Just a note on the Type 26 Frigates both HMS Glasgow and HMS Cardiff have been launched and will be commissioned late 2026 for Glasgow and early 2028 for Belfast... so they are further down the line the Constellation Frigate of which only 1 is under construction... and as to the Sachsen she was holding onto her missiles to safe the German government money...
the Constellation not ready until 2029 now because of major delays, also they are trying to get a second yard to start building them to get it back on schedule
The 84G Harpoon is not an error. The G stands for german, so this is license built in Germany, maybe with the one or the other different specifications/parts, but in general identically.
I’ve been enjoying Seapower, but occasionally getting frustrated with bugs and or limits of the mission editor… however, the stark contrast of this video really made me appreciate Seapower for what it is only a few weeks after launch. I hope that Seapower improves its aircraft mechanics so the CSG battles are a little bit more comparable. Sooner or later, CAP, Seapower will have modern ship mods and make it far more superior for these simulations than DCS.
When will sea power be "modernised"? As a patrion member I thank you for continuing to put out content. Keep it real cap. What they give they can tale away.
There is already a mod on the Steam Workshop that adds upgraded early 1990s varaints of some of the vessels. That's as modern as it goes so far though.
I would like to see a video on a NATO task force against the Russian Baltic fleet. You could do the German frigates, possibly French and British warships, a US destroyer, and 2 Polish Oliver Hazard Perry frigates vs 2 Neustrashimy, 4 Stereguschiyy, 4 Karakurt, 4 more Karakurt pretending to be Buyan M, and 4 Tarantul. Also possibly throw in some air assets, too
Probably the difference in interception rate is because it's a different era. Since 1980, air defense has advanced more than anti-ship missiles. And also, as you said, the ships here are launching only a few ASMs at a time, instead of all of them in a huge volley. The latter would probably make more sense, and may overwhelm the other side's air defenses.
There is a world of difference between the Gulf War Patriot and the current Patriot and I would imagine it's similar for other types of AD systems. Sensors, electronics and computational equipment just weren't up to the task in the 80s. That said, I still think the interception rate is too high. As we can see in Ukraine, there are ways to get through the AD screen.
Honestly the crazy Iranian volley was probably the first large cruise missile volley ever, it's just too much against normal restrained conflict - especially since you don't wanna be naked for the next week and run home to restock. Since that tactically is just as if you had been sunk...
@@udirt true, but the explosive power of all modern shells is greater than the. The 57mm is better than it was a couple decades ago, but so are the Russian and Chinese large bore shells. Just a couple hits by one or either of the big guns would be enough to knock out a lot of fighting power.
@@udirt sure, but since they all have similar sizes; the bigger rounds will always do more damage also the russian 130 reloads EXTREMELY fast, and has been documented to have a fire rate of up to 40 rounds per minute, PER BARREL and since its double barreled, its maximum fire rate can be as high as 80 rounds per minute by contrast the type 26 127mm manages a maximum of 20 rounds per minute and the ship only carries one of them so just the gorchov can put out the same volume of fire as 4 type 26's with just one gorchov but again, thats just a gun difference obviously the US 57mm fires way faster, but as you can probablly tell from the fact its almost only a third of the caliber, there is much less in the shell to do damage with, assuming it can even pen to begin with
I was waiting for this comment ... Russian guns are just more plentiful and bigger... they are more suited to shore bombardment and close in anti ship..
@@udirt Smaller calibre guns do have their advantages (e.g. in AA warfare). But the larger shells will always pack more punch per shot which translates to a much favourable damage radius. Doesn't help when newer guns in the Russian and Chinese arsenals have increased rate of fire.
In the beginning of the anti-ship missile age, the antiship missile had the advantage, later the ships anti air defensive missile capability caught up and surpassed the antiship missile. So I'd say both are relatively correct. But it's nearly back at a balance again in the last 5 - 7 years..
Fun fact: The anti-submarine mortars are only anti-submarine because they also have a depth/timed fuse, they have two: impact and timed/depth which is why we saw them used on MTLB platforms in Ukraine as anti-building solutions (nothing fixes problems like one of those salvoing into a apartment building).
Why are DCS SAMs so accurate? 40-60 years difference in ship and computer technology. Having some falibility is what makes Seapower more interesting for me.
@@5Andysalive I would say that is due to the fact that some of their ships had very little upgrades compared to their peers. Just look at say, a Type-45, Alreigh Burke flight III, and a Type-055 next to their current destroyer fleet.
With the current Israel vs Iran dust up, we can actually see what 2010s AD tech vs 80-90s Strike tech compared. That most AD still requires more than 1-2 per projectile to get a respectable PK, so we could probably see a more equal system requiring 3-4 per.
We don't really know the PK of the missiles. I would suspect that for incredibly advanced missiles such as the SM-3, SM-2Bk3C, SM-6Bk2, and ESSM bk 2, they have very high PK against munitions they are tailored to fight. Considering the ESSMBk2 and SM-2Bk3C have an active radar homing system onboard, and the SM-2Bk3C has the same seeker as the SM-6, they will be incredibly capable against modern munitions. I would hazard a guess of 1.3-1.1 missiles would be required, but realistically 2 will be fired at each threat thanks to the shoot shoot look doctrine.
@@wolfmaster0579 Ukraine has been confirmed to be using the lastest Patriot Missile, and they still require 2-3 for every Air Launched Hypersonic Khinzal.
@@Sufferingzify Also, there are 2 variants of PAC3, meaning we don't know the variant nor the number of them actually fired, with one of them. Additionally, we don't know the attack vector or system positioning of the attacks. Too many unknowns to properly gauge the systems capabilities.
@@jugganaut33 Yes, Cap's information on the T26 was a bit off. He said the first had been laid down, but there are actually 2 being fitted out now, Glasgow and Cardiff, with Belfast and Birmingham under construction.
Personally i prefer dcs, but thats mostly because i prefer modern stuff to cold war era stuff. i just love seeing the vlss spit out missiles in quick succession
Nice battle and new ship, after the next Gorshkov is released the rest will have 24-32 offensive vls cells instead of 16. Will you guys be modeling and using gorshkovs likes this and the original vls count or will you just stick to the model you have now? Also the gorshkovs would have been interesting with zircons in this battle.
The RBU-6000 can be used for shore bombardment and has also been repurposed to help defend against kamikaze drone boats in the current Russo-Ukrainian War
Loved it! Just to drive home the point/request; for the 'galleon battles' I would like to see these battles with guns only, sides close from 10 Nm just to allow the vessels with the bigger or better gun systems to gain their rightful advantage, especially if they are bow mounted as opposed to stern mounted? Not-at-all connected, I propose the Cap is the second-most sexy and most awesome man on the planet (if you need any tips, just let me know?).
