into account that A10 are fully night capable.
rgr
I stumbled across this and watched with mild amusement. As a former A-10 pilot with time in the Middle East, I can tell you that your tactics, weapons load, and method of employment were terrible. A-10s fight in pairs. They do not engage a ground force with a significant air-to-air threat as single flights. Also with no radar SAM threat, the A-10s would use high altitudedive bombing for free fall ordinance deliveries. Since the armored targets were relatively thin skinned, a better tactic may have been to have 2 A-10s attack the force while 2 others flew CAP to ward of the enemy fighters. I would cut down the cluster bomb loads and use the gun more employing high angle strafing tactics. You pick off the lead tanks with the gun then drop the CBU's on the formation as they stack up.
It was a nice try though.
What happens if you have a number of A-10 with WW2 Escorting fighters?
If assets like this where sent back in time there's no way the allies would throw them in unescorted
can the DCS A-10 mount gunpods? for all the dakka
Don't think so.
"Tally" for enemies, "Visual" for friendlies. That is important on a soapy radio... Never say "Tally Friendly" or "VIsual enemy". The single word "Tally" means that the heat is on...
Cap likes to overuse all the terms ;]
@@MattDvc yup
35:00 Yeah, do more hoggy stuff. I used to watch a guy who did hog CAS for a bunch of guys who did regular US marines ops on Arma III. He was an experienced pro hog CAS pilot, and it was just great --- goosebumpy great --- watching him do his thing: the comms with the FAC on the ground; using the pod to find and track stuff on the ground; Mavericks to take out ground units (danger close); the Avenger, with its iconic sound; evading things like Shilkas and Tunguskas firing back (angrily). So cool.
@1:55 “we gotta take 50% of the out and then MAYBE the French will fight for themselves” lmao
There’s a similar scene in the Harry Turtledove novel WorldWar: in the balance where a German tank unit is strafed by a jet aircraft similar to the A-10 on the Eastern Front in 1941. It only makes one run but manages to take out half the unit with firstly missiles then a gun run.
In the first gulf war the maverick missile's were the A10s weapon of choice. They fired 90% of the 5000k or so used.
Hello guys I must say I've quite enjoyed watching all the videos here on your site as my brother told me about you.
What's even wilder is that my daughter's have ALSO sat with me a time or two watching as well.
My youngest daughter raised a point saying how cool it would be if you could do a video where one side had either TIE Fighters or X Wings.
I know that seems like a bit farfetched but no different than time traveling Modern Fighters going back to WW2.
Think of this a single X WING against the Luftwaffe during the battle of Britain OR a TIE Interceptor against the RAF ?
KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK!!!
MERRY CHRISTMAS From the Winthrop Family
Does DCS have star wars craft?
They have two videos off a Carrier Strike Group vs a star destroyer (ruclips.net/video/m_HRrou6Bq0/видео.html , ruclips.net/video/GDHjncjIvRc/видео.html)
Good sim, but those A10 would take far more damage & still be able to stay in action than portrayed. Still fun to watch.
Why would you constantly drop CBUs across the line of vehicles instead of along the line?
Yeh, learnt for Attempt 2.
@@grimreapers got to say though this series of taking modern technology back to WW2 is really good to watch and the little history lesson at the start is interesting and sets the scene.
Really makes you wonder what WW2 German military would have thought seeing and having to face todays tech. Putting aside the smart bombs and missiles the F35 and F22 might have been seen as UFOs.
"That is not a World War 2... that's not a battalion what is that?" That's a lot of scrap metal with pieces of what used to be human beings scattered about, that's what that is.
38:14 "That's repairable" lol
Hi a question, there is an option on the mission editor dcs to prevent FPS drop when using cluster bombs. THANK YOU
That would be nice.
Damn.... All those dials, controls, switches, and displays, but not ONE cup holder?
I always wanted to know " WHAT IF " Sparticus would have had G.A. Custer and the 7th Cav ? The Germans had quad anti aircraft guns . They also went through the Ardennes which gives you great cover . Until you get columns in the open ground , your wasting their effectiveness . A-10 are going to come in low to use that great weapon . If your talking the whole German operation and how many A-10's ? As long as they can be refueled and re armed , it would be something to witness .
The cover provided by the Ardennes could be minimized with IR gear. Forests provide great visual cover, but mechanized equipment, with hot engines in the middle of a relatively cool forest, would be like beacons for IR equipment, and CBUs would still be pretty deadly in a forest setting.
Spartacus would have beaten the combined Sioux forces because he used much better judgment in establishing a field of battle and employed better tactics. And was not such a reckless glory hog.
Why are people so mad about how "they didn't fly good enough?" they just film a fun video, take time to entertain us, and everybody is bitching about "it's not realistic enough". If you wanted a good realistic video on the a-10 performance, maybe don't watch one of the a-10 flying against wwII tanks?
Yeh there's some weird guys in the DCs community. I just ignore them.
Ya gave her a go, but just think about what the Germans in those tanks would've thought after the first couple CBUs hit even near them..
Psychological warfare plus "shock and awe"!
Panzer Div had anti aircraft vehicles mixed among them didnt they?
No idea TBH.
