Could 6th Gen B-21 & 5th Gen F-22 Package Strike Mainland China? (WarGames 159) | DCS

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 29 сен 2024

Комментарии • 432

  • @Hitman1978
    @Hitman1978 Год назад +123

    I know it's really cool looking to fly formation with the B-21 especially with that livery, but a far better tactic would to have continued out in front 75-100 nm and dealt with all the air threats before the B-21 arrived. Just some food for thought. Great Video!

    • @ChiefsFireman
      @ChiefsFireman Год назад +13

      Agree. Keep 1-2 with the B-21 for cover, send the others ahead as scouts/clearing force.

    • @maiasdad
      @maiasdad Год назад +14

      But then how would you get the thumbnail photo?

    • @blackdeath4eternity
      @blackdeath4eternity Год назад +4

      not sure about 75-100nm but id say about 50, just enough to keep the enemy fighters engaged with yours & give it time to launch all missiles

    • @francismusso7644
      @francismusso7644 Год назад +1

      I agree with your tactics.

    • @Ken_Koonz
      @Ken_Koonz Год назад +4

      Rule of Cool trumps all.

  • @sampanyofella5832
    @sampanyofella5832 Год назад +136

    I've had a really tiring day and I've been a bit under the weather and was just hoping for the cure that your videos are. And, of course, you guys deliver with this incredible content. Thank you all of GR for what you do, and making everyone's days better, without fail.

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Год назад +30

      Pleasure

    • @sampanyofella5832
      @sampanyofella5832 Год назад +1

      Believe me it's mine too ^^@@grimreapers

    • @drrocketman7794
      @drrocketman7794 Год назад +4

      I feel ya man. My week has gone down the tubes.

    • @jamison884
      @jamison884 Год назад +2

      @@grimreapers I agree with this sentiment. I look forward to this winter and I hope we get even just one snow day (only a few dozen miles SW of NYC), so I can bundle up and watch GR videos with my cat.

    • @sampanyofella5832
      @sampanyofella5832 Год назад

      @@jamison884 Now you’ve got me hoping for that too lol. Kinda rare in south west England but it happened last year haha.

  • @steveturner3999
    @steveturner3999 Год назад +1

    I know it’s wasteful but using external tanks for the first 150 miles or more then dropping them would theoretically add 150 miles or more to the backend or allow faster speeds.

  • @clangerbasher
    @clangerbasher Год назад +1

    It's just so sci-fi. 🙃

  • @erasmus_locke
    @erasmus_locke Год назад +33

    I think you're really underestimating the stealthiness of the b21 vertical stabilizers make a huge difference in an airplanes radar cross section particularly for long wave radar. I fully believe that the b21 is more stealthy than the F-22 considering it's about 30 years newer and of course like I said no vertical stabilizers.

    • @Dreamin995
      @Dreamin995 Год назад +3

      Agree

    • @dextermorgan1
      @dextermorgan1 Год назад +1

      I believe you're right.

    • @ghlibisk67
      @ghlibisk67 10 месяцев назад +1

      I got 5:30 into the video and thought the same thing. Glad to see I'm not the only one.

  • @chris8612
    @chris8612 Год назад +18

    Weirdly the "Hello valued viewers" actually makes me feel valued as a viewer.😂
    Keep up the great content GR.

    • @dextermorgan1
      @dextermorgan1 Год назад

      Me too, yet I know I'm just some random blow hole from the internet. Lol

  • @mpeugeot
    @mpeugeot Год назад +157

    I promise you that the B-21 will have a lower signature than a Raptor.

    • @madlarkin8
      @madlarkin8 Год назад +48

      Go ahead and post that radar signature file for the rest of the class, or sit back down.

    • @skullcrushergamer1180
      @skullcrushergamer1180 Год назад +22

      Agreed b/c b-2 to has same rcs as a f-22 so it’s believed to be even more stealthy with new coating material etc

    • @mpeugeot
      @mpeugeot Год назад +34

      @@madlarkin8 you know better than that. Nice try. So you actually believe that the F-22 has a lower radar signature than the B-21. We know from public information that the F-23 was much more sleathy than the F-22, for the same reasons that the B-21 would have a lower radar signature. I am not going to say more than that. You can do the math yourself, and please show all work where you prove that the B-21 is less stealthy than the F-22.

    • @mpeugeot
      @mpeugeot Год назад +2

      @@skullcrushergamer1180 Well, that's another reason to base the conclusion on the B-21's likely stealthiness.

    • @MattWaller04
      @MattWaller04 Год назад +4

      You got data to back that claim up there sonny boy?

  • @cassius_eu5970
    @cassius_eu5970 Год назад +62

    Would be more realistic if it had some PLAN ships somewhere off the coast too, I can't imagine that the Chinese mainland would be entirely devoid of any PLAN destroyers or frigates patrolling it.

    • @Triggatra4258
      @Triggatra4258 Год назад +7

      It's not all about realism. It's a simulator at the end of the day and most don't play strictly for realism.

    • @dexlab7539
      @dexlab7539 Год назад

      Zero chance of US success if Cap added PLAN…just too many missiles on those imo

    • @arceuslee7087
      @arceuslee7087 Год назад +9

      ​@@Triggatra4258 you meant that admin put things which will ensure US victory right? So sad still lost F22s.
      It could have been fair if J20s were also humans or entirety of it was AI vs AI

    • @habeebadesina8468
      @habeebadesina8468 Год назад +15

      @@arceuslee7087 he always makes battles that ensure US victory, a bit biased in my opinion

    • @Fred_the_1996
      @Fred_the_1996 11 месяцев назад +1

      @@habeebadesina8468 exactly lol

  • @terminalarray1047
    @terminalarray1047 Год назад +24

    Cool video. The only problem I have with the B-21 mod is that is really underestimates the RCS and doesn't take into the account how much the US is investing into advanced EW in their air platforms. The B-21 is most likely completely loaded with the most powerful jamming technology up until the next 10-20 years. And it's open systems so it'll keep being upgraded.

