Question depends on the era of anti-ship missiles. These old 80's missiles would have to literally launch 500+ missiles to defeat 6 modern escort ships. Which is impossible. Here is modern missiles: th-cam.com/video/Yj5TiUaJHu0/w-d-xo.html
I think the perfect combo would be tomcat with 260’s. If they can get the peed of the tomcat paired up with the extra long range of the 260, it would send the stand-off distance even farther.
The AIM-54 did do a zoom climb not just because it is thinner air there for less drag, but because it was a "top attack" missile. Coming down on top of a target meant a far larger radar return, so more likely probability it could track and kill the target from above.
I think the F-14s should have had a loadout of 4x AIM-54, 2x AIM-7F/M and 2x AIM-9L/M. That way, the AIM-54s could be salvo-launched, then the AIM-7s used in head-on engagements to pick off the lead survivors, then circle back and shoot down a surviving bomber with a pair of AIM-9s.
Standard Air to Air loadout for the Tomcat as they would only launch with 6 from land or if the Russians had called in everything and they knew they would be coming back empty
When I was in the USN aboard the Theodore Roosevelt from 86 to 90 they were just switching over to the Tomcat -D models. The -D was equipped with the same F110-GE-400 engines as the -B's. It also included newer digital avionics systems including a glass cockpit and replaced the AWG-9 with the newer AN/APG-71 radar, the Airborne Self Protection Jammer (ASPJ), Joint Tactical Information Distribution System (JTIDS), SJU-17(V) Naval Aircrew Common Ejection Seats (NACES), and Infrared search and track. They also took a shitload of legacy Tom's and retrofitted them to the upgraded -D specs. So those would have made quite a difference methinks. But they did just fine as it were
Variable geometry wings are just cool as hell, and the wide F14 and its wide separation of engines just looks cool as hell, and having huge long range missiles is also cool as hell. Will it win, probably not, but I want it to!
Other than the fratricide, I think part of Fat Amy's problem was because of the longer engagement range, without the deconfliction they can actually do. Longer engagement time means follow-on missiles are still firing at live targets....that the first volley already targeted, but just haven't reached yet.
You're off on the speed predictions there. The F-4 remains one of the fastest combat aircraft to be put into service. When it was in it's heyday, the only fighter that could outpace it easily was the MiG-25, which was basically just a rocket with a cockpit and a couple of missiles.
l think the missile flight time favoured the FA-18F spacing, due to the long range of the aim 260, the f35c all targeted the same target in the 3 minutes missile flight time window, so slowing the launch rate of F35 may help with deconfliction
On of my favorite games of yesteryear was JF2. While sold on the concept of flying around in F-23 Black Widow ( F-22 was later patched in, Oops! ), the real star of the show was F-14 for fleet defense and intercept missions. Definitely more arcade than realistic, but was adequate for early 1990s. Later moved on to more "realistic" sims like Strike Eagle III and Falcon 4.0.
@@paladamashkin8981 yeah, F-4 was designed for just this, as was the early years of the F-14. just imagine how potent each were against an enemy from their era. I think the F-18F won because the data for those missiles is more readily available vs the data for the 260. Oh and the Sparrow is dogshit.
Tomcat, best cat. But if Lightning Again had targeting and deconfliction better modeled, would have mopped the floor and come back for the party favors. My name ain't Rob but, I like to party.
Also the F-4 was designed as an all weather Fleet Defiance/interceptor it wasn't until much later that other missions were added due to its versatility.
sorta dumb to remove the missiles from the tomcat but not the bugs, if it were intercepting they would have a max of 6 missiles each, probably less since there are many of them
25:53 a dead body is falling out of the sky (barely moving forward and mostly downward), an attaking anti-ship bomber is staying at altitude and coming towords the target really really fast.
26:50 it was also turning missiles that missed. So not splitting up into 3 attaking vectors, but one central one and then having the missiles turn (for every group btw, but esp with the Phoenix)
First Round-- F-18 Hornet's with AIM-120C-7 VS F-14B Tomcat's with AIM-54C's👍 Second Round-- F-18 Super Hornet's with AIM-120D's VS ST-21 Super Tomcat's with AIM-152 GDW's👍 Bonus Round-- SU-33's VS MIG-29KR's👍
This was a video I didn't know I needed till 32 minutes ago! This was a super interesting competition to watch! I was amazed how well the F-4 did and I was confident in my Tomcat to rock!
Really impressive test! Lots of fun to watch. Had to admit I'm surprised the Super bug took the day, but it goes to how the 260s are modeled re: deconfliction
Whoever commented that if the f-14s were the best they would still be out there, is flat-out 100-percent wrong. They were the best and they still would be the best. But the two reasons they were taken out of service was the cost of maintaining an older Fleet of aircraft and the Navy wanted to go to less diverse platform. The F-14 with made for one job and one job only in that was to be a fleet Interceptor and no aircraft has ever come close to doing its job. Especially if it had the missiles that we use today, along with the updated radar it would blow everybody away
9:30 F-4 ... Boy, I saw a lot of those taking off in the Tonkin Gulf. 16:00 _"I wonder if that's how the real [AIM-54] worked?"_ It is. It would climb to 100-140,000 feet and plunge from above. However ... Their PK was only ~20%, I think. 35:00 I'm actually surprised the Tomcats didn't do better, but am in no way surprised the Bugs were worst. After all, the USN knew they were abandoning this scenario by replacing the Tomcats.