If they add the Constellation and Type 26 frigates, they could also have added the upcoming German frigate F126, which is also already under construction (starting in 2023 and scheduled to enter service in 2028), instead of the obsolete and 20-year-old F124 frigate. By the way, the RGM-84 Harpoon on the F124 (and F125) frigates has been replaced in the German Navy by the Naval Strike Missile since 2022.
This was great but could not keep up with what was going on! 😅 I'd be interested to know if they would fire the missiles in this fashion IRL. Or if they would ripple fire them in such a way that the fastest caught up with the slowest in time to enter the SAM envelope at the same time? And so the swarm arrives at the same time?
I think you're looking for the term 'time on target attack', and yes, staggering the launches so they all arrive together would absolutely make sense. In a previous GR Naval battle I saw Spear-5s catch up to a swarm of Spear-3s right as they reached engagment range, the 5s did very well in the chaos.
Love the various engagements CAP but question, does DCS or Sea Power have simulated wind? One of the things about the carriers is turning into the wind to launch. I think it would be great it letting Carrier Based Forces join up and head into the fight in better formations. Love the work,Cap! Cheers!
They DCs has simulated wind. GR has done heavy weather carrier landings. I'm unsure if it's in game yet for Sea Power, but the mission editor let's you set it's direction and sea state (being how badly the wind makes wavez)
The Spear 5 is a Franco-British missile still in development, it should enter service only in early 2030... Right now UK frigates are due to replace their old harpoons but struggling with intermediate replacement due to budget contraints. Neither game is realistic. Both games over estimate the performance of Russian (and Chinese) weapons and ships. Smaller NATO sea skimming anti-ship missiles have been very hard to intercept until very recently, and still are (as demonstrated by the loss of the Russian Slava class cruiser in the Black sea recently). Some NATO ships can intercept very fast missiles (US and French ships have been intercepting balistic missiles in the red sea) which requires extremely fast response systems and very well trained crew but we don't really know about supersonic sea skimming missiles (although Russian and Chinese missiles do not fly as low as NATO missiles and are more easily detected). What should be reminded is that electronic capacities (detection, guidance and EW) and crew skill are very important in the equation, and low radar signature ships or missiles (like the French frigates and recent NATO missiles) is also an important asset, coupled to electronic counter measures.
@tetraxis3011 and yet Russia lost the flagship of their Black Sea Fleet to a country with no Navy😂😂 Cope HARDER!!! It's okay I understand, kind of like when you grow up and you meet your idol and you realize that they're really not good people. I figure it's the same for the Russian / Chinese fanboys😂
@@Wyomingchief 1. Ukraine does have a Navy. 2. That flagship was older than Ukraine itself, of course a modern missile would sink it. 3. Ukraine has failed to even damage a single modern Russian warship. (They have claimed that they sunk the Admiral Makarov in 3 different occasions only for satellite imagery to confirm the Admiral Makarov is perfectly afloat. Every. Single. Time.)
I've been saying for awhile... It seems battles between peer navies are just going to end with the combatants eating up each others ASMs and SAM interceptors, which means a fight to the death will have to be decided the old fashioned way, with ship closing in to point blank range and settling things with guns. Naturally, this mean future warships with more and bigger guns and maybe even armor will hold an advantage. And with the increasing threat of suicide drone boats being well demonstrated in Ukraine, new surface combat ship will likely need to be refitted with secondary guns In other words, BATTLESHIPS ARE COMMING BACK BABY!!!
I'd imagine the difference in effectiveness of the respective surface to air defenses boils down to different eras - you said yourself that Sea Power was based on 80's tech and weapons, while DCS is using current and even slightly forward looking tech. I'd say the difference probably makes sense.
I would imagine that’s absolutely correct, but I do wonder as they have tested older tech on this channel too, and if I remember correctly (big if) and the effectiveness was less but still greater than Seapower… Someone please correct me on that
I do recall that the lack of look-down-shoot-down capability severely limits the ability for missiles to intercept lowflying targets. This was the case for pretty much everything in Sea Power except for systems that entered service in the late 70s onwards.
Is there like a maximum minimum for the blue ships to shoot their missiles an anti-submarine warfare and anything else they might have on the ship? Because it looks like the reds were within that limit and they were able to kind of use everything. On your own time see if you can move them to a four to five mile distance and see what happens if the blues can somewhat use more other weapon systems. And if there is a different result let us know.
Awe, the boom-boom battles were so quick. It appears the red ships were killing the blue ships with cannon fire. Perhaps a funky cannon/autocannon damage value? If any of those aren't CH mods, I'd put money on a modder bias hah. 😀 I say that, as the two blue ships were eliminated at the same exact time simultaneously in both rounds, but only one ASM was fired on the red scoreboard, and one second after a second red ASM was fired, both blue ships show up as killed.
Historically we could say the Sam’s have been less effective than we see in DCS. DCS seems to be the equivalent of perfect crews, and the flat earth model it uses is frankly a huge problem for the navy stuff.
For 1980s and earlier era missiles, I think sea power is right. In the pre fixed phase array radar and datalink days, taking down vampires are really hard. However the same is not true today as we can see in the red sea, small area with a lot of Ashm strikes yet not a single modern warship was hit.
Fact is, we'll see how effective anti ship missiles defenses REALLY are if a China-Taiwan-US war ever breaks out.... could work better than expected... or be totally useless.
You have the Constellation and Type 26 reversed, 2 type 26's are structurally complete but being fitted out with their systems ( HMS Glasgow & HMS Cardiff ) and another 3 are being built ( HMS Belfast, HMS Birmingham & HMS Sheffield ) , whereas with the Constellation one is currently being bulit ( USS Constellation ), with 0 being fitted out, Type 26 will have two ships in service before the first Constellation completes sea trials as things are currently progressing..
Those 2 classes have literally zero to do with each other. They’re completely different vessels, designed and built by completely different shipyards (F124s by Blohm & Voss, De Zeven Provinciens by Damen). They only share the APAR - Smart L surveillance radar configuration but that was (and still is) a module package offered by Thales.
S-400 has been tested in Ukraine against Strom Shadow - very similar to NSM - and has absolutely been found wanting. If S-400 can be beaten 80% of the time by a 20 year old missile, I'm not sure how much of a chance these ships would have IRL.
As much as I think seapower has a ton of potential, the way it handles missile intercepts is very un-sim-like, the defensive system literally have a percentage chance of killing an incoming missile, so it's all just rolling dice.