    • @anggisuwandi2404
      @anggisuwandi2404 Год назад +3

      After seeing how Raptor perform over the decades, I wouldn't be surprised if the UFO is in fact B-21 so by theory she's already been flown over the decades and proven by many as unknown object, that's the true U.S product right there 😂

    • @adamb8317
      @adamb8317 11 месяцев назад +4

      Yeah the idea that the B-2 has the same targeting RCS as the F-22 but the 30 year newer B-21 is 20x less stealthy is just a hilariously conservative estimate. I've seen people claim that B-21 will be 0.1 of the RCS of even the raptor, and with advances in US stealth tech I tend to agree. Even Awacs will have trouble ever spotting it.

  • @papatango2362
    @papatango2362 Год назад +7

    I think the B21 would definitely have a lower RCS than F22.
    Heck I think even the B2 Spirit has a lower RCS than the F22

    • @brettmoss1737
      @brettmoss1737 Год назад +4

      I know they're very similar I remember when the B2 came out they said it had the radar cross-section of a hummingbird. I believe they said the F-22 is more like a bee. Why would you build the B21 to be the same or inferior? My guess is that it is probably invisible to just about every radar.
      The new ceramic paint for the ram is supposed to increase stealth by 70% imagine if the thing was designed around being invisible and then had the same ceramic stealth paint? A ghost.

    • @comediangj4955
      @comediangj4955 Год назад

      The flying wing design is specifically good against low bandwidth radars.

  • @mikedrop4421
    @mikedrop4421 Год назад +12

    I wonder if irl the B21's would be better off alone due to their even better stealth properties than anything else flying

    • @adamb8317
      @adamb8317 11 месяцев назад

      It's possible, the F-22 can at least be detected by EWS radar, whereas the B-21 pretty much cannot. There are arguments for both mission configurations. It really depends on where and how many the enemy fighters are. Also the F-22 could escort the b-21 OUT of strike zone, I think that might be the best option.

  • @suvidminecrafttutorials4175
    @suvidminecrafttutorials4175 Год назад +22

    Nice Video. For future B-21 videos I would like to see you use multiple B-21s. The B-21 is a small bomber, about half the size of the B-2 and the US is buying over 100 of them. It would be very unlikely that the US uses only B-21, they would use atleast 4.

    • @Gabriel_McMillan
      @Gabriel_McMillan Год назад +9

      I would suggest sending an ISR drone in to find the location of the ship before sending in a manned platform, stealth or otherwise. That's how 6th gen aircraft would almost certainly operate. RQ-170, RQ-180 or the Global Hawk. If nothing else JSTARS could use SAR to map out the whole port from hundreds of miles away. Or you could just assume that this was already done an hour before the mission, and proceed accordingly.
      Also, refueling would be provided by low-observable, carrier-launched, unmanned MQ-25 Stingrays, which they would probably not see, from far enough away.

    • @Gabriel_McMillan
      @Gabriel_McMillan Год назад

      @@duanemckinley9353 Should be a way to share ground/naval targets on datalink just as they share aerial targets. That's how it would work in real life. They only need a grid coordinate, really, plus TERCOM or IIR (in the case of the JASSM, it would use thermal imaging for terminal guidance, rather than TERCOM).

  • @JoshDownin
    @JoshDownin Год назад +28

    That was an electric fight. I have a potentially very unpopular opinion that also may not hold true in DCS: if the escorts were F-35s, your mission would have gone much more smoothly

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Год назад +27

      Maybe in real life but in game would make almost no different due to limitations.

    • @SunTzu2024
      @SunTzu2024 Год назад +3

      how?? /the f-35 has the same air to air. a worse radar cross section. its slower. and it has worse range then the f22. so explaine how the f-35 would of done better

    • @JoshDownin
      @JoshDownin Год назад +17

      @@SunTzu2024 I don't think the speed would have made a major difference here, and the F-35 actually has a longer range in stealth configuration. It also has a similar RCS that by no means would have compromised this mission. The reasons I think it performs better are its electronic warfare and situational awareness advantages. According to all publicly available information I've seen, the F-35 would have been able to coordinate more completely between friendly fighters and would have fought off enemy electronic warfare more effectively, giving the Lightnings the opportunity to fire sooner and more effectively, thus taking out more J-20s.

    • @SunTzu2024
      @SunTzu2024 Год назад +1

      @@JoshDownin i mean thats a good explanation. altough i dont think the f-35 can match its RCS, i did not know that the f35 has greater range in stealth config, thats strange to me considering its not an air superiority fighter, that role is the f-22's

    • @ObiWanShinobi917
      @ObiWanShinobi917 Год назад +13

      ​@@SunTzu2024the F-35 is as stealthy as the F-22 basically.
      And it's a flying supercomputer. It has a better radar than the F-22, meaning it can get through J-20 jamming easier, it has the most powerful jammers in any aircraft on the planet, it has counter jammers and jam-proof systems that can resist almost any form of EW, and has the ability to guide other plane's missiles. And make no mistake, it's also a deadly dogfighter despite its nickname.
      It would do better at this mission because you could send 1 F-35 way ahead of everyone else, it could detect the J-20's earlier, and the J-20s would see it before they saw the B-21 or the other F-35's, meaning they'd all gun for the lone F-35. The F-35's that stayed behind can all fire their missiles at the intercepting J-20's while having their radars off and being invisible, and the lone F-35 can use its own radar and targeting computer to relay info to the friendly missiles, and guide them into the J-20's who don't even know they have been fired on yet. Even though those missiles were fired at 80-90 miles well outside of usual range if you're being jammed.

