The American Carrier sunk at Midway, USSYorktown, was seriously damaged at the Coral sea, repaired in record time, (72 hours) was bombed at Midway, stopped, got going again, bombed again, abandoned, re boarded when she didn’t sink and the repair teams were in the act of saving her when she was torpedoed by a Japanese submarine. So not “a few bombs”.
Yeah... no. Yorktown didn't die to one bomb. She took one 250lbs in the battle of the Corral Sea after dodging 8 torps and up to 12 near misses of bombs. That one bomb did mess her up, killing or injuring 66 crewmen and damaging her Boilers, but she was patched up and sent off to Midway. At Midway itself, she took one hell of a pounding, three hits in the first attack on her. But her crews got her patched up and working just in time for the next wave to think she was Enterprise and attack. She took two torpedoes then after dodging two others. But she refused to die and repairs where underway with the help of USS Hammann and was being towed. Sadly a Japanese Sub found her then and put two more torps into her and one into the Hammann. The Hammann's back broke and she sunk quickly, and also exploded, or perhaps just her depth charges battering Yorktown. But the Yorktown, even with all the damage and four torp hits refused to die until 7:01 the next day.
@@WinVisten Yeah, The Yorktowns were built different, Hornet took an even bigger beating before she died and Enterprise survived the whole war. The lessens leaned in building them were then used in the Essex class, 24 were built and not a single one was lost. The last one, USS Lexington, wasn't retired until 1991! (Granted she was only a training ship by that point)
@@grimreapers The loss of a carrier to fire and explosions sounds like USS Lexington at Coral Sea. I suspect you just confused it with USS Yorktown at Midway..
"vs Star Wars" is the highest level of praise the Grim Reapers can bestow on a weapon system. Not every weapon system can elevate to that level of scientific testing.
How close would a C-17 need to get to launch? What can it carry with enough standoff range to get good survival in a modern threat environment? (The C-17 seems to be out of production so replacing losses would, at best, be very slow.) At a guess Rapid Dragon is a bit of an "all your eggs in few baskets" glass cannon, staggering carnage if they get to launch, with that "if" being the big question in any case where the op-force has any chance to prepare.
@@benjaminshropshire2900I think the lrasm and jassm have 600 mile standoff range. They are stealth weapons too so it will be hard to detect until the terminal phase. For context, 600 miles is far enough to hit Beijing from Seoul or Moscow from Kyiv.
FYI: When flying faster then your enemy and completely outnumbered, you don't slow down. Just go to the next target. Happened in WWII. British / Americans survived.
OK so you guys might not be able to program it in dcs but I'm pretty sure target de-confliction shouldn't be an issue in these simulations. Search "B2 80 jdams" and you can see the results from a 2003 test where a single b2 dropped 80 jdams on a simulated airfield in a single pass. 80 bombs on 80 different targets 20 years ago. My guess is that any of our modern systems like rapid dragon would have comparable targeting efficiency. 45 missiles 45 targets down assuming they aren't intercepted.
And my point is that it was 20 years ago and technology has come a long way since then. The jdam was developed over 25 years ago and the b2 is even older than that. Granted both systems have been continuously updated and upgraded. However every part of the rapid dragon system was developed with modern technology from the start. I am making an assumption of course that you could target and track 45 different targets. But I think it's a pretty safe assumption that they're more than just stealth cruise missiles and that the US military's data acquisition and targeting abilities have greatly increased over the last 20 years. I mean just compare a cell phone from 2003 to today. 💪
@@adamtheninjasmith2985 i totally agree, US military is so advanced that they could wipe Russia from Ukraine without nuclear weapons within a week. Add Nato in there and you have a force that can overwhelm any force China or Russia can muster! Even with homefield advantage China would lose all its warships trying to invade Taiwan so we know that's not going to happen anytime in the future!
With modern storm systems and vastly superior acquisition systems that are constantly getting better id say with a modern awacs it's been very feasible for 20 years
USS Yorktown was damaged at the battle of Coral Sea and was rushed into the Midway battle with minimal repairs. This contributed to the ship being lost.
And even then she took way more than just one bomb before going down. She was hit multiple times from the air, but American damage control had improved since Coral sea and the crew very well could have saved her, had it not been for I 168, who launched a spread of torpedoes which finally killed her.
Wasn't most/all of Yorktown's Coral Sea damage superstructure and deck related? Because the only reason she was lost at Midway was because a Japanese Sub torpedoed her at night
@TrumpShallPurgetheAnimeScourge nope she'd taken a armor piercing bomb that had gone 5 decks down before exploding at Coral Sea. She was down 2 boilers and had massive structural damage that still needed repairs. The yard said 6 months to totally repair her. But Nimitz in his desperate need for help at Midway demanded she be made combat effective in less than 72 hours of yard time. They basically repaired the hull deck and what structural damage was possible along with anything else. Then she sailed out for Midway. She was down 5 knots in speed slower in her turning but ready to go into combat. Yes she was sunk but I would take a 4 to 1 ratio in sunken carriers anytime in combat.
@TrumpShallPurgetheAnimeScourge I wouldnt say it was all the sub. The damage at coral sea was very extensive and frankly it was a miracle Yorktown was even seaworthy, then throw in the dive bombers from Hiryu at Midway which did so much damage, the crew were ordered to abandon ship. However after they were all off, Yorktown remained afloat and there was talk about attempting to save her, but being dead in the water for so long made her an easy target for I 168 who put the final nail in the coffin with her torpedoes.
The Yorktown nor any american CV in WW2 had a problem like you describe. They could flush the fuel lines and prevent catastrophic explosions due to gas buildup. The Yorktown was sunk by a sub while being towed home after the battle of Midway. In that battle she was hit by the first wave of Japanese planes but managed to put out all fires. She was hit again, badly, in wave 2 but survived again, if heavily damaged. The Japanse actually thought they had sunk 2 carriers while, in reality, they had sunk none.
So sorry to hear the muti-threading is not working. Out of all the DCS channels you could use it most. Thanks for the vid, good fun. Fly stalling his jet when tangling with the zero was very reminiscent of the splash the zeros scene in 'The final countdown' when the f14 does the very same thing.
F-22s are cool, but why not use F-15EXs that can carry a lot more missiles. It’s not like the Zeroes have radar that needs to be considered. You would not need to RTB as much. Wondering.
It's difficult to really appreciate how much work you do for your viewers. Your job seems uniquely more difficult than any regular gaming youtuber. It's a good thing you have the support of such an awesome community that works just as hard. It's so much work to do Arma3 and DCS stuff like this, and spend hours or days setting it up and making mods and organizing it and getting a bunch of people together to work as a team, and then filming it and then editing it down to be entertaining. People who pull that off on such a regular basis are amazing.
Been a crap day Capt, my youngest grand daughter was taken in to hospital with suspected meningitis. After many hours of woe, she has a liver infection and all will be well in a few days. I need cheering up so beer and good company will help. Thank you.
I would argue that the A6M Zero was probably the best pure fighter airplane in 1941 and most of 1942. Heavily armed (2x20mm), long range, fast climb, and maneuverable. In 41 it could out climb and turn the Spit and F4F and out turn the 109/190. The cost was lack of armor and self-sealing fuel tanks.
You guys should have either used F-15EXs as true missle trucks or go old school and fly P-47s for the defense of the C-17. Although the reality is the C-17 would never be in any danger from the Japanese fighters. Also, you could have just had the C-17 drop one pallet of LRASM's, circle around and wait for them to hit then drop the next pallet until all the ships are gone. That would take care of most of the confliction concerns in these scenarios.
The highest the Japanese Army air service Ki-84 Hayate could climb up to and still perform would be 38,799 ft. While the C-17 still beats the Ki-84 in this department by around 45,000 ft. Chances are it would be more around the 28,000 feet range meaning it's within interception distance. Now the main issue is trying to keep with the speed or get a proper angle on firing to hit the C-17. This could also apply to the Japanese Navy's Air Force, J2M aircraft as well. A6M's although could not do this so no threat from them,
The Japanese may have been confused about their aircraft dying like that from missiles but the Germans may have figured it out considering they had their own wire guided ruhrstall x4 missiles and radio guided fritz x smart bomb
Is it possible to stagger the drop if rapid dragon pallets, i.e. drop 1 pallet do a circle and drop another 30 seconds later and so on and so forth, it might help deconfliction
How helpful it would be depends largely on how early the LRASM locks onto a target. Dropping them from the same point may just mean that they lock onto the same targets, since it will take longer for the missiles to intercept the ships than it will for the Globemaster to circle back to its original drop point. Two planes dropping Rapid Dragon pallets from opposite sides of the Fleet would likely have better results.