Great timing for this video Cap, as a discussion of Sea Power versus DCS naval modelling is quite interesting. I hope the Sea Power dev team is able to use (hopefully) higher than projected sales revenues and increase the size of their team, as it is going to require a lot of development to get every proper feature Sea Power requires to truly bring it up to speed. Sea Power has the better core technology coding to use as a base game engine to simulate certain aspects of warfare, such as the functionality of using visual, radar, sonar, and electronic emissions for detection and mimicking proper radar tracks on display. Also, the existence of submarine functionality with depth layers, wake-homing and wire-guided torpedoes, passive and active sonar, sonar buoys, towed arrays, and so on are also vital core functions across all eras. I hope the engine allows for modeling of RCS for modern assets. However, I have some concerns over the SP engine when it comes to aircraft and missiles, as I simply have no idea how Sea Power is currently modelling their physics, let alone the sensors like radar. For example, I wonder how they are determining missile speed and drag over long distances and whether aircraft have actual lift or they're just assigned values to emulate flight (I think it's an emulation based on the current movement of aircraft, but I hope I'm wrong).
Things like aircraft having actual lift and missile drag are things that don't actually matter to the game. It's a large scale strategy game, it could literally just be a 2d map tbh.
@@tellyheadlol4258 Yup, I guess that should work based on the way the game is currently setup with variables and probabilities all listed within text files. I suppose it would just come down to an increasingly more complex series of changes in the assigned velocities and associating something like a fuel percentage to change based on the correlation to time spent at certain speeds and altitude settings (per the user's commands). It's a different philosophy to a sim like DCS, so I have to adjust the way of thinking.
@@jamison884 comes to a time cost to user happiness thing. For the amount of resources and time it would cost to add these features, I'm not sure that many people would really notice. It's already very in depth, far more than necessary, so I personally am fine with how it id
Looking at videos of Ukraine drone\HIMARS\ATACMS vs sites protected by S300\S400 the Russian anti air defense seams lacking. Is this similar to what they use on their ships?
why isn't the FREMM in the list? the constellation class hasn't even been built yet, the FREMM is considered one of the best if not the best frigate in the world (hence why the US picked it as a base for the constellation class)
The Seapower game is set in the 80's. The SAMs were not that great at the time and it was relatively easy to spoof the seekers. A Block I vs Block IV are world's apart with entirely different capabilities so they just weren't that effective until you got to the late 80's and into the 90's through to present day. If you use the Mission Editor you can select later models of ships with upgraded SAMs with better seekers. Also, you can assign flights to the Formations in the Editor and assign them roles.
I'm hoping we get the seahawk at some point, those were around the same time as the Oliver Hazard Perry class, and maybe the Toconderoga with VLS, or Arleigh Burke with VLS, not sure when American VLS came out though.
@@Spendingryan There is a mod that puts the late 80's versions of these ships in, and the VLS Tico is among them. These early seekers are just Sparrow SARH and are SO easily spoofed.
VLS is intresting, how does a UK ship ge back from the east med to a home port to reload , and still be in fighting shape to defend agasint russian subs the whole trip home to reload?
Its probably going to be a very harsh realization when modern naval powers fight eachother: Their anti-missile shield is more there for crew morale than anything, lot will get through and losses will be unacceptably high. Whole ship types will have to be retired and surface fleets will not look anything like they do today in the future, they may not even be fully surface vessels, more semi-submersibles.
Safest bet for real life would surely be somewhere in between, like say 50% - I think ship borne SAM in DCS are probably too good, given what (luckily little) action they've recently seen in reality in the Black Sea and Red Sea.
Constellation isn't even built and last i heard only had 90% of its design done. There are 2 type 26s which have currently been built but are currently getting fitted out !!
Cool, that's awesome to hear, sadly though aren't older frigates getting scrapped, though? I know we dont have the resources to operate newer and older ships together, but America does have the resources to use older equipment still like the Sea Harrier, on one of their smaller assault carriers, whereas we got rid of our Harriers a while ago in the UK.
@Spendingryan US do still yous Harrier's not sea harriers tho but they are retiring them i believe next year are so.. and they will be replaced with the f35b which is already on a few LHA. And also yes we are retiring and scrapping some ship's but they were planned to be retired but its happening a couple of years to early because the original plan was to swap one for one, one old ship for 1 new ship like type 26 are type 31 but they have decided to move the retirements forward but at the end of the day we knew they were going to be retired but just not so soon !!
@@duckmartin9853 my bad, yeah Harriers, think I got confused with the UK one? That's a shame they are being retired, the F35B is a cool jet though and much better!
@Spendingryan True it is a very good aircraft but it does have some down sides tho like it can't carry as much ordnance as something like the harrier gr9 even when the f35b is in beast mode still can't compete with the harrier gr9 but can still carry some very advance and deadly ordnance !!
@@AyOuB.God-soldier which have already been shot down by 90's patriot systems in Ukraine so not like Zircons matter that much against vastly more capable AEGIS systems on Arleigh Burkes and Constellations..
@@AyOuB.God-soldiermight be wrong but I think the Zircon has a smaller payload maybe? That might be why Currenthill is using the other missile with the larger payload, also, could be wrong again, but I think a military analyst did say that the Zircon may have to slow down to hit a moving target, something to do with plasma generated at extreme speeds blocking the sensor, but they might have made a new sensor?
I think the defensive surface to air systems are too effective in DCS and not effective enough in Sea Power. I cant speak to the DCS modern systems in real life but I worked on surface to air defensive systems in the 80s on a Spruance Class DD.
F-124 is 20 years old!!! All others are totally Newc(054, Gorshkow) or not even existing (Constellation, Type 26), what an unfair comparison for F-124!!
On a hunch, I'm guessing the problem might be that DCS does not have the model/assets for F-126. Unfortunate, as it looks quite sexy, not to mention the significant difference in armaments.
@@ddshiranuithe F126 would be a bad pick too cuz that is a dedicated ASW frigate class. The upcoming F127s would be a better pick, those are the air defence frigate „replacements“ for the F124 starting construction next year. Although those 64 VLS cell 11.500t ships are only frigates on paper.
@@dopepopeurban6129 I think the irony would be that even though it's got a different specialization, 126 still has better anti-ship capability than 124 purely by being larger and carrying more modern armaments, unless I misremember? But you're right, I guess by now 127's design is sufficiently "locked in" that one could have her show up in a game!
@ in terms of ASuW and AAW, the F126 carries less than the F124 but it features more recent missiles (2x8 Mk41 exclusively armed with the ESSM IIb on the F126 || 4x8 Mk41 with ESSM and SM2 on the F124 || excluding the 2x21 RIM-116 Ram found on all german frigates, corvettes and upcoming joint support vessels) down to short/medium range self defence. However, it does carry the NSM as opposed to the harpoon and it’s the first warship equipped with an upgraded version of the MLG-27 SeaSnake RCWS which is now rated to intercept drones and missiles, so essentially using the SesSnake as a CIWS. Would love to see how these systems perform.