  • @mark97199
    @mark97199 Год назад +13

    Can you do this in reverse? China vs Guam with new Guam defenses? The US is adding an Aegis ashore, Patriot battalion, THAAD, Typhoon launchers (mk 41 VLS on a truck) and Enduring Shield batteries (apparently similar to Iron Dome). I'd love to see what it would take to get through.

    • @mpeugeot
      @mpeugeot Год назад +2

      They should include submarine assets from Guam... a few cruise missiles launched from Guam would make it interesting. I would also use B-52's to launch swarms of decoys for additional fun.

    • @hughmungus2760
      @hughmungus2760 Год назад +3

      still waiting for a working DF17 mod for DCS, To even really have a chance of getting through guams defenses, it will have to involve the use of manoeuvrable hypersonic glide weapons

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Год назад +12

      Already working on it.

    • @dexlab7539
      @dexlab7539 Год назад

      @@grimreaperswhohoo! Can’t wait 🎉

    • @rileymorrisroe6743
      @rileymorrisroe6743 11 месяцев назад

      @@hughmungus2760 I agree, i wanna see China throw its best missiles at Guam (many have the range from China) and see THAAD, PAC-3MSE, Aegis try to defend against it for as long as possible. And vice versa.

  • @calneigbauer7542
    @calneigbauer7542 Год назад +6

    Can you try this with the f-22 backed up by the f-15e for a missile truck with destroyers in place with a e-3 with b-21 and b-1s flanking

    • @kennethreynolds5068
      @kennethreynolds5068 Год назад +2

      This is the most likely real life scenario

    • @brettmoss1737
      @brettmoss1737 Год назад

      Flank w F22, kill awacs. F22 sweep ahead, F15E, B21.
      Varying ingress directions.

  • @eddiepearl536
    @eddiepearl536 Год назад +9

    Cap let’s not forget the US would at the same time send 130 plus tomahawks from a Ohio class sub ( one of four they have converted from nuclear intercontinental missiles to ballistic missile sub ) That would definately keep Chinese air defense busy

    • @alanOHALAN
      @alanOHALAN Год назад

      China can just easily destroy the US with their nukes if that is what you are asking

    • @Fred_the_1996
      @Fred_the_1996 11 месяцев назад

      So? The chinese would have a lot of corvettes in the area too, these scenarios are never 100% realistic

    • @alanOHALAN
      @alanOHALAN 11 месяцев назад

      wait till you become a billionaire before you think you can influence US decision. Try risk a billion dollar for a fool's war@@Fred_the_1996

  • @brettmoss1737
    @brettmoss1737 Год назад +3

    I think you underestimate the B 21s stealth. Why would you build it if it didn't have a smaller cross-section than everything?

    • @gyratingwolpertiger6851
      @gyratingwolpertiger6851 Год назад

      Because they're cheaper to build and run than the B2 while iirc having better fuel economy and having some recon capability.

  • @streetcop157
    @streetcop157 Год назад +6

    B21 pilot is in the back cooking ramen in the microwave

    • @mpeugeot
      @mpeugeot Год назад

      That's classified.... LOL ;)

  • @GatorAaron
    @GatorAaron Год назад +4

    Why not use refueling at altitude over your base? That would make a good bit of difference eh? burning 20% fuel still out of range of AWACS

  • @douglasarthur2673
    @douglasarthur2673 Год назад +4

    That paint job on the B21………did it fly below a flock of seagulls ? 😂

  • @titanium5
    @titanium5 Год назад +13

    Super entertaining! I love these series GR! You guys make my day when your videos land.

  • @smilemore1997
    @smilemore1997 Год назад +2

    The RCS for the B-21 needs to be a lot smaller..

  • @mpeugeot
    @mpeugeot Год назад +5

    short answer, yes, with impunity based on what I know about our past capabilities (1998 USAF). I think that you could do it with the B-2 to be honest. The F-22 is more of a liability than an asset in prosecuting an attack unless used to decoy away Chinese assets.

    • @92HazelMocha
      @92HazelMocha Год назад +2

      In 1998 I would say definitely. However today maybe not; China has modernized their entire military twice since then and detection of stealth aircraft has definitely been a focus.

    • @mpeugeot
      @mpeugeot Год назад +3

      @@92HazelMocha that's a fair point, but it remains to be seen really how much better they have gotten, it has been said that the B-2 was pretty hard to track on radar. I know that anyone who does know today shouldn't be saying anything either way publicly. The conflict Serbia did provide some open source information on the effectiveness of the B-2 and F-117 platforms.

    • @92HazelMocha
      @92HazelMocha Год назад +1

      ​@@mpeugeothonestly there's no way to tell (at least from our point of view). Since other nations built systems to better detect and track stealth aircraft but we didn't because until very recently only we had them, they may be entirely capable of it. Alternatively since they all had to play catch up, they might be behind the curve technologically in that regard. I will say this though; eventually between AESA arrays, incorporation of ULF arrays into most systems and modern computing algorithms its only a matter of time until radar stealth is unfeasible again. Could be in 5 years or 30 years but eventually it'll be a detractor to aircraft design instead of an asset.

