NGAD Battles: NGAD Squadron vs F-22 & F-35 Air Wing: ruclips.net/video/U8W90rb4rQs/видео.html NGAD Squadron vs 2 x Russian Air Wings: ruclips.net/video/LdV-zF43iFA/видео.html NGAD Squadron vs China Air Wing: ruclips.net/video/bfMYuWFrPoM/видео.html NGAD Squadron vs F-22 Squadron: ruclips.net/video/bzdnlXIjP7w/видео.html
Thing to consider with the drones is they have no human pilot meaning the G overload is only set to whatever the hell the plane can withstand. Imagine a NGAD pulling 20Gs :)
Peregrine is genius. With such a short detection range, you no longer need massive long range missiles. Instead loads of medium range missiles will do the trick and allow more targets to be taken out.
@@cj64343 LREW is gonna be big, and i mean literally. A massive missile with hundereds of miles of range, sounds like its purpose-built to launch from NGAD or large-payload UCAV systems. Dont forget that this result we just saw in the video came without the sophisticated communications and data fusion systems that NGAD will utilize. Its truly game-changing stuff.
@@cj64343Peregrine will likely be both WVR/MRAAM because it weighs 150lbs (less than AIM9) while having larger diameter for a larger motor and more fuel; Raytheon has stated an intention of making it so. The shorter length _should_ work like shorter wheelbase and get it to pull AoA faster so HOBS shots can be quick and sharp while the general improvement to size and thrust should give it the range of an AIM-7 or the earlier AMRAAMs. If you ever remember the WVR program poke me and I'll look into it
Brilliant job guys. Thanks to Dark and everyone for all of your hard work. I would only add that the NGAD program is designed to use bespoke loyal wingman ("LW") drones, meaning, they won't be unmanned copies of the NGAD jet itself. This doesn't mean NGAD won't be able to fly with AI software in an unmanned mode, but these things will be far too expensive to go ahead to the front lines without a pilot and get into the danger zone. This is why the decision announced so far is to acquire 200 USAF NGADs with 1,000 loyal wingman drones of various models (which are "attributable" to a certain degree, the military term for expendable) to be flown via AI and commanded by the NGADs and upgraded/advanced F-35s of the day. There are tradeoffs for the LW and much that we don't know yet. For example, what will their speed/range/stealth/armament be since it has to be somewhat similar in capabilities to the manned NGAD to make sense (although there will be manned and unmanned tankers available for fueling). Meanwhile, this also means some LW designs will have hyper-agility to dogfight if needed, as they can take advantage of no squishy human inside of them (giggity) suffering the G's. One manufacturer at a defense industry expo recently unveiled an AI OpFor drone that can pull 9 G's and flies at 0.9M to serve as a dogfight opponent in training, just to give one example. I still deem this video an absolute tremendous success and huge step towards doing futuristic things in DCS when DCS just isn't designed to support. You're breaking DCS in a good way and doing things many people want to see. I think most poeple would want ED to be more than what they are right now. ED can keep their high fidelity professional flight models primarily surrounding older tech no longer on the cutting edge. But, they should also hire dudes like you guys to develop more of a current/future-gen sandbox where educated assumptions are made to create modern equipment and have scenarios just like this. ED - hire them! Give them resources! Watch your sales and game grow!
One of the smallest, but best parts of my day is clicking on the video hearing "welcome valued viewers I hope you are all doing wonderfully well" from Cap. Without any ads in front, no bullshit straight to point. Love you Grim Reapers
Absolutely glorious, I concur! I think the Peregrine is likely to replace the AIM-9 altogether. From what I've read, it has a 3 mode seeker, rather than a 2 mode seeker, and Raytheon won't say what the modes are, but it is generally believed one is radar, one is IR, and one is perhaps some sort of ELINT sensor. Or maybe it's UV, for flare rejection? The loyal wingmen do need their AIM-260s, but I'm sure you'll figure that part out soon enough. Also note that the US Marines were just issued their XQ-58 Valkyries to tinker with, which can be launched from any ship, anywhere, or from land, with nifty little rocket boosters, and which have a 3,500 mile range, albeit subsonic. Overall, excellent performance from the whole team, especially for a first attempt.
From what I hear, the Valkyries (or equivelants) will be a big part of large-scale engagement strategy. From what I've seen there may be a four layers to the USAF/USN air war strategy. At the heart, you have manned NGAD aircraft featuring high speed, long range, and a minimum crew of two (one to fly and one to control the drones). They will be stealthy and filled with advanced sensors and communications equipment, a great standalone platform themselves, but thats not all. Next layer are the UCAVs, long range drones with supermaneuverability and dogfighting capabilities developed through the X62/Skyborg. Their job is to accompany the NGADs, acting as another pair of sensors, a supply of dozens of extra Peregrines, and as bait for any enemies that get too close. If needed they will engage and decoy to protect the manned aircraft and have the ability to win a dogfight if needed. The third layer are systems like the valkyrie. Cheap and expendable platforms that are really just there to haul missiles and take the brunt of enemy integrated air defenses. They will also deploy the fourth layer, which is air-launched purpose-built drones. survelliance, EW, anti-personel, or whatever purpose you want. These (in combinations with MALDs) will get the enemy air defenses to turn on their radars and waste missiles so the more expensive layers of the system can strike. Its an integrated network of aircraft with extreme coordination and lethality that will mop up enemy air defenses/fighters unlike anything you've ever seen. With advanced sensor/data collection/processing, every aircraft in the network acts as a sensor node that is fed to the few manned pilots on the US side. This effectively creates a scenario where the pilot is given extensive and near-perfect information about the battlespace (like a video game) without the enemy being able to determine, much less detect the structure of the network. All in all, these networks will function like a singular aircraft that can withstand multiple missiles while carrying literally hundreds of its own, with god-like knowledge of its situation and near-indetectability. NGAD is going to have an even bigger effect on air combat than the F22 did...
@@gehirnxWhat you described is the ngad program itself dude. Many press releases have clearly stated ngad isn't one aircraft/system, but a combination of manned and unmanned platforms with the other components being new weapons technology and new electronic technology. You simply elaborated on what these possible combinations could be composed of
Yeah the peregrine has what's called a tri mode seeker and is fully autonomous. Regarding your speculation of maybe having a UV seeker mode, that wouldn't work at all. You'd have to do an extensive amount of filtering to remove the daylight from the signal that it'd consume a lot of juice from its onboard power systems for the filtering alone, and then you have all the computer processing eating more juice to acquire and maintain a target acquisition lock of what would be a really small amount of UV radiation being emitted from the aircraft itself. It just isn't worth it y'know. What I think is more likely is the third mode is actually a fast mover seeker. You have your standard radar/ir 2 mode seeker but a fast mover seeker could be the first mode the missile uses to actually find the enemy aircraft, locks onto it and then uses the other modes to land the hit. A mode that locks onto electronics emissions (I think that's what you were saying) wouldn't work either. To get those signals from a fast moving target requires large antennae combined with a way to aim where you want to pick up those signals, which weaken significantly over distance. I firmly believe it's a mover seeker yknow
Wow!! Flabbergasted, that was incredible!! Honestly, even before Simba spoke in the mission, I was keeping an eye on his sector of the map because I kept seeing them turning cold. That was freaking brilliant in my opinion, and from a doctrine standpoint, probably exactly how these things will be utilized. Damn good tactics Simba!! Great flying as always Grim Reapers!!