Germany navy was/is badly underfunded and missiles are really expensive. It's probably depressingly realistic that they would be hesitant to fire them.
The galleon battle would be better if you could figure out a way to get them to do guns only (though I guess the knife fight missile launches are their own interest), but like maybe a way to script the Frigates to close in once missiles are Winchester (tho idk if that scripting is available in DCS) As far as the two mini fleets able to defeat each others offense... it seems like the question would come down to which side can launch a follow on strike fastest (i.e either fleet, now out of/exceedingly low on air defense missiles running across something like a Burke or Type 55D would be in exceedingly serious trouble, or which side can get their boats back to port, rearmed with fresh missiles and sortie back out... which side has more missiles to reload in the first place, etc etc, a bunch of wibbly wobbly factors that maybe better represented by some large persistent Sea Power campaign, but I don't think neither game really can even come close to accurately representing...)
sea power SAM being ineffective is more accurate. its a known difficult issues even with modern SAM systems cruise missiles are notoriously difficult to intercept, especially if its supersonic.
Ive oten wondered ... if you're going to send a huge salvo of really expensive missiles, why not send a whole bunch of cheaper decoys so the enemy doesn't know which is which and they'll depleast their defence missiles sooner, giving your expensive missiles a better chance of success. I remember on some of your Ukraine videos they had decoys.
expensive missile parts: the engine/motor, nav computer, radar...leave any of these out and your decoy is easy to tell apart or not usable. Leave them in and your decoy isn't much cheaper while taking up limited VLS cells...
The USA toyed with doing a pure radar guided missle system back in the late 80's to deplete ciws and defensive missle systems. cost was not and is not a consideration. The first hurdle was if you are being fired upon the fleet would engage with everything. If after the first warning of anything incoming you have any delay the fleet could be damaged to the point it would not be possible to fire two salvos even 10 seconds apart. Best having a few extra missiles to overcome any defensive systems
15:45: I was wondering the same thing earlier, and yeah, nobody really knows which is more realistic. I'm sure plenty of people _think_ they know, and there's going to be many different answers people "know" to be "obviously correct"... but ultimately, this has never happened so nobody knows for sure, and hopefully we never do. Personally I think I'd prefer in the middle, where neither missile is almost certainly going to win. Unfortunately that's not either of the options. Maybe CH can learn Sea Power modding? 😄
With the cost of these missiles and the effectiveness of anti air missiles one does wonder whether a battery of 15 inch Naval guns with a range of up to 16 miles would be more useful.
DCS: NATO ships cant use their missiles for close range combat Real Life: The NATO Ships would have Marines lined up from bow to stern all equipped with Javelin missiles firing at the enemy ships while chanting OOH RAH
Why does 22350 have 16 cells of strike weapons, but only 4 anti-ship and 4 strategic cruise missiles are loaded. In the remaining 8 we carry air? Why, for example, not 16x3M55M. most likely cell load: 8x 3M55M + 8x 91RE1 - escort 16x 3M55M (or 3M22 "zircon") - anti-ship 8x 3M14 + 4x 3M55M + 4x 91RE1 - strike 16x 3M14 - anti-land mission
Just a note on the Type 26 Frigates both HMS Glasgow and HMS Cardiff have been launched and will be commissioned late 2026 for Glasgow and early 2028 for Belfast... so they are further down the line the Constellation Frigate of which only 1 is under construction... and as to the Sachsen she was holding onto her missiles to safe the German government money...
the Constellation not ready until 2029 now because of major delays, also they are trying to get a second yard to start building them to get it back on schedule
The 84G Harpoon is not an error. The G stands for german, so this is license built in Germany, maybe with the one or the other different specifications/parts, but in general identically.
I’ve been enjoying Seapower, but occasionally getting frustrated with bugs and or limits of the mission editor… however, the stark contrast of this video really made me appreciate Seapower for what it is only a few weeks after launch.
I hope that Seapower improves its aircraft mechanics so the CSG battles are a little bit more comparable. Sooner or later, CAP, Seapower will have modern ship mods and make it far more superior for these simulations than DCS.
Theres already mods that are beginning to add animated MK41 VLS, like NTU mod
Honestly I can't wait to see a modern PLAN depicted in Sea Power, as well as a WW2 mod incorporating the '43 USN and IJN.
@@SatThuVoBui i cant wait the times when we will have ww1 dreadnought and modern ship mod in sea power
thanks for pronouncing Sachsen properly
Best of luck Cap, hope the new job works out for you. You deserve more for from RUclips. Many thanks for the entertainment.
Thanks, scary times.
When will sea power be "modernised"? As a patrion member I thank you for continuing to put out content. Keep it real cap. What they give they can tale away.
There is already a mod on the Steam Workshop that adds upgraded early 1990s varaints of some of the vessels. That's as modern as it goes so far though.
sea power is supposed to be within a specific timeframe (1950s to 1980s)
Just wait for the DLC
@@namsangi1231 For now. Give it half a year or maybe a year, and you will see modern stuff there too. :)
Only by mods, the developers are focusing on the Cold War.
I would like to see a video on a NATO task force against the Russian Baltic fleet. You could do the German frigates, possibly French and British warships, a US destroyer, and 2 Polish Oliver Hazard Perry frigates vs 2 Neustrashimy, 4 Stereguschiyy, 4 Karakurt, 4 more Karakurt pretending to be Buyan M, and 4 Tarantul.
Also possibly throw in some air assets, too
We all would. RUclips won't allow it.
@@Bawbag68 That.. is right.
Probably the difference in interception rate is because it's a different era. Since 1980, air defense has advanced more than anti-ship missiles. And also, as you said, the ships here are launching only a few ASMs at a time, instead of all of them in a huge volley. The latter would probably make more sense, and may overwhelm the other side's air defenses.
There is a world of difference between the Gulf War Patriot and the current Patriot and I would imagine it's similar for other types of AD systems. Sensors, electronics and computational equipment just weren't up to the task in the 80s.
That said, I still think the interception rate is too high. As we can see in Ukraine, there are ways to get through the AD screen.
Honestly the crazy Iranian volley was probably the first large cruise missile volley ever, it's just too much against normal restrained conflict - especially since you don't wanna be naked for the next week and run home to restock. Since that tactically is just as if you had been sunk...
You would normally programme you ASM to go via various waypoints to approach the target simultaneously from all directions.
Frigate on frigate violence, a naval battle indeed
Valued frigate violence!
Red winning the galleon battle probably has to do with the main guns. 130mm, 100mm, 100mm vs. 127mm, 76mm, 57mm.
The fire ratio of the little ones is still so much higher...
At least against underarmored things of today you would shred so fast...