    • @MaxIsStrange1
      @MaxIsStrange1 Год назад +1

      @@92HazelMocha I think you’re wrong on stealth becoming a detractor. It seems like what the future actually holds is that everything and everyone will be built with reduced visibility in mind, so it will no longer be the ace in the hole it is now, and instead it’ll become a basic necessity added to the long list of requirements for most new combat aircraft. What the detractors of ‘stealth’ fail to understand is that the idea behind making yourself Very Low-Observable (VLO) has always been about shrinking the enemy’s detection range, and not about becoming invisible and invincible. It’s not a ‘trick’ like some people believe, and the world will never go back to using non-stealthy aircraft as primary front line fighters (what’s funny is that the nations claiming they’ve “defeated stealth” like Russia and China still invest a ton of money into developing their own stealth aircraft, and all of their new fighter concepts are that of stealthy aircraft). Reduced radar, thermal, visual, and acoustic signatures (people forget that stealth is not just about radars) are never going to be a detriment. Even from the perspective of the most pessimistic predictions, you will still get a lower detection range than that of 4th gen aircraft (let’s assume that a future super-radar will be able to lock stealthy aircraft even from 200 mi away-what the detractors fail to realize is that a radar powerful enough to do so is going to lock 4th gen planes from like 500 mi away, so either way, you’ll still benefit from stealth).
      An actual genuine problem of VLO fighters is the limited number of weapons they’re able to carry internally. I think that the solution will be AI-controlled wingmen and future fighter designs focused less on maneuverability, and more on range and the largest possible size of the internal bays (and most likely on even lower radar signature by doing away with vertical stabilizers).

  • @erasmus_locke
    @erasmus_locke Год назад +7

    The B-21 is designed to be a deep penetration bomber. Meaning it's supposed to fly straight through early warning radar without being detected.

    • @dextermorgan1
      @dextermorgan1 Год назад

      And in a nuclear mission, it would probably do just that, but tactics are different for a conventional, sneak attack.

    • @flyingtanks9313
      @flyingtanks9313 11 месяцев назад

      how is it supposed to do that against massive on shore radar arrays and multiple AWACS in sky?

    • @killerblingxbl
      @killerblingxbl 11 месяцев назад

      Active cloaking they admitted to be attempting in 2017 Popular Mechanics ;)

  • @pahtar7189
    @pahtar7189 Год назад +3

    If this is a slightly futuristic mission, why not use AIM-260 instead of AIM-120?

  • @Xobloot-qf2mj
    @Xobloot-qf2mj Год назад +2

    Hell, the Chinese don't need radar when they have an American 5 Star General that will inform them preemptively. Oh joy!

  • @johnmcdonald5183
    @johnmcdonald5183 Год назад +2

    With sufficiently recent satellite imagery, you could launch closer to max range, without the need to EO sight the target... not as fun but far safer.

  • @jamison884
    @jamison884 Год назад +4

    I'm certainly no expert, but I think you have to fly decently ahead of a stealth bomber to protect it and then rely on your active deterrance and its own stealth characteristics for survival. Also I believe firing one or two missiles max and disengaging immediately is required to survive, almost like a 1v1 BVR fight where you fire at long range, assume they fired at the same range, actively dodge/evade, and recommit to fire one more as soon as possible. Basically, flying your fighter and ignoring the fact you're in a four-ship.

  • @rickjames18
    @rickjames18 Год назад +6

    It there any way to pair stealth drones providing ISR (Data-link) and maybe jamming once discovered ahead of the F-22s and B-21s. Also, would a AWAC be out of the question a few hundreds miles off target? I think that would greatly increase the chances of survival for the mission. Also, were those the AIM-120D3s or older models? Thanks for the espisode, really enjoyed.

    • @lovepapa9559
      @lovepapa9559 Год назад

      China has ability and drones to do this job too. When B21 in service, China will has J35 in service too. 😅

    • @rickjames18
      @rickjames18 Год назад +1

      @@lovepapa9559 I hope we never find out so be careful what you wish for. China's ability to copy weapons and tactics will likely never be as good. As for the J35 or F-35 copy, well time will tell how good it is.

  • @MG_Steve
    @MG_Steve Год назад +4

    Is there anything like a mini AWACS drone or similar that could provide AWACS capability for guidance when a real AWACS isn't available? It obviously wouldn't match the range of the proper AWACS, but it wouldn't need the same range just to be around to help guide the missiles?
    (Honest Q, I have no idea).

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Год назад +4

      F-35 can do it in real life but not in game.

    • @MG_Steve
      @MG_Steve Год назад

      @@grimreapers Ah, there's your next challenge Cap! ;)

    • @MG_Steve
      @MG_Steve Год назад

      @@grimreapers I guess you could do a one off video & mock it by scripting the spawn of an AWACS at the appropriate time to support the missiles, but make it invincible and invisible to the other side (if you can) - it could be interesting to see what difference it would make to the outcome if there was AWACS-like support via an F35 (albeit faked). Perhaps worth a single player test as at least you can speed up the transit times? One run with & one without & compare them?

  • @UnhorsedGoose
    @UnhorsedGoose Год назад +5

    God that ~45 degree climb was incredible, I've been watching and playing lots of World War 2 missions so that was extra cool to see

  • @urscreamin4it
    @urscreamin4it Год назад +2

    Simba I'd like to see you go one on one with growling sidewinder. I think it'd be a good match.

