How Many Chinese DF-26B Ballistic Missiles Could Beat A US Carrier Group? (WarGames 207) | DCS
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 31 июл 2024
- Today we ask the question of how many Chinese anti-ship DF-26B ballistic hypersonic missiles it would take to overwhelm a large US carrier strike group.
Mods: www.currenthill.com/
PATREON: / grimreapers
0:00 Intro
0:57 Scenario Details
3:06 Strike with 3 x Missiles
6:00 Strike with 9 x Missiles
7:42 Strike with 15 x Missiles
9:09 Strike with 18 x Missiles
10:36 Strike with 21 x Missiles
11:52 Strike with 24 x Missiles
13:32 Strike with 27 x Missiles
15:02 Strike with 30 x Missiles
15:54 Strike with 33 x Missiles
17:23 Strike with 36 x Missiles
18:53 Strike with 40 x Missiles
20:06 Strike with 48 x Missiles
21:44 Strike with 57 x Missiles
23:37 Strike with 66 x Missiles
25:28 Strike with 66 x Missiles Re-Match
26:52 Strike with 75 x Missiles
USEFUL LINKS
GRIM REAPERS (RUclips): / @grimreapers
GRIM REAPERS 2 (RUclips): / @grimreapers2
GR PODCASTS: anchor.fm/grim-reapers
DCS TUTORIALS: / @grimreapers
DCS BUYERS GUIDES: • DCS World Module Quick...
DONATE/SUPPORT GRIM REAPERS
MERCHANDISE: www.redbubble.com/people/grme...
PATREON monthly donations: / grimreapers
PAYPAL one-off donations: www.paypal.me/GrimReapersDona...
SOCIAL MEDIA
WEBSITE: grimreapers.net/
STREAM(Cap): / grimreaperscap
FACEBOOK: / grimreapersgroup
TWITTER: / grimreapers_
DISCORD: / discord
THANK YOU TO: Mission Makers, Admin, Staff, Helpers, Donators & Viewers(without which, this could not happen) xx
#WarGames #GRWarGames #China #BallisticMissile #DF26 #DF21 #AircraftCarrier #Aviation #AviationGaming #FlightSimulators #militaryhistory #DCS #DCSWORLD 
Игры
That's a brilliant variation on this scenario - "Imagine the US would really like it if they parked them all close together..." What if the launchers were scattered and still planned for a ToT attack.
Oddly enough, the AEGIS defense would likely be even more efficient because it would make target deconfliction that much easier
@@cynthiaherbst3909it 1000% would 🫡 a clearer battle space is as (if not more) beneficial 2 a system as it is 2 a human
it depends very significantly if they are capable of successfully coordinating the strike. if they came form several different angles it would be mildly more difficult to counter them, but realistically they would also arrive less closely timed together so that instead of having to defend against a single swarm they would be defending against a constant stream which would be much easier
Another thing that isn't modeled is mirv/decoys, and the fact that a successful hit will most likely not destroy the missile ridiculously cleanly like it does in DCS irl. You will have either damaged missile that still is dangerous or fragments traveling at rediculously fast speeds, making for more targets that are still coming down. So the actual efficacy will certainly be much less
@@ilmarga I think the unmodeled ECM and EW cancels it out tho lol
Don't know why but I'm getting strong Missile Command vibes from the re-entry interception graphics.
I cam down here to say this.
After running the math per round, the US achieved a P.o.K of about 3.5 to just over 4 SAMs per ballistic missile or at worst about 23%, with it fluctuating per round.
those number jump alot when your talking subsonic or supersonic missiles those are hypersonic ballistic missiles its kind of correct us doctrine is 3 interceptor per one ballistic missile.
A longer range shot would be more realistic which would yield a flatter trajectory, meaning the terminal phase would be in thicker air for a longer time, ergo a slower warhead, therefore easier to hit. Maybe the final warhead speed drops from M6 to M4. Those few seconds could be valuable.
Yes, plus there are better missiles to use at 200 miles.
Mid range 12-18 Mach, end range 20 Mach. Qian Xuesen's trajectory. How did you think of only Mach 4.
In this game, anti-aircraft weapons almost achieve a 100% interception rate, but in reality it is not like that.
Nah, in DCS SAMs can miss. And in real life ballistic missiles can fail.