@@udirt true, but the explosive power of all modern shells is greater than the. The 57mm is better than it was a couple decades ago, but so are the Russian and Chinese large bore shells. Just a couple hits by one or either of the big guns would be enough to knock out a lot of fighting power.
@@udirt sure, but since they all have similar sizes; the bigger rounds will always do more damage also the russian 130 reloads EXTREMELY fast, and has been documented to have a fire rate of up to 40 rounds per minute, PER BARREL and since its double barreled, its maximum fire rate can be as high as 80 rounds per minute by contrast the type 26 127mm manages a maximum of 20 rounds per minute and the ship only carries one of them so just the gorchov can put out the same volume of fire as 4 type 26's with just one gorchov but again, thats just a gun difference obviously the US 57mm fires way faster, but as you can probablly tell from the fact its almost only a third of the caliber, there is much less in the shell to do damage with, assuming it can even pen to begin with
I was waiting for this comment ... Russian guns are just more plentiful and bigger... they are more suited to shore bombardment and close in anti ship..
@@udirt Smaller calibre guns do have their advantages (e.g. in AA warfare). But the larger shells will always pack more punch per shot which translates to a much favourable damage radius. Doesn't help when newer guns in the Russian and Chinese arsenals have increased rate of fire.
If you can, run the galleon battle after removing the missiles, so they are forced to go with guns.
It looked like the Guns are what made the difference anyway. I'm guessing the russian 100 is just more effective then the 76 and the 57mm.
I think what really happened was the anti submarine missile just wrecked the blues. Guns alone wouldn't sink those ships that fast.
In the beginning of the anti-ship missile age, the antiship missile had the advantage, later the ships anti air defensive missile capability caught up and surpassed the antiship missile. So I'd say both are relatively correct. But it's nearly back at a balance again in the last 5 - 7 years..
Fun fact: The anti-submarine mortars are only anti-submarine because they also have a depth/timed fuse, they have two: impact and timed/depth which is why we saw them used on MTLB platforms in Ukraine as anti-building solutions (nothing fixes problems like one of those salvoing into a apartment building).
Keep in mind that Sea Power is set in the 80's vs Modern Day for DCS. Anti-missile tech has come a long way in 40 years.
Good luck with the new job!
I was looking forward to seeing the Sachsen
ITS FINALLY HERE THE SACHSEN😍😍😍😍
Damn CH. The Model is STUNNING🤩
Why are DCS SAMs so accurate? 40-60 years difference in ship and computer technology. Having some falibility is what makes Seapower more interesting for me.
It's mainly the time difference. Think about the PAC-1 Patriots failing to stop SCUDS and then compare that to a modern PAC-3 Patriot.
but arguably russian ships are in general more fallible today than they were at the height of the cold war.
@@5Andysalive I would say that is due to the fact that some of their ships had very little upgrades compared to their peers. Just look at say, a Type-45, Alreigh Burke flight III, and a Type-055 next to their current destroyer fleet.
With the current Israel vs Iran dust up, we can actually see what 2010s AD tech vs 80-90s Strike tech compared. That most AD still requires more than 1-2 per projectile to get a respectable PK, so we could probably see a more equal system requiring 3-4 per.
We don't really know the PK of the missiles. I would suspect that for incredibly advanced missiles such as the SM-3, SM-2Bk3C, SM-6Bk2, and ESSM bk 2, they have very high PK against munitions they are tailored to fight. Considering the ESSMBk2 and SM-2Bk3C have an active radar homing system onboard, and the SM-2Bk3C has the same seeker as the SM-6, they will be incredibly capable against modern munitions. I would hazard a guess of 1.3-1.1 missiles would be required, but realistically 2 will be fired at each threat thanks to the shoot shoot look doctrine.
@@wolfmaster0579 Ukraine has been confirmed to be using the lastest Patriot Missile, and they still require 2-3 for every Air Launched Hypersonic Khinzal.
@@Sufferingzify There is no confirmation on that. There are people who throw around suggestions or their experiences, but no broad stats.
@@Sufferingzify Also, there are 2 variants of PAC3, meaning we don't know the variant nor the number of them actually fired, with one of them. Additionally, we don't know the attack vector or system positioning of the attacks. Too many unknowns to properly gauge the systems capabilities.
I'm a simple man, I see Type 26, I click.
Of all 3 that will probably be built
@@jugganaut33 Yes, Cap's information on the T26 was a bit off. He said the first had been laid down, but there are actually 2 being fitted out now, Glasgow and Cardiff, with Belfast and Birmingham under construction.
Personally i prefer dcs, but thats mostly because i prefer modern stuff to cold war era stuff. i just love seeing the vlss spit out missiles in quick succession
Even if Sea Power extended its time line to 1990s, the change would be significant ! Lacking of VLS in Sea power is frustrating.
Nice battle and new ship, after the next Gorshkov is released the rest will have 24-32 offensive vls cells instead of 16. Will you guys be modeling and using gorshkovs likes this and the original vls count or will you just stick to the model you have now? Also the gorshkovs would have been interesting with zircons in this battle.
Another entertaining video.
Just note the ESSM are quad packed into the Mk41 VLS so doing a missile count you can have more than what is given here.
The RBU-6000 can be used for shore bombardment and has also been repurposed to help defend against kamikaze drone boats in the current Russo-Ukrainian War
the F124 being a specialized Anti-Air Frigate the size of a destroyer... I bet it can defend against teh SAm of the 3 ships on it's own
Comparing 1980s tech to 2020, is like comparing 1940s tech to 1980s.. massive difference.
Might as well bung in HMS Vanguard and see how she would have done. A lot more armour for a start
Loved it! Just to drive home the point/request; for the 'galleon battles' I would like to see these battles with guns only, sides close from 10 Nm just to allow the vessels with the bigger or better gun systems to gain their rightful advantage, especially if they are bow mounted as opposed to stern mounted?
Not-at-all connected, I propose the Cap is the second-most sexy and most awesome man on the planet (if you need any tips, just let me know?).
If they add the Constellation and Type 26 frigates, they could also have added the upcoming German frigate F126, which is also already under construction (starting in 2023 and scheduled to enter service in 2028), instead of the obsolete and 20-year-old F124 frigate. By the way, the RGM-84 Harpoon on the F124 (and F125) frigates has been replaced in the German Navy by the Naval Strike Missile since 2022.
19:53 how much are your feet pics, anyway?
Makes sense to me that Cap'd sell Imperial pics instead of Metric pics.
Prices vary but I'm aiming for the extremely wealthy market. Princes and sheiks.
@@grimreapers😂
Great work! How do you hide the UI in Sea Power? I looked in the settings and couldn't find a hotkey to do it.
If I remember correctly, I think it's backspace, and F1 to like F4 are the cool camera angles.