    • @simba1113
      @simba1113 Год назад +2

      I'm not oppose to it but GS has his content and he is doing his thing, wish him all the best on what he is doing. if he wants to do something he knows how to get ahold of me. we have spoken in the past and he knows that offer was made along time a go :) . There is no beef and his success helps DCS and others like us. Cheers.

    • @dwightchaos9449
      @dwightchaos9449 6 месяцев назад +1

      @@simba1113 I appreciate you two not lettting the community instigate beef.

  • @TheStormpilgrim
    @TheStormpilgrim Год назад +2

    Best thing would be a couple very noisy groups of F-18s and F-15s further up and down the coast to get Red Panda hot and bothered, while a lone B-21 slips through the darkness and does its dirty deeds done darned expensive. I can't believe it would need to get within 60 miles for electro-optical given that preliminary target coordinates could be ascertained from satellite. Seemed like a bit of a McGuffin to make the mission more interesting...and it definitely did that.

  • @Baronstone
    @Baronstone Год назад +1

    No, the detection range of the F-22 by the AWACs is 30 miles, and for the S400 it is 20 KILOMETERS at best, and at worst it is 5 kilometers. After all, an F-35 flew over an S-400 site in Ukraine and they didn't even know it was there

  • @willchosen
    @willchosen Год назад +5

    These are really interesting to watch, thanks for sharing this amazing content.

  • @ramagefreak
    @ramagefreak Год назад +3

    i wonder if a B21 could use civilian air traffic (if possible) to try and sneak in closer. the bomber and maybe even an escort of fighters in under its big radar cross section? An airbus should mask anything a 5th gen could produce cross-section wise. just don't know is DCS can model that?

    • @dachstatter
      @dachstatter Год назад +1

      I can't imagine too many civilian aircraft putting themselves between a shooting war with the US and China.

    • @wakes_inc
      @wakes_inc Год назад

      Cannot use civilians as human shield

  • @myke5696
    @myke5696 Год назад +2

    I think we'd use two or three B-21s in this scenario (thus many more cruise missiles to destroy this target). Although I suppose then you'd have to add a couple Chinese picket ships with antiair capability.

    • @nicholaslee5473
      @nicholaslee5473 Год назад

      Realistically this mission would not exist. An aircraft carrier is not really useful when it's in port. Plus, it's well defended by shore defenses. It's a waste of resources to hit it. If the military is going so far as to strike inland, then they will go for more priority targets like air defenses, radar networks, command centers, etc...
      However, when it's out at sea, then it becomes a worthwhile target.

  • @dsong2006
    @dsong2006 Год назад +2

    How would China realistically defend this, basically have more of their J-20s/AWACs and Type 055 air defense destroyer forward deployed out further to form a defensive ring? Have their SAMs right on the coast? Can we re-run with more B-21s/F-22 and a fully defended coast line with China's East Sea fleet? Also I think some of China's most commonly used mid/long range SAMs are missing, namely the land based HQ-9s(similar to whats on the 052D/055s), HQ-16s and HQ-22s(recently sold to Serbia).

    • @stupidburp
      @stupidburp Год назад +1

      This is the point of their south china sea island outposts. To provide extra sensor layers to pass through before reaching the coast. For the Northern section of their coastline, they will have to rely more heavily on naval patrols.

  • @marinuslubbe3993
    @marinuslubbe3993 Год назад +5

    Jassm like Lrsam is broken in this game. Yeah they are supposed to be stealthy but there's no way SAM radars cant see them even at point blank range.

    • @hughmungus2760
      @hughmungus2760 Год назад

      honestly at this point I think flak cannons aimed by the naked eye would work better. At least stealth doesn't work against really big airburst rounds.
      Or better yet, a high power laser.

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Год назад

      Yeh I know it's touch and go in game. AAA saw them though...

  • @erasmus_locke
    @erasmus_locke Год назад +3

    It would have made a lot more sense to have two of the f-22s flying low two of them high and with at least a 2 mi gap between all of them then follow up with the b21 skirting around the edge of their radar firing the missiles at a 90⁰ angle.

  • @raturn0
    @raturn0 Год назад +1

    since the b2 has been over both mainland china and russia, i'm pretty sure the b21 wouldn't have a problem striking almost anywhere.

  • @erikerice9068
    @erikerice9068 Год назад +3

    Sorry to change subjects, but were any of you guys able to go to RIAT this year? If so, any footage to upload for everyone to see?🤔

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Год назад

      It was raining this year so not much to see: ruclips.net/video/zgREgN6u24g/видео.html

  • @mshahmirraza
    @mshahmirraza Год назад +4

    China will have more Air Defences than you have estimated. They use a lot of indigenous ones, making an integrated air defence with short to medium to long range systems available.

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Год назад +1

      Yeh I did look into it but we don't have any of the big Chinese SAMs in game yet.

    • @hughmungus2760
      @hughmungus2760 Год назад

      @@duanemckinley9353 I dont think bombing farming villages or washing machine factories makes much military sense so those likely won't be defended

  • @Anarchy_420
    @Anarchy_420 Год назад +1

    PL-15 mismatch D-3's are becoming notoriously problematic lol to be polite...

