@swayzefan3600 *An AIM-163 variant o' the tube-launched RIM-163 Standard VI?* Far more appropriate for a USN-USMC / Northrop Grumman AF-14 Echo, which can handle the weight.
@@grimreapers Please do this again, however with-- MIG-31 with R-37M, ST-21 with AIM-152, SU-35 with R-77M, J-20 with PL-15, J-15 with PL-17, F-22 with AIM-260, F/A-XX with AIM-260, and the following with either AIM-260 or SM-6, F-15EX, YF-12A, and SR-72! To make it even more spicy at the end you could use The AIM-4 Falcon and Genie Rocket!🙏👍
@@Anarchy_420 *The Hughes AIM-47, the ultimate development o' the Falcon AAM, is far superior to the AIM-4 Series w/r/t range.* Superior to the AIM-26, in fact. U. S. Air Force FX already won by the McDonnellDouglas F-15, Tactical Air Command USAF could've probably used the Grumman F-14 Series for deep strike missions: Provided that the General Dynamics F-111 failed to meet spec, that is.
@@xenaguy01 yeah Her dad calls her bunny and her mates get wind of that and call her ‘buns’. Great parts of the book when they engage and smack the bears as taxi pilots
Damn right it was a game changer. The Arrow should've been mass produced, but it's demise just showed the near sightedness of military & political garbage that still exists today.
@@JesusFriedChrist it does make me wonder why the Avro Arrow isn't included in DCS. I'd LOVE to have an opportunity to fly it!! (I'm Canadian so it holds a special place in my heart).
Interesting exercise. I was at Norfolk when the USAF was testing the ASAT at Langley in the 80s. More recently in '08 the USN shot down a satellite with an SM3. It's probably more likely that in the future the more versatile SM would be used in the future should it become necessary.
@Greybeard1357 *The RIM-161, I presume?* The Aerojet-Raytheon RIM-163 could have a MIM-163 variant for land use. Better support across land and naval versions. The Lockheed Martin AIM-260 is a missile with rocket booster and solid-fuel ramjet sustainer motors.
Please do this again, however with-- MIG-31 with R-37M, ST-21 with AIM-152, SU-35 with R-77M, J-20 with PL-15, J-15 with PL-17, F-22 with AIM-260, F/A-XX with AIM-260, and the following with either AIM-260 or SM-6, F-15EX, YF-12A, and SR-72!🙏👍
@Anarchy_420 *The designation for Project ST21: USN-USMC / Northrop Grumman ASF-14 Hotel all-weather strike fighter.* Crew of two (Pilot fore, WSO aft); dual General Electric F120-GE-406 controlled-bypass turbofans with extended afterburner barrels, fed by strengthened four-shock inlets; AESA radar and RHAW receiver built in house by Northrop Grumman Avionics; buddy-hose and ATARPS compatible. (The ASAT mission requires two Rails on Stations 3 and 6 for an AIM-163 or ASM-280 INS AAM.)
The hardest part of hitting a satellite isn't the altitude, it's the speed! Same challenges as sams trying to intercept hypersonics. Love the channel, hope you're well cap 💛
well, much greater speed but much more predictable trajectory so if you get data from the ground and can stick to a preplanned timing this doesn't really stop you from sending something oan collision course that only locks on and does course corrections shortly before impact
Answer: yes, the F35 in cooperative engagement mode can intercept satellite over 700,000 ft altitude by taskinga Standard Missile 3. First sat intercept by SM 3 was on 21 Feb 2008. First cooperative engagement taskinf from F35 to aegis was on 12 Sep 2016.
Great video. Love the high altitude videos for some reason. I also liked the teamwork with the boys to launch the missiles at the right time. I've been a subscriber for around 5 years and I love what you all contribute to people that enjoy your content.
IRL the ASAT mission had something like sub 60 second window in which the F-15 was in range. Its pretty realistic that its difficult to find and lock up the target and get a good launch angle all in the span of a very short period of time.
Well you will need computerized guidance because IRL it wouldn't only be 400 km high but also moving at at least 8 km/s when in orbit. Intercepting a target moving at Mach 24 isn't easy.
@@emmata98 closest satellite orbits will have 7.7 km/s. Highly elliptical orbits like a lot of surveillance sattelites have (Molniya orbits for example) have up to10 km/s at periapsis.