This was great but could not keep up with what was going on! 😅
I'd be interested to know if they would fire the missiles in this fashion IRL. Or if they would ripple fire them in such a way that the fastest caught up with the slowest in time to enter the SAM envelope at the same time? And so the swarm arrives at the same time?
I think you're looking for the term 'time on target attack', and yes, staggering the launches so they all arrive together would absolutely make sense. In a previous GR Naval battle I saw Spear-5s catch up to a swarm of Spear-3s right as they reached engagment range, the 5s did very well in the chaos.
In real life they would fire more tactically but in DCS I don't have that control of vessels.
Love the various engagements CAP but question, does DCS or Sea Power have simulated wind? One of the things about the carriers is turning into the wind to launch. I think it would be great it letting Carrier Based Forces join up and head into the fight in better formations. Love the work,Cap! Cheers!
They DCs has simulated wind. GR has done heavy weather carrier landings. I'm unsure if it's in game yet for Sea Power, but the mission editor let's you set it's direction and sea state (being how badly the wind makes wavez)
@@NemoGraynameA8 Thank you for the clarification Nemo.
@@NemoGraynameA8 I am pretty sure it is since carriers tend to leave their orderd course when launching aircraft
The Spear 5 is a Franco-British missile still in development, it should enter service only in early 2030... Right now UK frigates are due to replace their old harpoons but struggling with intermediate replacement due to budget contraints. Neither game is realistic. Both games over estimate the performance of Russian (and Chinese) weapons and ships. Smaller NATO sea skimming anti-ship missiles have been very hard to intercept until very recently, and still are (as demonstrated by the loss of the Russian Slava class cruiser in the Black sea recently). Some NATO ships can intercept very fast missiles (US and French ships have been intercepting balistic missiles in the red sea) which requires extremely fast response systems and very well trained crew but we don't really know about supersonic sea skimming missiles (although Russian and Chinese missiles do not fly as low as NATO missiles and are more easily detected). What should be reminded is that electronic capacities (detection, guidance and EW) and crew skill are very important in the equation, and low radar signature ships or missiles (like the French frigates and recent NATO missiles) is also an important asset, coupled to electronic counter measures.
Bro is crying cuz his fantasy of a weak Russia and China ain’t true.
UK ships are generally deploying with NSM now instead of Harpoon
@tetraxis3011 and yet Russia lost the flagship of their Black Sea Fleet to a country with no Navy😂😂
Cope HARDER!!!
It's okay I understand, kind of like when you grow up and you meet your idol and you realize that they're really not good people. I figure it's the same for the Russian / Chinese fanboys😂
@@tetraxis3011😂
@@Wyomingchief 1. Ukraine does have a Navy.
2. That flagship was older than Ukraine itself, of course a modern missile would sink it.
3. Ukraine has failed to even damage a single modern Russian warship. (They have claimed that they sunk the Admiral Makarov in 3 different occasions only for satellite imagery to confirm the Admiral Makarov is perfectly afloat. Every. Single. Time.)
Gun range battle is brilliant.
I've been saying for awhile...
It seems battles between peer navies are just going to end with the combatants eating up each others ASMs and SAM interceptors, which means a fight to the death will have to be decided the old fashioned way, with ship closing in to point blank range and settling things with guns. Naturally, this mean future warships with more and bigger guns and maybe even armor will hold an advantage.
And with the increasing threat of suicide drone boats being well demonstrated in Ukraine, new surface combat ship will likely need to be refitted with secondary guns
In other words, BATTLESHIPS ARE COMMING BACK BABY!!!
I'd imagine the difference in effectiveness of the respective surface to air defenses boils down to different eras - you said yourself that Sea Power was based on 80's tech and weapons, while DCS is using current and even slightly forward looking tech. I'd say the difference probably makes sense.
I would imagine that’s absolutely correct, but I do wonder as they have tested older tech on this channel too, and if I remember correctly (big if) and the effectiveness was less but still greater than Seapower…
Someone please correct me on that
I do recall that the lack of look-down-shoot-down capability severely limits the ability for missiles to intercept lowflying targets. This was the case for pretty much everything in Sea Power except for systems that entered service in the late 70s onwards.
Pretty sad to hear that you need the second job (onlyfans) for the bills. So many hours of content I enjoy trough the years
Great Vid Super Capt.
Tell us about the 2nd job.
Is there like a maximum minimum for the blue ships to shoot their missiles an anti-submarine warfare and anything else they might have on the ship? Because it looks like the reds were within that limit and they were able to kind of use everything.
On your own time see if you can move them to a four to five mile distance and see what happens if the blues can somewhat use more other weapon systems. And if there is a different result let us know.
Nice new title pic!
Awe, the boom-boom battles were so quick. It appears the red ships were killing the blue ships with cannon fire. Perhaps a funky cannon/autocannon damage value? If any of those aren't CH mods, I'd put money on a modder bias hah. 😀
I say that, as the two blue ships were eliminated at the same exact time simultaneously in both rounds, but only one ASM was fired on the red scoreboard, and one second after a second red ASM was fired, both blue ships show up as killed.
the AK-130 is no joke
@@AdieritNeither is the 76mm Oto Melara, fires a lot faster and both sides aren't armored
Bit funny, gonna travel by ship in these exact waters in a few days😅
Be interesting to run the missiles boat contest in DCS, if the models are available. Should be an easy win for the Nanuchkas?
Historically we could say the Sam’s have been less effective than we see in DCS. DCS seems to be the equivalent of perfect crews, and the flat earth model it uses is frankly a huge problem for the navy stuff.
Those friggin Frigits!
For 1980s and earlier era missiles, I think sea power is right. In the pre fixed phase array radar and datalink days, taking down vampires are really hard. However the same is not true today as we can see in the red sea, small area with a lot of Ashm strikes yet not a single modern warship was hit.
I think that Sam's in sea power are less effective because they are older missiles, also ship guns are more effective in sea power than dcs
Seapower is a redo of the old Harpoon game
Fact is, we'll see how effective anti ship missiles defenses REALLY are if a China-Taiwan-US war ever breaks out.... could work better than expected... or be totally useless.
You have the Constellation and Type 26 reversed, 2 type 26's are structurally complete but being fitted out with their systems ( HMS Glasgow & HMS Cardiff ) and another 3 are being built ( HMS Belfast, HMS Birmingham & HMS Sheffield ) , whereas with the Constellation one is currently being bulit ( USS Constellation ), with 0 being fitted out, Type 26 will have two ships in service before the first Constellation completes sea trials as things are currently progressing..
Close only counts in Horseshoes, Hand Grenades and Thermo Nuclear Weapons, Cap.
The Sachsen-class is developed in conjuction with the Dutch Zeven Provincien class. So in total they built 7 if these beauties.