The USS Yorktown was not sunk. She was damaged, and towed back for repair. She was put back to sea in record time. She went on to see action in the Viet Nam war. Afterwards she was decommissioned and moved to Charleston, SC where she is a floating museum.
I have been "following" the C-17 since it was born. My absolute favorite transport in existence. Like to see an "AC-17 Slugger" with 2 105mm, or 155mm, howitzers two GAU-8/As, and maybe four 40mm Bofors, or M-134 mini guns. 😀 A suggestion for another "Rapid Dragon" mission. 2 C-130s vs. the Tirpitz convoy, maybe?
There's always been theories about turning the C-17 into a gunship, but realistically it's just not practical due to it being a jet, fuel usage, weight, size, noise, stall speed, cost, etc. That being said, DC is one platform where it could be fun to see it simulated and used in semi-realistic scenarios
in concept maybe but in reality, since the c17 is jet engined, the main reason for the usage of c130 is cuz its still prop driven and was designed to be fuel efficient and to loiter
@Joshua Powell My "other" idea kind of calls back to the original gunship, the AC-47 Puff, or Spooky. An AC-27 Spartan "Sword" pocket gunship, with 2 M61 Vulcans, and four M134 mini guns.
@@timbaskett6299 That's actually been tested already in some respects. It used a 30mm though because of the accuracy and penetrating power along with missiles. The problem with any sort of mini gun is that it's more of an area saturation weapon. Great against infantry and light vehicles, but the 30mm is a better multi-purpose weapon. That's why when I worked on the AC-130U, the 40mm was very popular. It was used almost like a sniper rifle to hit specific targets while the 25mm was for suppression and the 150mm pretty much deleted any form of cover
Btw: Hannibal is a regular name, you remember the one guy with the elephants over the alps? :) But despite the fact that Mads Mikkelsen played Hannibal, it's not an scandinavian name. It's Phoenician. (referring to 22:05)
That's what I was thinking : the limiting factor US side is the number of weapons the planes can hold so the plane with the largest weapons capacity is the one that will be the most effective.
In the 2000s Japan handed over the film from 3 different planes they had in the air that day, and it showed 100% a mini-sub shot a torpedo into Arizona...
Watching these videos makes it very obvious how even a small technological tech difference (70 years) between civilizations can become crippling in battle. Now imagine Terrans bumping into a civilization 100 years more advanced.
Regarding the carrier USS Yorktown at Midway. She was attacked three times, twice by air. After the first attack, Yorktown's damage control parties made sufficient repairs that the ship was underway at 19 kts. and operational within an hour. Their efforts were so effective that the second attack sortie mistook Yorktown for an undamaged enemy. The second attack sortie stuck Yorktown on the port side with two torpedoes. After several hours of largely futile damage control work, Captain Elliot Buckmaster ordered Abandon Ship. However, even with a 25-degree list Yorktown refused to sink. Consequently, Buckmaster sent a volunteer party aboard to help arrange a tow by the cruiser Astoria. Unfortunately, the IJN sub I-168 struck her with two torpedoes at 15:36 on 6 June 1942. Four hits were enough, and Yorktown finally sank at 7:01, 7 June 1942.
Historical correction: Approx video timestamp 21.05: It wasn't the Yorktown (CV 5) at Midway. The incident occured to the Lexington (CV 2) at the Battle of the Corral Sea. A single bomb hit caused a massive explosion some time after the impact because of ruptured aviation fuel tanks. A witness to the event then developed a method to flood the aviation fuel system with CO2 to prevent such an occurance in the future. The method was implemented immediately and was used at Midway just weeks after Corral Sea.
21:00 Sorry to say, but you're wrong on all points here. Not only did American carriers routinely take bomb hits in its hangars, they were usually not even crippling. Yorktown was also not sunk by bomb hits at all. Even the torpedo hits didn't sink her! It took a submarine launching a full spread of torpedoes at point-blank range to actually sink her after she was dead in the water. She managed to get back into action after the first series of bomb hits so quickly that the Japanese thought she was a different carrier in the follow-up attack.
Zeros would never be able to intercept a C-17 at altitude so the C-17 would be completely safe from enemy aircraft, and at 25kft+ I don't think that any of the Japanese fleet would have effective AA fire. I also think that the ships would, in real life, have any statistically significant chance of shooting the cruise missiles either. If it happens it'd just be luck.
Don't know if it could be done, but I'd love to see a ww2 bomber formation with mini guns instead of .50 cal. Per weight would be able to carry 4times the mini gun ammo and with tracers and rate of fire targeting would be so much better.
Hannibal was the Carthaginian general who went over the Alps with war elephants and attempted to defeat ancient Rome. He was defeated by Fabius Maximus Contatur, and never achieved decisive success although he won a number of battles. Fabius repeatedly dodged meeting Hannibal in a decisive battle and won by attrition, keeping reinforcements from getting through. Hence the term "Fabian strategy".
Back when the Moskva was a topic of discussion, it was mentioned that the cruise missiles that the Moskva used were designed to fly in a sort of pack with one operating in a pop-up mode as a de facto quarterback coordinating and deconflicting the strike. If that missile failed then another missile would be promoted to quarterback and rise from the deck. Solutions should be straightforward, but the missiles would have to cooperate. To say nothing of a scenario where the rapid dragon pallet drop or drops have missiles going different directions for widely divergent targets, missile packs will have to divide appropriately into sub packs. Again, it shouldn't require oceans of thought.
Loved the video @Grim Reapers! Can't wait for the next video man! Would love to see More videos with the Warbirds, Warships, Transport Ships, Vehicles and Guns of the Second World War man. I mainly want to see how Large the World War Two Asset Pack is, and maybe try to come up with some Missions for you guys with it. As for the Imperial Japanese Navy Aircraft Carriers, Akagi and Kaga (Which made up the 1st Aircraft Carrier Division) were Built in much the same way as the Lexington-class Aircraft Carriers in the United States, both were planned as Battlecruisers albeit from two different classes with Akagi planned for the Amagi-class and Kaga planned for the Tosa-class. The 1928 Great Kanto Earthquake saw to it that work would be a bit more difficult for the Japanese as Amagi and Tosa's Hulls were Damaged beyond Economical Repair, while Akagi and Kaga's Hulls weren't so badly Damaged and seeing what the United States was doing with the Lexington-class in accordance to the First London and Washington Naval Treaties went ahead and followed Suit. Soryu and Hiryu (Which made up the 2nd Aircraft Carrier Division) are Technically Half-Sisters as Hiryu was planned to be Soryu's Sister but the Japanese decided to Experiment with Armoring the Flight Deck similar to the British Royal Navy with the Illustrious-class Aircraft Carriers. This Design Philosophy would later be applied to the construction of the Ill-Fated Taiho, but more along the Basis of the More Modern Shokaku-class Aircraft Carriers. The two Shokaku-class Aircraft Carriers, Shokaku and Zuikaku (Which made up the 5th Aircraft Carrier Division), were more on a Similar Footing with the American Yorktown-class Sisters (Yorktown (5), Enterprise (6) and Hornet (8)) with having an Open Hangar Deck and powerful strike Aircraft being the Backbone of the Carrier's Air Groups. And Speaking of Imperial Japanese Navy Aircraft Carrier Air Groups... I remember writing down the Air Group Sizes of each Aircraft Carrier the Japanese had during World War Two a long time ago either at the time they were lost or at the time of Pearl Harbor. They are as Follows: Akagi (Dec. 7th, 1941): • 21 A6M2 "Zero" Fighters +4 in storage. • 18 D3A1 "Val" Dive Bombers +5 in storage. • 27 B5N2 "Kate" Torpedo Bombers. Kaga (Dec. 7th, 1941): • 21 A6M2 "Zero" Fighters. • 27 D3A1 "Val" Dive Bombers. • 27 B5N2 "Kate" Torpedo Bombers. Ryujo (Light Carrier) (At the time of her loss on Aug. 24th, 1942): • 24 A6M2 "Zero" Fighters. • 9 B5N2 "Kate" Torpedo Bombers. Sōryū (Dec. 7th, 1941): • 21 A6M2 "Zero" Fighters. • 18 D3A1 "Val" Dive Bombers. • 18 B5N2 "Kate" Torpedo Bombers. Hiryu (Dec. 7th, 1941): • 21 A6M2 "Zero" Fighters. • 18 D3A1 "Val" Dive Bombers. • 18 B5N2 "Kate" Torpedo Bombers. Shokaku-class (Shokaku and Zuikaku) (Dec. 7th, 1941): • 18 A6M2 "Zero" Fighters +2 Spares. • 27 D3A1 "Val" Dive Bombers +5 Spares. • 27 B5N2 "Kate" Torpedo Bombers +5 Spares. Hiyō-class (Hiyō and Jun'yō) (June 1942): • 27 A6M2 "Zero" Fighters. • 12 D3A1 "Val" Dive Bombers. • 9 B5N2 "Kate" Torpedo Bombers. Taiho (Planned): • 24 A7M2 "Sam" Fighters. • 25 B7A2 "Grace" Torpedo Bombers. • 4 C6N1 "Myrt" Dive Bombers. (Jun. 13th, 1944) • 22 A6M5 "Zero" Fighters. • 22 D4Y1 "Judy" Dive Bombers. • 3 D3A1 "Val" Dive Bombers. • 18 B6N2 "Jill" Torpedo Bombers. Hope this helps in the future with the World War Two Asset Pack guys! I spent about an hour or two typing this up. Also, I'm slowly working on that Mission from Batumi to Gudauta for you guys, just managed to get the Objectives down for both forces. I'm hoping it's not going to be more than the 90 minutes you usually do these things for so, fingers crossed!