Great video, guys! Cap, I'd love to see each top super power nation run the same test, then run a final scenario running the top interceptor of each nation to see what is best overall!!
Being intercepting the enemy as far away as possible is critical the C.A.G. (Commander, Air Group) may and probably would send half of the Interceptors without external fuel and the other half with external fuel. The reasoning behind this is that the interceptors without external fuel would get to the bombers first, fire their weapons, turn back and inflight refuel. The second flight, the ones with external fuel would take out any remaining bombers the interceptors without external fuel did not stop. THIS SCENARIO MAY BE WORTH ATTEMPING. If nothing else, we all can learn from this idea and that will help everyone in DCS (THE PILOTS AND MISSION PLANNERS) Please try it. !!!
the best fleet defense interceptor is and alway will be the F-8 Crusader. they kill to loss ratio was best of any Vietnam war area and that was before the "top gun program"
Love what you guys do. This has got to be one of the coolest games I have ever seen. growing up the Tomcat was my all time favorite. As of today it is in my top 3. keep up the great work guys.
I’m so dumb. I thought people were calling the F-18 the “Bog” because it was so much slower than the F-14 which it replaced so it was like going through a boggy marsh. “Bug” makes so much more sense.
Pure fleet defense is probably going to go to the Super Hornet. Interception would go to the F-14D if we had it. F-35 performance will depend entirely on load out and whether the sensor system is properly modeled (I'm going to guess it isn't, so poorly).
As to the F-4 correct threats would have been Tu-16 Badgers running in with AS--1 which was subsonic 2 carried per Badger, the KSR-2/AS-4 Kelt as well as the KSR-5/AS-6 which was a smaller version of the KH-22/AS-4 for the Badger, the KH-22 making around Mach 4.6 and dive onto target of around Mach 3.5 but would be carried in pairs by Tu-95 a truly dangerous missile for those days also the KH-22 could be carried in singles on the Tu-22K (Not the Backfire but it's earlier brother). Also the defences from the ships back then for the 1960's and 1970'S no VLS launchers so each ship could only loft 1 or 2 SAM's at a time with a reload of around 7 to 18 seconds depending on ship... this is the reason the F-4 carried a lot of fuel same with the Tomcats so they could loiter out around 250nm up threat and start their intercepts early though there would only generally be a pair or a 4 ship out there. But in high threat areas they would loft more aircraft with tanker support obviously. And this is the reason AEGIS was born so it could handle this type of threat along with the E-2's and Tomcats.
Wonder how The A-4 Skyhawk and like you said F-14A would have done... oh and it'd been cool to see The AIM-120C-7! Besides that brilliantly done exceptionally entertaining!👍👍
I saw several of your videos, and saw you do a lot of interesting simulations, like the ones of a modern Falklands War. Being from Brazil I tried to think of a possible cenario you could run that included us and a possible one would be a brazilian invasion of French Guiana, its VERY improbable to happen but there was a brazilian president in the past that wanted to do it, so I would like to see a scenario like the Falklands 2025. so The brazilian forces of 2025, operating from the French Guiana would need to stop a French strike group from arriving, you already have created the French strike group, would need to research the brazilian forces, those would be what we have today plus the 12 Gripens armed with meteors that should be operational by 2025 and a new Tamandaré frigate that also should be delivered by 2025. We dont have a carrier anymore after we sunk the São Paulo this year and the Atlantico (ex-HMS Ocean) can only operate helicopters and drones so even if it would probably be present on the invasion it would not be very usefull in this scenario unless as a target for the french Rafales. Binkov's Battlegrounds channel made a video abou such an invasion a few years back (Could Brazil take French Guiana from France if it wanted to? (2020)) but since there were no operational Gripens at the time he just considered the F5s, AMXs and the P3 Orions, plus he dont run any simulations just expeculate about possible outcomes. He assumed Brazil would in the end keep the Guiana becouse of the huge amount of man power it could send but our air force would be obliterated, it would be interesting to see someone simulating what the air combat could look like in 2025.
8:00_ "If the Tomcat was the best, we'd still be flying the Tomcat."_ That's untrue. TPTB in the USN _KNEW_ the Tomcat was a better fleet interceptor, but replaced it after the Soviet Union fell because it had a more limited role. The F-18 could do literally everything else better, as well as needing half the maintenance hours because non-swing wing.
Hi Cap there was supposed to be a further upgraded Tomcat but it was killed in favour of the Hornet but if you want to find out more there is a You Tuber called Ward Carroll who has an episode on this
It would if you integrated the fire control which I assume would require ripping out of computers... The cost of doing this in real life though. Also, with an older radar, unless it were to be replaced as well, the number of targets engaged at a time would most likely stay the same
one thing to consider is that the lack of proper loft of GR missile (mod restrictions) make their time to impact much lower compare to the realistic AIM-54s. Even if their TTI is lower than AIM54 irl, it is certainly not that much faster. This says enough how much Tomcats were ahead of their time really. also I kinda noticed that the launch rate of the F14 was noticeablely lower than the other aircraft. Is this a core game bug?
While I never liked them you are right. I've also found in most video games that players tend to treat them like a shorter range fire and forget like the 120. You've got to maintain that lock to the end.
It's interesting to note, the modern F4's have the AIM-120C. With AESA Radar. I'm wondering if a Japanese F4 would be better suited for these type of Fights?