The manned aircraft is not but the drones can probably pull as many G’s as the airframe can withstand. Wouldn’t be surprised if they were hyper maneuverable and could pull something insane like 25 G’s.
My understanding of loyal wingman (or NGAD) is that you are able to get 3 or 4 airframes searching for targets, increasing sensor detection and lethality more than the sum of the aircraft.... all will be digitally sync'd up, providing efficient battlespace awareness to the human (or AI) controller. It is almost time to place lasers on aircraft as well. Not there yet, but by 2035 it is almost a certainty. The first "smaller" land based anti-drone units are being put through trials now.
Absolutely loved this video. I'd love to see variations on this theme, with air to air, as well as air to surface/ground. It would also be cool to see smaller numbers of NGADs, paired with 4 loyal wingman drones, to show that more could be done with less.
NGAD: "We want the capacity of an F-15EX with the capability of an F-22 improved in a platform that can hop the pacific with 1-2 aerial refuel points maximum" I like it. When can I buy one.
I believe the NGAD will be two seater - the second man will allow even a larger group of drones to be commanded, and the mother plane may only have missiles for self-defence.
First of really love your content. From a retired navy amateur perspective there is a big tactical subject area that I really didn't see addressed. NGAD Provides a huge tactical sensor advantage. Which place right into the navy's Pacific tactics of being every where with superior sensors to be able to detect, eval, guide weapons to prosecute and kill without being detected. Another Battle idea would be to use this thought process to defeat China's hyper missile threat from stand off range. That way Navy could protect against attack on Taiwan with less danger using preposition NGAD.
That was absolutely GLORIOUS!! Not just the victory, but the mission and setup of the NGAD itself. Just goes to show the power of the AI wingman + the Peregrine missile's insanely clever design? Who needs 200+KM missiles when stealth aircraft can't see each other at half that range? So design a 50-95km missile that's small and has exceptional tracking and manouverability within that range to completely sodomize enemy low observ/stealth craft? Excellent implementation in DCS you beautiful, beautiful boys!
So, the various literature that's out there about the potential tactics for using drones like the Valkyrie with the NGAD is to either: 1) you sense, I shoot - send the drones out ahead to extend sensing range but keep them cold and dark as much as possible and send back detections so you can quarterback and work out a solution. Then either use your long range missiles, or call on 4th Gen missile trucks to rip. 2) I sense, you shoot - spread the formation out, use your own radar to detect, and let the drones shoot a bunch, and you keep your missiles to mop up, or take out any crtiical targets (like a C2 node, tanker, etc). Regardless, you put the drones out front where they can be in harms way, and keep the squishy human in the rear with the gear.
Cool fight, it'll be interesting to see what the actual capabilities and intended doctrine will be for NGAD as this is still quite science fiction-y as is.
Grim Reapers is building "DCS-Beyond"!! 😄 Peregrine should be renamed "SPAMRAAM"!! A future US carrier group sneaks in behind the IJN at Pearl Harbor, equipped with F/A-XX NGADs, F-35B and Cs. I just hope the NGAD (F/A-XX) doesn't end up being the size of an A-5 Vigilante. At some point we'll have the first "Around the world unrefueled supersonic flight". Think Rutan's Voyager but over Mach 1. I keep watching this video, and keep getting more ideas. A Gen 4 (Typhoon) with Meteors, and Gen 4+ (F-15EX) armed with Peregrine.
Drone wingmen would be a lot smaller with much smaller payloads, plan is to buy nearly 5 times as many drones as NGADs each a lot smaller than the NGAD.
@@rofibhoi9788 indeed, was merely wondering if 18 NGADs out of proposed fleet of 200 would actually operate as one or having 6 but with wingmen would be more realistic.
IRL would be about 5-10 years from now. AI would likely be advanced enough to fly this entire mission autonomously, and China could have their own NGAD in the works by then
I think its disengenous to say that an aircraft that is good at everything is a "fantasy" We already have an aircraft thats good at everything. Its the F-35. It can conduct SEAD very well. It can conduct Reconnaissance and information gathering/sharing very well. It can conduct BVR missions very well. And even though people refuse to accept it because theyre stupid even though actual pilots of the thing have said so multiple times, The F-35 is a VERY capable and deadly dogfighter as well.
I've yet to see footage of an F-35 with an M777 slung, or seen it airdrop a hundred paratroopers or drop off an Abrams, so I'd say it's definitely not fulfilling the vertical heavy lift or cargo roles very well.
I believe it was Alex Hollings who mentioned the 4 weapons bays 2 small ones and 2 large ones, he thinks the NGAD will carry 4 AMRAAMS in the 2 small weapons bays and 4 cruise missiles in the 2 bigger ones, maybe we can try some antishipping with NGAD
They're also turning the bone into a ship killer with the ability to carry 36 LRASMs, and I believe its worth mentioning that the LRASM has a range off 500 nautical miles although I understand that you might have problems updating that. I'll post a link to support this claim which you'll need to copy and paste since you tube doesn't support links.
@@cj64343 There are still 45 left. Their not planning on retiring any more until 2030, the last are planned for retirement 2036 and they are still getting upgrades just google Bone turning onto ship killer.
Turns out in late July 2023 Northrup Grumman said they would not pursue the USAF NGAD. Though some think they may take a crack at the US Navy version the F/A-XX 6th gen carrier fighter. It maybe that Northrup knowns that USN carrier fighter will have low production run. So it might see it as something it can produce with its available assets verses how many NGAD's the USAF will require. But its statements so far have been vague on both the NGAD and 'other projects'. Odds are then the USAF NGAD will probably be the Lockheed Martin plane they teased which has the nick name 'Bird of Prey'. Since the F/A-XX is intended to replace the the F/A-18 Super Hornet. I image it will be set up to fire air launched hypersonic anti-ship missiles. Which would be insane, since it can use the F/A-XX stealth to get it close and then hit the enemy fleet at hypersonic speeds.
That was an epic battle! Would be cool if it had a better radar compared to the standard AESA radar you guys use though (you should also make PESA radars for Russian fighters). Another thing that would be really cool to be implemented are towed decoys which have been in use for a long time now and constantly upgraded. Would make the F-35 an absolute beast in dodging radar guided missiles.
I think with there modeling PESA is the same, they cannot really model chirping and anti jam property's with radars. As for toed decoys, once ED adds the AN/ALE-50 on the viper I presume they could modify it for their uses? But they might not have any way to model it RN.
Considering US has been making sealth for decades, China developing the second best 5th gen stealth is an insane feat, even if stolen technology, even Russia or Japan couldn't do it
I am guessing here, but I strongly suspect that the NGAD will have amazing acceleration: the engines the US are working on will be adaptive cycle with a thrust ratio in the 50,000lb class: this will be a big, heavy fighter, but the power to weight ratio will be far in advance of anything before. I agree that it is likely it will sacrifice a fair degree of turn performance and roll rates due to prioritizing stealth (likely no vertical control surfaces), range, payload. There is a small possibility that it could utilize blended control surfaces on its body (think the F-15 airbrake), or perhaps some advanced aerodynamic concepts could be used, but at the cost of weight, some stealth, range etc...not to mention cost and maintenance. It probably is not worth it. It may be the case that the NGAD will instead have 360 degree weapon launch capability. If that is coupled with some directed energy weapon that isn't just a single line of sight, then it could be a new ballgame for all. We wait with interest! And a FANTASTIC recreation.