Some poor Japanese tech spent the whole trip in bragging about his new radar and all the great things it can do…..gets attacked by stealth fighters and missles….
Long time viewer, first time commenter. You NEED to fix your missiles for multithreading. Think of all the battles you can revisit that struggled to/couldn't run in multiplayer. Absolute game changer. Please, please, please work on this ASAP. Thanks.
On the A6-M Zero - It possessed habits that had to be trained for. At the beginning of the war the pilots were fitted to the ship and knew their way around it. By the time of the Marianas Turkeyshoot many of these pilots had been lost. One of the uses of the Zero was its range; keep in mind Imperial Japanese pilots were flying distances and times the ETO B-17 pilots could only wish for in their escorts. As for one of the more hampering habits of the [I think it was the zero] aircraft was under specific conditions in I think it was a dive or diving turn the tail would dis-integrate. It had some other interests as well. Also keep in mind as the war progressed, the Americans were observing its abilities and weaknesses, so its margin of advantage was steadily being diminished.
The person who talked about the early war zero vs. American aircraft should be aware that the American Wildcats had a 3 - 1 kill ratio vs. the Zero. The American planes had more armor, better firepower, and better tactics.
Yorktown actually survived most of the battle and the damage it took till it was being towed home. It was sunk by a sub. Yorktown was also had been repaired from the damage it took at Coral Sea and was quickly repaired to fight at Midway.
Nothing like sitting on Kawaii N Shore drinking a cold beer, watching penguins tease the polar bears and kangaroos while enjoying that crisp Mediterranean breeze rolling down the steep banks of Mt Kilimanjaro.
I really and truly don't believe real-world target deconfliction is an issue..at all. Data link for the US is an extremely mature technology and when you have the military informing the public of AI-assisted infrared missile sensors targeting specific ship features and silhoheutees as they approach targets and reporting back to base prior to impact on preliminary damage predictions based on images gathered just prior to impact, while also adjusting their ultimate target to hit specific pre-determined spots on the targetted ship for maximum damage (for example, a specific part of a superstructure to knock out the enemy command center function or specific sensor), I'm very confident assuming they got that suff nailed down. My confidence level on effecient target deconfliction and maximizing damage is at about 98%. : )
not to contradict you, but the carrier lost at midway was hit by a 500lb bomb on the fist strike against it, was repaired and recovered so much the second strike mistook it for a different carrier and put 3 (?) more 500 lb bombs into it and later a sub put 4 torpedoes to finally kill her. Plus she was still damaged from the battle of the coral sea. she didn't die as easy as you mentioned.
The A6M was not badly made. It had lightweight construction to allow for comparable performance to early model bf-109s and spitfires that were it's contemporaries when it was designed. The Japanese aero engines tended to be a bit down on power when compared to their contemporaries is Europe and America, with the Zero's Sakai 12 radial putting out around 900 HP when a Spitfires, 109 , or P-40 might have 1100 or 1200 HP, so the design of the zero had to be lightweight and very efficient to get up to 330 mph. The major trade offs came in terms of protection, and when those problems were recognized, upgrading newer models with, say, armored headrests for the pilot, or self sealing fuel tanks ran into the issue that the air frame was so well balanced, adding a little weight in the wrong place could turn it into a soggy blancmange of a thing. The Japanese had some very good late war fighter designs, but transitioning their production to those fighters meant accepting a slump in production, while facing off against the infinite plane printing machine that was US war industry at a time when Japan was on the back foot every where in the Pacific and new planes were desperately needed to make up losses. We could shift production to newer better fighters and build them by the thousands, they couldn't.
On the discussion of armoured decks on carriers, I'd suggest popping over to Drachenifel's channel. He has a great video breaking down the pros and cons of armoured carriers and non armoured and why IJN and USN weren't armoured and RN were. The reasons really simple. Armour takes space. In the Pacific theatre the biggest threat were other carrier based aircraft with smaller payloads so IJN and USN prioritised hanger space and capacity as they were also further away from resupply and replacements. Royal Navy were expecting to operate in European Theatre and spend far more time inside the range of land based aircraft with payloads far heavier so they traded hanger space and capacity for armour to take the hits they knew they'd take.
I have read that even the Wildcat had some success with the Zero. Part of the Zero's fame was it's unexpected overall performance from the US and UK pre-war analyses. That, combined with extremely well trained IJN fighter pilots the zero was very deadly. Particularly against US Army air corps fighters like the P-39 and P-40 that were primarily designed as lower elevation ground support type fighters for a predicted Euro Theater use. At low altitudes the P-39 would have more success, but overall the early US fighters weren't up to the task to take on the Zero in all aspects . But come around the battle around Santa Cruz or Eastern Solomon's the awe factor of the Zero was going away. The IJN was taking enormous losses of pilots and the newer fighters Hellcat especially just outclassed the Zero. The IJN pre-war preparedness for long distance carrier battles was better than the US overall. But that was not a very long lived advantage. The one US airframe that can arguably be considered better than the IJN counterpart was the Dauntless, vs the Val. Even then, the Val held it's own early on as an effective airframe.
Yamoto wasn't with the Pearl Harbor group. He was back in Japan aboard his flagship at the time getting reports about the attack. There was rumors if I remember correctly that many officers wanted him to replace Nagimo as Task Force commander feeling that he would've done what Nagimo couldn't do, destroy the US Carriers and eliminate US presence in the Pacific.
Just quickly, I can't recall off the top of my head how much damage the Yorktown sustained from air attack, or the manner of it (enough to disable it obv), but it was a torpedo from a Japanese sub that finally sank her. The Americans spent a lot of time on the ship trying to save it.
Ok, the easiest win against the IJN Pearl Harbor fleet: 1 squadron of Macross VF-1S with GBS-1 and FAST packs. A few missile swarms and AA lasers will easily deal with the fighters while 1-2 armed with Angels of Death Reactive Warheads would destroy every ship afloat.
Yeah. F-15EX in missile truck configuration with 12x AIM-120 would have made shorter work of the Japanese fighters. Everyone hits Fox 3 times 12 and goes home.
IDK, they had rudimentary radar at best, not like it would be guiding weapons to hit the f15s. But having like, 20 missiles per plane would let them rip the zeros apart
Pearl Harbor is getting easier and easier. Next up, time to test out taking down a MQ-9 with a Su-27 wingtip, like what just happened when russia intercepted one. Many missiles have no collision so I wonder if the reapers do in game.
I am stable version, so I won't see mult-anything for 5 more months. And one fix I crave, albeit a minor annoyance only, is that call out from the tower "unable to clear for takeoff" then "clear for takeoff..." 5 seconds later. Does it on every map and every airstrip. And I cannot wait until GR gets their clever little hands on the F-15E Strike Eagle. Imagine this mission with 2 GR's in each jet attacking the Japanese fleet instead of Rapid Dragon. Oooh... sexiness on display!
Next Scenario: Rapid Dragon vs. a fleet of ̶j̶a̶p̶a̶n̶e̶s̶e̶ ̶t̶o̶r̶p̶e̶d̶o̶b̶o̶a̶t̶s̶ british trawlers in the english channel. Preferable narrated in your best Drachinifel impression voice :P
No ONE aircraft is going to defeat hundreds for the same reason that no one person can, by himself (no force multipliers), defeat a hundred men in hand-to-hand combat. He will be overwhelmed by their superior numbers.