Fragments aren't modeled either
@@pietreks3409 In real life, there is a Kinzhal missile, which cannot be intercepted. The difference from this video is that it glows red at the end of its flight.
Exactly almost nothing the US works like it's advertised. This is total bs...
The kh22 and kh32 can't be intercepted, same with kinzhal, and zircon....
how does a DF21 with a terminal descent rate of mach 9 get chased and shot down from BEHIND by SM2 or SM3 or SM6 with a speed half that?
Good observation
SM3 block 11A is the fastest anti ballistic missile going msch 14! The Sm6 block 11b will be hypersonic with 550km range!
Hows a human walking 4mph get hit by a car going 40mph? By walking in front of it...
That's a great question....the SM 3 BLOCK IIA actually go as fast as Mach 18, so they say......we have never seen the DF 21D vs the SM 3 BLOCK IIA.......not sure how fast the new SM 6 BLOCK IB will actually be.....the Pershing II was the BETTER DF 21D.
IIRC Minuteman III is all solid fuel and *does* shut off the last stage by explosively dumping pressure. I think it uses blow-out-panels, but a linear cutting charge ring to drop the nozzle would get the job done rather nicely to.
I would imagine they would also shroud the carrier in tons of chaff, flares, and ECM.
I think the US learned its lesson about using RBOC after they took hits from their own escort. I wonder if that was ever corrected? It was back in the Gulf War though.
Hm, "tons of chaff, flares and ECM" incidentally aka Hornets
@@solace001Former Navy EW here. Short answer: Yes
@@DreadX10 Depending on the wavelength it's cut to, you can just be completely blotting out everybody's radar and just making a horrible mess . Then you have to take the wind into account. Nothing like decoying a missile...through a chaff cloud straight into one of your buddies.
Very exciting video.
Nothing like waking up having my first cup of coffee and this video pops up👍
If SM-3 works.. im gonna go out on a limb and say 60
Not a bad guess at all
@@JD-sb4ss i was 15 off but yeah lol better than Caps guess 😝😂
It doesn't work particularly well in Ukraine.
@@MultiNike79 Ukraine doesn't have SM-3.... are you dumb?
@@MultiNike79 orc scum detected
According to Perun, the water instead of fuel is a mistranslation of a colloquialism. i dont remember the specifics but i roughly means "they used cheaper alternatives" or something, like watering down soup
that claim isn't even likely to be true, it sound too similiar to a rehash of CIA propaganda against USSR word for word. the chinese largely use solid missile, they don't use liquid fuel missile.
And thats without EW
And quite close
The -26 uses EO guidance so EW won't matter.
@@corvanphoenixnaive
@@corvanphoenix so? the launch and rockets can still be detected by Ballistic search radar and Satellites looking for heat signatures
@voidwalker9223 I'm not sure where you're coming from or going with that. I was referring to the fact that 🇺🇸 Electronic Warfare in this scenario is redundant due to the DF-26 being modelled in DCS with an Electro Optical seeker.
NCIS gonna be happy with your simulation. Thank you for your service
I remember reading in that one part of the Dead Sea Scrolls how they used "sacred numbers" to calculate how many Chinese ballistic missiles it would take to render a US carrier strike group ineffective. The upshot being that, according to their interpretation of the Bahgavad Ghita, Confucious may already have done those calculations using cuneiform on the Mayan Calendar. He was within 10% of your results. Glad to see it visualized here.
Thanks CH and Dark for the destruction! LOL
Way to go Cap :)
I _almost_ didn't recognize Dark's voice with so little vocal fry. Thanks!
AEGIS is such a damn good battlefield management system. Incredible that this is likely an underestimation of its efficiency.
All Russia or China need to do to counter that in terms of intelligence is hire me as their lead developer.
Agis is great. the real question is. How much of AEGIS has been stolen by china. i mean the did get their hands on f35 and f22 files.
well it did almost fail against that Houthi missile
The most likely reason Gravely had to use her CIWS is to save cost. The Houthi missile is a subsonic anyways and it would be cheaper to use CIWS than an ESSM
@@wassollderscheiss33are you him?
Please do a version of this using different types of missiles.
Cruise missiles and ballistic missiles of various speeds up to hypersonics, various altitudes and angles of attack.
All timed to arrive at the same moment.
For the funs, it would be interesting to see GR control the missles in their terminal phase and see if they could dodge the incoming missiles and hit their targets.