  • @Anarchy_420
    @Anarchy_420 Год назад +2

    Please create a scenario with The SR-72 and B-21!🙏

  • @colinboneham7387
    @colinboneham7387 Год назад +1

    The decoy missiles would have been sent in as a decoy for the chinese aircraft & the B21 would go in by itself no F22/F35 cover so less likely for it to get hit imo

  • @jamieaulbach5120
    @jamieaulbach5120 Год назад +7

    Fighters do fly with nightvision but one thing that is not modeled correctly is what you can see. So you have to focus them for outside the aircraft so inside instruments appear blurry. You actually just look under your goggles to look at the instruments. I flew in the Air Force for 15 of my 20 years and this is the reason you hear of crews having neck problems. They arch their neck in weird ways to look under the goggles.

    • @Utubesuperstar
      @Utubesuperstar Год назад +1

      I mean y’all also have to wrench your neck looking about while under high g loads but yeah that too lol

    • @jamieaulbach5120
      @jamieaulbach5120 Год назад

      @@Utubesuperstar yes, but not with 5 to 10 pounds attached way out in front of you. To counteract having to fight the NVG's they add weight to the battery pack on the back of the helmet. So much weight in fact that if a pilot ejects with his NVG's on he can die from having their neck broken.

    • @Utubesuperstar
      @Utubesuperstar Год назад

      @@jamieaulbach5120 yeah I know, I was simply saying that it’s making an already significant problem worse

    • @dexlab7539
      @dexlab7539 Год назад

      Sounds like a design problem…or USAF doesn’t give a crap about pilot ?

    • @jamieaulbach5120
      @jamieaulbach5120 Год назад

      @@dexlab7539 Most other countries just dont fly at night and do not have night vision. For fighters night vision is not a necesity most of the time as night visual dogfights are extremely rare. It is also now being integrated into the helmet design just look at the F35 helmet. The USAF care more about pilots than any other country. We spend more on survival and recovery after getting shot down than all other countries combined. One example is the flight engineers in the back of our rescue aircraft go through over 2 years of training before being combat mission ready most other countries its less than 6 months of training.

  • @TofuBoi_
    @TofuBoi_ 9 месяцев назад +1

    By the way China translates "South China Sea" & "East China Sea" into "China's southern sea" & "China's eastern sea" in Chinese.

  • @darrylc1562
    @darrylc1562 Год назад +1

    A! Run a sim of the battle of Wolf 359. 🙏🖖

  • @armoredpriapism
    @armoredpriapism Год назад +2

    I think the 21 got in the pl15 basket right when its bomb bays were open 😢

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Год назад

      That is indeed what happened. Just bad luck. Typical GR.

  • @woesiohans
    @woesiohans 11 месяцев назад +1

    23:34 and that's how baby JASSMs are made :)

  • @trev8591
    @trev8591 Год назад +3

    Impressive formation flying. Great mission, chaps!

  • @jamieaulbach5120
    @jamieaulbach5120 Год назад +3

    On load outs the typical American loadout for most aircraft is only one AIM-9 and the rest 120's. Just something to think about for the future. One exception is the A-10 which takes 2 since they do not have 120's.

    • @92HazelMocha
      @92HazelMocha Год назад

      ​@@cj64343The exception to the rule. From what I've heard SME's say, the value of an aim9 in modern combat is debatable to say the least.

    • @jamieaulbach5120
      @jamieaulbach5120 Год назад

      @@cj64343 Not just AIM9 we have other missiles that fit there. Just not publicly acknowledged.

  • @rnash999
    @rnash999 Год назад +11

    By bunching up around the B-21 did you make a larger RCS than it normally would have on its own?

    • @alexdeeprose2303
      @alexdeeprose2303 Год назад +1

      IRL yea, they’d never fly that close. In DCS the RCS doesn’t combine like that.

    • @kendallbedford2523
      @kendallbedford2523 Год назад

      That's what they did wrong

  • @aaronsalyers4819
    @aaronsalyers4819 9 месяцев назад +1

    20minutes from ohio to Florida in a raptor

  • @dan.vitale
    @dan.vitale Год назад +1

    I have a feeling if B21s are being used, so would AIM260s.. plus if everything revolves around datalink, I'd say there's no chance they would attempt a mission like this without DL.

  • @penroc3
    @penroc3 Год назад +1

    naval targes would be found with satalies or other sensors like on the RQ180

  • @92HazelMocha
    @92HazelMocha Год назад +5

    1980's sams vs future US stealth bombers. Seems fair.

  • @clangerbasher
    @clangerbasher Год назад +3

    GR is making me an F22 fanboy.

  • @justinmorgan4568
    @justinmorgan4568 Год назад +1

    You know something severe is going on when you have SIX raptors on the loose...

  • @Ariccio123
    @Ariccio123 Год назад +1

    *climbing in full afterburner*
    "Uh oh we don't have enough fuel"
    WELL y'know, that aircraft, you don't have to put the damn pedal to the metal all the time

  • @GreenBlueWalkthrough
    @GreenBlueWalkthrough Год назад

    Yeah there are ways to do it cleaner like staying away from the B-21 and be pure distraction which does mean jammers after hostile contact... But yeah while F-22's are irplaceable sinking a Chinese carrier would set china back years... Oh and the B-21 while like a death star is supossed to be a more losable and even spawmed asset so that and the J-20 losses don't really matter to etheir side... Speaking of you just set China back a few years in power projection and because then shot down some of our stuff we could say GG no re and not have WW3.

  • @joestoltenow7713
    @joestoltenow7713 Год назад +1

    Cap, could you please begin your videos with “I hope you’re all doing wonderfully well” more often? I don’t know why but the way you say it just feels right lol

  • @theswiller85
    @theswiller85 Год назад +1

    I think u have confused acquisition with targeting. Yeah they can detect them but that cannot keep a weapons grade lock on them visible is very different than shootable

  • @svenskdod
    @svenskdod Год назад +4

    They had AWACS which would have helped them considerably. You could have used some F-18s with MALDs to draw the patrol away.