Nice, My request should be fairly easy for you as it's editing the same file: Do it again, only this time with a realistic number of Chinese jets out on patrol, maybe 3 pairs? (and carrier launch as would really happen as soon as the engagement starts), but with only one flight of AA and everyone else follows a minute behind loaded for anti-shipping. Can one flight suppress a carrier group's air power long enough to sink it?
This is George A super-cruise of Mach 2.2 is more logical than another speed. When designing the supersonic transport Concord, they managed to super-cruise the transport between the speeds of Mach 1.7 and 2.2. At these higher speeds the drag was lower than transonic speeds 1.0 to 1.6. Speeds above Mach 2.2 raised the skin temperatures too high as well as drag began to increase again dramatically after Mach 2.2. At Mach 2.2 the Concord was actually more fuel efficient than a 747. While the Concord burned nearly twice the fuel, it did so at more than twice the speed and at these high speeds after-burners were no used. The Afterburners were used on take-off and accelerating through transonic speeds, but the bulk of the journey was conducted at Mach 2.2 with no afterburner. These lessons of transonic drag have not been lost for military designers, Military designers have known for quite some time the target speed for super-cruise is Mach 2.2. I offer this as I would think NGAT would also target Mach 2.2 as its super-cruise speed where transonic drag is minimized.
Game timestamps 10:50:27 fa_xx (NGAD-4-3) fired Peregrine 10:50:36 (J-15-2-3) fired GR_PL-10 10:50:39 (J-15-2-3) hit and destroyed by Peregrine (NGAD-4-3) 10:50:43 fa_xx (NGAD-4-3) hit and destroyed by GR_PL-10 (J-15-2-3) The only loss of a drone! You are welcome :)
Writing up some much more detailed stuff on the underlying physics, but it's taking so long i want to get a basic comment out there. Some comments you've made about how you've set the NGAD's up has me concerned because of the implications of the variable cycle engine. It may be your limited by DCS though, no idea. Assuming the maximum possibble fuel burn at any given speed and altitude is the same between a raptor and an NGAD, (it won't be, but the thrust will go up or down, relative to what i'm going to outline below, in correlation to the fuel burn rate difference), an NGAD will achieve very different thrust values compared to the rapor. At around mach 1 upto the Raptors maximum non-afterburning speed the thrust per pound of fuel burned will likely be slightly worse than the raptor. At anything below mach 1 down to whatever airspeed the engine hits it's bypass limit at the thrust will be higher and will go up very fast. Likely to a very extreme degree. Since range is a factor of thrust per pound of fuel burned vs airframe drag this also means it's maximum range will occur at such a speed, (the altitude this occurs at is dependent on whatever altitude they optimise for). the maximum rnage value will not occur at mach 1.9 as you had it et up here, (this was the big thing that caught my attention). At anything above the speed where a Raptor needs it's afterburner the performance of the NGAD's engines will depend on weather it has any form, (partial or full), of ramjet mode. If it doesn't the raptor will be more efficient all the way up. If it does then it will outperform the raptor past that point by a large margin, but not the utterly extreme margin it would at below mach 1. It's also worth noting that if it does have a ramjet function the engines will be capable of pushing the airframe much faster than whatever the airframes structural and thermal limit is, (as a reference point, assuming it had an infinitely durable airframe it should be capable of challenging the SR-71 record, thats how good such an engine would be). All of the above assumes they design for a max airframe speed not much higher than the raptor. If they go significantly higher the Raptor will have the edge all the way until it hits it's afterburners, but the NgAd would win from there on out. But that only makes sense if they want SR-71 or better top speeds and i don't seen that happening. Now obviously that doesn't necessarily mean it's going to out accelerate or outturn a raptor if it carries more fuel relative to its thrust, (as you have set it up here), but i 100% question if it would need that much more fuel than a raptor to achieve that much more range given the advantages of a variable cycle, though achieving that range at a mach 1.9 supercruise with the sheer amount of fuel you've given it probably isn't unreasonable. It just wouldn't be the maximum range speed with a variable cycle engine.
Potentially a naval & air battle? Have 2-3 flights of human NGAD (with AI wingman) and a US carrier strike group (with or without F-35) attempt to destroy a Chinese naval port with nearby J-20 & J-35 air support. A similar case of the simulated Chinese attack on San Diego, but a reversed test.
Great video Cap, GR, and all affiliated. I think you guys are dead on as far as the role you have developed the NGAD to perform. In addition, I feel the future flight computers and weapons development for the NGAD platform will be increasingly geared towards improved stealth & BVR abilities that will largely encompass intergration of Link16 and the "hive-mind" concept with the obvious increased priority the US has with the inclusion of drone aircraft. With that said, do you guys have ideas for creating a system that could simulate the power of Link16 in DCS? Or is that something that would be far too complicated?
To be honest it's already here just not really talked about. They are also using the decision-making processes learned from IA aircraft dog fights to increase drone NGAD independence allowing for a much larger amount of drones per human controller. For an idea just search for the drone computer light shows
Acceleration is not a logical trade off. Comparing last generations NGAD (the F-14 with F-110 engines) acceleration was extreme, on par with F-110 F-16s or F-15s. I would anticipate maneuverability to actually be on par with current 4th or 4+ gen aircraft. Probably not thrust vectored, so not F-22 level maneuverability. That being said, the J20 doesn't look very maneuverable, my guess is NGAD will be better than a J20. Probably on par or better than the F-14, with better flight controls making it easier to employ.
Now, imagine a modernized B-52 (updated engines, avionics, RAM coating etc) capable of carrying 2-4 NGAD style drones under the wing to then be deployed as escorts on deep strike missions. If that sounds cool, which it is, read the Dreamland series by Dale Brown. Its awesome.
That's why I said..."Imagine". Y'know, that thing where you consider the existance of a thing that doesn't exist!? Or a world in which a non existent thing... is. Like, imagine a world in which you didn't post that comment and so 1 less person thinks you're an arse, wouldn't that be lovely? BUT IT ISN'T, and I do. That reality is real because imagination is seemingly forbidden, by you. Who died and made you "destroyer of dreams"!? Who hurt you? Are the other 3715 Jonathanpfeffer's also killjoys who suck the fun out of everything and kill the dreams of children and adults alike? And who do I have to off to also gain that title/promotion? It's because of people like you the rest of us can't have nice things.
It might be of value to set up one day for demonstrating how NOT to utilize your NGADs. - dog fight - canyon running (limits of maneuverability) - impact of adverse weather on stealth coatings (if that's still a thing) - missile evasion tactics (can it dodge ?) - IR susceptibility from different aspects Also, try setting the drone-wingman to about 10x the NGAD RCS. It may be a better approximation of a Loyal Wingman flying Missile Truck duties,... Get the pilot more accustomed to a more distant separation on in/egress as well as illustrating the dangers of floating too far inside the AWACS zone while being wingman-aggressive ?? Just a thought.... watching a few 200 million USD aircraft go down in flames may impress a point on the fliers. Or maybe demo the classic 'ingress into radar/ground-fire-hostile' scenarios wouldn't work. BTW, do we know how the NGAD performs against those sense-but-no-acquisition/lock low frequency radars ?
@@cj64343 from everything I hear (albeit mostly speculation) it seems like it’ll be a big bulky, yet very stealth aircraft designed for speed, range and a lot of stand off weapons. Which to me just sounds like a stealthy mig 31, though significantly better.