Those 2 classes have literally zero to do with each other. They’re completely different vessels, designed and built by completely different shipyards (F124s by Blohm & Voss, De Zeven Provinciens by Damen). They only share the APAR - Smart L surveillance radar configuration but that was (and still is) a module package offered by Thales.
@@dopepopeurban6129 Literally zero, lol. Early development was done in cooperation between Germany and The Netherlands with Thales Netherlands.
S-400 has been tested in Ukraine against Strom Shadow - very similar to NSM - and has absolutely been found wanting. If S-400 can be beaten 80% of the time by a 20 year old missile, I'm not sure how much of a chance these ships would have IRL.
As much as I think seapower has a ton of potential, the way it handles missile intercepts is very un-sim-like, the defensive system literally have a percentage chance of killing an incoming missile, so it's all just rolling dice.
Yes I agree, I've also noticed this.
Great timing for this video Cap, as a discussion of Sea Power versus DCS naval modelling is quite interesting. I hope the Sea Power dev team is able to use (hopefully) higher than projected sales revenues and increase the size of their team, as it is going to require a lot of development to get every proper feature Sea Power requires to truly bring it up to speed.
Sea Power has the better core technology coding to use as a base game engine to simulate certain aspects of warfare, such as the functionality of using visual, radar, sonar, and electronic emissions for detection and mimicking proper radar tracks on display. Also, the existence of submarine functionality with depth layers, wake-homing and wire-guided torpedoes, passive and active sonar, sonar buoys, towed arrays, and so on are also vital core functions across all eras. I hope the engine allows for modeling of RCS for modern assets.
However, I have some concerns over the SP engine when it comes to aircraft and missiles, as I simply have no idea how Sea Power is currently modelling their physics, let alone the sensors like radar. For example, I wonder how they are determining missile speed and drag over long distances and whether aircraft have actual lift or they're just assigned values to emulate flight (I think it's an emulation based on the current movement of aircraft, but I hope I'm wrong).
Things like aircraft having actual lift and missile drag are things that don't actually matter to the game. It's a large scale strategy game, it could literally just be a 2d map tbh.
@@tellyheadlol4258 Yup, I guess that should work based on the way the game is currently setup with variables and probabilities all listed within text files. I suppose it would just come down to an increasingly more complex series of changes in the assigned velocities and associating something like a fuel percentage to change based on the correlation to time spent at certain speeds and altitude settings (per the user's commands).
It's a different philosophy to a sim like DCS, so I have to adjust the way of thinking.
@@jamison884 comes to a time cost to user happiness thing. For the amount of resources and time it would cost to add these features, I'm not sure that many people would really notice. It's already very in depth, far more than necessary, so I personally am fine with how it id
Looking at videos of Ukraine drone\HIMARS\ATACMS vs sites protected by S300\S400 the Russian anti air defense seams lacking. Is this similar to what they use on their ships?
why isn't the FREMM in the list? the constellation class hasn't even been built yet, the FREMM is considered one of the best if not the best frigate in the world (hence why the US picked it as a base for the constellation class)
the devs didn't add it?
the devs didn't add it?
I work on the Constellation class ships. Still got a year and half until FFG 62 is ready. Love seeing it in action.
Did Cap start an OF?
Thank you!
The Seapower game is set in the 80's. The SAMs were not that great at the time and it was relatively easy to spoof the seekers. A Block I vs Block IV are world's apart with entirely different capabilities so they just weren't that effective until you got to the late 80's and into the 90's through to present day. If you use the Mission Editor you can select later models of ships with upgraded SAMs with better seekers. Also, you can assign flights to the Formations in the Editor and assign them roles.
I'm hoping we get the seahawk at some point, those were around the same time as the Oliver Hazard Perry class, and maybe the Toconderoga with VLS, or Arleigh Burke with VLS, not sure when American VLS came out though.
@@Spendingryan There is a mod that puts the late 80's versions of these ships in, and the VLS Tico is among them. These early seekers are just Sparrow SARH and are SO easily spoofed.
VLS is intresting, how does a UK ship ge back from the east med to a home port to reload , and still be in fighting shape to defend agasint russian subs the whole trip home to reload?
Die Söchsen. 00:02 The coat of arms is the wrong way around, front to back.
It's meant to be facing the ship?
Its probably going to be a very harsh realization when modern naval powers fight eachother: Their anti-missile shield is more there for crew morale than anything, lot will get through and losses will be unacceptably high. Whole ship types will have to be retired and surface fleets will not look anything like they do today in the future, they may not even be fully surface vessels, more semi-submersibles.
Can you not disable the missiles for the galleon battles?
Yes BUT it's a real PITA to do and galleon is only a bit of fun.
Constellation is expected to be delivered in 2029. It is NOT "almost in service"
Safest bet for real life would surely be somewhere in between, like say 50% - I think ship borne SAM in DCS are probably too good, given what (luckily little) action they've recently seen in reality in the Black Sea and Red Sea.
Wait a minute from last I remember the F124 has 2 bus master close in supply systems alongside multiple smaller machine guns ,
Constellation isn't even built and last i heard only had 90% of its design done. There are 2 type 26s which have currently been built but are currently getting fitted out !!
Cool, that's awesome to hear, sadly though aren't older frigates getting scrapped, though? I know we dont have the resources to operate newer and older ships together, but America does have the resources to use older equipment still like the Sea Harrier, on one of their smaller assault carriers, whereas we got rid of our Harriers a while ago in the UK.
@Spendingryan US do still yous Harrier's not sea harriers tho but they are retiring them i believe next year are so.. and they will be replaced with the f35b which is already on a few LHA. And also yes we are retiring and scrapping some ship's but they were planned to be retired but its happening a couple of years to early because the original plan was to swap one for one, one old ship for 1 new ship like type 26 are type 31 but they have decided to move the retirements forward but at the end of the day we knew they were going to be retired but just not so soon !!
@@duckmartin9853 my bad, yeah Harriers, think I got confused with the UK one? That's a shame they are being retired, the F35B is a cool jet though and much better!
@Spendingryan True it is a very good aircraft but it does have some down sides tho like it can't carry as much ordnance as something like the harrier gr9 even when the f35b is in beast mode still can't compete with the harrier gr9 but can still carry some very advance and deadly ordnance !!
Design is not done but they starting to build. I work at the ship yard. Q1 2026 for the first then every 6 months after another.
The f124 will receive NSMs to replace the harpoons
And the gurshkov is already equipped with zircon missiles
@@AyOuB.God-soldier which have already been shot down by 90's patriot systems in Ukraine so not like Zircons matter that much against vastly more capable AEGIS systems on Arleigh Burkes and Constellations..