With the Kido Butai taking this much damage from LRASMs, Nimitz would have more time to prepare for the Guadalcanal campaign. Enterprise, Lexington, Yorktown, Wasp, Hornet, and Saratoga would be available to lead the invasion.
First, there was no need for the fighters (except entertainment) as the C-17 has a service celling nearly 50% higher than the Zero. It could simply fly over the CAP and drop its payload closer and there was nothing the IJN had at the time that could stop it. I would have thought it would be more fun to use F/A-18s than F-35s. Even with Harpoons the F/A-18A can out perform a Zero, allowing for dogfighting and then sniper-shooting whatever the C-17 leaves afloat. Second, the Yorktown was not sunk by 1 bomb. In-fact no US Fleet carrier was lost that way, although the much smaller and more poorly designed Light Carrier USS Princeton (CVL-23) was lost at Leyte Gulf was. The Yorktown received multiple hits from a Japanese air strike, knocking out her boilers, causing a severe fire and flooding resulting in a pronounced list. (resulting in her being reported as "sinking" by the Japanese) Her crew then got the fire and flooding under control, her list corrected and her boilers restarted, when she was attacked and hit again by a second strike, causing a major fire, flooding and her boilers knocked out (resulting in the Japanese reporting a 2nd carrier knocked out and sinking). Still, her crew managed to the the fire and flooding back under control and her list mostly corrected, though her engines were out. so she was taken under tow back to Pearl Harbor. It was only then, on her way back under tow that she came across the IJN submarine I-68 which hit her with 2 torpedoes, but even then she remained afloat through the night. finally rolling over and sinking the next morning. We don't make our Fleet Carriers prissy ladies, we make our Fleet Carriers tuff old broads, (with the exception of Wasp which was a treaty design error).
The biggest difference between the Japanese and U.S. survivability of ships hit in WW2 had to do with damage control differences between the two nations. The Japanese tended to depend heavily upon officers as damage control specialist in each section of a ship. In the U.S. navy every sailor was cross trained for damage control and fire suppression and fire suppression had priority over all other responsibilities. U.S. damage control specialists were cross trained for all sections of a ship. Results were devastating if the trained Japanese specialists was killed when the damage occurred, and no one was likely able to have the knowledge for that section of the ship. Many of the Japanese came from areas without much technology. However because most U.S. personnel were far more accustomed to technology they could adjust on the fly. The rigid discipline in the Japanese navy also worked against them. If a Japanese sailor stepped out of thier place they could be beaten. So ideas on improving damage control were not encouraged. Also a Japanese sailor was expected to stay at thier station, rather than help with damage control without ordes. For exaple an enlisted U.S. sailor at coral sea, who saw the damage done on his carrier when aviation fuel lines were severed in an attack was able to suggest purging the lines with inert gas after each use without fear of being considered as stepping out of his place, or being unqualified to suggests anything. His ideah was welcomed by command, and quickly adopted throughout the fleet. This was very unlikely to happen in the Japanese navy. The Japanese were not encouraged to use there own initiative, but always waited for orders. The opposite was true in the U.S. navy. Knowing that getting generators restarted for pumps U.S. personnel would just start them without orders. The typical Japanese sailor had to wait for the order that might not come due to severed communications or loss of the appropriate officers. The problem the Japanese navy had with damage control slowly improved during the war, but far slower than adjustments needed in the U.S. navy. Because transfers between ships were unusual in the Japanese navy in order to promote ship wide team spirit. This resulted in slow dissemination of experience throughout the fleet. In fact, it was not uncommon for an entire Japanese navel airwings being left undeployed for extended periods, due to extensive refitting or repairs on the carrier they were assigned to. In the U.S. navy personnel were regularly transferred to different and newer vessels, resulting in quick dissemination of lessons learned on other ships. Lastly ship design also contributed to damage control success or failure. U.S. ships were designed with far more redundant equipment for fire suppression and damage control than the Japanese vessels.
Besides relatively fragile carriers, (Though they weren't entirely bad) the IJN's relatively primitive damage control training contributed more to the issues they had. US Navy ships that had taken worse damage would survive, while the IJN ships would go down as flooding and/or fires spread beyond the crews ability to deal with. The US Navy trained every crew-member for damage control, and did repeated drills for it, as well as cross training. This paid large dividends. The IJN on the other hand relied on dedicated damage control teams. And while the IJN DC teams were quite good, they could become quickly overwhelmed by multiple hits/fires/leaks. Plus, if the DC teams were either cut off from the area by damage, or were among the casualties.....not good.
I mean, I know you want to kill all/most of the Zeros but TBH dropping almost 1/2 of them while simultaneously destroying their careers is absolutely a win. Ultimately, Japan's strategy fails when 200+ aircraft crash in the ocean and they lose all the carriers in the strike group, even with US losses the same, since our careers were fortunately away. Just a few modern aircraft (and an asston of munitions) would have actually succeeded in ruining Japan's Pearl Harbor attack.
Rapid Dragon Series:
Rapid Dragon & MALD vs Russian Black Sea Fleet: th-cam.com/video/sHTGKG1cYec/w-d-xo.html
Rapid Dragon vs IJN WWII Carrier Group: th-cam.com/video/QXONs2voDjE/w-d-xo.html
Rapid Dragon vs Russian Black Sea Fleet: th-cam.com/video/rvUTl6xjxqY/w-d-xo.html
Rapid Dragon vs Omaha Beach Defenses: th-cam.com/video/k4T1WWtVyYk/w-d-xo.html
Rapid Dragon vs Chinese Invasion Fleet: th-cam.com/video/MQ1wrspnL7A/w-d-xo.html
Could you do 4 C-17s with Rapid Dragons infiltrating into Moscow?
@@kolinskiparadox I hate to shoot your idea down but how would C-17s get that far into Russia?
CH wish list-- AGM-129A!🙏
The American Carrier sunk at Midway, USSYorktown, was seriously damaged at the Coral sea, repaired in record time, (72 hours) was bombed at Midway, stopped, got going again, bombed again, abandoned, re boarded when she didn’t sink and the repair teams were in the act of saving her when she was torpedoed by a Japanese submarine. So not “a few bombs”.
"Hannibal" is a rather famous name from Roman/Carthaginian history...
Yeah... no. Yorktown didn't die to one bomb. She took one 250lbs in the battle of the Corral Sea after dodging 8 torps and up to 12 near misses of bombs. That one bomb did mess her up, killing or injuring 66 crewmen and damaging her Boilers, but she was patched up and sent off to Midway.
At Midway itself, she took one hell of a pounding, three hits in the first attack on her. But her crews got her patched up and working just in time for the next wave to think she was Enterprise and attack. She took two torpedoes then after dodging two others. But she refused to die and repairs where underway with the help of USS Hammann and was being towed. Sadly a Japanese Sub found her then and put two more torps into her and one into the Hammann.
The Hammann's back broke and she sunk quickly, and also exploded, or perhaps just her depth charges battering Yorktown. But the Yorktown, even with all the damage and four torp hits refused to die until 7:01 the next day.
Thanks! My memory failing again...
That's one HELL of a ship!
@@WinVisten Yeah, The Yorktowns were built different, Hornet took an even bigger beating before she died and Enterprise survived the whole war.
The lessens leaned in building them were then used in the Essex class, 24 were built and not a single one was lost. The last one, USS Lexington, wasn't retired until 1991! (Granted she was only a training ship by that point)
It was the IJN Akagi that was lost to a single direct hit, although a near miss that jammed her rudder was an important contributing factor.
@@grimreapers The loss of a carrier to fire and explosions sounds like USS Lexington at Coral Sea. I suspect you just confused it with USS Yorktown at Midway..
the scary bit of rapid dragon is that if they wanted to every one of those missiles could be nuclear tipped
lol just dozens nukes heading towards a ww2 japanese fleet
But could they all explode at the same time we’ll enough to not destroy the other ones before they explode
@@joshuanewman1273 Here comes the sun...
@@ryanjones2297 oh no
@@krazypotatopotato6743 With just a little planning, yes.
Man this thing is going out of control 😂
Next: Rapid Dragon against Star Wars Stellar Ships
"vs Star Wars" is the highest level of praise the Grim Reapers can bestow on a weapon system. Not every weapon system can elevate to that level of scientific testing.
Lol, true
Star Wars testing = top tier testing.
15:40 «I am Jack’s absolute prostate»😭😂 11/10 Fight Club referance, Cap
Someone got it! xx
The fact that Rapid Dragon works this way is Frightening. The amount of carnage from one or 2 C-17's in this manner is Staggering.