I don't think they can drop the dogfight ability, or at least close range ability, because stealth on both sides decreasing detection ranges, should make them more likely.
i really think you should use XQ-58 drones forward with 4-6 drones per human flown NGAD. have the xq-58's loaded with 2 AIM-9x each and the human piloted NGADs with the loadouts as had in this mission. the foreard xq-58's would use IRST to locate ant track targets forward of the human piloted NGAD fighter's. the XQ-58'S are CHEAP...loosing 10 XQ-58'S would be fard cheaper than loosing just 1 drone NGAD as was used in this mission.
@@cj64343 the XQ-58 is VLO and smaller thus allowing for a relatively low RCS. the speed is not extremely relevant being the groups in this mission were pre staged before commencement of attack. 6 manned NGAD with 6 xq-58's forward would allow for 36 forward IRST sensor platforms that will all be capable of getting kills and are targets that will absorb opponents munitions. each XQ-58 is costed well below a 10th the cost of a full sized non maneuverable NGAD. the only real difficulty would be each pilot having to control 6 units instead of just 2. multi seat NGAD would be handy in this regard.
@@cj64343 the xq-58's will have a smaller RCS than the j35 (more than adequate). the xq-58's would be operating greater than 50 NM ahead of the NGAD relaying targeting info via data link. if a XQ-58 is seem it will be fired on thus depleting opponents munitions supply well before manned NGAD are in danger. each XQ-58 carries 2 aim9x thus capable of reducing enemy numbers significantly well before manned NGAD get into harms way. the xq-58's would also (actual primary job) gain forward situational awareness thus give the manned NGAD the always wanted unfair advantage over the opponents. a simple win win. can DCS allow for this type of operation is the real question. how the pilot's in the NGAD control the xq-58's is also a question.
It's doubtful that the airframe could sustain G loads much beyond what human pilots could anyway, especially with the heavy fuel-laden missile-truck design used in the video. There have been a few times where aircraft like the F-14 and F-16 have pulled 10-11g, and moderate to significant airframe damage resulted. Aircraft like these just aren't designed for those kinds of G loads.
If you are loading the loyal wingmen (drones) with medium range missiles only (Peregrines), shouldn't you position at least one of then CLOSER to the enemy (ahead of his human "master") at least a bit (few miles) instead putting them just following?
What are the odds that the NGAD will be later fitted with energy weapons? Either air-to-air or air-to-ground would have at least the same range of an autocannon.
I think that a future laser system may be used against enemy missiles like a mini CIWS. Using a directed energy weapon against an organic target is actually considered a war crime by the Geneva Convention
Laser for BVR air-to-air combat is unlikely since you need a ton of power to transfer enough energy onto the target fast enough at a long enough range while outranging BVRAAM for it to be useful, due to the inherent atmospheric refraction and diffusion. Such a powerful laser would be huge, heavy, and sucking a ton of power, something that you would only put on the big boys like the YAL-1 A much smaller and lighter CIWS laser against AAM and SAM is a different matter though. That one is much more likely to be implemented, maybe even for the F-35 in the future
Don't you think the strategy from the Chinese with planes like this, would be, keeping the J-15B's in the back or center and then having them support the J35's from there when they engage?
The image being used is just a stand in image for an aircraft no one has seen. Canards can increase radar returns (like all control surfaces), but that depends on a host of specifics.
the NGAD/FA-XX design they are using here is not reminiscent of any official statements. we actually have next to no clue what the actual aircraft will look like, we can only guess that it will not have vertical stabilizers and will prob be on the larger side
NGAD Battles:
NGAD Squadron vs F-22 & F-35 Air Wing: ruclips.net/video/U8W90rb4rQs/видео.html
NGAD Squadron vs 2 x Russian Air Wings: ruclips.net/video/LdV-zF43iFA/видео.html
NGAD Squadron vs China Air Wing: ruclips.net/video/bfMYuWFrPoM/видео.html
NGAD Squadron vs F-22 Squadron: ruclips.net/video/bzdnlXIjP7w/видео.html
Thing to consider with the drones is they have no human pilot meaning the G overload is only set to whatever the hell the plane can withstand. Imagine a NGAD pulling 20Gs :)
That's possible, however their size and weapons load would have to be reduced which I doubt is worth it for the maneuverability.
That thing doesnt look like it can pull 20G
Peregrine is genius. With such a short detection range, you no longer need massive long range missiles. Instead loads of medium range missiles will do the trick and allow more targets to be taken out.
@@cj64343 LREW is gonna be big, and i mean literally. A massive missile with hundereds of miles of range, sounds like its purpose-built to launch from NGAD or large-payload UCAV systems. Dont forget that this result we just saw in the video came without the sophisticated communications and data fusion systems that NGAD will utilize. Its truly game-changing stuff.
@@cj64343Peregrine will likely be both WVR/MRAAM because it weighs 150lbs (less than AIM9) while having larger diameter for a larger motor and more fuel; Raytheon has stated an intention of making it so. The shorter length _should_ work like shorter wheelbase and get it to pull AoA faster so HOBS shots can be quick and sharp while the general improvement to size and thrust should give it the range of an AIM-7 or the earlier AMRAAMs. If you ever remember the WVR program poke me and I'll look into it
Brilliant job guys. Thanks to Dark and everyone for all of your hard work.
I would only add that the NGAD program is designed to use bespoke loyal wingman ("LW") drones, meaning, they won't be unmanned copies of the NGAD jet itself. This doesn't mean NGAD won't be able to fly with AI software in an unmanned mode, but these things will be far too expensive to go ahead to the front lines without a pilot and get into the danger zone. This is why the decision announced so far is to acquire 200 USAF NGADs with 1,000 loyal wingman drones of various models (which are "attributable" to a certain degree, the military term for expendable) to be flown via AI and commanded by the NGADs and upgraded/advanced F-35s of the day.
There are tradeoffs for the LW and much that we don't know yet. For example, what will their speed/range/stealth/armament be since it has to be somewhat similar in capabilities to the manned NGAD to make sense (although there will be manned and unmanned tankers available for fueling). Meanwhile, this also means some LW designs will have hyper-agility to dogfight if needed, as they can take advantage of no squishy human inside of them (giggity) suffering the G's. One manufacturer at a defense industry expo recently unveiled an AI OpFor drone that can pull 9 G's and flies at 0.9M to serve as a dogfight opponent in training, just to give one example.
I still deem this video an absolute tremendous success and huge step towards doing futuristic things in DCS when DCS just isn't designed to support. You're breaking DCS in a good way and doing things many people want to see. I think most poeple would want ED to be more than what they are right now. ED can keep their high fidelity professional flight models primarily surrounding older tech no longer on the cutting edge. But, they should also hire dudes like you guys to develop more of a current/future-gen sandbox where educated assumptions are made to create modern equipment and have scenarios just like this. ED - hire them! Give them resources! Watch your sales and game grow!
One of the smallest, but best parts of my day is clicking on the video hearing "welcome valued viewers I hope you are all doing wonderfully well" from Cap. Without any ads in front, no bullshit straight to point. Love you Grim Reapers
I can't imagine the amount of work that went into that. Thank you everyone involved, entertaining and such a surprising outcome! Didn't expect that.
Absolutely glorious, I concur!
I think the Peregrine is likely to replace the AIM-9 altogether. From what I've read, it has a 3 mode seeker, rather than a 2 mode seeker, and Raytheon won't say what the modes are, but it is generally believed one is radar, one is IR, and one is perhaps some sort of ELINT sensor. Or maybe it's UV, for flare rejection? The loyal wingmen do need their AIM-260s, but I'm sure you'll figure that part out soon enough.