  • @pierro281279
    @pierro281279 Год назад +3

    We really need to see an advanced radar simulation.
    I don't know about b21 in DCs but from what I recall f117 just has a 0.01 RCS from any direction.
    And stealth airplanes still have huge RCS spikes depending of their orientation .

    • @hughmungus2760
      @hughmungus2760 Год назад +1

      play CMANO. its alot less forgiving when it comes to 'stealth' wunderwaffen.

    • @pierro281279
      @pierro281279 Год назад +2

      @@hughmungus2760 I think I'm going to buy it!
      DCs is perfect for old jets but needs a lot of improvement for stealthiness.
      I'm pretty sure that the RCS number given are best case scenario. But DCS assumes it's ok for every angle ( I may be wrong with recent updates )

    • @92HazelMocha
      @92HazelMocha Год назад +2

      ​@@pierro281279In dcs there is a standard reflection model so the game just reads a frontal RCS number and automatically calculates the other aspects. This is mostly fine for older airframe, but with stealth aircraft the frontal RCS is lowest instead of the highest. The result is that stealth aircraft are far less dectedable in DCS than the real world and missiles are incredibly easy for every aircraft to notch.

    • @pierro281279
      @pierro281279 Год назад

      @@92HazelMocha ty so much. If you have the bit of code I'd be more than interested

    • @92HazelMocha
      @92HazelMocha Год назад

      ​@@pierro281279Wish I did, but ED made it impossible to share/edit, it's part of the "core game" now. However if you look at any module's aircraft files you'll see there's only a single RCS number which represents the frontal RCS and its not tied to the FM or physical aircraft model.

  • @erikerice9068
    @erikerice9068 Год назад +2

    I was curious, could you convert a B-21 to a tanker, or is that too much to ask of DCS? Just wondering.

    • @djuni24
      @djuni24 Год назад

      to do what?

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Год назад

      Not that I am aware of.

    • @stupidburp
      @stupidburp Год назад

      I think that a tanker conversion would be the best use of the B-2s that will be replaced by B-21. Could hold more fuel and get more use out of aging airframes already paid for. During refueling the boom will probably give their position away anyways if they are operating too close to adversaries. But a stealthy fueler would be more survivable than a typical fueler for the last sip before entering hostile airspace.

  • @Fatallydisorganized
    @Fatallydisorganized Год назад +2

    Why aren't you using Jassm XR? It's in it's final testing stages.

    • @grimreapers
      @grimreapers  Год назад

      6:35 JASSM limited to 60 miles today.

  • @LazarusAutoDetail
    @LazarusAutoDetail 5 месяцев назад

    Of course, you are assuming that the Chinese equipment actually works which is an unlikely scenario since much of it is reversed engineered technology from Russia which obviously isn't as advertised. Also, do you really think that the US would only use 1 stealth bomber? Unlikely at best... But fun scenario non-the-less!

  • @dereksteneman9657
    @dereksteneman9657 8 месяцев назад

    Friendly F22 pilot here; yes we fly with NVGs at night… guessing it’s not modeled in DCS plus a night mission would make a bad video. Technique…
    Fly at 0.9 IMN above 45k and out of AB!!
    Super cruise is Mil Power at 1.2 IMN
    Save fuel for the fight!!!

  • @s0gi1
    @s0gi1 Год назад +1

    I think for these types of videos it would be an interesting concept to put civilian planes in the mission so that if you accidentally shoot them down, you fail the mission.

  • @dereksteneman9657
    @dereksteneman9657 8 месяцев назад

    Friendly raptor pilot again; get away from each other!!! Sensors on the F22 mean you can need to fly 20-25nm away from each other line abreast and/or in trail…. You’re too close to each other.
    B21 escort… they don’t want F22 near them… stay outside 30nm from B2 or B21. Different RCS optimized for different missions.

  • @palkokity8235
    @palkokity8235 8 месяцев назад

    Since I just watched you bomb Godizilla, King Kong, and a bunch of other monsters......
    I want to see a scenario where Japan forms an aliance with Godzilla, and whatever other mutant creatures created by all of the nuclear bombs that you have dropped on the Japanese Imperial Fleet. Have those monsters combine forces with 5th/6th Gen airpower to attack . . . Anywhere.

  • @johnsilver9338
    @johnsilver9338 9 месяцев назад

    If F-22 has 0.0001m2 RCS and can be detected at 20 miles, then J-20 with 0.05m2 RCS can be detected at 95 miles by the same radar. Or if J-20 can be detected at 30 miles, then F-22 can be detected at 6.3 miles. It can't be both F-22 at 20 mile and J-20 at 30 mile. Otherwise either plane's RCS is wrong or a separate radar is used to detect the other.

  • @eyeborg3148
    @eyeborg3148 Год назад

    JASSM seems overmodeled in DCS… I have a hard time believing SAM systems can lock and shoot down an F-22 at say 40 or 50nm but struggle with a much less maneuverable JASSM at close range. Yes it’s stealthy but no stealth is that good, especially at close range.
    Seems every time JASSM or LRASM is used it almost never gets intercepted. Feel free to reply with disagreeements if you think it’s really that good.