11:50: The F-35's bay stores do still have weight, which indirectly creates drag, so those stores still aren't free. But you're right that they're not nearly as bad as external stores. On the other hand, the bay still occupies the same amount of space when it's empty, so it has its aerodynamic disadvantage too.
Good point, but if we’re just categorizing them based on era, then having the same targets makes it more of an accurate comparison. There are too many new variables if you change the enemies for each plane as well.
To me, the fight to watch was between the Tomcat, and the Super Hornet. The big cat didn't disappoint. It did exactly what it was designed to do. The Super bug also did well. The thing is, had the Soviet Union endured, I think the F-14D would still be around owing to its superior abilities. Great video. It was incredibly informative.
Why didn’t the Super Hornet get the AIM-260? They will get it at the same time as the F-35’s… maybe even sooner, because a lightning can get way closer without getting shot down, while the 4++ gen can stay further away to stay save
Irl the Super Hornets will definitely get them before, and tbh the F35 may never carry them. They won't be able to fit into those internal bays, externally loaded they exponentially increase the RCS and drag of the aircraft. I laughed when he said "12 aim260's" because the F35 would struggle to even get off the ground with that load. TLDR; F35's should've had the aim120D's and the superhornets the Aim260's.
@@grimreapers but it is about the aircraft, and the super bug and lightning will get the 260 at the same time, and fly at the same time, why give the Hornet a disadvantage
Cap - well planned scenario! A thought if you ever redo this scenario in the future: I believe Simba's incorrect about the threat timeframe. The Tu-22M + Kitchen missiles is not a 1990s threat. This is a 1970s/1980s threat. It's exactly the threat the Tomcat was designed to meet. Tom Clancy covers this kind of attack in "Red Storm Rising" (the chapter called "Dance of the Vampires") in the mid-1980s. Your scenario here actually shows why the Tomcat was needed - the F-4 Phantom failed to get 1/2 the bombers before they could launch, and it's unclear that a 1970s/1980s carrier group could have defended against 18 Kitchen missiles arriving simultaneously. The Phantoms were saved in this case by having a 1990s or later CVBG behind them.
I'd like to see it it run again, only replace the legacy F-18 with a stealthy F-35 and don't bother with the F-4. Also, as many human pilots as possible per side. Thanks boys!
Who ever said that if the Tomcat were that good they'd still be in service needs to do his research. The reason why the Tomcat was decommissioned was because of the maintenance cost.
Air frames were 32+ years old when they were decommissioned, so maintenance costs were skyrocketing. While B52s from the 50s may still be flying the carrier landings and hard use made for a lot of maintenance. The need for a dedicated fleet interceptor is mostly gone too, but in my view that is being short sighted. In the last 22 years it's mostly ground attack and very little air to air in comparison and the old saying of always preparing for the last war instead of the next rings true.
Awesome experiment but I couldn't help commenting. The US Navy typically will have two bags of gas on the Bugs and Super Bugs. Often times "Goofy Gas" or "Double ugly" will be used to get as much fuel and weapons on board while also allowing options for extra sensors. One Hornet pilot told me that a third drop tank causes enough drag to negate the fuel.Single tank is usually training missions. For some reason, the Super Bug continues to be posted as having a Max speed of Mach 1.8 instead of Mach 1.6. I am not sure why that was never corrected. IIRC Mach 1.6 was at altitude with minimal AAMs and 40%.
Hey Cap, HB did FM refinements to the F-14A (F-14B pending) and it should perform better in tasks like this now. Maybe you'd want to give it a test or two. BTW, you got the 35C to finally work again?
I have never understood why the Legacy F-18 was slower than the F-4. The F-4 is a larger, heavier aircraft with a worse thrust to weight ratio yet it was quite a bit faster than the Hornet.
To put it simply, jet thrust increases with speed (past M0.6 or so). When you see thrust numbers on wikipedia or whatever, those numbers are usually static, i.e. they were measured on a test bench or something like that. F-4 has straight turbojets and they don't produce as much power at 0 airspeed as turbofans, but they start to catch up and do better at high mach numbers. Intake design makes a big difference at the top end also.
Even if the best the Tomcat, it would need to be substantial better to still have the 14 flying After the cold war money was priority over quality. Just look at the less than 200 raptors made
You guys should try adding the super hornet block three just for fun, it has much more powerful engines and it’s harder to see on radar. It would really make things interesting.
Service record wise it's F4 vs F14 vs FA-18. FA- 18 is the most versatile, but the F-14 had longer loiter time and Aim 54s. F-35 is still new, but stealth makes it a BVR monster.
They are - once in the air actually flying at speed there's little to choose from a 60s era Tu-22 and the current in service Tu-22M. The latter's advantage is all about low speed handling a bit more speed and of course a much better RADAR. As the attacks were being directed by AWAC the plane's own RADAR would be of little consequence as even a 1960s Tu-126's airborne RADAR could see something as large as an aircraft carrier at a couple of hundred miles.
Hmmm, it is possible that with AIM 120 D for the super Hornets, it is an in service design and modeling may just be better for deconfliction, still on data link as well
Added pressure, the most recent aircraft defends the oldest carrier fleet other than the cv due to launching appropriate aircraft, so 2020's protecting 1960's 70's Dd's and so on 😊
One point is that in the 60s and 70s the navy jets had VERY specific roles. There were 7 or 8 different T/M/S on each boat. Hence the tomcat being made exactly for this. As planes evolved they could fill more roles. The F/A-18 is very impressive in that regard.