Your videos are always so fun! I am on your discord, Hope I get to say hi. Great video!
Hmm... if what Habitual Line Crosser said is true, then the issue isn't that the missiles are bad, but that the hypersonics can't maneuver in terminal phases since they're going so fast, so it's not that difficult to predict where it'll be and where you can intercept it.
yep. theya re relying in speed to give short reaction times rather than maneuverability to dodge defenses
@@delphy2478 which hey, as an American, I'm not complaining.
Plus they're satellite guided with cannot be as accurate as an onboard radar so we don't even know if they could hit a carrier a 1000 miles away 😂
@@user-ft2zc5or9d Yeah, I wonder what the delay is on satellite info. Does that play much of a role if the carrier is maneuvering? Edit: 18:11 Cap explains that they have a separate terminal guidance system, so it probably just depends on how reliable that is.
Finally something concrete to explain this - and the video doesn’t even factor in EW, killchain disruption, unreliability (new tech), near misses, lack of vulnerability, plus a flatter trajectory from longer ranges meaning more time in thicker atmosphere and more friction
With the high number of missile interceptions at relatively the same time, I'm wondering how the debris field would affect the DF's flying at those speeds.
excellent episode gents...
Crazy to me that no other nation could even do something like this in the first place
Filled with water("Guan Shui") does not mean literally filled with water. It is a chinese colloquialism/euphimism lost in translation. It means basically over promised and under delivered or it could mean over priced to cook the books, or using cheaper parts than necessary to skim off the top.
I'd love to see how a fleet in motion or under maneuvers would change the POK.
You should try carrier group vs everything all at once.
AGEIS is probably the most advanced anti air system in the world so well done
It's funny how they automatically assume non-western weapons to be defective.
When the game portrays NATO systems to have 100% interception rates.
Also how they questions the accuracy of DF-26s going at Mach 6, while the SM-3s going at the same speed (and requiring to hit much smaller and faster target) was not questioned whether it's a feasible weapon or not.
i want to point out that according to what i found on the internet, china has something like 200 total of these missiles. so they could theoretically try this trick like 2-3 times unless they gambled literally everything on a single all-in strike.
They have a plethora of various ASMs that are meant to be used together, all designed to do one thing.
Also the expert quoted said: "200 or more" with China i would always assume its more than estimates due to their immense industrial capacity.
@@volvo245 if you told me that the USA was going to shoot 200 missiles, i would be able to believe that 195 of them would correctly fire with the other 5 having a variety of failures and problems. if you told me china was going to shoot 200 missiles, i would be impressed if 150 of them successfully fired and had the accuracy to hit their target even without any defenses in the way.
i do agree that china has a broad industrial capacity, the only problem is that it's also being spread across a broad array of projects. they are building capital class navy ships, they are building tanks, they are building missile launch systems, they are building aircraft, and they are building dozens of types of missiles and bombs, so only a tiny tiny portion of that vast capacity goes towards a particular ballistic missile.
also, advanced missiles are some o the systems that rely the most heavily on the hyper advanced microchips that china is facing serious shortages on, so even if they allocate more of their base to their manufacture they will still be limited by how quickly they can acquire chips that they are being sanctioned against and restricted from directly purchasing using workarounds and smuggling tiny quantities
@@delphy2478copium is a helluva drug
@@delphy2478thats being generous lucky if %20 work. There bridges are falling down and globally the joke its made in china is universal.
@@delphy2478
The sanctions have greatly accelerated Chinas development of home grown chips, theyve already made breakthroughs which surprised the US government. I wont disregard the possibility of China eventually reach a level where they become self sufficient in microchips powering their weapons in the future.
Is there an explanation of how the DF-21D should be launched? I tried inside the green circle and outside the green circle on a target both on land and at sea and it doesn't launch missiles for me
Interesting video, I noticed that you had the carrier fleet stationary, not sure, but I don't believe they would remain still, would it make a difference if the fleet was moving? Just wondering
Battle groups never stop moving.
Finally, an answer to the question that has been bothering philosophers for millennia!
Like everyone else, I want to know what would happen to an older fleet. Perhaps something from the 80's.