Also note that the US Marines were just issued their XQ-58 Valkyries to tinker with, which can be launched from any ship, anywhere, or from land, with nifty little rocket boosters, and which have a 3,500 mile range, albeit subsonic.
Overall, excellent performance from the whole team, especially for a first attempt.
From what I hear, the Valkyries (or equivelants) will be a big part of large-scale engagement strategy. From what I've seen there may be a four layers to the USAF/USN air war strategy. At the heart, you have manned NGAD aircraft featuring high speed, long range, and a minimum crew of two (one to fly and one to control the drones). They will be stealthy and filled with advanced sensors and communications equipment, a great standalone platform themselves, but thats not all. Next layer are the UCAVs, long range drones with supermaneuverability and dogfighting capabilities developed through the X62/Skyborg. Their job is to accompany the NGADs, acting as another pair of sensors, a supply of dozens of extra Peregrines, and as bait for any enemies that get too close. If needed they will engage and decoy to protect the manned aircraft and have the ability to win a dogfight if needed. The third layer are systems like the valkyrie. Cheap and expendable platforms that are really just there to haul missiles and take the brunt of enemy integrated air defenses. They will also deploy the fourth layer, which is air-launched purpose-built drones. survelliance, EW, anti-personel, or whatever purpose you want. These (in combinations with MALDs) will get the enemy air defenses to turn on their radars and waste missiles so the more expensive layers of the system can strike. Its an integrated network of aircraft with extreme coordination and lethality that will mop up enemy air defenses/fighters unlike anything you've ever seen. With advanced sensor/data collection/processing, every aircraft in the network acts as a sensor node that is fed to the few manned pilots on the US side. This effectively creates a scenario where the pilot is given extensive and near-perfect information about the battlespace (like a video game) without the enemy being able to determine, much less detect the structure of the network. All in all, these networks will function like a singular aircraft that can withstand multiple missiles while carrying literally hundreds of its own, with god-like knowledge of its situation and near-indetectability. NGAD is going to have an even bigger effect on air combat than the F22 did...
@@gehirnxWhat you described is the ngad program itself dude. Many press releases have clearly stated ngad isn't one aircraft/system, but a combination of manned and unmanned platforms with the other components being new weapons technology and new electronic technology. You simply elaborated on what these possible combinations could be composed of
Yeah the peregrine has what's called a tri mode seeker and is fully autonomous.
Regarding your speculation of maybe having a UV seeker mode, that wouldn't work at all. You'd have to do an extensive amount of filtering to remove the daylight from the signal that it'd consume a lot of juice from its onboard power systems for the filtering alone, and then you have all the computer processing eating more juice to acquire and maintain a target acquisition lock of what would be a really small amount of UV radiation being emitted from the aircraft itself. It just isn't worth it y'know.
What I think is more likely is the third mode is actually a fast mover seeker. You have your standard radar/ir 2 mode seeker but a fast mover seeker could be the first mode the missile uses to actually find the enemy aircraft, locks onto it and then uses the other modes to land the hit.
A mode that locks onto electronics emissions (I think that's what you were saying) wouldn't work either. To get those signals from a fast moving target requires large antennae combined with a way to aim where you want to pick up those signals, which weaken significantly over distance.
I firmly believe it's a mover seeker yknow
@@jamesmaddison4546 I believe the newer Russian shoulder fired missiles do use UV for flare rejection. Just a guess.
Wow!! Flabbergasted, that was incredible!! Honestly, even before Simba spoke in the mission, I was keeping an eye on his sector of the map because I kept seeing them turning cold. That was freaking brilliant in my opinion, and from a doctrine standpoint, probably exactly how these things will be utilized. Damn good tactics Simba!! Great flying as always Grim Reapers!!
people who think NGAD will be a dogfighter are probably the same sort of people who thinks the a10 can perform air superiority missions.
The manned aircraft is not but the drones can probably pull as many G’s as the airframe can withstand. Wouldn’t be surprised if they were hyper maneuverable and could pull something insane like 25 G’s.
@@mr.nemesis6442 that's exactly what I said in another comment
From the Tack view it worked Perfectly! Your Strategy and your team's strengths are amazing... Amazing work GR and CAP!
So good! really enjoyed this. Great job Guys! Thank you for the time and effort to make this as accurate as possible. Kudos to the Pilots!
Would be interesting to see if the real life pilots were using the J35 against AI NGADs.
I think the closest you could get in DCS is one human in NGAD with drones against 5 or so humans in J-35s.
I think you got the Idea of the NGAD perfectly
Now you need to perform the baseline air to ground test against the Japanese Imperial Fleet with the NGAD! 😂
My understanding of loyal wingman (or NGAD) is that you are able to get 3 or 4 airframes searching for targets, increasing sensor detection and lethality more than the sum of the aircraft....
all will be digitally sync'd up, providing efficient battlespace awareness to the human (or AI) controller.
It is almost time to place lasers on aircraft as well. Not there yet, but by 2035 it is almost a certainty. The first "smaller" land based anti-drone units are being put through trials now.
Dear valued streamer, I hope you're doing very well today😊 Thanks for some Saturday DCS nourishment!
Absolutely loved this video. I'd love to see variations on this theme, with air to air, as well as air to surface/ground. It would also be cool to see smaller numbers of NGADs, paired with 4 loyal wingman drones, to show that more could be done with less.
NGAD: "We want the capacity of an F-15EX with the capability of an F-22 improved in a platform that can hop the pacific with 1-2 aerial refuel points maximum"
I like it. When can I buy one.
That was stunning. It really looks like a future battle.
Such a thought-provoking exercise. Great job!
That was an amazing set up, good job guys👍 a perfect summary of what future air warfare is gonna look like
Thank you so much Cap and Boys! 👍 Great video and it's giving me a lot to think about.
Thanks Cap for all the hard work!
Thanks!
Great choices for your NGAD :) Well done Grim Reapers 🌏 With regards from Australia :) AUKUS rules OK.
Good job!....learning more about the NGAD evertime!...
I believe the NGAD will be two seater - the second man will allow even a larger group of drones to be commanded, and the mother plane may only have missiles for self-defence.
First of really love your content. From a retired navy amateur perspective there is a big tactical subject area that I really didn't see addressed. NGAD Provides a huge tactical sensor advantage. Which place right into the navy's Pacific tactics of being every where with superior sensors to be able to detect, eval, guide weapons to prosecute and kill without being detected.
Another Battle idea would be to use this thought process to defeat China's hyper missile threat from stand off range. That way Navy could protect against attack on Taiwan with less danger using preposition NGAD.
That was absolutely GLORIOUS!! Not just the victory, but the mission and setup of the NGAD itself. Just goes to show the power of the AI wingman + the Peregrine missile's insanely clever design? Who needs 200+KM missiles when stealth aircraft can't see each other at half that range? So design a 50-95km missile that's small and has exceptional tracking and manouverability within that range to completely sodomize enemy low observ/stealth craft? Excellent implementation in DCS you beautiful, beautiful boys!
Here for it. Amazing work.
So, the various literature that's out there about the potential tactics for using drones like the Valkyrie with the NGAD is to either:
1) you sense, I shoot - send the drones out ahead to extend sensing range but keep them cold and dark as much as possible and send back detections so you can quarterback and work out a solution. Then either use your long range missiles, or call on 4th Gen missile trucks to rip.