Here is a thought, if the missile will find it by itself, then don't fire directly at the target you have to lead the target. if you fire directly at it, by the time the missile gets there the satellite is long gone. As seen with most of the shots. good flying though Cap
Right!? Give me zoom climb of the best F-15 variant that exists, carrying only external fuel and enough to hit max speed, at the highest altitude and vertical as it flames out due to lack of oxygen as it’s running in fumes, for max thrust to weight ratio as it burns through stupid amounts of fuel in full burner, at this point, 90 degree climb.
well you'd need some fictional hypersonic plane for that its not really about altitude but speed if you can reach mach 23 you are in orbit regardless of altitude if you caN't then you aren't regardless of altitude its jsut much easier to reach amch 23 at really high altitudes
Can I make a recommendation that would make a war game simulation either very efficient or laughably inefficient, can GR get Grinding Sidewinder and Longshot into a war game as either pilots (efficient) or as a buddy team on helicopters, or as pilot and RIO/WSO (laughably inefficient). I watch all these channels and would love to see the chaos this could invoke. Especially if GS and Longshot are helo, where they have the combat effectiveness of stormtroopers and make questionable decisions "lets dogfight a MI24 in our Huey". Just a thought Get well soon Cap, love from Australia.
Watching this on my birthday.'Merica!!! Also cannot confirm or deny that I first learned about this story from doing security for a defense contractor that was involved in this.
The Boeing YAL-1 airborne laser testbed was a modified Boeing 747-400F with a megawatt-class chemical oxygen iodine laser (COIL) mounted inside. It was designed to take out tactical ballistic missiles, but perhaps it could be anti-satellite capable had it been allowed to become an operational component of the USAF arsenal. Perhaps GR should fly a B747 around for funs.
I know it's all for fun, but hearing Cap say I don't see why a Sidewinder couldn't do it shows he didn't take into account that the satellite would be travelling over the engagement zone at orbital velocities. But given the balloon couldn't hold altitude I don't think DCS could have handled simulating it travelling at those velocities either. Still a fun bit of content.
I wonder how a scenario would play out if an OPFOR force tried to send their own aircraft at these high-altitudes to intercept an ASAT F-15 and whatever air units are trying to protect that F-15
of course the real/added challenge and achievement is timing. A satellite in low earth orbit moves with several km per second sideways. If you don't nail it to the (i guess split-) second, this method would fail. In a way your SR-72 intercept attempts were closer to the challenge. Unless, that was also considered, you create a massive area of effect (i.e. a nuclear explosion) to take it out. That is not criticism on the video or DCS btw. Just mentioning it. To really test it you'd need Kerbal Space program and some mods. But for Kerbal players (almost!) hitting things in space is basic bread and butter anyway. But not with super slow (take that DCS!) missiles. Which is also why this is how you'd do it today. But tbf to the "technology of the time", space flight was well out of it's early stages by then. Which (i'm depending on Scott Manley here, for example the his video on the Nike-Hercules) ) allowed them to think about concepts based on precision, not scale. And politically rather juicy ideas like nukes for intercepting in orbit (or in the air!) were scrapped (and banned).
"Fly on my monitor." Reminds me of a story written down by a pilot of n the Saab J-29 Tunnan (Flying Barrel). He was solo flying adversary in an exercise, were his task was to engage "incomming bombers". He was briefed that he should expect the then new fighter variant J-32B Lansen to be in the area. Flying, he caught a glance of something in the rear view mirror. Assuming that it was a J-32B, he banked and pulled, but no matter what he did, the 32 didn't move in the mirror, staying put on his six. He then realised that it was a fly, sitting on the mirror. After some cursing, he, as all little boys would in his situation, wondered how many G's the fly would be able to take before losing grip. Well beyond what the J-29 was allowed to pull, in peace time, it turned out...
Too bad you couldn't fit an SM-3 on the F-15C or EX. Anyone remember the "NF-104"? The Starfighter with the rocket engine in the base of the tail. It would be cool to see a MiG-21 set up the same way.
@timbaskett6299 *The Grumman F-14 could, as an AIM-161 Echo.* Ideal for test: YF-14B-30-GR SerNo 007 (BuNo 157986), fitted with dual General Electric YF120-GE-400 controlled bypass turbofans with extended afterburner barrels - the F120 will supercruise the Tomcat, but max 'burner is required for the test.