@@grimreapers Did a quick Google. It's appears the Germans included 12 anti aircraft guns to a division. To help protect from bombers.
Could you fly in pairs and use the Thach weave to protect each other from the fighters, with 4 sidewinders each and CBU for ground attack?
I think that's a good idea.
@@grimreapers We want to join in and help out when you do the remake of this. 😃
"well i'm missing a wing but it's fine, i can trim it out. It's an A-10"
When is attempt 2 coming out
day after tomorrow :)
My Old Man (Dad) Passed away 5 Years ago, and the A-10 was his absolute favorite aircraft. Awesome videos as always I think he would've got a kick out of this.
Cheers and Merry Christmas folks.
:)
Hahaha, the devestation of that first bomblet drop @ 12:46... that is crazy.
Hey Cap, is there a way to get my hands on the Mission File so I can try it out myself?
Thought it would be interesting to test myself first instead of ranting about the "Blah blah bad Hog Pilots" without ever trying it myself.
But if you search for some good Hog Pilots I would reccomend Rakuzard. He is a German RUclipsr that makes some good Warthog content and really nice german DCS Tutorials on many modules. He and his Airwing might stand a chance in A10s.
NoDak Express Gaming is also skilled in the Warthog and likes to try silly stuff.
I do not know if a cooperative Video would be a good idea but just wanted to throw it into the room.
I really like your content and apreciate that you give so many crazy scenarios a try thank you so much to everyone who participated in the Video and sorry if the community tends to be a bunch of know it alls, something I am guilty of more often than I want to confess :(
see you in the next video ^^
StarStream
Yup contact me in Discord plz
Great vid. I must say, why are we fighting Spitfires? I must have missed a lot admittedly
No bf109’s modelled/available i believe
Nearest we have to Bf-109E1-4 at low level speed.
That's the worse bomb raid I ever seen!
I find these scenarios also rely on you transporting back in time the whole GPS satellite system for your navigation and precision weapons.
You could also have a TACP or CCT on the ground guiding the attacks using other tools...
A-10 can operate fine with no GPS, just disable EGI and revert back. Works fine.
The A10 A through C block aircraft has a full inertial nav system. That being said, for this scenario it would be fun if the time travel also sent back a TACAN beacon or two, and a FAC plane that can paint all the incoming armor and issue orders to the combat patrols. And the A10 practice of flying in 2-man groups.
25:12 On the other hand, the tank commanders would have needed a change of trousers after seeing _that_ in the rear view mirror :-)
Fun stuff :) But I'm curious to know why you made your bomb runs across the columns, rather than right down the lines.
Fixed it for Attempt 2 :)
@Grim Reapers Ah, yes - I see that now. Missed it earlier :) Thank you!
in the hud options you can enable an option to have a piper at the bottom of the HUD in CCIP mode. if you put that on target and then press and hold weapon release, the point will be saved and the weapon will be released so it hits that point. It's a kind of hybrid between ccip and ccrp and would've been handy here.
Maybe a couple of A-12 configured for Air to Air to keep the opposition fighters busy so everyone else could bomb unmolested.
I was eyeing some gaming computers and Fight Controls at Micro Center today.
agree
Can you redo it but with gun runs from behind, chase down the tanks
Already recorded, vids comes in a few days.
@@grimreapers Awesome
Conclusion: It could work very good with "good" pilots and slightly more planes (30 planes vs 24 kills each = 720 tanks).
I don't see how you can use the hog if you don't have air superiority. You need at least one dogfighter up there to keep the spitfires off your ass. Oh, and it helps to have a working rudder.
Well, they're pretty close equivalent to warbirds in terms of performance, so it's not like they're flying into a nest of mig-29s.
Always fun. Remember when they had some bomb dropping contest mission? Wish I remembered the details. Saved replays and uploaded them to see who won.
Not sure how DCS models gunfire exactly, but I think 20mm or even .50 cal might be enough for WW 2 tanks. Often .50 cal was enough to disable the Panzer 4's from top and sides at the right angles. 30mm yes is overkill, and the A-10 is JUST slow enough to be nabbed by enemy fighters. I agree with the posters that say you're better off with something faster like an F-16 or even an AV-8B. Zip in, zip out. CBUs are the same no matter the platform. (We saw this in the recent SU-25 at Kursk mission.)
The answer can only be NO. The problem is purely one of numbers. Germany invaded France with 7,378 artillery guns, 2,445 tanks, 5,638 aircraft, 3,350,000 troops plus a large Italian force attacking from the Alps. Compare that to the total of 716 A10's manufactured and only 218 of them still flying today. To defeat the Nazi invasion would require many more A10's than that.
Good work figuring out how to run this.
Fundamental issues with this effort was absence of air to air coverage, protecting air to ground assets. Don't get me started on lack of wingman coverage, both in air-- and ground-- wings. Solo attacks might work for solo flyer-- you had numerous craft.
Very well done Cap, especially for not really flying the A-10c much. I would have loved to have been apart of this ( A-10c is the only jet I fly still since joining Grav ) but unfortunately I was to busy irl to take part. I really hope you do more A-10c missions in the future and I would love to join ( time permitting and I catch it in chat )
old man here…Video games like this are amazing. So real.