2) I sense, you shoot - spread the formation out, use your own radar to detect, and let the drones shoot a bunch, and you keep your missiles to mop up, or take out any crtiical targets (like a C2 node, tanker, etc).
Regardless, you put the drones out front where they can be in harms way, and keep the squishy human in the rear with the gear.
Cool fight, it'll be interesting to see what the actual capabilities and intended doctrine will be for NGAD as this is still quite science fiction-y as is.
Wow this video is certainly a Futuristic Video cause no one is even close to activating this in their Military. But good thinking to the future...
Irony: Chinese 6 Gen will probably enter service before NGAD
Here is an idea for a bvr battle. How about J20s vs J35s?
Grim Reapers is building "DCS-Beyond"!! 😄 Peregrine should be renamed "SPAMRAAM"!! A future US carrier group sneaks in behind the IJN at Pearl Harbor, equipped with F/A-XX NGADs, F-35B and Cs. I just hope the NGAD (F/A-XX) doesn't end up being the size of an A-5 Vigilante. At some point we'll have the first "Around the world unrefueled supersonic flight". Think Rutan's Voyager but over Mach 1.
I keep watching this video, and keep getting more ideas. A Gen 4 (Typhoon) with Meteors, and Gen 4+ (F-15EX) armed with Peregrine.
the NGAD is going to be absolutely gigantic lol. look at the range and speed and weapons carriage requirements.
@@jonathanpfeffer3716 One thing they can't simulate in DCS yet is the dual cycle engines.
Drone wingmen would be a lot smaller with much smaller payloads, plan is to buy nearly 5 times as many drones as NGADs each a lot smaller than the NGAD.
The air force plans to acquire 200 NGAD jets and 1,000 of its unmanned companion wingmen is the current plan according to Task and Purpose
These aren't those wingmen, these are just unmanned NGAD fighters.
@@henrygibson9613thing is there’s also lots of other drones and assets. XQ-58s, 15-EXs with LREWs, etc. etc.
@@rofibhoi9788 indeed, was merely wondering if 18 NGADs out of proposed fleet of 200 would actually operate as one or having 6 but with wingmen would be more realistic.
@@jonathanpfeffer3716 True, sadly modelling of them all doesn't seem realistic. Unless a generic modular wingman could be made?
I look at NGAD as a small fast stealth AWACs with self defense built in.
They fight more like Rhinos in the sky; super fast, hard to see, can chase down anything, has super long range, carries a lot of DAMAGE.
I think IRL the workload for one pilot will be too much. It will be interesting seeing how this pans out.
IRL would be about 5-10 years from now. AI would likely be advanced enough to fly this entire mission autonomously, and China could have their own NGAD in the works by then
GR never disappoints ❤🎉
Really good video, Cap! Thanks for all your hard work! And thanks to "the boys"!
It will be interesting to see the differences between all the new 6th gen fighters. Great job on the simulation.
I think its disengenous to say that an aircraft that is good at everything is a "fantasy"
We already have an aircraft thats good at everything. Its the F-35.
It can conduct SEAD very well.
It can conduct Reconnaissance and information gathering/sharing very well.
It can conduct BVR missions very well.
And even though people refuse to accept it because theyre stupid even though actual pilots of the thing have said so multiple times,
The F-35 is a VERY capable and deadly dogfighter as well.
I've yet to see footage of an F-35 with an M777 slung, or seen it airdrop a hundred paratroopers or drop off an Abrams, so I'd say it's definitely not fulfilling the vertical heavy lift or cargo roles very well.
Same-ish but add the LRASM's for the boys...
I believe it was Alex Hollings who mentioned the 4 weapons bays 2 small ones and 2 large ones, he thinks the NGAD will carry 4 AMRAAMS in the 2 small weapons bays and 4 cruise missiles in the 2 bigger ones, maybe we can try some antishipping with NGAD
I'm assuming it could also carry 8 AMRAAMS in the 2 bigger weapons bays instead of cruise missiles so you would be correct with the 12 total missile
They're also turning the bone into a ship killer with the ability to carry 36 LRASMs, and I believe its worth mentioning that the LRASM has a range off 500 nautical miles although I understand that you might have problems updating that.
I'll post a link to support this claim which you'll need to copy and paste since you tube doesn't support links.
@@cj64343 It'll be a while yet
@@cj64343 There are still 45 left. Their not planning on retiring any more until 2030, the last are planned for retirement 2036 and they are still getting upgrades just google Bone turning onto ship killer.
@@markstoltzfus4984MUCH longer than 500nmi with current models actually
Turns out in late July 2023 Northrup Grumman said they would not pursue the USAF NGAD. Though some think they may take a crack at the US Navy version the F/A-XX 6th gen carrier fighter. It maybe that Northrup knowns that USN carrier fighter will have low production run. So it might see it as something it can produce with its available assets verses how many NGAD's the USAF will require. But its statements so far have been vague on both the NGAD and 'other projects'. Odds are then the USAF NGAD will probably be the Lockheed Martin plane they teased which has the nick name 'Bird of Prey'. Since the F/A-XX is intended to replace the the F/A-18 Super Hornet. I image it will be set up to fire air launched hypersonic anti-ship missiles. Which would be insane, since it can use the F/A-XX stealth to get it close and then hit the enemy fleet at hypersonic speeds.
That went suprisingly well. And scary. To receiving end.
That was an epic battle!
Would be cool if it had a better radar compared to the standard AESA radar you guys use though (you should also make PESA radars for Russian fighters).
Another thing that would be really cool to be implemented are towed decoys which have been in use for a long time now and constantly upgraded. Would make the F-35 an absolute beast in dodging radar guided missiles.
I think with there modeling PESA is the same, they cannot really model chirping and anti jam property's with radars. As for toed decoys, once ED adds the AN/ALE-50 on the viper I presume they could modify it for their uses? But they might not have any way to model it RN.
A view of the what the Chinese could see on shared radar would be cool.
We need another Grim Reapers vs aliens simulation. This time all 5th/6th gen aircraft (F22, F35, Su57, J20, NGAD, etc) vs ID4 aliens
China's '5th gen' can't even challenge America's 5th gen today.
Considering US has been making sealth for decades, China developing the second best 5th gen stealth is an insane feat, even if stolen technology, even Russia or Japan couldn't do it
@@Hhhh22222-w China's 'stealth' planes are not stealth. India, Taiwan and Japan have already locked their J20s on radar from a long distance.
with that tiny of a radar cross section i wonder if the missiles would be easier to detect than the firing planes
That has already been the case for 25 years with F-22 and F-35. Even 1970's F-14 Tomcats could detect missiles.
The navy version has kennards on it so I'm pretty sure it would be maneuverable and it's taking over for the raptor so I think that sums it up
I am guessing here, but I strongly suspect that the NGAD will have amazing acceleration: the engines the US are working on will be adaptive cycle with a thrust ratio in the 50,000lb class: this will be a big, heavy fighter, but the power to weight ratio will be far in advance of anything before.
I agree that it is likely it will sacrifice a fair degree of turn performance and roll rates due to prioritizing stealth (likely no vertical control surfaces), range, payload. There is a small possibility that it could utilize blended control surfaces on its body (think the F-15 airbrake), or perhaps some advanced aerodynamic concepts could be used, but at the cost of weight, some stealth, range etc...not to mention cost and maintenance. It probably is not worth it.