+GrimReapersAtomic *The U. S. Air-Launched Antisatellite Missile, Service Test, YASM-135* (and the potential Tube-Launched and Rail-Launched versions) *was the first truly hypersonic AAM.* Ideal aircraft for the mission? The USN-USMC / Northrop Grumman F-14E-190-GR, with dual General Electric F120-GE-400 controlled-bypass turbofans fed by strengthened four-shock inlets.
Start sooner and hit a sustained climb and then increase climb rate where your starting now so your speed will be much higher and give your missile greater speed and range. And use and use aim 120 d, pl 15, meteor, or r77 m or 1 even.(If you could use the f15 with aim 260 or mig 25/31 with r 37 at the highest balloon with nose on at release)
Wouldn't being guided by awacs and firing when the missle still had air resistance to maneuver be the way to do that? 300k feey is only about 55 miles. Getting closer in the jet just means you are the targeting system as the missle can barely adjust.....seemed clear shooting early in atmo was the best bet.
"Too expensive" = It worked so well, we're going to produce a lot of them, but we don't want anyone to know we have them because then "they" will create systems to defeat it. We'd rather have it be a surprise in the next war.
This was fun and made you think. What if that interceptor missile hadn't been made. What could be used to knock out a pesky eye in the sky. Glad you're up and about Cap 🙂
What you need is a helium balloon, this would be very high during the day due to the expansion of the gas due to the heat of the sun. not one of hot air which when it cannot heat the air it descends in height.
It's funny you think they aren't producing the weapon. Breaking news: the US can easily shoot down foreign satellites. Also, the f-15 isn't the only platform either...
@@MarvinWestmaasI'd like to know that too, since it was an issue when Russia shot one down in 2021. The debris was a risk for ISS. ISS is in low Earth orbit but it's still higher than many satellites. In other words: Even a low Earth orbit satellite is a risk for Kessler syndrome. 🤷🏽♂️ Especially since the f-15 test mentioned here was in 1985 and was conducted by the USAF.... *_In 1991, Kessler published "Collisional cascading: The limits of population growth in low Earth orbit" with the best data then available. Citing the USAF conclusions about creation of debris, he wrote that although almost all debris objects (such as paint flecks) were lightweight, most of its mass was in debris about 1 kg (2 lb 3 oz) or heavier. This mass could destroy a spacecraft on impact, creating more debris in the critical-mass area._* .....so, Kessler himself seems to disagree...
more than likely: the platform they would use in the future, however, would likely be a satellite destroying satellite (technology which has already been tested).
RAF and USAF have both successfully tested and anit-satellite defence from an have both successfully tested and desatlike defence from an typhoon and an f16
I know you had issues with the mods in making this attempt, but presuming there were no compatibility issues, it would be interesting to see you try this with your AIM-260 and AWACS support.
Couldn't Jester lock it up in STT once you pull nose high? And then fire a C Phoenix? It might get enough guidance inside the atmosphere to manage a lucky hit after the lock is broken and the fins run out of air?
Well you followed the scientific process and got a result and learnt more about DCS than you did before. I can't complain about that. 😀 Speaking of theory and doing, Cap how's the curtain pole doing?
60 miles, or 100 km, is k own as the Carmen line, the minimum altitude at which an object is regarded as having gone into space. You're nowhere near orbit, but you got into space. BTW You ought to try the English Electric Lightning.
... but can you do this in an F-86 Sabre ? 🤔 This sort of thing needs an Ground control intercept in conjunction with an airborne radar. The Maths require you to lob the missile into the path of an approaching satellite traveling 17500 mph, you'd need to fire before it was over your horizon. Tom Clancy talked about the logistics of this in one of his books, and there is a youtuber called Scott Manley who has done a video about the orbital mechanics of this. I recommend both.
350 miles ceiling..wow..that would be a horrible horrible thing to do to smash satelite into thousands of pieces at 350 miles.. debris would stay in orbit for several years
How about using one of the GR modified SR-71 or Darkstar and try again? MMMmmmm.... Or have someone create a Space Shuttle for DCS? MMMmmmm 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Hope you're getting better Cap!
