Some one said air-launched SM-6? kzfaq.info/get/bejne/rKd_pM-Y3bKwY58.html

@swayzefan3600 *An AIM-163 variant o' the tube-launched RIM-163 Standard VI?* Far more appropriate for a USN-USMC / Northrop Grumman AF-14 Echo, which can handle the weight.

​​@@grimreapers Please do this again, however with-- MIG-31 with R-37M, ST-21 with AIM-152, SU-35 with R-77M, J-20 with PL-15, J-15 with PL-17, F-22 with AIM-260, F/A-XX with AIM-260, and the following with either AIM-260 or SM-6, F-15EX, YF-12A, and SR-72! To make it even more spicy at the end you could use The AIM-4 Falcon and Genie Rocket!🙏👍

@@grimreapersSM-3 are made for interception outside the atmosphere.

@@Anarchy_420 *The Hughes AIM-47, the ultimate development o' the Falcon AAM, is far superior to the AIM-4 Series w/r/t range.* Superior to the AIM-26, in fact. U. S. Air Force FX already won by the McDonnellDouglas F-15, Tactical Air Command USAF could've probably used the Grumman F-14 Series for deep strike missions: Provided that the General Dynamics F-111 failed to meet spec, that is.

_"Bunny Nakamura"_ is who I immediately thought of too!

Buns

@@scottr9900 Bunny, "Buns" is how I remember her.

@@xenaguy01 yeah Her dad calls her bunny and her mates get wind of that and call her ‘buns’. Great parts of the book when they engage and smack the bears as taxi pilots

The first space ace…

DCS altitude and speed limits need to be raised by a LOT.

The arrow was a game changer

Damn right it was a game changer. The Arrow should've been mass produced, but it's demise just showed the near sightedness of military & political garbage that still exists today.

@@jimdraven2432Facts.

@@JesusFriedChrist it does make me wonder why the Avro Arrow isn't included in DCS. I'd LOVE to have an opportunity to fly it!! (I'm Canadian so it holds a special place in my heart).

thx

@AnimeFan-gp6jb *The RIM-162, I presume?* This and the RIM-163 Standard VI are candidates for antisatellite missions. A far superior missile might be an RSM-275 (Standard X) version; Lockheed Martin is developing the XAIM-260 for their F-22 and F-35 Series.

​@BCSchmerker It was a modified Rim-161 also known as an SM3

@@Dark_Heart5580 Viz., a YAIM-161 variant.

well, much greater speed but much more predictable trajectory so if you get data from the ground and can stick to a preplanned timing this doesn't really stop you from sending something oan collision course that only locks on and does course corrections shortly before impact

also the detail that the satellite is well outside of usable atmosphere, so any missile without reactive terminal maneuvering will miss

@Greybeard1357 *The RIM-161, I presume?* The Aerojet-Raytheon RIM-163 could have a MIM-163 variant for land use. Better support across land and naval versions. The Lockheed Martin AIM-260 is a missile with rocket booster and solid-fuel ramjet sustainer motors.

@Anarchy_420 *The designation for Project ST21: USN-USMC / Northrop Grumman ASF-14 Hotel all-weather strike fighter.* Crew of two (Pilot fore, WSO aft); dual General Electric F120-GE-406 controlled-bypass turbofans with extended afterburner barrels, fed by strengthened four-shock inlets; AESA radar and RHAW receiver built in house by Northrop Grumman Avionics; buddy-hose and ATARPS compatible. (The ASAT mission requires two Rails on Stations 3 and 6 for an AIM-163 or ASM-280 INS AAM.)

@@BCSchmerker in the past GR have used The ST-21 Super Tomcat with AIM-152 GDW's

@@BCSchmerker kzfaq.info/get/bejne/jsyoidGWyrzde4E.htmlsi=a7S8akRP7yijkFFV👍

@@BCSchmerker Grim Reapers vid with ST-21 with AIM-152 kzfaq.info/get/bejne/kNZobM9enrvDpYk.htmlsi=V1Jl4SQTP7w3FYsA

Orbit is a bit less than 8 km/s (circualar), which only decreases as you go up^^

@@patricktho6546 closest satellite orbits will have 7.7 km/s. Highly elliptical orbits like a lot of surveillance sattelites have (Molniya orbits for example) have up to10 km/s at periapsis.

@@Adwaenyth therefore I limited it to cirqular orbits...

Nerds have entered the chat……and I’m here for it, go onnn!

Ah yes, that was it.

Right!? Give me zoom climb of the best F-15 variant that exists, carrying only external fuel and enough to hit max speed, at the highest altitude and vertical as it flames out due to lack of oxygen as it’s running in fumes, for max thrust to weight ratio as it burns through stupid amounts of fuel in full burner, at this point, 90 degree climb.

well you'd need some fictional hypersonic plane for that its not really about altitude but speed if you can reach mach 23 you are in orbit regardless of altitude if you caN't then you aren't regardless of altitude its jsut much easier to reach amch 23 at really high altitudes

I'm always up for it, but I know time zones are a problem, and now I have a baby I can not be flexible on times. Just life.

lol

OK cool

I have seen a lightning mod on youtube

Nice idea, pity about the firestreak

How much fuel? 1 minute? 5? At full burn. Anyone know?