How close would a C-17 need to get to launch? What can it carry with enough standoff range to get good survival in a modern threat environment? (The C-17 seems to be out of production so replacing losses would, at best, be very slow.) At a guess Rapid Dragon is a bit of an "all your eggs in few baskets" glass cannon, staggering carnage if they get to launch, with that "if" being the big question in any case where the op-force has any chance to prepare.
@@benjaminshropshire2900I think the lrasm and jassm have 600 mile standoff range. They are stealth weapons too so it will be hard to detect until the terminal phase. For context, 600 miles is far enough to hit Beijing from Seoul or Moscow from Kyiv.
FYI: When flying faster then your enemy and completely outnumbered, you don't slow down. Just go to the next target. Happened in WWII. British / Americans survived.
OK so you guys might not be able to program it in dcs but I'm pretty sure target de-confliction shouldn't be an issue in these simulations. Search "B2 80 jdams" and you can see the results from a 2003 test where a single b2 dropped 80 jdams on a simulated airfield in a single pass. 80 bombs on 80 different targets 20 years ago. My guess is that any of our modern systems like rapid dragon would have comparable targeting efficiency. 45 missiles 45 targets down assuming they aren't intercepted.
Aren’t jdams guided beforehand? To direct coordinates not actively seeking new targets from their own seeker
Correct, those jdams were pre-programmed prior to takeoff.
And my point is that it was 20 years ago and technology has come a long way since then. The jdam was developed over 25 years ago and the b2 is even older than that. Granted both systems have been continuously updated and upgraded. However every part of the rapid dragon system was developed with modern technology from the start. I am making an assumption of course that you could target and track 45 different targets. But I think it's a pretty safe assumption that they're more than just stealth cruise missiles and that the US military's data acquisition and targeting abilities have greatly increased over the last 20 years. I mean just compare a cell phone from 2003 to today. 💪
@@adamtheninjasmith2985 i totally agree, US military is so advanced that they could wipe Russia from Ukraine without nuclear weapons within a week. Add Nato in there and you have a force that can overwhelm any force China or Russia can muster!
Even with homefield advantage China would lose all its warships trying to invade Taiwan so we know that's not going to happen anytime in the future!
With modern storm systems and vastly superior acquisition systems that are constantly getting better id say with a modern awacs it's been very feasible for 20 years
"Your mother was a snowblower" Johnny 5... Shows my age
Best/worst robot movie.
Yeah lol, but Steve Gutenberg is always cool in the Police Academy movies
USS Yorktown was damaged at the battle of Coral Sea and was rushed into the Midway battle with minimal repairs. This contributed to the ship being lost.
And even then she took way more than just one bomb before going down. She was hit multiple times from the air, but American damage control had improved since Coral sea and the crew very well could have saved her, had it not been for I 168, who launched a spread of torpedoes which finally killed her.
Wasn't most/all of Yorktown's Coral Sea damage superstructure and deck related? Because the only reason she was lost at Midway was because a Japanese Sub torpedoed her at night
@TrumpShallPurgetheAnimeScourge nope she'd taken a armor piercing bomb that had gone 5 decks down before exploding at Coral Sea. She was down 2 boilers and had massive structural damage that still needed repairs. The yard said 6 months to totally repair her. But Nimitz in his desperate need for help at Midway demanded she be made combat effective in less than 72 hours of yard time. They basically repaired the hull deck and what structural damage was possible along with anything else. Then she sailed out for Midway. She was down 5 knots in speed slower in her turning but ready to go into combat. Yes she was sunk but I would take a 4 to 1 ratio in sunken carriers anytime in combat.
@TrumpShallPurgetheAnimeScourge I wouldnt say it was all the sub. The damage at coral sea was very extensive and frankly it was a miracle Yorktown was even seaworthy, then throw in the dive bombers from Hiryu at Midway which did so much damage, the crew were ordered to abandon ship. However after they were all off, Yorktown remained afloat and there was talk about attempting to save her, but being dead in the water for so long made her an easy target for I 168 who put the final nail in the coffin with her torpedoes.
Thanks.
The Yorktown nor any american CV in WW2 had a problem like you describe. They could flush the fuel lines and prevent catastrophic explosions due to gas buildup. The Yorktown was sunk by a sub while being towed home after the battle of Midway. In that battle she was hit by the first wave of Japanese planes but managed to put out all fires. She was hit again, badly, in wave 2 but survived again, if heavily damaged. The Japanse actually thought they had sunk 2 carriers while, in reality, they had sunk none.
So sorry to hear the muti-threading is not working. Out of all the DCS channels you could use it most. Thanks for the vid, good fun.
Fly stalling his jet when tangling with the zero was very reminiscent of the splash the zeros scene in 'The final countdown' when the f14 does the very same thing.
F-22s are cool, but why not use F-15EXs that can carry a lot more missiles. It’s not like the Zeroes have radar that needs to be considered. You would not need to RTB as much. Wondering.
Yeah against a large swarm of widely inferior aircrafts, raw power is the easiest solution
Yorktown survived two separate attacks and was finally torpedoed while under tow. A lot more than one bomb.
It's difficult to really appreciate how much work you do for your viewers. Your job seems uniquely more difficult than any regular gaming youtuber. It's a good thing you have the support of such an awesome community that works just as hard. It's so much work to do Arma3 and DCS stuff like this, and spend hours or days setting it up and making mods and organizing it and getting a bunch of people together to work as a team, and then filming it and then editing it down to be entertaining. People who pull that off on such a regular basis are amazing.
Been a crap day Capt, my youngest grand daughter was taken in to hospital with suspected meningitis.
After many hours of woe, she has a liver infection and all will be well in a few days.
I need cheering up so beer and good company will help. Thank you.
Best wishes. Hope she recovers quickly.
Sorry to hear about this :( Keep me posted please.
I would argue that the A6M Zero was probably the best pure fighter airplane in 1941 and most of 1942. Heavily armed (2x20mm), long range, fast climb, and maneuverable. In 41 it could out climb and turn the Spit and F4F and out turn the 109/190. The cost was lack of armor and self-sealing fuel tanks.
You guys should have either used F-15EXs as true missle trucks or go old school and fly P-47s for the defense of the C-17. Although the reality is the C-17 would never be in any danger from the Japanese fighters.
Also, you could have just had the C-17 drop one pallet of LRASM's, circle around and wait for them to hit then drop the next pallet until all the ships are gone. That would take care of most of the confliction concerns in these scenarios.
Was going to say F-15EX also. Stealth is not necessary for Zeros.
The highest the Japanese Army air service Ki-84 Hayate could climb up to and still perform would be 38,799 ft.
While the C-17 still beats the Ki-84 in this department by around 45,000 ft. Chances are it would be more around the 28,000 feet range meaning it's within interception distance. Now the main issue is trying to keep with the speed or get a proper angle on firing to hit the C-17. This could also apply to the Japanese Navy's Air Force, J2M aircraft as well.
A6M's although could not do this so no threat from them,
The big winning move would be having the C-17s intercept the Japanese fleet much further out. Not as much fun, but far more effective
The Japanese may have been confused about their aircraft dying like that from missiles but the Germans may have figured it out considering they had their own wire guided ruhrstall x4 missiles and radio guided fritz x smart bomb
No worries Cap. Trying to be the be the host of the show and Ace at the same time not easy. But "do a thing" ;)
Agree must do a thing.
I love being a valued viewer.
Hannibal. Prince of Carthage (now Tunisia) had a bunch of wars with Rome. He's the one who took elephants over the Alps.
Nice to see a fellow student of *basic* history. =9[.]9=
Maybe re-run this with F-15 missle trucks
Is it possible to stagger the drop if rapid dragon pallets, i.e. drop 1 pallet do a circle and drop another 30 seconds later and so on and so forth, it might help deconfliction
How helpful it would be depends largely on how early the LRASM locks onto a target. Dropping them from the same point may just mean that they lock onto the same targets, since it will take longer for the missiles to intercept the ships than it will for the Globemaster to circle back to its original drop point.
Two planes dropping Rapid Dragon pallets from opposite sides of the Fleet would likely have better results.
erm yes I think that is possible.
The F4 Wildcat was a STRONG plane that survived the damage that would easily down a Zero
Correction. The name Hannibal is not swedish, it comes from the age of the Romans, Italy. 22 and 05 second minute mark.
The USS Yorktown was not sunk. She was damaged, and towed back for repair. She was put back to sea in record time. She went on to see action in the Viet Nam war. Afterwards she was decommissioned and moved to Charleston, SC where she is a floating museum.