🤓 parachute doesnt deploy unless its below a certain altitude? but it should simulate drag, anything you could deploy would help bring you down. 80kft -90 is on the edge of your last chance where there is enough air and gasses to push against just very thin. since you cant ignite the fuel you could try a jettison of fuel, release of rockets to push down.... when you face earth. anything with momentum or pressurized. if you ejected upside down, you should be pushed down. but as was simulated, whatever air there is gets frozen. without a proper suit this would be very cold- if the ejection system is just a puff it may not be enough to clear the aircraft.
the US navy recently tested an SM-6 mounted to the superhornet. see if you can shoot down ballistic missiles using aircraft - aim-260 i guess?
Some one said air-launched SM-6? th-cam.com/video/vAOqlgxLL3k/w-d-xo.html
@swayzefan3600 *An AIM-163 variant o' the tube-launched RIM-163 Standard VI?* Far more appropriate for a USN-USMC / Northrop Grumman AF-14 Echo, which can handle the weight.
@@grimreapers Please do this again, however with-- MIG-31 with R-37M, ST-21 with AIM-152, SU-35 with R-77M, J-20 with PL-15, J-15 with PL-17, F-22 with AIM-260, F/A-XX with AIM-260, and the following with either AIM-260 or SM-6, F-15EX, YF-12A, and SR-72! To make it even more spicy at the end you could use The AIM-4 Falcon and Genie Rocket!🙏👍
@@grimreapersSM-3 are made for interception outside the atmosphere.
@@Anarchy_420 *The Hughes AIM-47, the ultimate development o' the Falcon AAM, is far superior to the AIM-4 Series w/r/t range.* Superior to the AIM-26, in fact. U. S. Air Force FX already won by the McDonnellDouglas F-15, Tactical Air Command USAF could've probably used the Grumman F-14 Series for deep strike missions: Provided that the General Dynamics F-111 failed to meet spec, that is.
Bunny Nakamura from Red Storm Rising gets her Ace by shooting Satellites. Really cool sequences.
_"Bunny Nakamura"_ is who I immediately thought of too!
Buns
@@scottr9900
Bunny, "Buns" is how I remember her.
@@xenaguy01 yeah Her dad calls her bunny and her mates get wind of that and call her ‘buns’.
Great parts of the book when they engage and smack the bears as taxi pilots
The first space ace…
To make the attempt legendary, the Avro Arrow needs to be brought into DCS to make an attempt.
DCS altitude and speed limits need to be raised by a LOT.
The arrow was a game changer
Damn right it was a game changer. The Arrow should've been mass produced, but it's demise just showed the near sightedness of military & political garbage that still exists today.
@@jimdraven2432Facts.
@@JesusFriedChrist it does make me wonder why the Avro Arrow isn't included in DCS. I'd LOVE to have an opportunity to fly it!! (I'm Canadian so it holds a special place in my heart).
Hello valued Super Cap, we hope YOU are doing fantastically well!
Interesting exercise. I was at Norfolk when the USAF was testing the ASAT at Langley in the 80s. More recently in '08 the USN shot down a satellite with an SM3. It's probably more likely that in the future the more versatile SM would be used in the future should it become necessary.
@Greybeard1357 *The RIM-161, I presume?* The Aerojet-Raytheon RIM-163 could have a MIM-163 variant for land use. Better support across land and naval versions. The Lockheed Martin AIM-260 is a missile with rocket booster and solid-fuel ramjet sustainer motors.
Please do this again, however with-- MIG-31 with R-37M, ST-21 with AIM-152, SU-35 with R-77M, J-20 with PL-15, J-15 with PL-17, F-22 with AIM-260, F/A-XX with AIM-260, and the following with either AIM-260 or SM-6, F-15EX, YF-12A, and SR-72!🙏👍
@Anarchy_420 *The designation for Project ST21: USN-USMC / Northrop Grumman ASF-14 Hotel all-weather strike fighter.* Crew of two (Pilot fore, WSO aft); dual General Electric F120-GE-406 controlled-bypass turbofans with extended afterburner barrels, fed by strengthened four-shock inlets; AESA radar and RHAW receiver built in house by Northrop Grumman Avionics; buddy-hose and ATARPS compatible.
