How Would NATO Jets Do Close Air Support in Ukraine? | DCS

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 20 янв 2025

Комментарии • 29

  • @CommandT
    @CommandT  Год назад +1

    Folks for those of you who are Patreon supporters I have now added the mission file to the google drive that you have access to. You will need the following mods by Currenthill:
    PANTSIR SPAAGM
    T-90M MBT
    TIGR-M IMV
    TOR SHORAD
    www.currenthill.com/russia

    • @jasonmiller7735
      @jasonmiller7735 Год назад

      For some reason, when I look at the Google Drive, I can see that the Mission Mods.docx file has been updated recently, but I don't see the new .miz file for this one.

  • @sergeydubovyk9268
    @sergeydubovyk9268 11 месяцев назад +1

    actually, laser mavs may make more sense as much as you limit your " exposure time". and by the same token GBUs. If there is already an established contact line within visual range, getting ground-based jtac team is logistically fairly doable -- and then you can saturate either air-defense, or reduce amount of passes needed + you spend less time on target acquisition

    • @CommandT
      @CommandT  11 месяцев назад

      Target acquisition - totally agree, laser would definitely work so long as it's from a ground based JTAC that allows you to effectively fire and forget!

  • @ikapustiv
    @ikapustiv Год назад +2

    IMHO (I am not an expert) F-16 or F/A-18 would allow to do SEAD and fighter sweep as well as other offensive counter air to protect ground position from Su-34 guided bombing, and that's it (which is not insignificant). Can not say how significant threat they would pose to Ka-52 (as latter stay low most of the time when naer frontline). They probably not going to be able provide significant CAS otherwise than JDAM deployment - which is not enough in quantity and should be used on high value targets.

    • @mickhick619
      @mickhick619 Год назад

      Vipers and super hornets would do sead, Eagle's and probably a few hornets would be on cap. I don't see a need to use F35s or F22 in the Ukraine.

    • @CommandT
      @CommandT  Год назад

      I doubt they'd even be able to employ JDAMs without significant risk. Maybe some sort of glide bomb. But yeah I should have said that they definitely could CAP from further back and provide at least some sort of counter-air.

    • @nobodymissesphilofthefutur8237
      @nobodymissesphilofthefutur8237 Год назад

      Interesting to hear this take after the news of Ukraine downing multiple SU-34s. Though it is contested whether these downs were from Patriots or hidden F-16s , the actual idea that they could at least provide decent CAP rather than CAS is interesting.

  • @wolfkill1997
    @wolfkill1997 10 месяцев назад

    I haven't laughed for so long, I can imagine how this happens in real life

  • @yo0gayo0ga43
    @yo0gayo0ga43 Год назад +2

    First of all, I want to say thank you for your videos, they are interesting.
    Your analyzes are cool, but have no life in the real conditions of the conflict in question.
    Firstly, Ukraine has practically run out of planes. Russia introduced more long-range detection aircraft, thanks to which they began to shoot down aircraft at great depths with long-range air-to-air missiles.
    I brought this to the point that obviously the problem with the number of flying aircraft will continue - it is unlikely that anyone will provide an aircraft to operate Mavericks or other guided missiles near the front, taking into account not only anti-aircraft systems like yours and early warning aircraft, but and ground reconnaissance teams in the rear that use man-portable air defense systems for ambushes. It’s trivial that a plane at such a short distance could collide with a drone loaded with explosives, which have gained great popularity on both sides of the conflict.
    I think that they will be used exclusively as sites for launching long-range missiles, which is why training the crews takes so little time - practically nothing is required of them.
    This is what Ukraine will do with the service, when Russia stated that such airfields even in NATO countries will be considered legitimate targets, which, logically, is correct - we’ll look at it here.

    • @CommandT
      @CommandT  Год назад

      Hmmm, I partly disagree with your analysis. My video does assume that whoever is doing close air support, is also covered by CAP flights and maybe some SEAD/ decoy launcher flights (F-16s in the case of Ukraine). Obviously doing what I did in the video in real life just as a single or even a 2-ship would be crazy. And perhaps this won't be possible for a while whilst Ukraine gets up to speed flying the F-16s but eventually it could be possible.
      Time will tell though :)

  • @rumi.137
    @rumi.137 Год назад

    Great video.
    What the program used to see the map above and all units etc?

    • @CommandT
      @CommandT  Год назад +1

      Thanks. That’s Tacview

  • @octobergamer2602
    @octobergamer2602 Год назад

    CBU-105s?

  • @jasonmiller7735
    @jasonmiller7735 Год назад

    Well done. Will you post the .miz for your Patreon supporters?

    • @CommandT
      @CommandT  Год назад +1

      Yes I will! My apologies. Haven’t had a chance to do it. Will get it up tomorrow morning.

    • @CommandT
      @CommandT  Год назад +1

      It's now uploaded :)

    • @jasonmiller7735
      @jasonmiller7735 Год назад

      Thank you very much. @@CommandT

  • @mobius7089
    @mobius7089 Год назад +3

    well that's not CAS

    • @CommandT
      @CommandT  Год назад +1

      In what way? You're supporting troops on the contact line...

    • @michaelolson3616
      @michaelolson3616 Год назад +4

      Warthogs doing straffing runs in a near peer conflict like they were able to do in GWOT is a pipe dream. MANPADS and other handheld anti air materiel is too abundant, making them too risky. In all reality CAS would probably be used rarely and in key objectives/missions.

    • @ikapustiv
      @ikapustiv Год назад +2

      In my understanding CAS is done by the request from ground troops and allows to deal with threats that otherwise are difficult/risky/dangerous to deal with using ground troops avialble force, and as a result should allow ground troops break/escape contact, retreat, advance, or secure positions. The point is that it is done when, where and how it is needed, and of course, the aircraft must have flexibility and space to provide it in that right way. So, considering amoubt of SAMs, that is probably not the case for this conflict.

    • @ricbish
      @ricbish Год назад +1

      CAS is to directly support troops on the ground. This is more of a direct attack on known enemy positions. Yes you helping the troops on the front line but you’re not in direct support of the troops on the ground, i.e. Troops request you to take out a artillery thats attacking them or attack building A at these coordinates with troops in contact. Still a cool video and loved the way you made the enemy front!! In my opinion sending F16’s etc to Ukraine wont make much difference h of a difference in the end. I personally think it’s close to the end here with Ukraines army being decimated. It’s a sad thing to see but thats not what this videos about. Loved the video, you definitely know how to deploy the F18C quickly! Nice job1

    • @CommandT
      @CommandT  Год назад

      @@ricbish Thanks although I don't think the definition of CAS necessarily implies a JTAC with 9 lines. But it's a moot point really. The idea is that jets would be able to accurately pin point and destroy targets within close proximity of enemy forces which are either attacking or defending a certain position along the front line. I just didn't populate the map with friendlies to avoid totally bottlenecking my CPU.

  • @notenote2004
    @notenote2004 Год назад +5

    Russia would smoke them in no time!

    • @CommandT
      @CommandT  Год назад +2

      It's a little more complex than that