Does CH have any plans you know of modding the Indian Navy Cap? Would be fun to see actual Indian ships rather than non-spec stand ins soon!
Bro, would love to see that.
Modding the Indian Navy Cap?
What, like a ginormous floating stetson or something?
@@nigeldepledge3790 "modding the Indian Navy, Cap?" An unfortunate case of a missing punctuation lol.
Yeh but wayy later in the year.
@34:40
Cap says, "Your Mother was a snowblower".
Append with, "...and your Father was an FW-190 Dora!".
I have been "following" the C-17 since it was born. My absolute favorite transport in existence. Like to see an "AC-17 Slugger" with 2 105mm, or 155mm, howitzers two GAU-8/As, and maybe four 40mm Bofors, or M-134 mini guns. 😀 A suggestion for another "Rapid Dragon" mission. 2 C-130s vs. the Tirpitz convoy, maybe?
There's always been theories about turning the C-17 into a gunship, but realistically it's just not practical due to it being a jet, fuel usage, weight, size, noise, stall speed, cost, etc. That being said, DC is one platform where it could be fun to see it simulated and used in semi-realistic scenarios
in concept maybe but in reality, since the c17 is jet engined, the main reason for the usage of c130 is cuz its still prop driven and was designed to be fuel efficient and to loiter
@Joshua Powell My "other" idea kind of calls back to the original gunship, the AC-47 Puff, or Spooky. An AC-27 Spartan "Sword" pocket gunship, with 2 M61 Vulcans, and four M134 mini guns.
@@timbaskett6299 That's actually been tested already in some respects. It used a 30mm though because of the accuracy and penetrating power along with missiles. The problem with any sort of mini gun is that it's more of an area saturation weapon. Great against infantry and light vehicles, but the 30mm is a better multi-purpose weapon. That's why when I worked on the AC-130U, the 40mm was very popular. It was used almost like a sniper rifle to hit specific targets while the 25mm was for suppression and the 150mm pretty much deleted any form of cover
Can't beat a good GR LRASM Gasm. Game on👍
Btw: Hannibal is a regular name, you remember the one guy with the elephants over the alps? :)
But despite the fact that Mads Mikkelsen played Hannibal, it's not an scandinavian name. It's Phoenician.
(referring to 22:05)
Very glad that someone clarified this. I was a bit alarmed when I heard that.
Jammers, put the Miss in Missiles.
The only real person named Hannibal I know, is Hannibal Barca, the Carthaginian general
F-15 EXs might have been even better.
That's what I was thinking : the limiting factor US side is the number of weapons the planes can hold so the plane with the largest weapons capacity is the one that will be the most effective.
Note: CV-5 was sunk at Midway. CV-10, also named the USS Yorktown, is a museum ship docked at Patriots Point, Charleston, SC.
thx
In the 2000s Japan handed over the film from 3 different planes they had in the air that day, and it showed 100% a mini-sub shot a torpedo into Arizona...
Watching these videos makes it very obvious how even a small technological tech difference (70 years) between civilizations can become crippling in battle. Now imagine Terrans bumping into a civilization 100 years more advanced.
Regarding the carrier USS Yorktown at Midway. She was attacked three times, twice by air. After the first attack, Yorktown's damage control parties made sufficient repairs that the ship was underway at 19 kts. and operational within an hour. Their efforts were so effective that the second attack sortie mistook Yorktown for an undamaged enemy. The second attack sortie stuck Yorktown on the port side with two torpedoes. After several hours of largely futile damage control work, Captain Elliot Buckmaster ordered Abandon Ship. However, even with a 25-degree list Yorktown refused to sink. Consequently, Buckmaster sent a volunteer party aboard to help arrange a tow by the cruiser Astoria. Unfortunately, the IJN sub I-168 struck her with two torpedoes at 15:36 on 6 June 1942. Four hits were enough, and Yorktown finally sank at 7:01, 7 June 1942.
Why not F15 missile trucks?
Historical correction: Approx video timestamp 21.05: It wasn't the Yorktown (CV 5) at Midway. The incident occured to the Lexington (CV 2) at the Battle of the Corral Sea. A single bomb hit caused a massive explosion some time after the impact because of ruptured aviation fuel tanks. A witness to the event then developed a method to flood the aviation fuel system with CO2 to prevent such an occurance in the future. The method was implemented immediately and was used at Midway just weeks after Corral Sea.
21:00
Sorry to say, but you're wrong on all points here. Not only did American carriers routinely take bomb hits in its hangars, they were usually not even crippling. Yorktown was also not sunk by bomb hits at all. Even the torpedo hits didn't sink her! It took a submarine launching a full spread of torpedoes at point-blank range to actually sink her after she was dead in the water. She managed to get back into action after the first series of bomb hits so quickly that the Japanese thought she was a different carrier in the follow-up attack.
Thanks for correction.
imagine the hit to the morale on the rest of the fleet after seeing all 6 of their carriers go up in smoke in the space of a minute.
Hannibal is not a Scandanavian name. Ever heard of Hannibal, the Carthaginian general that terrorized Rome?
Zeros would never be able to intercept a C-17 at altitude so the C-17 would be completely safe from enemy aircraft, and at 25kft+ I don't think that any of the Japanese fleet would have effective AA fire.
I also think that the ships would, in real life, have any statistically significant chance of shooting the cruise missiles either. If it happens it'd just be luck.
Hannibal Barca was a Carthaginian general and statesman who lived in the 220BC time frame.
Coming soon: Grim Reapers Shoot down the Grim Reaper MQ-9 in a Non-lethal Way
Don't know if it could be done, but I'd love to see a ww2 bomber formation with mini guns instead of .50 cal. Per weight would be able to carry 4times the mini gun ammo and with tracers and rate of fire targeting would be so much better.
Hannibal is not a normal swedish or scandinavian name. Just to make that clear.
USS Yorktown didn’t sink at Midway. It was taken out by a Japanese submarine on way back to Pearl Harbor for repairs.
Hannibal was the Carthaginian general who went over the Alps with war elephants and attempted to defeat ancient Rome. He was defeated by Fabius Maximus Contatur, and never achieved decisive success although he won a number of battles. Fabius repeatedly dodged meeting Hannibal in a decisive battle and won by attrition, keeping reinforcements from getting through. Hence the term "Fabian strategy".
Grim Reapers doing critical scientifical evaluations.
agree
Back when the Moskva was a topic of discussion, it was mentioned that the cruise missiles that the Moskva used were designed to fly in a sort of pack with one operating in a pop-up mode as a de facto quarterback coordinating and deconflicting the strike. If that missile failed then another missile would be promoted to quarterback and rise from the deck.
Solutions should be straightforward, but the missiles would have to cooperate. To say nothing of a scenario where the rapid dragon pallet drop or drops have missiles going different directions for widely divergent targets, missile packs will have to divide appropriately into sub packs. Again, it shouldn't require oceans of thought.
Loved the video @Grim Reapers! Can't wait for the next video man! Would love to see More videos with the Warbirds, Warships, Transport Ships, Vehicles and Guns of the Second World War man. I mainly want to see how Large the World War Two Asset Pack is, and maybe try to come up with some Missions for you guys with it.
As for the Imperial Japanese Navy Aircraft Carriers, Akagi and Kaga (Which made up the 1st Aircraft Carrier Division) were Built in much the same way as the Lexington-class Aircraft Carriers in the United States, both were planned as Battlecruisers albeit from two different classes with Akagi planned for the Amagi-class and Kaga planned for the Tosa-class. The 1928 Great Kanto Earthquake saw to it that work would be a bit more difficult for the Japanese as Amagi and Tosa's Hulls were Damaged beyond Economical Repair, while Akagi and Kaga's Hulls weren't so badly Damaged and seeing what the United States was doing with the Lexington-class in accordance to the First London and Washington Naval Treaties went ahead and followed Suit. Soryu and Hiryu (Which made up the 2nd Aircraft Carrier Division) are Technically Half-Sisters as Hiryu was planned to be Soryu's Sister but the Japanese decided to Experiment with Armoring the Flight Deck similar to the British Royal Navy with the Illustrious-class Aircraft Carriers. This Design Philosophy would later be applied to the construction of the Ill-Fated Taiho, but more along the Basis of the More Modern Shokaku-class Aircraft Carriers. The two Shokaku-class Aircraft Carriers, Shokaku and Zuikaku (Which made up the 5th Aircraft Carrier Division), were more on a Similar Footing with the American Yorktown-class Sisters (Yorktown (5), Enterprise (6) and Hornet (8)) with having an Open Hangar Deck and powerful strike Aircraft being the Backbone of the Carrier's Air Groups.