(The ASAT mission requires two Rails on Stations 3 and 6 for an AIM-163 or ASM-280 INS AAM.)
@@BCSchmerker in the past GR have used The ST-21 Super Tomcat with AIM-152 GDW's
@@BCSchmerker th-cam.com/video/XfxVneeVyKM/w-d-xo.htmlsi=a7S8akRP7yijkFFV👍
@@BCSchmerker Grim Reapers vid with ST-21 with AIM-152 th-cam.com/video/Zp89l-9U_uU/w-d-xo.htmlsi=V1Jl4SQTP7w3FYsA
The hardest part of hitting a satellite isn't the altitude, it's the speed! Same challenges as sams trying to intercept hypersonics. Love the channel, hope you're well cap 💛
well, much greater speed but much more predictable trajectory so if you get data from the ground and can stick to a preplanned timing this doesn't really stop you from sending something oan collision course that only locks on and does course corrections shortly before impact
also the detail that the satellite is well outside of usable atmosphere, so any missile without reactive terminal maneuvering will miss
To hit a satellite you need a missile with a long burn time and a way to change direction outside the atmosphere.
Answer: yes, the F35 in cooperative engagement mode can intercept satellite over 700,000 ft altitude by taskinga Standard Missile 3. First sat intercept by SM 3 was on 21 Feb 2008. First cooperative engagement taskinf from F35 to aegis was on 12 Sep 2016.
Great video. Love the high altitude videos for some reason. I also liked the teamwork with the boys to launch the missiles at the right time. I've been a subscriber for around 5 years and I love what you all contribute to people that enjoy your content.
IRL the ASAT mission had something like sub 60 second window in which the F-15 was in range. Its pretty realistic that its difficult to find and lock up the target and get a good launch angle all in the span of a very short period of time.
Well you will need computerized guidance because IRL it wouldn't only be 400 km high but also moving at at least 8 km/s when in orbit. Intercepting a target moving at Mach 24 isn't easy.
Orbit is a bit less than 8 km/s (circualar), which only decreases as you go up^^
@@emmata98 closest satellite orbits will have 7.7 km/s. Highly elliptical orbits like a lot of surveillance sattelites have (Molniya orbits for example) have up to10 km/s at periapsis.
@@Adwaenyth therefore I limited it to cirqular orbits...
Nerds have entered the chat……and I’m here for it, go onnn!
Here is a thought, if the missile will find it by itself, then don't fire directly at the target you have to lead the target. if you fire directly at it, by the time the missile gets there the satellite is long gone. As seen with most of the shots. good flying though Cap
Cap, agree with you, Patriot Pac3 on an F-15 could be a good option for ASAT.
Cap just did not think that the canopy being in place was causing the problems 🤔
Ah yes, that was it.
this was part of red storm rising book.
Now I want a video of you putting jets into orbit
Right!? Give me zoom climb of the best F-15 variant that exists, carrying only external fuel and enough to hit max speed, at the highest altitude and vertical as it flames out due to lack of oxygen as it’s running in fumes, for max thrust to weight ratio as it burns through stupid amounts of fuel in full burner, at this point, 90 degree climb.
well you'd need some fictional hypersonic plane for that
its not really about altitude but speed
if you can reach mach 23 you are in orbit regardless of altitude
if you caN't then you aren't regardless of altitude
its jsut much easier to reach amch 23 at really high altitudes
Yup, basic training was July 1985, so I well remember the ASAT 🙂
@8:55 Sven banging away at the problem, We missed you Sven♥
I wish Sven would stop banging!
"Buns" Bunny Nakamura approves!
Interesting. The SM-3 also uses an infrared seeker and also employs a kinetic kill.
This is where you need a EE Lightning - Mach 2 vertical climb to launch...
I have seen a lightning mod on youtube
Nice idea, pity about the firestreak
How much fuel?
1 minute? 5? At full burn.
Anyone know?
@@SmithandWesson22A there is an interview with an RAF pilot where i believe he says he could empty the fuel tanks after 10 minutes.
Twas a bad idea. That much debris is nothing but trouble for everyone.
you could potentially use the option that gives you on screen markers for targets to simulate the guidance package
Fun fact the pilot of the F15 that actually did this is a client of mine now he's an astronaut
Great video Cap, lots of fun
Great test, cap et al. Proves that the natural laws of physics still works (somewhat) in DCS
A nice way to make space debris that will stuff up other satelites in time as well as the ISS.