Throw in the scenario when the CAG retaliates against the launch site and when you do, do not forget what is under the water that can also be used in the strike. As you say, a simplistic attack on a CAG, have you ever served on DDG when doing sea trials when the 127mm was used as part of the middle layer of defence, very effective in throwing up a wall of shrapnel and destroying anything trying to fly through that wall at up to 18nm
24:17 I believe this is also NCIS's take Simba 😅
I would say, within that carrier group they should have just a dedicated launch ship that can house 500 SM-3 missiles and leave the rest of the defense to the fleet.
Missile barge concept was abandoned for....wait for it....ZUMWALT! 😂💩
Not cool guys! You're not counting on layer 6....Mike, the former outfielder that can throw grenades really far and will extremely good accuracy. Nice modeling and sort of scary to watch.
I see a lot of missle flights through previous explosions. Would this have an affect on the missle flights?
ROFL, good video for sure. I enjoy limit testing
The US Admirals know better than these 'experts' not to underestimate these Chinese missiles..... 😂😂
I get it. It's more important to feel secure than be secure. Do whatever you want.
What are the specs of this computer? I've heard this comment about the host (local and server) a lot, but I don't recall ever hearing the specs mentioned.
486 with turbo button and 8mb of ram, its a asskicker!
5900X AMD.
Not too old, but from what I've read (no expert on this game at all here), RAM 32Gb+ and a good GPU are more important than CPU. This makes sense to me as it seems to fall over when more assets (ram) and more effects (GPU???) are happening. I suppose it matters quite a lot how much of the physics modeling/math is delegated by the CPU to the GPU, which is much better at that sort of thing.
Every source I've read says the weapons are guided by radar in the terminal phase.
Meanwhile 60 high speed submarine drones make a stealthy run during the battle and hole the carrier 6 times below the water line, forcing it out of theatre and into a long dry dock.
This tickles the part of my brain that would hit +9 on the calculator in highschool :D
Nice
Got to wonder how terminal IR homing would work if your sensor window is glowing white hot...
Yeah just keep assuming your enemies weapons won't work. LOL.
I would also like to know this.
By injecting pressurized coolants (Most likely liquid nitrogen) into the layer between the IR lens and the outer window during reentry and terminal phase. And the IR window is not at the tip of the “double cone” shaped reentry vehicle, but slightly behind where there is changing in angle of the cone, thus shielding the IR window from coming in direct contact with the aerodynamic shockwave. That 's what keeps the IR sensor working. I saw a video on a Chinese military channel talking about this.
Can't you just jettison a cover once you're close enough for final phase manoeuvring? Presumably the sensing and course adjustments only take a second or two.
and imagine that these rackets have no obfuscation countermeasures like changing direction and speed, a form to make them harder to spot ..
I think the Chinese might had made their missiles' flight path erratic because perhaps they knew that a simple path won't work.
This is the jokest simulation inhave ever seen 😂
There are no penetration aids with the Chinese missiles? No multiple warheads, stealth warheads, decoys, EW or jamming?
For non-nukes against massive targets, multiple warheads don't make much sense due to them not being able to ensure sufficient damage, At these re-entry speeds. the surface temperature would instantly destroy stealth coating. They rest are very hard (pretty much just guessing) to simulate based on public data.
Thanks Cap, I love these videos. Anytime you make a video that struggles rendering at the erection phase (giggitty), you know we're in for some fun.
I would be wiling to bet my personal safety that these missiles have a very large error when it comes to targetting moving ships. Generally, if the US doesn't have a hypersonic anti-ship missile that can hit a destroyer or frigate sized target, I simply have a hard time believing China has mastered it and put it into mass production.
US navy be like: random bullshit go
Will current hill be releasing the DF-26 bravos? i see he has the DF-21 Delta. i have the DF-21 but dont see the 26B
No, we had to bastardize CH's DF-21 to make the DF-26 but its only useful in a tiny amount of situation (these wargames). Kind of hard to explain.
@@grimreapers no i got you. these are the exact type wargames i make on dcs. i love mission making
Would a group of sea drones or submarines be more effective?
Are you using a Shoot-Shoot-Look-Shoot philosophy. That is what we would use in a saturation attack scenario. Burns through a lot of missiles but it gives a high initial intercept rate. Of course this was 30 years ago when I was an Aegis FC at the MSS console on an Arleigh Burke DDG, so the PK was lower back then.
If the ballistic missiles were launched from multiple cardinal directions would that make any difference to the defenders?
He said at the end that multiple directions gives Aegis a better view of the incoming and it performs better.