And Speaking of Imperial Japanese Navy Aircraft Carrier Air Groups... I remember writing down the Air Group Sizes of each Aircraft Carrier the Japanese had during World War Two a long time ago either at the time they were lost or at the time of Pearl Harbor. They are as Follows:
Akagi (Dec. 7th, 1941):
• 21 A6M2 "Zero" Fighters +4 in storage.
• 18 D3A1 "Val" Dive Bombers +5 in storage.
• 27 B5N2 "Kate" Torpedo Bombers.
Kaga (Dec. 7th, 1941):
• 21 A6M2 "Zero" Fighters.
• 27 D3A1 "Val" Dive Bombers.
• 27 B5N2 "Kate" Torpedo Bombers.
Ryujo (Light Carrier) (At the time of her loss on Aug. 24th, 1942):
• 24 A6M2 "Zero" Fighters.
• 9 B5N2 "Kate" Torpedo Bombers.
Sōryū (Dec. 7th, 1941):
• 21 A6M2 "Zero" Fighters.
• 18 D3A1 "Val" Dive Bombers.
• 18 B5N2 "Kate" Torpedo Bombers.
Hiryu (Dec. 7th, 1941):
• 21 A6M2 "Zero" Fighters.
• 18 D3A1 "Val" Dive Bombers.
• 18 B5N2 "Kate" Torpedo Bombers.
Shokaku-class (Shokaku and Zuikaku) (Dec. 7th, 1941):
• 18 A6M2 "Zero" Fighters +2 Spares.
• 27 D3A1 "Val" Dive Bombers +5 Spares.
• 27 B5N2 "Kate" Torpedo Bombers +5 Spares.
Hiyō-class (Hiyō and Jun'yō) (June 1942):
• 27 A6M2 "Zero" Fighters.
• 12 D3A1 "Val" Dive Bombers.
• 9 B5N2 "Kate" Torpedo Bombers.
Taiho (Planned):
• 24 A7M2 "Sam" Fighters.
• 25 B7A2 "Grace" Torpedo Bombers.
• 4 C6N1 "Myrt" Dive Bombers.
(Jun. 13th, 1944)
• 22 A6M5 "Zero" Fighters.
• 22 D4Y1 "Judy" Dive Bombers.
• 3 D3A1 "Val" Dive Bombers.
• 18 B6N2 "Jill" Torpedo Bombers.
Hope this helps in the future with the World War Two Asset Pack guys! I spent about an hour or two typing this up. Also, I'm slowly working on that Mission from Batumi to Gudauta for you guys, just managed to get the Objectives down for both forces. I'm hoping it's not going to be more than the 90 minutes you usually do these things for so, fingers crossed!
Some poor Japanese tech spent the whole trip in bragging about his new radar and all the great things it can do…..gets attacked by stealth fighters and missles….
Long time viewer, first time commenter. You NEED to fix your missiles for multithreading. Think of all the battles you can revisit that struggled to/couldn't run in multiplayer. Absolute game changer. Please, please, please work on this ASAP. Thanks.
Trying. Really problematic.
On the A6-M Zero - It possessed habits that had to be trained for. At the beginning of the war the pilots were fitted to the ship and knew their way around it. By the time of the Marianas Turkeyshoot many of these pilots had been lost. One of the uses of the Zero was its range; keep in mind Imperial Japanese pilots were flying distances and times the ETO B-17 pilots could only wish for in their escorts. As for one of the more hampering habits of the [I think it was the zero] aircraft was under specific conditions in I think it was a dive or diving turn the tail would dis-integrate. It had some other interests as well. Also keep in mind as the war progressed, the Americans were observing its abilities and weaknesses, so its margin of advantage was steadily being diminished.
The person who talked about the early war zero vs. American aircraft should be aware that the American Wildcats had a 3 - 1 kill ratio vs. the Zero. The American planes had more armor, better firepower, and better tactics.
Yorktown actually survived most of the battle and the damage it took till it was being towed home. It was sunk by a sub. Yorktown was also had been repaired from the damage it took at Coral Sea and was quickly repaired to fight at Midway.
Thanks for correction.
Nothing like sitting on Kawaii N Shore drinking a cold beer, watching penguins tease the polar bears and kangaroos while enjoying that crisp Mediterranean breeze rolling down the steep banks of Mt Kilimanjaro.
*mental injury*
lols
Looks like an air to air Rapidery Dragon is needed with a hunk of F-35s coordinating targets.
I really and truly don't believe real-world target deconfliction is an issue..at all. Data link for the US is an extremely mature technology and when you have the military informing the public of AI-assisted infrared missile sensors targeting specific ship features and silhoheutees as they approach targets and reporting back to base prior to impact on preliminary damage predictions based on images gathered just prior to impact, while also adjusting their ultimate target to hit specific pre-determined spots on the targetted ship for maximum damage (for example, a specific part of a superstructure to knock out the enemy command center function or specific sensor), I'm very confident assuming they got that suff nailed down. My confidence level on effecient target deconfliction and maximizing damage is at about 98%. : )
98% is a very good figure J!
not to contradict you, but the carrier lost at midway was hit by a 500lb bomb on the fist strike against it, was repaired and recovered so much the second strike mistook it for a different carrier and put 3 (?) more 500 lb bombs into it and later a sub put 4 torpedoes to finally kill her. Plus she was still damaged from the battle of the coral sea. she didn't die as easy as you mentioned.
The A6M was not badly made. It had lightweight construction to allow for comparable performance to early model bf-109s and spitfires that were it's contemporaries when it was designed. The Japanese aero engines tended to be a bit down on power when compared to their contemporaries is Europe and America, with the Zero's Sakai 12 radial putting out around 900 HP when a Spitfires, 109 , or P-40 might have 1100 or 1200 HP, so the design of the zero had to be lightweight and very efficient to get up to 330 mph. The major trade offs came in terms of protection, and when those problems were recognized, upgrading newer models with, say, armored headrests for the pilot, or self sealing fuel tanks ran into the issue that the air frame was so well balanced, adding a little weight in the wrong place could turn it into a soggy blancmange of a thing. The Japanese had some very good late war fighter designs, but transitioning their production to those fighters meant accepting a slump in production, while facing off against the infinite plane printing machine that was US war industry at a time when Japan was on the back foot every where in the Pacific and new planes were desperately needed to make up losses. We could shift production to newer better fighters and build them by the thousands, they couldn't.
On the discussion of armoured decks on carriers, I'd suggest popping over to Drachenifel's channel. He has a great video breaking down the pros and cons of armoured carriers and non armoured and why IJN and USN weren't armoured and RN were. The reasons really simple. Armour takes space. In the Pacific theatre the biggest threat were other carrier based aircraft with smaller payloads so IJN and USN prioritised hanger space and capacity as they were also further away from resupply and replacements. Royal Navy were expecting to operate in European Theatre and spend far more time inside the range of land based aircraft with payloads far heavier so they traded hanger space and capacity for armour to take the hits they knew they'd take.
I have read that even the Wildcat had some success with the Zero. Part of the Zero's fame was it's unexpected overall performance from the US and UK pre-war analyses. That, combined with extremely well trained IJN fighter pilots the zero was very deadly. Particularly against US Army air corps fighters like the P-39 and P-40 that were primarily designed as lower elevation ground support type fighters for a predicted Euro Theater use. At low altitudes the P-39 would have more success, but overall the early US fighters weren't up to the task to take on the Zero in all aspects . But come around the battle around Santa Cruz or Eastern Solomon's the awe factor of the Zero was going away. The IJN was taking enormous losses of pilots and the newer fighters Hellcat especially just outclassed the Zero. The IJN pre-war preparedness for long distance carrier battles was better than the US overall. But that was not a very long lived advantage. The one US airframe that can arguably be considered better than the IJN counterpart was the Dauntless, vs the Val. Even then, the Val held it's own early on as an effective airframe.
19:30
*Starts singing Fall out Boy's 'Light 'em Up'*:
"So light em up up up, light em up up up" ...
Yamoto wasn't with the Pearl Harbor group. He was back in Japan aboard his flagship at the time getting reports about the attack. There was rumors if I remember correctly that many officers wanted him to replace Nagimo as Task Force commander feeling that he would've done what Nagimo couldn't do, destroy the US Carriers and eliminate US presence in the Pacific.
There is a movie about a similar scenario called "The final countdown"
Just quickly, I can't recall off the top of my head how much damage the Yorktown sustained from air attack, or the manner of it (enough to disable it obv), but it was a torpedo from a Japanese sub that finally sank her. The Americans spent a lot of time on the ship trying to save it.