Use a MiG-31, intercepting the SR-72 Darkstar, while it's going Mach 5.5, at 264,000 feet. That's gonna be the realistic numbers anyway...
Can I make a recommendation that would make a war game simulation either very efficient or laughably inefficient, can GR get Grinding Sidewinder and Longshot into a war game as either pilots (efficient) or as a buddy team on helicopters, or as pilot and RIO/WSO (laughably inefficient). I watch all these channels and would love to see the chaos this could invoke.
Especially if GS and Longshot are helo, where they have the combat effectiveness of stormtroopers and make questionable decisions "lets dogfight a MI24 in our Huey". Just a thought
Get well soon Cap, love from Australia.
I'm always up for it, but I know time zones are a problem, and now I have a baby I can not be flexible on times. Just life.
Watching this on my birthday.'Merica!!! Also cannot confirm or deny that I first learned about this story from doing security for a defense contractor that was involved in this.
The Boeing YAL-1 airborne laser testbed was a modified Boeing 747-400F with a megawatt-class chemical oxygen iodine laser (COIL) mounted inside.
It was designed to take out tactical ballistic missiles, but perhaps it could be anti-satellite capable had it been allowed to become an operational component of the USAF arsenal.
Perhaps GR should fly a B747 around for funs.
All of my favorite Cap videos contain the quote "look at its jigglers."
lol
I know it's all for fun, but hearing Cap say I don't see why a Sidewinder couldn't do it shows he didn't take into account that the satellite would be travelling over the engagement zone at orbital velocities. But given the balloon couldn't hold altitude I don't think DCS could have handled simulating it travelling at those velocities either. Still a fun bit of content.
Yes that's a good comment.
It's run out of something!
>air
It's run out of something!
>air
I wonder how a scenario would play out if an OPFOR force tried to send their own aircraft at these high-altitudes to intercept an ASAT F-15 and whatever air units are trying to protect that F-15
F14 in TWS mode? yeah need a vectored thrust missile............ python5 with aim54 as the booster..............
now make it am od aircraft flying past at 16000 knots so its actually in orbit
of course the real/added challenge and achievement is timing. A satellite in low earth orbit moves with several km per second sideways. If you don't nail it to the (i guess split-) second, this method would fail. In a way your SR-72 intercept attempts were closer to the challenge. Unless, that was also considered, you create a massive area of effect (i.e. a nuclear explosion) to take it out.
That is not criticism on the video or DCS btw. Just mentioning it.
To really test it you'd need Kerbal Space program and some mods. But for Kerbal players (almost!) hitting things in space is basic bread and butter anyway. But not with super slow (take that DCS!) missiles. Which is also why this is how you'd do it today.
But tbf to the "technology of the time", space flight was well out of it's early stages by then. Which (i'm depending on Scott Manley here, for example the his video on the Nike-Hercules) ) allowed them to think about concepts based on precision, not scale. And politically rather juicy ideas like nukes for intercepting in orbit (or in the air!) were scrapped (and banned).
"Fly on my monitor." Reminds me of a story written down by a pilot of n the Saab J-29 Tunnan (Flying Barrel).
He was solo flying adversary in an exercise, were his task was to engage "incomming bombers".
He was briefed that he should expect the then new fighter variant J-32B Lansen to be in the area.
Flying, he caught a glance of something in the rear view mirror. Assuming that it was a J-32B, he banked
and pulled, but no matter what he did, the 32 didn't move in the mirror, staying put on his six. He then
realised that it was a fly, sitting on the mirror. After some cursing, he, as all little boys would in his situation,
wondered how many G's the fly would be able to take before losing grip. Well beyond what the J-29 was
allowed to pull, in peace time, it turned out...
Hitting a static target at that altitude is one thing. Now get it moving at around 17,500mph and hit it.
Fair comment.
The raptor's natural opponent
Biggest miss-match in history?
Hey Cap, could you try a MiG-31 with a R-37 and a YF-12 with an Aim-47 against the satellites?
This had me fired up the whole time! Good fun.
Why not use the only sane platform - F104! You need a rocket for this job! 😮
Where will the -104 carry an 18ft, 2,000lb missile?