@@Scoobydcs They designed the Tomcats to be able to carry basic ground ordnance as a backup function, but it was never intended in that role in service. Only in the 1990s did they begin training crews in ground attack profiles. So did the Tomcat have a basic A2G capability (very basic) in the 1970s and 1980s? Yes. Did anyone consider the Tomcat a multirole aircraft in the fleet and were crews trained to use A2G ordnance? No.
LOL....No one games a CIWS system for each ship to shoot down the missiles? By the way, the Tomcat can carry six AIM-54 and using its advanced radar, can hit 5 out of the 6 in tests in extended range (100 miles). The Tomcat had the best speed and package, hands down. USAF SECURITY POLICE 1982-1997.
Stop say8ng the tomcat was designed for 1 thing (bomber interceptor) it wasn't, that was simply it's primary role. It was always designed as a multirole air superiority fighter from day 1
the F14 seemed more spread out than the others?? due to slow launch rate?? in reality the CAP patrol would have got there first, 2xF14s (8x 54s) and the alert fighters would only need to deal with any leakers.....maybe Damp should have kept those 9m's.....
In-game, f-35 launch their missiles at targets one by one. Wonder if in real life they can launch a salvo simultaneously, each of the missiles going to a predesignated target? That's more sensible, innit?
If they preform like they do in game it's the F35 hands down. If what ever war we're fighting makes it 2 or 3 years it's probably a stripped down hornet. They can act as a tanker and bomber which is probably more important than being a fighter. Plus there production lines could be stepped up in a hurry. The guys that maintained them are still in service. They shoot all the same ordinance. You fly a F18 onto a carrier it's just another Tuesday.
Cap, how many anti-ship missile’s does it take to defeat a modern US carrier group?
Question depends on the era of anti-ship missiles. These old 80's missiles would have to literally launch 500+ missiles to defeat 6 modern escort ships. Which is impossible. Here is modern missiles: th-cam.com/video/Yj5TiUaJHu0/w-d-xo.html
@@grimreapers How bout how many aircraft does it take to defeat a modern US carrier air wing?
I think the perfect combo would be tomcat with 260’s. If they can get the peed of the tomcat paired up with the extra long range of the 260, it would send the stand-off distance even farther.
The AIM-54 did do a zoom climb not just because it is thinner air there for less drag, but because it was a "top attack" missile. Coming down on top of a target meant a far larger radar return, so more likely probability it could track and kill the target from above.
Also most legacy RWRs have blind spots over 45 degree above.
I think if the F35's targetting ability could be properly modelled in game then it would be an easy win and probably would only need one of them.
and due to the friendly fire they were also one plane short, might not have won it, but it would have been closer
It depends if it got its middles off first.
I think it would have won as well. It was very difficult to differentiate the targets with the modeled system.
Yup sadly I doubt we'll ever get access to the targeting side of the code.
@@grimreapers you never know, if Gaijin ever add the F35 to War Thunder then its targeting algorithm will become open source sooner or later!
I think the F-14s should have had a loadout of 4x AIM-54, 2x AIM-7F/M and 2x AIM-9L/M. That way, the AIM-54s could be salvo-launched, then the AIM-7s used in head-on engagements to pick off the lead survivors, then circle back and shoot down a surviving bomber with a pair of AIM-9s.
Standard Air to Air loadout for the Tomcat as they would only launch with 6 from land or if the Russians had called in everything and they knew they would be coming back empty
Yeah! Also I don't believe that the phoenix C is modelled properly in dcs, It should have a range of 140 nm tops, at mach 5!
@@GolddenWaffles correct 💯
@@GolddenWaffles According to Wikipedia, the C model had a max range of 99.4 nautical miles (184.1 km).
It was recommended to carry less to increase the speed of the aircraft.
When I was in the USN aboard the Theodore Roosevelt from 86 to 90 they were just switching over to the Tomcat -D models. The -D was equipped with the same F110-GE-400 engines as the -B's. It also included newer digital avionics systems including a glass cockpit and replaced the AWG-9 with the newer AN/APG-71 radar, the Airborne Self Protection Jammer (ASPJ), Joint Tactical Information Distribution System (JTIDS), SJU-17(V) Naval Aircrew Common Ejection Seats (NACES), and Infrared search and track. They also took a shitload of legacy Tom's and retrofitted them to the upgraded -D specs. So those would have made quite a difference methinks. But they did just fine as it were
Unfortunately, the F-14D is not currently modeled in game, so we're stuck with the A and B models.
Most probably modern tech will win, but I'm going to say F-14 just because of the coolness factor
It still is. I don't care. F14 forever baby
@@xanatos819 With the Phoenix missiles.
Variable geometry wings are just cool as hell, and the wide F14 and its wide separation of engines just looks cool as hell, and having huge long range missiles is also cool as hell. Will it win, probably not, but I want it to!
Other than the fratricide, I think part of Fat Amy's problem was because of the longer engagement range, without the deconfliction they can actually do.
Longer engagement time means follow-on missiles are still firing at live targets....that the first volley already targeted, but just haven't reached yet.
Great video as always. I’ve just tried DCS for the first time. Longest flight 2 feet! Woot! I have a whole new level of respect for y’all’s skills.