@@SmithandWesson22A there is an interview with an RAF pilot where i believe he says he could empty the fuel tanks after 10 minutes.

Ok

Yes that's a good comment.

I wish Sven would stop banging!

Biggest miss-match in history?

Even if there is no new one, how hard can it be to rebuild a old missile, granted all the components are a bit dated ...

@@surters true, I’m former military, USMC, I obviously have very limited knowledge the same as everyone else except who built this stuff, but even the poor ass USMC with really, really old shit had some pretty fancy and brand new, amazing stuff at the time I was in. My unit had the very first of now modern, to older flir systems, used in combat, we had the only few in existence, including the prototype that was sent to us. I joined in 05. Not really classified info, as they are all the standard or oldest type used now…with few exceptions. But we were the first to test and use in war, in Iraq and Afghanistan, and they were mind blowing at the time we got the only 3 in existence…and we mounted them to 60 plus yr old helos, granted they were heavily upgraded…and the most capable attack helos. And utility helicopters ever made. Still the best, in the form of the AH-1Z and UH-1Y the most modern, capable, proven and deadly airframe for CAS. Been doing it longer, as they are first ones, first turbine powered helo, the UH-1 line and the worlds first and oldest attack helicopter, and still serving, the AH-1 line, 1/4 of the airframes of the AH-1 and UH-1 are original airframes that first flew and fought in Vietnam, fully upgraded now approaching 80 years old from adoption. We could easily build new versions, that are insanely better, for a lower cost, maybe after inflation, and the required graft and greed fund is applied, about same cost to slightly higher, but would be far, far more capable. And they say the mig whatever, had the best climb record and time, yeah, only according to the Soviets, the rest of the world recognizes the F-15 as the record holder, an F-15 hit 92,000 and some change altitude in ballistic climb, granted nothing on it, max fuel, but no one else Carrie’s anything for attempted climb records. And has the highest altitude and highest speed that is verifiable, by an air breather, not just claimed with zero evidence. If you have an F-15 Lox tanks, an automated systems to use lox as needed, along with an aerial refueling, you could fly an F-15 into orbit, granted, you couldn’t reenter, as no heat shielding, and not enough fuel/lox left to slow enough to reenter atmosphere, but you could fly into space, with the right set up, which I find hilarious, obviously would need rcs thrusters for maneuvering and like they said, we are looking at strapping the SM line to fighters like the F-15….which is insane, and I love it.

@timbaskett6299 *The Grumman F-14 could, as an AIM-161 Echo.* Ideal for test: YF-14B-30-GR SerNo 007 (BuNo 157986), fitted with dual General Electric YF120-GE-400 controlled bypass turbofans with extended afterburner barrels - the F120 will supercruise the Tomcat, but max 'burner is required for the test.

Where will the -104 carry an 18ft, 2,000lb missile?

Our AIM-260 is hard limited to around 110k ft in DCS. Just a thing.

Fair comment.

Still there :)

@@grimreapers Yippee! 😆

Our AIM-260 is hard limited to around 110k ft in DCS. Just a thing.

Space junk is a thing. But good luck moving the perigee of an orbit up with an explosion or collision at one place in a circular orbit. It doesn't work that way at all. Most orbits of useful satellites are pretty circular. Plus, elliptical, especially highly elliptical orbits, decay mainly based on how high the perigee (lowest point of the orbit) is. You can raise the apogee of some particles up, but the perigee does not follow it up.. You need to do burns at a minimum of 2 places around an orbit to truly raise it and create junk higher up. Also, the orbit of each small piece of space junk decays a lot faster than the orbit of the original satellite, because it has much less mass per unit frontal area. Each little fragment doesn't get to bring along a miniature set of thrusters to maintain its orbit. We're talking about shooting at LEO (low Earth orbit) satellites here that decay, not stuff in super high orbits that can stay up there for centuries on their own, like geosynchronous satellites 22,400 miles up. Little bits and pieces 100 miles up don't stay up there for years. Even Skylab came down due to drag. Shooting a satellite in a circular orbit, or in an elliptical orbit while it is reachable near its perigee, speeds up its orbital demise, despite creating many small bits of junk for a while.

@@EfficientRVer - that depends. Not knowing the full ins and outs of the matter, I was allowing for the possibility that at least a small proportion of the scattered debris could end up with increased orbital energy (and that it was at perigee when you hit it). Yes, smaller fragments experience drag more severely than do larger ones in the same region, and their orbits will decay faster. But, you seem to be assuming that all satellites in low-earth orbit are at altitudes of around 350 - 400 km. Where does "low-earth orbit" end? If we assume that some of the satellites you might want to target are at altitudes of (say) 500 - 750 km, the debris field you'll create will experience far less drag than at (say) 350 km; and the debris must of a necessity pass through the orbits of many other satellites on its way down. All it would take is one significant collision between a chunk of the debris you've created and an active satellite to start a cascade. Kessler Syndrome is a thing: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kessler_syndrome

Laughs in KSP/KSP2 is sad when I realize I don’t fighters or or missiles or weapons, true guidance/seekers. And all the fun stuff.

We can;t seem to get anything much above 300,000ft. It changed a couple of years back? For the AIM-54.

@@grimreapers no worries. My response, was the best of what it if? Haha, great videos otherwise. Everyone is limited by hard or software.