F-15 is beast and that's why i love it.
Too bad you couldn't fit an SM-3 on the F-15C or EX. Anyone remember the "NF-104"? The Starfighter with the rocket engine in the base of the tail. It would be cool to see a MiG-21 set up the same way.
@timbaskett6299 *The Grumman F-14 could, as an AIM-161 Echo.* Ideal for test: YF-14B-30-GR SerNo 007 (BuNo 157986), fitted with dual General Electric YF120-GE-400 controlled bypass turbofans with extended afterburner barrels - the F120 will supercruise the Tomcat, but max 'burner is required for the test.
+GrimReapersAtomic *The U. S. Air-Launched Antisatellite Missile, Service Test, YASM-135* (and the potential Tube-Launched and Rail-Launched versions) *was the first truly hypersonic AAM.* Ideal aircraft for the mission? The USN-USMC / Northrop Grumman F-14E-190-GR, with dual General Electric F120-GE-400 controlled-bypass turbofans fed by strengthened four-shock inlets.
“104-0 look out below I took out a satellite just for show”
Start sooner and hit a sustained climb and then increase climb rate where your starting now so your speed will be much higher and give your missile greater speed and range. And use and use aim 120 d, pl 15, meteor, or r77 m or 1 even.(If you could use the f15 with aim 260 or mig 25/31 with r 37 at the highest balloon with nose on at release)
Wouldn't being guided by awacs and firing when the missle still had air resistance to maneuver be the way to do that? 300k feey is only about 55 miles. Getting closer in the jet just means you are the targeting system as the missle can barely adjust.....seemed clear shooting early in atmo was the best bet.
"Too expensive" = It worked so well, we're going to produce a lot of them, but we don't want anyone to know we have them because then "they" will create systems to defeat it. We'd rather have it be a surprise in the next war.
orbital speed at even 300,000ft is 7.8km/s or about mach 23. I dont think DCS can even support something going that fast.
This was fun and made you think. What if that interceptor missile hadn't been made.
What could be used to knock out a pesky eye in the sky.
Glad you're up and about Cap 🙂
What you need is a helium balloon, this would be very high during the day due to the expansion of the gas due to the heat of the sun. not one of hot air which when it cannot heat the air it descends in height.
It's funny you think they aren't producing the weapon. Breaking news: the US can easily shoot down foreign satellites. Also, the f-15 isn't the only platform either...
Like Cap says, ASAT are damn expensive. And nobody actually wants Kessler syndrome taking out _everybody's_ satellite infrastructure.
@@akizeta We're so far below the threshold of Kessler syndrome that we could explode every satellite in orbit and not have a problem.
@@Reniconix According to whom?
@@MarvinWestmaasI'd like to know that too, since it was an issue when Russia shot one down in 2021. The debris was a risk for ISS. ISS is in low Earth orbit but it's still higher than many satellites.
In other words: Even a low Earth orbit satellite is a risk for Kessler syndrome. 🤷🏽♂️
Especially since the f-15 test mentioned here was in 1985 and was conducted by the USAF....
*_In 1991, Kessler published "Collisional cascading: The limits of population growth in low Earth orbit" with the best data then available. Citing the USAF conclusions about creation of debris, he wrote that although almost all debris objects (such as paint flecks) were lightweight, most of its mass was in debris about 1 kg (2 lb 3 oz) or heavier. This mass could destroy a spacecraft on impact, creating more debris in the critical-mass area._*
.....so, Kessler himself seems to disagree...
more than likely: the platform they would use in the future, however, would likely be a satellite destroying satellite (technology which has already been tested).
Great video. Try the BoneR. Plenty of power and a spread of missles
Why not an F-104 with a radar guided missile because the F-104 can already get pretty fast and high
RAF and USAF have both successfully tested and anit-satellite defence from an have both successfully tested and desatlike defence from an typhoon and an f16
F.15 with Pegasus ASAT
I know you had issues with the mods in making this attempt, but presuming there were no compatibility issues, it would be interesting to see you try this with your AIM-260 and AWACS support.
Our AIM-260 is hard limited to around 110k ft in DCS. Just a thing.
This was a fun one!