I have over 24 hours in the game and still struggle, have never landed, not a single time.
@@bigboie3507 well, admiral Benson flew 194 missions and never landed, so no big deal!
Loved the new 5-way attack model - very interesting and fun!
You're off on the speed predictions there. The F-4 remains one of the fastest combat aircraft to be put into service. When it was in it's heyday, the only fighter that could outpace it easily was the MiG-25, which was basically just a rocket with a cockpit and a couple of missiles.
Get well soon Cap, you goddamned legend!
I like the setup, great way to do a roughly equal positioning and comparison.
Any video with the phantom is a good one.
l think the missile flight time favoured the FA-18F spacing, due to the long range of the aim 260, the f35c all targeted the same target in the 3 minutes missile flight time window, so slowing the launch rate of F35 may help with deconfliction
On of my favorite games of yesteryear was JF2. While sold on the concept of flying around in F-23 Black Widow ( F-22 was later patched in, Oops! ), the real star of the show was F-14 for fleet defense and intercept missions. Definitely more arcade than realistic, but was adequate for early 1990s.
Later moved on to more "realistic" sims like Strike Eagle III and Falcon 4.0.
Phantom was originally designed specifically for this role. It was meant to climb fast and shoot down aircraft incoming to the carrier.
Phantom was exactly the plane for this. It was so good the air force used it instead of continuing development of their own plane the f108
@@paladamashkin8981 yeah, F-4 was designed for just this, as was the early years of the F-14. just imagine how potent each were against an enemy from their era. I think the F-18F won because the data for those missiles is more readily available vs the data for the 260. Oh and the Sparrow is dogshit.
Tomcat, best cat. But if Lightning Again had targeting and deconfliction better modeled, would have mopped the floor and come back for the party favors.
My name ain't Rob but, I like to party.
Your great at working with the camera angles. You know what viewershippers want!!
Also the F-4 was designed as an all weather Fleet Defiance/interceptor it wasn't until much later that other missions were added due to its versatility.
"They really do move in herds."
I'm fucking dead!! Lmfao
Early 90's movies best movies.
Well set up! Nice job as usual GR
What a great and super fun mission. Having them all go at once and compete with each other was a wonderful idea!.
sorta dumb to remove the missiles from the tomcat but not the bugs, if it were intercepting they would have a max of 6 missiles each, probably less since there are many of them
25:53 a dead body is falling out of the sky (barely moving forward and mostly downward), an attaking anti-ship bomber is staying at altitude and coming towords the target really really fast.
26:50 it was also turning missiles that missed. So not splitting up into 3 attaking vectors, but one central one and then having the missiles turn (for every group btw, but esp with the Phoenix)
Cap doing Cap things, overarming the hell out of his F-18s. For heaven's sake, give them 6 in these scenarios!
First Round-- F-18 Hornet's with AIM-120C-7 VS F-14B Tomcat's with AIM-54C's👍
Second Round-- F-18 Super Hornet's with AIM-120D's VS ST-21 Super Tomcat's with AIM-152 GDW's👍
Bonus Round-- SU-33's VS MIG-29KR's👍
This was a video I didn't know I needed till 32 minutes ago! This was a super interesting competition to watch! I was amazed how well the F-4 did and I was confident in my Tomcat to rock!
Technically they failed since the bombers got their load off but the clean up was better than expected. Same with classic f18s.
Really impressive test! Lots of fun to watch. Had to admit I'm surprised the Super bug took the day, but it goes to how the 260s are modeled re: deconfliction
Whoever commented that if the f-14s were the best they would still be out there, is flat-out 100-percent wrong. They were the best and they still would be the best. But the two reasons they were taken out of service was the cost of maintaining an older Fleet of aircraft and the Navy wanted to go to less diverse platform. The F-14 with made for one job and one job only in that was to be a fleet Interceptor and no aircraft has ever come close to doing its job. Especially if it had the missiles that we use today, along with the updated radar it would blow everybody away
9:30 F-4 ... Boy, I saw a lot of those taking off in the Tonkin Gulf.
16:00 _"I wonder if that's how the real [AIM-54] worked?"_
It is. It would climb to 100-140,000 feet and plunge from above.
However ... Their PK was only ~20%, I think.
35:00 I'm actually surprised the Tomcats didn't do better, but am in no way surprised the Bugs were worst. After all, the USN knew they were abandoning this scenario by replacing the Tomcats.
Great video, guys! Cap, I'd love to see each top super power nation run the same test, then run a final scenario running the top interceptor of each nation to see what is best overall!!
Interesting video.
We even had a RIM sighting at the end! Wonder if they just flew straight into the sea again.
Probably.
The F4 is a big, heavy 'Tomb'/'Toom'. Tornado is a slightly slimmer 'Tonka'. 11:45
Being intercepting the enemy as far away as possible is critical the C.A.G. (Commander, Air Group) may and probably would send half of the Interceptors without external fuel and the other half with external fuel. The reasoning behind this is that the interceptors without external fuel would get to the bombers first, fire their weapons, turn back and inflight refuel. The second flight, the ones with external fuel would take out any remaining bombers the interceptors without external fuel did not stop.
THIS SCENARIO MAY BE WORTH ATTEMPING. If nothing else, we all can learn from this idea and that will help everyone in DCS (THE PILOTS AND MISSION PLANNERS) Please try it. !!!