@@trentvlakthis is not true. while the radar can detect better, the fire control of aegis system is mechanical, this is why they have 3 set of fire control. if you exceed 3 direction, they will have to turn the fire control which would greatly reduce the response time. the flight 3 is suppose to replace the fire control with a fully active one, but USN cancel it because they would have to maintain a different set of missiles that use the new fire control. the likelihood of multiple direction is unlikely anyway, China's coast would be on 1 side of the fleet.
i wonder if one of the things they don't tell us about is whether or not a few of the sm-6s or 2s have a modernized w54 in the nose. just for this kind of attack.
Always wondered if conventional anti air defenses can defend against rail gun projectiles.
What happens when there are 100 or more decoys fired at the same time?
The RIM-116* is the RAM (Rolling Airframe Missile) system, for a Carrier its the 2nd to last layer of defense. For a carrier it goes Battle Group, Airwing CAP, ESSM B1 in the trainable Seasparrow launchers, RAM, then CIWS.
RIM-162 is ESSM
RIM-116 is RAM
@@maxlin3442 You're right. Honestly working with ESSM, I'm just used to that number. I haven't worked with RAM for a while now. Damn Sometimers kicking in, gonna fix it.
@@red2001ss You work on ESSM and RAM?Boy it must be amazing to see these in person. A pity our navy in Taiwan has neither of these, but we have our own versions of them, namely TC-2N for ESSM and Sea Oryx for RAM.
@@maxlin3442 I don't work with the Missiles themselves, but do on the Launching system, the MK29 GMLS Seasparrow System. All but one of the ships that have the Seasparrow system have been upgraded to fire the ESSN Block 1 shape. They are working on getting the Block 2 that is used in VLS to work. And like I said, only 1 ship is still using the RIM-7, but not for long. I haven't dealt with RAM since the Navy days at the School where it is taught, but that could easily change.
Defense is probably more effective as moving ships, launching 66 simultaneously isn't likely so the aegis would be able to both pick them off in sequence and ignore the ones not on target (ballistic missiles have predicable trajectory). Amazing it took that many to get through with idealized attack. Incredible.
Yeah they arent gonna be just launching ballistics if they want to sink a carrier greoup
Just curious, given the missiles would be going fastest whilst outside the atmosphere and then slows down from there due to friction with the air, the ones your using were going faster during their decent….physics says no?
It's a limitation of DCS mods. The unrealistic physics are an attempt to match the actual (projected) trajectory of DF21D's.
Outside atmosphere is the top of the parabola and would therefore be the slowest part of the ballistic phase. They will speed up as they fall until air resistance increases to limit them to a terminal velocity as the air thickens.
in part, but also some missiles do have rockets that are used during re-entry for higher speed and/or limited maneuvering, so it's possible they could accelerate (although it might need to be a different missile for that)
the missile is not going faster, they are changing the zoom, which make thing appear faster. if you are on a train, you look at thing near you, they seem to more faster than the thing further away. this is just our mental bias to perspective.
69 is always the magic number . . . too funny you guys. great video as always..
Is this a new version of Missile Command?
I am sure there would be decoys and lesser missiles also fired to,soak up the defense.
Redo this test but stagger the launches. Wave attacks will waste more defensive missiles. 35 is more than enough to drain missiles if launched in waves of 3.
What's the difference between DF-26 and the DF-ZF?
The DF-ZF is a maneuvering warhead for the shorter-range (1,500km class) DF-21 missile. The DF-26 is a longer-range (5,000 km class) ballistic missile.
What PC specs are you running, CAP?
5900X AMD, that's the main hurdle for this.
@@grimreapers Thats no slouch, how does DCS do with multiple cores like can it load all cores simultaneously or does it pull on fewer cores kinda of like Arma 3? Sorry for all the questions just generally curious.
I wonder if these systems could really handle this many of these coming in all at once like that.
the unclassified information indicates they are designed to handle tracking and identifying much more than this
BTW, one CAN 'throttle' a solid-rocket motor. Not easy to do; not the most reliable; but it CAN be done.
Is it done via the nozzle?