So have CH strap a THAD to an F15 and give it a try
Couldn't Jester lock it up in STT once you pull nose high? And then fire a C Phoenix? It might get enough guidance inside the atmosphere to manage a lucky hit after the lock is broken and the fins run out of air?
Jester is hard coded not to look above 60k ft or whatever his ceiling it.
@@grimreapers ah, that doesn't help then. He can't even lock targets present on the scope?
That's only a little over 56 miles.
Well you followed the scientific process and got a result and learnt more about DCS than you did before.
I can't complain about that. 😀
Speaking of theory and doing, Cap how's the curtain pole doing?
Still there :)
@@grimreapers
Yippee! 😆
This is cool. Quite interesting.
Use a 2 seater and a WIZZO.... or A-12/YF12..... Raptor?
Japanese Mitsubishi AAM-4(99)? AAM-5 w/ Thrust vectoring ?
Let's see a drone version of this mission
i lold at the parachute
What about using an AIM-260 seeing as how it uses an RCS system for control rather than fins?
You should try it with a Starfighter.
R-77-1 might be able to do it, it has huge control fins.
Are you going to do a f4e tutorial series
Probably. If you want that?
You need to fly east to west , with the spin of the Earth.
Why didnt you try an AIM-260? That has side-thrusters, right?
Our AIM-260 is hard limited to around 110k ft in DCS. Just a thing.
60 miles, or 100 km, is k own as the Carmen line, the minimum altitude at which an object is regarded as having gone into space. You're nowhere near orbit, but you got into space.
BTW You ought to try the English Electric Lightning.
... but can you do this in an F-86 Sabre ? 🤔
This sort of thing needs an Ground control intercept in conjunction with an airborne radar.
The Maths require you to lob the missile into the path of an approaching satellite traveling 17500 mph, you'd need to fire before it was over your horizon.
Tom Clancy talked about the logistics of this in one of his books, and there is a youtuber called Scott Manley who has done a video about the orbital mechanics of this.
I recommend both.
Ohh nice.
No air. Need a missle with active turning, like a TOW
Cap made the game up so he can only pay the game as he missed out last show. Only joking. Lol 😊👍
lol
350 miles ceiling..wow..that would be a horrible horrible thing to do to smash satelite into thousands of pieces at 350 miles.. debris would stay in orbit for several years
why no Typhoon?
Tell CH to make the YF-12 with the Phoenix.
How about using one of the GR modified SR-71 or Darkstar and try again? MMMmmmm.... Or have someone create a Space Shuttle for DCS? MMMmmmm 🤣🤣🤣🤣 Hope you're getting better Cap!
Cap sounds good. I thought he was about about die a week ago.
Can we try this with modern planes? Or a B-1R?
OK
That was fun, but why not the SR-72?
When will CH be modelling the SpaceX Super Heavy ? 'To infinity and beyond ' !
Agreed
Wouldn't it be more apropos to do the Chinese version?
Why not a MiG-31 and Axehead missile?
Axehead is hard limited to 120k ft in DCS.
I was sitting in my room rocking out to MTV and suddenly my TV blew up? What did you guys do?
Sorry about that.
@@grimreapers At least it was for science
please try with Eurofighter and a Meteor 😉
What about having the sattelite moving at speed and not just downwards, or would that be just like the Darkstar intercept
can you stt lock it? or find it on the AWG9 with the tomcat?
Maybe try a aim-260?
Doesn't it (260) have actuators instead of fins?
Ours has a 120,000ft hard limit :(
Cap, Why is there no Mig 31?
Their missiles are hard limited to 120k ft in DCS.
When is the f4e
Just filmed first vid. I got access fairly late.
Should have tried the jtam
🤓 parachute doesnt deploy unless its below a certain altitude?
but it should simulate drag, anything you could deploy would help bring you down. 80kft -90 is on the edge of your last chance where there is enough air and gasses to push against just very thin.
since you cant ignite the fuel you could try a jettison of fuel, release of rockets to push down.... when you face earth. anything with momentum or pressurized.
if you ejected upside down, you should be pushed down. but as was simulated, whatever air there is gets frozen. without a proper suit this would be very cold- if the ejection system is just a puff it may not be enough to clear the aircraft.
well dcs has a few new satalites 😅 i wonder at what point does dcs despawn assets and hiw bugged it get at 30k missles floating around