Roger thanks
Ok, the easiest win against the IJN Pearl Harbor fleet: 1 squadron of Macross VF-1S with GBS-1 and FAST packs. A few missile swarms and AA lasers will easily deal with the fighters while 1-2 armed with Angels of Death Reactive Warheads would destroy every ship afloat.
Should have had an option for using the bomb trucks for the boys on this one XD Raptors are super cool tho.
Yeah. F-15EX in missile truck configuration with 12x AIM-120 would have made shorter work of the Japanese fighters. Everyone hits Fox 3 times 12 and goes home.
Something comes to mind about projecting nickels at (gr)ass and saving someone's prostate but it probably shouldn't be said in this polite company.
That’s crazy, the entire fleet would have just disappeared to the Japanese like they were in the Bermuda triangle.
Am I missing something, or have we not yet seen Rapid Dragon actually deploy yet? In any of these videos.
It probably just spawns it🤷♂️
you can see them fall out in the taiwan video with the c130s
Yeh, the missiles just materialise with the C-17, nothing to see.
I had faith in the Rapid Dragon system.
Given the WW2 tech of the Japanese, why the F-22 instead of a missile truck like the F-15?
Would this have worked more effectively using F-15 missile trucks?
IDK, they had rudimentary radar at best, not like it would be guiding weapons to hit the f15s. But having like, 20 missiles per plane would let them rip the zeros apart
Pearl Harbor is getting easier and easier.
Next up, time to test out taking down a MQ-9 with a Su-27 wingtip, like what just happened when russia intercepted one. Many missiles have no collision so I wonder if the reapers do in game.
Why f-22 and not f-35 with pilons or f-15 ex? I'd think more missiles is better
I am stable version, so I won't see mult-anything for 5 more months. And one fix I crave, albeit a minor annoyance only, is that call out from the tower "unable to clear for takeoff" then "clear for takeoff..." 5 seconds later. Does it on every map and every airstrip. And I cannot wait until GR gets their clever little hands on the F-15E Strike Eagle. Imagine this mission with 2 GR's in each jet attacking the Japanese fleet instead of Rapid Dragon. Oooh... sexiness on display!
WWII pilots would be thinking "WE'RE BEING ATTACKED BY ALIENS!!!"
Next Scenario: Rapid Dragon vs. a fleet of ̶j̶a̶p̶a̶n̶e̶s̶e̶ ̶t̶o̶r̶p̶e̶d̶o̶b̶o̶a̶t̶s̶ british trawlers in the english channel. Preferable narrated in your best Drachinifel impression voice :P
lol cool
No ONE aircraft is going to defeat hundreds for the same reason that no one person can, by himself (no force multipliers), defeat a hundred men in hand-to-hand combat. He will be overwhelmed by their superior numbers.
Me using the research all command in HOI4:
Great video by the way
With the Kido Butai taking this much damage from LRASMs, Nimitz would have more time to prepare for the Guadalcanal campaign. Enterprise, Lexington, Yorktown, Wasp, Hornet, and Saratoga would be available to lead the invasion.
Challenge: Same Challenge but no missiles. Just guns. HINT: 10 Fighters don't slow down. Not about the ONE target.
First, there was no need for the fighters (except entertainment) as the C-17 has a service celling nearly 50% higher than the Zero. It could simply fly over the CAP and drop its payload closer and there was nothing the IJN had at the time that could stop it. I would have thought it would be more fun to use F/A-18s than F-35s. Even with Harpoons the F/A-18A can out perform a Zero, allowing for dogfighting and then sniper-shooting whatever the C-17 leaves afloat.
Second, the Yorktown was not sunk by 1 bomb. In-fact no US Fleet carrier was lost that way, although the much smaller and more poorly designed Light Carrier USS Princeton (CVL-23) was lost at Leyte Gulf was. The Yorktown received multiple hits from a Japanese air strike, knocking out her boilers, causing a severe fire and flooding resulting in a pronounced list. (resulting in her being reported as "sinking" by the Japanese) Her crew then got the fire and flooding under control, her list corrected and her boilers restarted, when she was attacked and hit again by a second strike, causing a major fire, flooding and her boilers knocked out (resulting in the Japanese reporting a 2nd carrier knocked out and sinking). Still, her crew managed to the the fire and flooding back under control and her list mostly corrected, though her engines were out. so she was taken under tow back to Pearl Harbor. It was only then, on her way back under tow that she came across the IJN submarine I-68 which hit her with 2 torpedoes, but even then she remained afloat through the night. finally rolling over and sinking the next morning. We don't make our Fleet Carriers prissy ladies, we make our Fleet Carriers tuff old broads, (with the exception of Wasp which was a treaty design error).
Best cap quote "spaamram time"
Su-27 v.s. MQ-9???
Well that went slicker than snot on a chickens lips!
erm
Love the Short Circuit reference Cap!
Great work!👍👍
It's a good thing that ya'll didn't model the cost of countermeasures for the scoreboard, or Cap would throw the results every time lol
Agreed, or aircraft canopies.
The biggest difference between the Japanese and U.S. survivability of ships hit in WW2 had to do with damage control differences between the two nations.
The Japanese tended to depend heavily upon officers as damage control specialist in each section of a ship.
In the U.S. navy every sailor was cross trained for damage control and fire suppression and fire suppression had priority over all other responsibilities. U.S. damage control specialists were cross trained for all sections of a ship. Results were devastating if the trained Japanese specialists was killed when the damage occurred, and no one was likely able to have the knowledge for that section of the ship.
Many of the Japanese came from areas without much technology. However because most U.S. personnel were far more accustomed to technology they could adjust on the fly.
The rigid discipline in the Japanese navy also worked against them. If a Japanese sailor stepped out of thier place they could be beaten. So ideas on improving damage control were not encouraged. Also a Japanese sailor was expected to stay at thier station, rather than help with damage control without ordes.
For exaple an enlisted U.S. sailor at coral sea, who saw the damage done on his carrier when aviation fuel lines were severed in an attack was able to suggest purging the lines with inert gas after each use without fear of being considered as stepping out of his place, or being unqualified to suggests anything. His ideah was welcomed by command, and quickly adopted throughout the fleet. This was very unlikely to happen in the Japanese navy.
The Japanese were not encouraged to use there own initiative, but always waited for orders. The opposite was true in the U.S. navy. Knowing that getting generators restarted for pumps U.S. personnel would just start them without orders. The typical Japanese sailor had to wait for the order that might not come due to severed communications or loss of the appropriate officers.
The problem the Japanese navy had with damage control slowly improved during the war, but far slower than adjustments needed in the U.S. navy. Because transfers between ships were unusual in the Japanese navy in order to promote ship wide team spirit. This resulted in slow dissemination of experience throughout the fleet. In fact, it was not uncommon for an entire Japanese navel airwings being left undeployed for extended periods, due to extensive refitting or repairs on the carrier they were assigned to. In the U.S. navy personnel were regularly transferred to different and newer vessels, resulting in quick dissemination of lessons learned on other ships.
Lastly ship design also contributed to damage control success or failure. U.S. ships were designed with far more redundant equipment for fire suppression and damage control than the Japanese vessels.
American bomber piolets used to aim for the red globe painted on the decks when his the ship was a goner.
Besides relatively fragile carriers, (Though they weren't entirely bad) the IJN's relatively primitive damage control training contributed more to the issues they had. US Navy ships that had taken worse damage would survive, while the IJN ships would go down as flooding and/or fires spread beyond the crews ability to deal with. The US Navy trained every crew-member for damage control, and did repeated drills for it, as well as cross training. This paid large dividends. The IJN on the other hand relied on dedicated damage control teams. And while the IJN DC teams were quite good, they could become quickly overwhelmed by multiple hits/fires/leaks. Plus, if the DC teams were either cut off from the area by damage, or were among the casualties.....not good.
Ab-so-friggin-awewsome! Thank you GR!
I mean, I know you want to kill all/most of the Zeros but TBH dropping almost 1/2 of them while simultaneously destroying their careers is absolutely a win. Ultimately, Japan's strategy fails when 200+ aircraft crash in the ocean and they lose all the carriers in the strike group, even with US losses the same, since our careers were fortunately away. Just a few modern aircraft (and an asston of munitions) would have actually succeeded in ruining Japan's Pearl Harbor attack.
Looks like instead of dancing with the slow-movers it might be more efficient to fly past them and then more then down from behind one after another
A night attack would have been more effective. The Japanese wouldn't have known anything was up until their carriers started exploding
Love your videos so much Cap
Contact me in GR Discord.