And just one f14 could have tracked in all the other's Phoenix's and deconflict targets while the others RTB to rearm or refuel.
Nice work as always Cap. The F4 was pretty quick for its time though.
the best fleet defense interceptor is and alway will be the F-8 Crusader. they kill to loss ratio was best of any Vietnam war area and that was before the "top gun program"
Love what you guys do. This has got to be one of the coolest games I have ever seen. growing up the Tomcat was my all time favorite. As of today it is in my top 3. keep up the great work guys.
I’m so dumb. I thought people were calling the F-18 the “Bog” because it was so much slower than the F-14 which it replaced so it was like going through a boggy marsh. “Bug” makes so much more sense.
bog = Bug interchangeable.
My thoughts on the transition from 14 to 18 is best described as going from a Porsche to Prius. Glad I retired in '95.
Pure fleet defense is probably going to go to the Super Hornet. Interception would go to the F-14D if we had it. F-35 performance will depend entirely on load out and whether the sensor system is properly modeled (I'm going to guess it isn't, so poorly).
As to the F-4 correct threats would have been Tu-16 Badgers running in with AS--1 which was subsonic 2 carried per Badger, the KSR-2/AS-4 Kelt as well as the KSR-5/AS-6 which was a smaller version of the KH-22/AS-4 for the Badger, the KH-22 making around Mach 4.6 and dive onto target of around Mach 3.5 but would be carried in pairs by Tu-95 a truly dangerous missile for those days also the KH-22 could be carried in singles on the Tu-22K (Not the Backfire but it's earlier brother). Also the defences from the ships back then for the 1960's and 1970'S no VLS launchers so each ship could only loft 1 or 2 SAM's at a time with a reload of around 7 to 18 seconds depending on ship... this is the reason the F-4 carried a lot of fuel same with the Tomcats so they could loiter out around 250nm up threat and start their intercepts early though there would only generally be a pair or a 4 ship out there. But in high threat areas they would loft more aircraft with tanker support obviously. And this is the reason AEGIS was born so it could handle this type of threat along with the E-2's and Tomcats.
In terms of technological innovation and development in response, this honor goes to the F4 phantom.
Second that, Phantoms are beautiful.
Wonder how The A-4 Skyhawk and like you said F-14A would have done... oh and it'd been cool to see The AIM-120C-7! Besides that brilliantly done exceptionally entertaining!👍👍
The Phantom II is a large fighter with a top speed of over Mach 2.2
Loved this scenario. Great job Cap and you beautiful boys!
I saw several of your videos, and saw you do a lot of interesting simulations, like the ones of a modern Falklands War.
Being from Brazil I tried to think of a possible cenario you could run that included us and a possible one would be a brazilian invasion of French Guiana, its VERY improbable to happen but there was a brazilian president in the past that wanted to do it, so I would like to see a scenario like the Falklands 2025. so
The brazilian forces of 2025, operating from the French Guiana would need to stop a French strike group from arriving, you already have created the French strike group, would need to research the brazilian forces, those would be what we have today plus the 12 Gripens armed with meteors that should be operational by 2025 and a new Tamandaré frigate that also should be delivered by 2025.
We dont have a carrier anymore after we sunk the São Paulo this year and the Atlantico (ex-HMS Ocean) can only operate helicopters and drones so even if it would probably be present on the invasion it would not be very usefull in this scenario unless as a target for the french Rafales.
Binkov's Battlegrounds channel made a video abou such an invasion a few years back (Could Brazil take French Guiana from France if it wanted to? (2020)) but since there were no operational Gripens at the time he just considered the F5s, AMXs and the P3 Orions, plus he dont run any simulations just expeculate about possible outcomes. He assumed Brazil would in the end keep the Guiana becouse of the huge amount of man power it could send but our air force would be obliterated, it would be interesting to see someone simulating what the air combat could look like in 2025.
8:00_ "If the Tomcat was the best, we'd still be flying the Tomcat."_
That's untrue. TPTB in the USN _KNEW_ the Tomcat was a better fleet interceptor, but replaced it after the Soviet Union fell because it had a more limited role. The F-18 could do literally everything else better, as well as needing half the maintenance hours because non-swing wing.
Swing wing had nothing to do with mtc issues. They debunked that several years ago on Tomcast.
It was all politics...
Hi Cap there was supposed to be a further upgraded Tomcat but it was killed in favour of the Hornet but if you want to find out more there is a You Tuber called Ward Carroll who has an episode on this
Excellent setup and a great, great battle.
Very interesting.
Get well soon Cap.
What about fitting modern missiles to old planes (would that work?) Planes like the F104 etc.....that would be interesting!
It would if you integrated the fire control which I assume would require ripping out of computers... The cost of doing this in real life though. Also, with an older radar, unless it were to be replaced as well, the number of targets engaged at a time would most likely stay the same
I have COVID and you sound more sick than I do! Take it easy Capt.. Take care of yourself first.
Yes I have it also.
one thing to consider is that the lack of proper loft of GR missile (mod restrictions) make their time to impact much lower compare to the realistic AIM-54s. Even if their TTI is lower than AIM54 irl, it is certainly not that much faster.
This says enough how much Tomcats were ahead of their time really.
also I kinda noticed that the launch rate of the F14 was noticeablely lower than the other aircraft. Is this a core game bug?