@@grimreapersthe easiest way is to have a solid fuel rocket that requires oxygenation, then you can throttle the flow of the oxygenation agent to control the burn rate of the fuel. if you have a variable geometry nozzle then you could theoretically adjust the thrust by changing the nozzle mid-flight, but that would be a really expensive nozzle system for a single rocket. you might also try to flood the combustion with some inert gas like nitrogen to slowdown the combustion process. but like OP said, all of these methods have some difficulties and aren't super reliable, if you want throttling a liquid fuel system is just far superior
The Game greatly over estimates the defense capabilities of the carrier group and significantly underestimates modern hyper sonic missile capabilities
And you can prove that how Mr Armchair General?
Hypersonics don't work in reality, because they throw away any attempt at stealth in favor of attempting to brute-force just running through the enemy's defensive perimeter before it can react.
Except the hypersonic is hilariously obvious, can't maneuver, isn't actually that fast (drag is a thing), and just generally fails at being a good design.
Actually type hypersonic misses that Russia China and even Iran can field currently are far superior to anything the Americans can field currently. Also at least the Russian variant of the hypersonics are specifically designed to be maneuver in ways that can not be predicted by defense systems @@MandolinMagi
Fun, but I question how good DCS in general simulates the ships. For example, wouldn't the ships be manoeuvring? Wouldn't the ships have deployed flares and chaff, not to mention towed decoys? This raises the next question - are the Chinese ASBM's as accurate as portrayed in the game? I'm uncertain that they are very maneuverable plunging at MACH 8 or whatever it is... so a maneuvering ship with decoys might very well evade the missile. To state the obvious - your Guam scenario was different because, of course, the base can't move. Last point - and not a criticism of your scenario or DCS, but just a food for thought - how would the fleet manage employment of SAMs? Would they launch 5 or 6 or more per incoming, when (depending on where they are), the more they launch now the less they would have for a possible follow-on strike (from aircraft, for example). This is, of course, the difficult tradeoff and decision - survive for certain now to die later, or take a chance now to have a chance later.
I love it when Grim Reapers go stupid...thats the best time in a video
How quick can the lifeboats be launched? I'm only asking in case im on a ship and a missile is on the way. 🤨
I expect all stats of the J-35 be updated from here on out....I told you so 😂😅😊 RCS says what ????
How do the Chinese find the group? They are moving at 30+ knots.
Does the USN have naval radar or active optical decoys?
Toss a few dozen big quad copter drones out with the right transmitter (e.g. radio or laser) and you might be able to sucker off enough missiles to make a difference. And they would cost a enough less than an SM-3 that they don't need to be very effective in absolute terms to be comparatively cost effective. That said, I'm going to guess it's going to be rather deep into the defenses before you can start ignoring inbound as "suckered" so it's unlikely to significant decrease the amount you spend on active defenses or make much difference to the "no chance anything gets thought" threshold. It would however dilute any attack and thus multiplying the cost of an attack that can be _counted_ on to be _effective._
yeah, actual IRL defenses have a variety of extra options, including maneuverability and electronic warfare, as well as being smarter in how they spread their defensive fire around
Thanks guys nothing I’d rather watch while on the thrown 😊
Thrown watching best watching?
The funniest thing about the claim that these missiles have water in their fuel tanks - besides the fact they are solid fuelled - is the fact that the word used there can mean moist, as in moist soil, but appearantly also gets used to say something was scuffed or poorly maintained. That's like China claiming the US runs its vehicles on fecal matter because an engineer said the engine of a vehicle has gone to shit.
Ccp is like Shh dont educate the morons😂
never have I been so early
Could you guys do the rescue mission from Iron Eagle?
surely, the first wave would be like 200x cruise missiles, before DFs are deployed.
This is non-sense. When a 055 destroyer gets within 1000 kilo range of the carrier group, by itself can sink the carrier with hyper-sonic anti-ship missiles. You don't need DF-26B.
Dude, the title literally says”how many DF26B could beat a US Carrier Group” the video is about the DF 26, not the 055
Bro before you comment read the title first 💀
Wouldn't be part of the carrier group defense to just engage those missiles with a close trajectory to the carrier? I'd assume that knowing their ballistic trajectory, there wouldn't be a need to shoot down each missile. Can it be simulated?
Well those missiles have terminal radar guidance meaning they’re able to lock onto a ship and track it as it moves
It would have been nice if you would have substituted a Japanese Agis capable ship for and American one.
That way the fleet would have more defense, but less striking power.