It may be the case that the NGAD will instead have 360 degree weapon launch capability. If that is coupled with some directed energy weapon that isn't just a single line of sight, then it could be a new ballgame for all. We wait with interest!
And a FANTASTIC recreation.
Nice, My request should be fairly easy for you as it's editing the same file: Do it again, only this time with a realistic number of Chinese jets out on patrol, maybe 3 pairs? (and carrier launch as would really happen as soon as the engagement starts), but with only one flight of AA and everyone else follows a minute behind loaded for anti-shipping.
Can one flight suppress a carrier group's air power long enough to sink it?
UK vixen programme? a 2030 UK CSG would be amazing! UK wingman with F35B, spear 3 etc?
Just love the fact there was a movie years and years ago …. Stealth ….. that called modern day well 😹
Interested to see how Tom Cruise can manage two 6th gen with an F-18 in the Top Gun 3
Let's do 10th generation USAF vs a combined fleet of Imperial Star Destroyers and Federation Starships.
This is George
A super-cruise of Mach 2.2 is more logical than another speed. When designing the supersonic transport Concord, they managed to super-cruise the transport between the speeds of Mach 1.7 and 2.2. At these higher speeds the drag was lower than transonic speeds 1.0 to 1.6. Speeds above Mach 2.2 raised the skin temperatures too high as well as drag began to increase again dramatically after Mach 2.2. At Mach 2.2 the Concord was actually more fuel efficient than a 747. While the Concord burned nearly twice the fuel, it did so at more than twice the speed and at these high speeds after-burners were no used. The Afterburners were used on take-off and accelerating through transonic speeds, but the bulk of the journey was conducted at Mach 2.2 with no afterburner.
These lessons of transonic drag have not been lost for military designers, Military designers have known for quite some time the target speed for super-cruise is Mach 2.2. I offer this as I would think NGAT would also target Mach 2.2 as its super-cruise speed where transonic drag is minimized.
*Angry American noises*
The people’s Chainsaw!!!!
Well done Dark, CH and everyone else!!! What a fantastic video!
sooner we get thoses NGADS in service, the better. great sim you guys . . . 👍 👍
Game timestamps
10:50:27 fa_xx (NGAD-4-3) fired Peregrine
10:50:36 (J-15-2-3) fired GR_PL-10
10:50:39 (J-15-2-3) hit and destroyed by Peregrine (NGAD-4-3)
10:50:43 fa_xx (NGAD-4-3) hit and destroyed by GR_PL-10 (J-15-2-3)
The only loss of a drone! You are welcome :)
Palestine has just invaded isreal with a paraglider, do you think you could set up a scenario on that 😂😂😂
Only if Cap is flying it in his birthday suit 😂
Did it go machhhhhhhhhhhhhh 1.2?
Almost spat out my beer laughing at your comment😂 And that's bad, cause I loves my beer!!!
Ah, ya made me chuckle
I dont think they do monkeys with rockets
@grimreapers can the peregrin hit those lil swam drones? a few(ish) say 2x4plane flights of ngads from a airbase defend from 150(ish) drones
Will try.
Writing up some much more detailed stuff on the underlying physics, but it's taking so long i want to get a basic comment out there.
Some comments you've made about how you've set the NGAD's up has me concerned because of the implications of the variable cycle engine. It may be your limited by DCS though, no idea.
Assuming the maximum possibble fuel burn at any given speed and altitude is the same between a raptor and an NGAD, (it won't be, but the thrust will go up or down, relative to what i'm going to outline below, in correlation to the fuel burn rate difference), an NGAD will achieve very different thrust values compared to the rapor.
At around mach 1 upto the Raptors maximum non-afterburning speed the thrust per pound of fuel burned will likely be slightly worse than the raptor.
At anything below mach 1 down to whatever airspeed the engine hits it's bypass limit at the thrust will be higher and will go up very fast. Likely to a very extreme degree. Since range is a factor of thrust per pound of fuel burned vs airframe drag this also means it's maximum range will occur at such a speed, (the altitude this occurs at is dependent on whatever altitude they optimise for). the maximum rnage value will not occur at mach 1.9 as you had it et up here, (this was the big thing that caught my attention).
At anything above the speed where a Raptor needs it's afterburner the performance of the NGAD's engines will depend on weather it has any form, (partial or full), of ramjet mode. If it doesn't the raptor will be more efficient all the way up. If it does then it will outperform the raptor past that point by a large margin, but not the utterly extreme margin it would at below mach 1. It's also worth noting that if it does have a ramjet function the engines will be capable of pushing the airframe much faster than whatever the airframes structural and thermal limit is, (as a reference point, assuming it had an infinitely durable airframe it should be capable of challenging the SR-71 record, thats how good such an engine would be).
All of the above assumes they design for a max airframe speed not much higher than the raptor. If they go significantly higher the Raptor will have the edge all the way until it hits it's afterburners, but the NgAd would win from there on out. But that only makes sense if they want SR-71 or better top speeds and i don't seen that happening.
Now obviously that doesn't necessarily mean it's going to out accelerate or outturn a raptor if it carries more fuel relative to its thrust, (as you have set it up here), but i 100% question if it would need that much more fuel than a raptor to achieve that much more range given the advantages of a variable cycle, though achieving that range at a mach 1.9 supercruise with the sheer amount of fuel you've given it probably isn't unreasonable. It just wouldn't be the maximum range speed with a variable cycle engine.
Potentially a naval & air battle? Have 2-3 flights of human NGAD (with AI wingman) and a US carrier strike group (with or without F-35) attempt to destroy a Chinese naval port with nearby J-20 & J-35 air support. A similar case of the simulated Chinese attack on San Diego, but a reversed test.
How about an NGAD vs. Super Tomcat airwing. Great video. Very informative.
Great video Cap, GR, and all affiliated. I think you guys are dead on as far as the role you have developed the NGAD to perform. In addition, I feel the future flight computers and weapons development for the NGAD platform will be increasingly geared towards improved stealth & BVR abilities that will largely encompass intergration of Link16 and the "hive-mind" concept with the obvious increased priority the US has with the inclusion of drone aircraft.
With that said, do you guys have ideas for creating a system that could simulate the power of Link16 in DCS? Or is that something that would be far too complicated?
To be honest it's already here just not really talked about. They are also using the decision-making processes learned from IA aircraft dog fights to increase drone NGAD independence allowing for a much larger amount of drones per human controller. For an idea just search for the drone computer light shows
Wow I am 3/4 the way through the video and this is Impressive for real. I just hope that is why and how it works out...
Acceleration is not a logical trade off. Comparing last generations NGAD (the F-14 with F-110 engines) acceleration was extreme, on par with F-110 F-16s or F-15s. I would anticipate maneuverability to actually be on par with current 4th or 4+ gen aircraft. Probably not thrust vectored, so not F-22 level maneuverability. That being said, the J20 doesn't look very maneuverable, my guess is NGAD will be better than a J20. Probably on par or better than the F-14, with better flight controls making it easier to employ.
Fa/xx will probably have the Rotation Detonation Engine. So... Fast interceptor version too
WOW - BRILLIANT Cap!! Thank you
I just wanted the NGAD to come with a shark with a friggin laser beam on his head. Is that asking too much? 😂😂😂
^ fair comment
Would be interesting to see what happens when take out AWACS with LR BVR to blind them and pick them off with hit and run using LO advantage
I hope you're doing very well?