Yup that's a thing. GR missiles cover ground too fast.
I didn't notice but maybe they taxi slower than other planes?
I love the sparrows. In a furball it's worth its weight in 'not killing friendlies ' always carry a pair if possible.
While I never liked them you are right. I've also found in most video games that players tend to treat them like a shorter range fire and forget like the 120. You've got to maintain that lock to the end.
It's interesting to note, the modern F4's have the AIM-120C. With AESA Radar. I'm wondering if a Japanese F4 would be better suited for these type of Fights?
I love the switching between Bug and Bog, GR made it a Bog for me forever, when I saw Topgun Maverick I yelled Boooooooooooooog
Bug = Yanks Bog = Brits
11:50: The F-35's bay stores do still have weight, which indirectly creates drag, so those stores still aren't free. But you're right that they're not nearly as bad as external stores.
On the other hand, the bay still occupies the same amount of space when it's empty, so it has its aerodynamic disadvantage too.
Should run it back with each group fighting the tech from their decade and see who does it better based on their era.
Good point, but if we’re just categorizing them based on era, then having the same targets makes it more of an accurate comparison. There are too many new variables if you change the enemies for each plane as well.
@@Sweedster ooh and the measure could be, how close to release point the Bombers get. I also can't wait til we get a non Mod phantom.
To me, the fight to watch was between the Tomcat, and the Super Hornet. The big cat didn't disappoint. It did exactly what it was designed to do. The Super bug also did well. The thing is, had the Soviet Union endured, I think the F-14D would still be around owing to its superior abilities. Great video. It was incredibly informative.
Thanks for explaining, I thought you were saying "bog" and it was very confusing 😂
I'd love to see the attackers of each time running a gauntlet to see which is best, that list would be the A-4, A-6, F/A-18D, F/A-18E, and F-35C
Plus the A-3,A-5 and A-7
@@DARTHBLUNT713 a-6 and a-7 are also great, yes, too bad we never get to see them here. Not modeled?
This was aweosme. Thanks!
Superbog is a beast!!
Why didn’t the Super Hornet get the AIM-260? They will get it at the same time as the F-35’s… maybe even sooner, because a lightning can get way closer without getting shot down, while the 4++ gen can stay further away to stay save
Irl the Super Hornets will definitely get them before, and tbh the F35 may never carry them. They won't be able to fit into those internal bays, externally loaded they exponentially increase the RCS and drag of the aircraft. I laughed when he said "12 aim260's" because the F35 would struggle to even get off the ground with that load. TLDR; F35's should've had the aim120D's and the superhornets the Aim260's.
Super bug representing 2000-2020, no AIM-260 in this period.
@@grimreapers but it is about the aircraft, and the super bug and lightning will get the 260 at the same time, and fly at the same time, why give the Hornet a disadvantage
Cap - well planned scenario! A thought if you ever redo this scenario in the future: I believe Simba's incorrect about the threat timeframe. The Tu-22M + Kitchen missiles is not a 1990s threat. This is a 1970s/1980s threat. It's exactly the threat the Tomcat was designed to meet. Tom Clancy covers this kind of attack in "Red Storm Rising" (the chapter called "Dance of the Vampires") in the mid-1980s. Your scenario here actually shows why the Tomcat was needed - the F-4 Phantom failed to get 1/2 the bombers before they could launch, and it's unclear that a 1970s/1980s carrier group could have defended against 18 Kitchen missiles arriving simultaneously. The Phantoms were saved in this case by having a 1990s or later CVBG behind them.
I'd like to see it it run again, only replace the legacy F-18 with a stealthy F-35 and don't bother with the F-4. Also, as many human pilots as possible per side. Thanks boys!
Hope you had fun at the weekend Cap, sounds like you did
Got that Covid again.
@@grimreapers Suitably grim. Hope you're doing ok.
I think each decade should have different bombers to intercept as the 1960s bomber will not be the same as the 2030 bomber, at least they shouldn't be
Unfortunately the f-35 is completely classified so most of the information in this simulator is you know guesswork.
Who ever said that if the Tomcat were that good they'd still be in service needs to do his research. The reason why the Tomcat was decommissioned was because of the maintenance cost.
Air frames were 32+ years old when they were decommissioned, so maintenance costs were skyrocketing. While B52s from the 50s may still be flying the carrier landings and hard use made for a lot of maintenance. The need for a dedicated fleet interceptor is mostly gone too, but in my view that is being short sighted. In the last 22 years it's mostly ground attack and very little air to air in comparison and the old saying of always preparing for the last war instead of the next rings true.
You have to redo this when the corsair comes to see if it changes anything.
The old F-4 was a smoky, lumbering old truck, but I'll always have a soft spot for it :)
Awesome experiment but I couldn't help commenting. The US Navy typically will have two bags of gas on the Bugs and Super Bugs. Often times "Goofy Gas" or "Double ugly" will be used to get as much fuel and weapons on board while also allowing options for extra sensors. One Hornet pilot told me that a third drop tank causes enough drag to negate the fuel.Single tank is usually training missions. For some reason, the Super Bug continues to be posted as having a Max speed of Mach 1.8 instead of Mach 1.6. I am not sure why that was never corrected. IIRC Mach 1.6 was at altitude with minimal AAMs and 40%.
Remember that the F-35s were down an airship because of the friendly fire. I don’t know if that one got its sticks out or not, though.