"reasons you I don't understand"= plasma
So true. That's why Houthi ASBM has PK of 1 out of 10, and some US Destroyers don't even bother shooting them down
Fair comment.
Hi GR, please do a SM6 antiship mode attacking Chinese carrier battlegroup
Yup can do.
About the Chinese missiles "having water in them":
That was a mistranslation, what famous misunderstood was they were trying to say watered down or diluted.
So no they didn't literally replace rocket fuel with water since most rockets like this are solid fuel, no they removed a chemical out of the fuel and sold it, and replaced it with some other chemical. Or they were in charge of manufacturing the rockets and instead of purchasing correct quality material, they'd find the lowest priced "product" of lesser quality which make the rocket perform completely inferior to how its supposed to function.
Also, the new Mk.38 mod.4 replaces the 25mm M242 Bushmaster with the 30mm mk.44 Bushmaster on blk III Burke's...
This is almost certainly fake. We see a lot of incredibly stupid fakes about Russia. I think that the West is also unable to say anything other than lies about China.
I worked at Huawei and saw anger and aggression from the West. The way Canada takes hostages, engages in piracy, invasions and extols literally those same Nazis very well shows the zero moral level of Western society.
Not likely the carrier wouldn't attack the launch sites is it? The cost of the missiles I can see why they're getting into lasers.
Wouldn't be part of the carrier group defense to just engage those missiles with a close trajectory to the carrier? I'd assume that knowing their ballistic trajectory, there wouldn't be a need to shoot down each missile.
Why would you not defend the air defense ships?
@namyun2743 ballistic missiles have calculated trajectories. If the radar determines the probability of hitting a ship is low, if the missile will hit the water, why waste a SAM. This is how the IronDome works and how the US Navy is operating in the Red Sea.
@@josealexander9794 Then why did you specify "carrier"? What about the other ships in the CBG that were being targeted? Should they not be protected as well? Especially the ones providing the air defense?
@@josealexander9794those missile are guided, every missile is design to land on a ship.
More boom is never stupid. Besides, this is how you run war games, make the worst assumptions and see what happens, then see what you can change for a better outcome.
Hey Cap, did you see the video on Mosquitoes taking off from carriers to attack the Imperial Japanese Navy in harbour? I’m curious. Could you land back on the carrier if we fitted the Mosquito with a landing hook?
Or you tweak the parameters until its GiGo and then pat yourselves on the back for job well done and move on to the private sector to cash in on the bribes you took as a general.
@@volvo245
Well gee, them doing what I did for years, isn’t allowed?
@Grim Reapers
DF-26 warhead size range from 1,200 - 1,800kg nuclear warhead or conventional warhead
Source Wikipedia
But Who knows if it’s correct
The definition of hypersonic is when the chemistry of the air is changed and you start to form plasma. This speed goes down as air density goes up. The issue with hypersonic is there is no way to target the missile other than Inertial Guidance because all electromagnetic waves are blocked, so no GPS and not remote base/plane correction. Your scenario should include losses due to straying. There's no way a US Carrier Task Group is going allow any Chinese AWACS any where near it, plus once launched the task group will travel at least a .5 to 1 km and again, hypersonic is not a precision weapon.
The issue for Francis is AJ has more than enough capability to move out of the way of his speed but also enough speed to crack back his head at will. If AJ stays disciplined, this will be an early textbook KO. But AJ's issue is and, the reason for his Ls to be frank, is because he throws his mental discipline out the window. If he resolves that, watch out.
My guess was 60. Fascinating Sim to watch. Imagine 3 waves of 60..That would do it.. No defence left.. Maybe Seawhizz... Purely hypothetical of course.. Thanks guys.. 👍👏
If you are seeking reality while setting up a CAG, SAG or any BG formation your strongest ships will set along the threat axis. IE Cruisers will not always be out front. Destroyers run as the screen/lead elements. Tico CG's will align along the aerial threat axis. The purpose of this is to ascertain Defense in Depth. Carrier middle of far end from the threat 2 destroyers front, 1 alongside, 1 aft, and 2 cruisers outside of the destroyers along the threat axis. More realistic setup. Just saying. Also NCIS is the Naval Criminal Investigative Service. They investigate Naval and Marine criminal situations and check for security threats to the USA Navy and marines. They just want your info to find out where you got it and that your not a spy. LMAO Keep the videos coming.
This is why they are putting the lasers on the new carriers.