Yes, I'm coming to you from 6 feet under. Life is great being of the lifeless.
Trying to word a paragraph in RUclips. Shows how RUclips has their heads up their ass.
Now, imagine a modernized B-52 (updated engines, avionics, RAM coating etc) capable of carrying 2-4 NGAD style drones under the wing to then be deployed as escorts on deep strike missions. If that sounds cool, which it is, read the Dreamland series by Dale Brown. Its awesome.
no such thing as deep strike missions with the B-52 lmao
That's why I said..."Imagine". Y'know, that thing where you consider the existance of a thing that doesn't exist!? Or a world in which a non existent thing... is. Like, imagine a world in which you didn't post that comment and so 1 less person thinks you're an arse, wouldn't that be lovely? BUT IT ISN'T, and I do. That reality is real because imagination is seemingly forbidden, by you. Who died and made you "destroyer of dreams"!? Who hurt you? Are the other 3715 Jonathanpfeffer's also killjoys who suck the fun out of everything and kill the dreams of children and adults alike? And who do I have to off to also gain that title/promotion? It's because of people like you the rest of us can't have nice things.
NGAD will use SIAW, MUTANT, HAWC, Peregrine, Loyal Wingman Ghost Bat, Valkyrie, LOCUST, Gambit drone series, Longshot air launched UCAV, CRANE X-drones, Darkhorse, Fury.
It might be of value to set up one day for demonstrating how NOT to utilize your NGADs.
- dog fight
- canyon running (limits of maneuverability)
- impact of adverse weather on stealth coatings (if that's still a thing)
- missile evasion tactics (can it dodge ?)
- IR susceptibility from different aspects
Also, try setting the drone-wingman to about 10x the NGAD RCS. It may be a better approximation of a Loyal Wingman flying Missile Truck duties,... Get the pilot more accustomed to a more distant separation on in/egress as well as illustrating the dangers of floating too far inside the AWACS zone while being wingman-aggressive
?? Just a thought.... watching a few 200 million USD aircraft go down in flames may impress a point on the fliers.
Or maybe demo the classic 'ingress into radar/ground-fire-hostile' scenarios wouldn't work.
BTW, do we know how the NGAD performs against those sense-but-no-acquisition/lock low frequency radars ?
The NGAD fighters will have replaced their old cannons with high power lasers which means less weight to carry.
So is the NGAD going to be an American stealth version of the Mig-31?
@@cj64343 from everything I hear (albeit mostly speculation) it seems like it’ll be a big bulky, yet very stealth aircraft designed for speed, range and a lot of stand off weapons.
Which to me just sounds like a stealthy mig 31, though significantly better.
I don't think they can drop the dogfight ability, or at least close range ability, because stealth on both sides decreasing detection ranges, should make them more likely.
NGAD is mostly supersonic, how to dogfight @ that speed?
i really think you should use XQ-58 drones forward with 4-6 drones per human flown NGAD. have the xq-58's loaded with 2 AIM-9x each and the human piloted NGADs with the loadouts as had in this mission.
the foreard xq-58's would use IRST to locate ant track targets forward of the human piloted NGAD fighter's.
the XQ-58'S are CHEAP...loosing 10 XQ-58'S would be fard cheaper than loosing just 1 drone NGAD as was used in this mission.
@@cj64343
the XQ-58 is VLO and smaller thus allowing for a relatively low RCS.
the speed is not extremely relevant being the groups in this mission were pre staged before commencement of attack.
6 manned NGAD with 6 xq-58's forward would allow for 36 forward IRST sensor platforms that will all be capable of getting kills and are targets that will absorb opponents munitions. each XQ-58 is costed well below a 10th the cost of a full sized non maneuverable NGAD. the only real difficulty would be each pilot having to control 6 units instead of just 2. multi seat NGAD would be handy in this regard.
@@cj64343
the xq-58's will have a smaller RCS than the j35 (more than adequate). the xq-58's would be operating greater than 50 NM ahead of the NGAD relaying targeting info via data link. if a XQ-58 is seem it will be fired on thus depleting opponents munitions supply well before manned NGAD are in danger.
each XQ-58 carries 2 aim9x thus capable of reducing enemy numbers significantly well before manned NGAD get into harms way.
the xq-58's would also (actual primary job) gain forward situational awareness thus give the manned NGAD the always wanted unfair advantage over the opponents.
a simple win win.
can DCS allow for this type of operation is the real question. how the pilot's in the NGAD control the xq-58's is also a question.
GR really need to work on the subtitles
Do a revised Ngad vs F22.
Yup planning something like that but bigger.
Just, awesome lads!
Great job TEAM!!!
Very insightful sim! Have you factored in that the AI NGAD could pull G beyond human limits?
It's doubtful that the airframe could sustain G loads much beyond what human pilots could anyway, especially with the heavy fuel-laden missile-truck design used in the video. There have been a few times where aircraft like the F-14 and F-16 have pulled 10-11g, and moderate to significant airframe damage resulted. Aircraft like these just aren't designed for those kinds of G loads.
Could you see if you could model the GCAP Tempest?
Second 6th gen aircraft. Don't forget B-21
Definitely agree. It looks like an AWCS killer like the Chinese J20
If you are loading the loyal wingmen (drones) with medium range missiles only (Peregrines), shouldn't you position at least one of then CLOSER to the enemy (ahead of his human "master") at least a bit (few miles) instead putting them just following?
Missile swarm works.
What are the odds that the NGAD will be later fitted with energy weapons? Either air-to-air or air-to-ground would have at least the same range of an autocannon.
I think that a future laser system may be used against enemy missiles like a mini CIWS.
Using a directed energy weapon against an organic target is actually considered a war crime by the Geneva Convention
Laser for BVR air-to-air combat is unlikely since you need a ton of power to transfer enough energy onto the target fast enough at a long enough range while outranging BVRAAM for it to be useful, due to the inherent atmospheric refraction and diffusion. Such a powerful laser would be huge, heavy, and sucking a ton of power, something that you would only put on the big boys like the YAL-1
A much smaller and lighter CIWS laser against AAM and SAM is a different matter though. That one is much more likely to be implemented, maybe even for the F-35 in the future
@@fauzin3338 and not even necessarily to destroy the missiles in early variants, but likely just to blind their IR seekers.
Don't you think the strategy from the Chinese with planes like this, would be, keeping the J-15B's in the back or center and then having them support the J35's from there when they engage?
Not that I think it would have changed that much in this case.
What do you think about Gunns doing gci? I thinks it very needed !!! Lol I get a kick when the gang is together
That would be extremely cool.
@@grimreapers cool as a jewl
Well done..
Almost like watching stealth cap 😅👍
I don't think any of them will have full AI. My guess is the carrier will have a squad of drone pilots who use virtual reality.
4:07 seems like you have mixed up the PLAAF planes and texts.
BTW why not J-20 instead of J-15B?
Ah you swapped them.
Guess no J-20 because they are carrier-based, maybe make one defending an island.
J20 with canards, Americans: not stealthy
While their 6th gen with canards, RCS: 0.000005 or whatever xd
Good eye 👁
there was some natf-23 concepts....
The image being used is just a stand in image for an aircraft no one has seen. Canards can increase radar returns (like all control surfaces), but that depends on a host of specifics.
the NGAD/FA-XX design they are using here is not reminiscent of any official statements. we actually have next to no clue what the actual aircraft will look like, we can only guess that it will not have vertical stabilizers and will prob be on the larger side