Hey Cap, HB did FM refinements to the F-14A (F-14B pending) and it should perform better in tasks like this now. Maybe you'd want to give it a test or two. BTW, you got the 35C to finally work again?
That.....was awesome
26:15 they fired closer, better deconfliction and didn't have basically 2 waves, witch esp with the f35 most missed.
So, slap some Aim-260's on an F-14 to get the best missle on the best airframe and it would have been game over.
You'd have to convert the radar, but theortically possible.
I have never understood why the Legacy F-18 was slower than the F-4. The F-4 is a larger, heavier aircraft with a worse thrust to weight ratio yet it was quite a bit faster than the Hornet.
To put it simply, jet thrust increases with speed (past M0.6 or so). When you see thrust numbers on wikipedia or whatever, those numbers are usually static, i.e. they were measured on a test bench or something like that. F-4 has straight turbojets and they don't produce as much power at 0 airspeed as turbofans, but they start to catch up and do better at high mach numbers. Intake design makes a big difference at the top end also.
I've been watching GR videos for a couple of years now, and this whole time, I thought Cap was saying "bog," not "bug."
Bog = Bug interchangeable.
So if the f14s would have had aim 260s or aim 120ds they would have won lol you should run that scenario. Great videos keep up the good work.
Even if the best the Tomcat, it would need to be substantial better to still have the 14 flying After the cold war money was priority over quality. Just look at the less than 200 raptors made
You guys should try adding the super hornet block three just for fun, it has much more powerful engines and it’s harder to see on radar. It would really make things interesting.
Service record wise it's F4 vs F14 vs FA-18.
FA- 18 is the most versatile, but the F-14 had longer loiter time and Aim 54s.
F-35 is still new, but stealth makes it a BVR monster.
It would be nice to see each plane going up against the era appropriate bomber, just to get a more even overview.
They are - once in the air actually flying at speed there's little to choose from a 60s era Tu-22 and the current in service Tu-22M. The latter's advantage is all about low speed handling a bit more speed and of course a much better RADAR. As the attacks were being directed by AWAC the plane's own RADAR would be of little consequence as even a 1960s Tu-126's airborne RADAR could see something as large as an aircraft carrier at a couple of hundred miles.
Caps voice makes it sound like it was one hell of a party !!!!!!!! if they had made the super tomcat we wouldnt have to deal with the crappy bogs !!!!
Hmmm, it is possible that with AIM 120 D for the super Hornets, it is an in service design and modeling may just be better for deconfliction, still on data link as well
The targeting is controlled by core game and we can;t get access to see what's going on behind the scenes.
Added pressure, the most recent aircraft defends the oldest carrier fleet other than the cv due to launching appropriate aircraft, so 2020's protecting 1960's 70's Dd's and so on 😊
The hornet is an insect, but not a bug. Just saying.
One point is that in the 60s and 70s the navy jets had VERY specific roles. There were 7 or 8 different T/M/S on each boat. Hence the tomcat being made exactly for this. As planes evolved they could fill more roles. The F/A-18 is very impressive in that regard.
The f14 was always designed to be multirole from day 1. Hence the a2g modes in the hud
@@Scoobydcs that is not true, strike capability was added to the A late in that models service life and was designed in to the B
@@andrewchell2514 AFAIK they had a2g modes in the hud from day 1 or very early
@@andrewchell2514 th-cam.com/video/SsUCixAeZ0A/w-d-xo.html
thats straight from the designers mouth
@@Scoobydcs They designed the Tomcats to be able to carry basic ground ordnance as a backup function, but it was never intended in that role in service. Only in the 1990s did they begin training crews in ground attack profiles. So did the Tomcat have a basic A2G capability (very basic) in the 1970s and 1980s? Yes. Did anyone consider the Tomcat a multirole aircraft in the fleet and were crews trained to use A2G ordnance? No.
LOL....No one games a CIWS system for each ship to shoot down the missiles? By the way, the Tomcat can carry six AIM-54 and using its advanced radar, can hit 5 out of the 6 in tests in extended range (100 miles). The Tomcat had the best speed and package, hands down. USAF SECURITY POLICE 1982-1997.
Dont forget the 3rd F-35 shot down the 2nd one, that may have contributed to them losing by seconds in the intercept race.
Yup, that was pretty frigging stupid of them.
Stop say8ng the tomcat was designed for 1 thing (bomber interceptor) it wasn't, that was simply it's primary role. It was always designed as a multirole air superiority fighter from day 1
the F14 seemed more spread out than the others?? due to slow launch rate?? in reality the CAP patrol would have got there first, 2xF14s (8x 54s) and the alert fighters would only need to deal with any leakers.....maybe Damp should have kept those 9m's.....
You left out the F-8 Crusader
imagine a super tomcat 21 with aim 260 and aesa
In-game, f-35 launch their missiles at targets one by one. Wonder if in real life they can launch a salvo simultaneously, each of the missiles going to a predesignated target? That's more sensible, innit?
Comment before watching the video. TOMCAT wins!!
If they preform like they do in game it's the F35 hands down. If what ever war we're fighting makes it 2 or 3 years it's probably a stripped down hornet. They can act as a tanker and bomber which is probably more important than being a fighter. Plus there production lines could be stepped up in a hurry. The guys that maintained them are still in service. They shoot all the same ordinance. You fly a F18 onto a carrier it's just another Tuesday.