@@AyOuB.God-soldierapparently
@@AyOuB.God-soldiermight be wrong but I think the Zircon has a smaller payload maybe? That might be why Currenthill is using the other missile with the larger payload, also, could be wrong again, but I think a military analyst did say that the Zircon may have to slow down to hit a moving target, something to do with plasma generated at extreme speeds blocking the sensor, but they might have made a new sensor?
@@Spendingryan I think it will be much much harder to interspersed than the P800
VLS added to seapower for Nato ships. Its amazing for a mod made right after the game was released.
Hey.. I know this area!
One of the divisions is just 40kms from where I live!
Cool
I think the defensive surface to air systems are too effective in DCS and not effective enough in Sea Power. I cant speak to the DCS modern systems in real life but I worked on surface to air defensive systems in the 80s on a Spruance Class DD.
At this point, the Constellation class frigate rapidly becoming the new LCS, I’d rather the US just buy 30 or so Type 26 frigates
Oof, topical.
Blue: about 186 SAM, 40 AShM
Red: 152 SAM, 32 AShM
thx
F-124 is 20 years old!!! All others are totally Newc(054, Gorshkow) or not even existing (Constellation, Type 26),
what an unfair comparison for F-124!!
On a hunch, I'm guessing the problem might be that DCS does not have the model/assets for F-126. Unfortunate, as it looks quite sexy, not to mention the significant difference in armaments.
@@ddshiranuithe F126 would be a bad pick too cuz that is a dedicated ASW frigate class. The upcoming F127s would be a better pick, those are the air defence frigate „replacements“ for the F124 starting construction next year. Although those 64 VLS cell 11.500t ships are only frigates on paper.
@@dopepopeurban6129 I think the irony would be that even though it's got a different specialization, 126 still has better anti-ship capability than 124 purely by being larger and carrying more modern armaments, unless I misremember? But you're right, I guess by now 127's design is sufficiently "locked in" that one could have her show up in a game!
@ in terms of ASuW and AAW, the F126 carries less than the F124 but it features more recent missiles (2x8 Mk41 exclusively armed with the ESSM IIb on the F126 || 4x8 Mk41 with ESSM and SM2 on the F124 || excluding the 2x21 RIM-116 Ram found on all german frigates, corvettes and upcoming joint support vessels) down to short/medium range self defence. However, it does carry the NSM as opposed to the harpoon and it’s the first warship equipped with an upgraded version of the MLG-27 SeaSnake RCWS which is now rated to intercept drones and missiles, so essentially using the SesSnake as a CIWS. Would love to see how these systems perform.
@@dopepopeurban6129 Ah yes, _Frigate_ .
MINT CAPT!
The unrealistic thing with these simulations is: It assumes all ships are fully ready for fight. lol
Expensive draw 😊
Cool ..if that's who you really are, but can you do that in an F-86?
I bet the constellation will be a really good ship once it’s complete but damn does the us need to start making these things
Wow, I was amazed at how well you pronounced "Sachsen" - that was perfect - not, what we germans expect from a ... brit?
Germany navy was/is badly underfunded and missiles are really expensive. It's probably depressingly realistic that they would be hesitant to fire them.
I think in DCS AD is to good (nearly perfect score), but in Sea Power it is way to bad (ineffective, CIWS almost unusable).
The galleon battle would be better if you could figure out a way to get them to do guns only (though I guess the knife fight missile launches are their own interest), but like maybe a way to script the Frigates to close in once missiles are Winchester (tho idk if that scripting is available in DCS)
As far as the two mini fleets able to defeat each others offense... it seems like the question would come down to which side can launch a follow on strike fastest (i.e either fleet, now out of/exceedingly low on air defense missiles running across something like a Burke or Type 55D would be in exceedingly serious trouble, or which side can get their boats back to port, rearmed with fresh missiles and sortie back out... which side has more missiles to reload in the first place, etc etc, a bunch of wibbly wobbly factors that maybe better represented by some large persistent Sea Power campaign, but I don't think neither game really can even come close to accurately representing...)
sea power SAM being ineffective is more accurate. its a known difficult issues even with modern SAM systems cruise missiles are notoriously difficult to intercept, especially if its supersonic.
Does anyone know if Currenthill wants to make mods for Sea Power?
Sea power is still in early access I think. not sure you can even mod it yet.
@@hughmungus2760 people have apparently modded it already
Ive oten wondered ... if you're going to send a huge salvo of really expensive missiles, why not send a whole bunch of cheaper decoys so the enemy doesn't know which is which and they'll depleast their defence missiles sooner, giving your expensive missiles a better chance of success. I remember on some of your Ukraine videos they had decoys.
expensive missile parts: the engine/motor, nav computer, radar...leave any of these out and your decoy is easy to tell apart or not usable. Leave them in and your decoy isn't much cheaper while taking up limited VLS cells...
The USA toyed with doing a pure radar guided missle system back in the late 80's to deplete ciws and defensive missle systems. cost was not and is not a consideration. The first hurdle was if you are being fired upon the fleet would engage with everything. If after the first warning of anything incoming you have any delay the fleet could be damaged to the point it would not be possible to fire two salvos even 10 seconds apart. Best having a few extra missiles to overcome any defensive systems
DCS best
15:45: I was wondering the same thing earlier, and yeah, nobody really knows which is more realistic. I'm sure plenty of people _think_ they know, and there's going to be many different answers people "know" to be "obviously correct"... but ultimately, this has never happened so nobody knows for sure, and hopefully we never do.
Personally I think I'd prefer in the middle, where neither missile is almost certainly going to win. Unfortunately that's not either of the options. Maybe CH can learn Sea Power modding? 😄
Am interested in knowing about it, please share me the link
With the cost of these missiles and the effectiveness of anti air missiles one does wonder whether a battery of 15 inch Naval guns with a range of up to 16 miles would be more useful.
DCS: NATO ships cant use their missiles for close range combat
Real Life: The NATO Ships would have Marines lined up from bow to stern all equipped with Javelin missiles firing at the enemy ships while chanting OOH RAH
You can't have an air rifle, Cap. You'll shoot your eye out.
To be fair, she's probably right...
@@grimreapers 😆Love your work, man!
Could you please use the Dutch ADCF Frigate next time. It's better than the German F124
Can you do the same with destroyers and cruisers
I think I've done them already, question mark?
The german radar needs some graffiti and the chinese radar needs eyes 😂
Why does 22350 have 16 cells of strike weapons, but only 4 anti-ship and 4 strategic cruise missiles are loaded. In the remaining 8 we carry air? Why, for example, not 16x3M55M.
most likely cell load:
8x 3M55M + 8x 91RE1 - escort
16x 3M55M (or 3M22 "zircon") - anti-ship
8x 3M14 + 4x 3M55M + 4x 91RE1 - strike
16x 3M14 - anti-land mission
bouth games are correct, it is the Tech difference