  • @JClark2600
    @JClark2600 11 месяцев назад

    @6:00 Sounds about right, if I were the US war planners I'd send up about a billion dollars worth of aircraft and men without real-time NRO satellite coverage of the target area. Who needs to confirm target and defensive platform locations (ie J-20's) when starting WW3. If you're reading Jane's for all these systems technical data lets just skip past the recon section, it's thin and honestly we already take Russia and China's word for many of these systems... Why go to all the trouble of building these scenarios as close as you can to 'the real thing' (in your words) if you're just going to ignore large national assets?

  • @hutt716
    @hutt716 9 месяцев назад

    If we did this attack irl there’s no way we would send up only 1 B21 with a few Raptors knowing they would outnumber us. When you’re on the attack you want to outnumber your enemy. NO WAY they would attack with this small of a force.

  • @megawega6370
    @megawega6370 Год назад

    In DSC it isn't that China is lucky. The mod creators make the planes and missiles better than they actually are. China is simply outclassed in radar, aircraft, tactics and basically everything else byt the US assets. These little war games are great but completely fictional. Making the Chinese AI pilots MAX skill level is laughable as well. Anyway good video.

  • @RobRoss
    @RobRoss Год назад

    Why not just slow down until you were back in sync with the arrival time of the B-21 at the waypoint? Instead of maneuvering at speed to intercept it? You would have saved a lot of fuel. 🤔 🤷‍♂️

  • @kendallbedford2523
    @kendallbedford2523 Год назад +1

    She exists now lol

  • @Jaka515
    @Jaka515 Год назад

    ya i bet the US would attack with just 1 stealth bomber against mainland china and not know the situation on the ground before arriving... Hell they used 2 in Kosovo and 6 in afghanistan. The closest analog I could find with proper data was the initial salvo from desert storm 47 tomahawks were fired from 5 ships in the first salvo against a far less sophisticated opponent.

  • @terencyowens9491
    @terencyowens9491 Год назад

    This... But have the Raptors and the B21 loaded with Meteor. Have a second B21 loaded with JASSAM.

  • @supersportzcom
    @supersportzcom Год назад +1

    Same timing but dont wait for b21. Hit the deck and engage and draw off fighters once found.

  • @brentlanierskayakfishing5010
    @brentlanierskayakfishing5010 10 месяцев назад

    Try again with the B21 a ways away from the fighters or trailing behind. STAY AWAY from the B21

  • @kentgladden4316
    @kentgladden4316 11 месяцев назад

    Yo, Cap. At 40,000', curvature of the earth/line of site (against surface contacts) is 250 miles.

  • @hutt716
    @hutt716 9 месяцев назад

    B21 has a lower RCS than Raptors. B2 is the same or less RCS as a Raptor so the B21 is 100% going to be a lower RCS than the Raptor and also can fly super high.

  • @alexincobra7379
    @alexincobra7379 Год назад

    The Pentagon is coming up with a replacement for the AIM 120's. You don't have that information yet?

  • @tetefather
    @tetefather 11 месяцев назад

    This is why the stealth bombers will certainly be replaced by much cheaper stealth drones.. that's 2 billion going puff into the air.

  • @andyvonbourske6405
    @andyvonbourske6405 Год назад

    does anyone know why he never uses his jammer?
    ive heard rumors that china is planning to release 100 J-20 a year but it's hard to believe .

  • @wind_runner6836
    @wind_runner6836 10 месяцев назад

    This would be cool to redo as the B-21 is a standoff bomber it would probably use drones for this mission. Could we have it do that? I see you did that with the NGad and this should be able to do the same thing.

  • @justandy333
    @justandy333 10 месяцев назад

    I pretty sure im missing something here. But my understanding of stealth tech is that its able to be detected within a fairly close range, but the enemy will not be able to gain an adequate targetting solution. Thus not be able to shoot it down. Without pylons obviously. Stealth tech has proved itself, im struggling to get my head around how theyre still able to be shot down within the ranges suggested here. Im new to dcs, can someone fill me in on what im missing please 🙂

  • @aaronstreeval3910
    @aaronstreeval3910 Год назад

    People want the b21 to replace the b1 personally we should forward deploy em to Hawaii Australia and the UK.

  • @kwokterrance6690
    @kwokterrance6690 Год назад

    I just wonder can a f22 “stealth“ a Radar speed gun
    will it get a speeding ticket??😂😂😂😂😂

  • @SimonsAuntPhyllis
    @SimonsAuntPhyllis Год назад

    Is it possible for you guys to somehow mimic the Ukrainian sea drones attacking Russian ships in the Black Sea?? Just to see what we can learn about the situation.

  • @sigrholambda
    @sigrholambda 25 дней назад

    wait how does the b21 have a higher rcs than the raptor if it doesnt have vertical tail surfaces

  • @harrisone79
    @harrisone79 Год назад +2

    This should be done with a tot attack. With f35/f15ex and b1 w mass decoys from one direction and a b21 raid from another direction maybe throw in a few sub launch tomahawk for good measure.

  • @EastsideBodega_
    @EastsideBodega_ Год назад +1

    So the U.S. needs to invest into a stealth tanker is what you’re sayin

  • @theram8787
    @theram8787 Год назад

    China gets 6th gen and 5th gen, best fighter bomber tech in the world (well whats left of it), for one carrier. Seems like a pretty good trade off for china.

  • @fidgetpants4058
    @fidgetpants4058 Год назад

    Please dont take offence but everytime I put one of these videos on I can't help thinking mick jagger is doing the talking lol great content all the best 👍👍👍

  • @neanderthor66
    @neanderthor66 Год назад

    Given what happened to the bomber, wouldn't it make more sense to not fly in formation with it? Why not fly at different altitudes and even ahead of it, but near enough to support it?