The Distinction Between Cruiser Destroyer Frigate & LCS
Вставка
- Опубліковано 5 сер 2024
- There are many different ships in the world’s navies today. They all have different applications and some classifications are exclusive to certain countries. Different countries have put their effort into different kinds of ships and some have invested in almost all of them. Strictly Speaking, in recent years the distinction between these ship types have become increasingly blurred. During World War II, cruisers had displacements ranging from 6,000 to 15,000 tons, while destroyers were around 2,000 to 2,200 tons. Today, Arleigh Burke-class "destroyers" have a displacement of over 7,000 tons, while Ticonderoga-class cruisers are barely larger at 9,000 tons. A strong argument could be made that the current U.S. Navy, rather than having 22 cruisers and 62+ destroyers, actually has 84+ cruisers and no destroyers.
So today we are going to discuss the difference between a cruiser, a destroyer, a frigate, and a littoral combat ship
All content on Military TV is presented for educational purposes.
Subscribe Now :
/ @military-tv
/ militarytv.channel
defense-tv.com/ - Наука та технологія
This video is 100% 🇺🇸 based! Most countries, & yes there other countries in the world, call a littoral combat ship a corvette!
Well he was only describing US navel ships. The only Corvettes we have are sports cars so...
Gee, almost as if American content creators are speaking from an American perspective?
Probably why it was presented in measurements of feet and not meters as well 😉
Spoilers, all naval ship classification is biased and inconsistent as there us no uniform classification shared between nations. It's been pretty loose since the day of the sail ened.
Hell, even with in a nation's own navy their is inconsistency and debate.
Though, onto the LCS, it overlaps with some of the corvette's function, but was a from the ground up concept that heavily focused on modularity and mission specific loadouts. In theory, you could have it set up to focus on general patrol (like a corvette) or up arm it to be an anti surface ship role. In practice, this modularity was not so flexible, and requires extensive retooling.
The corvette in general is a patrol ship meant to stay near shore, compared to a frigate which is an escort vessel meant to travel with the fleet. The LCS was going to be something in between, but failed to live up to expectations, and ended up being more or less just overpriced corvette with slightly better anti ship capability (thanks to after the fact upgrades).
@Bill Pilling... good one.
This is USN based.
In the UK, the Royal Navy's last Cruisers, were HMS Tiger, Lion and Blake. Meeting the over 10,000 tonnes Washington 1922 treaty classification and fitted with, Twin 6 inch Main Cannons (152.4mm).
Tiger & Blake were modified in 1964, with there rear armament replace with a large Helicopter Hangar and Flight Deck, capable of carrying 4 Westland Wessex (UK built and further developed Sikorsky S-58 / H-34 Choctaw/ Seabat / Seahorse, with Napier Gazelle or De Havilland Gnome Turboshaft engines) Anti Submarine Helicopters.
Later these were replaced by 3 Westland Sea King (UK built and further developed Sikorsky S-61/ SH-3 Sea King).
Experience with these led to the purchase of the 3 Invincible Class Through Deck Cruisers (Politicians and Civil Servants hate to admit they have made a mistake), and they would not be called Carriers until HMS Invincible was launched.
Then they were known as Anti Submarine Helicopter Carriers.
The Sea Harrier order, wasn't placed until really late 1975.
Even then, the RAF, Civil Service and retired Navy officers looked down on them, as nothing more than "Toy Aeroplanes".
It was hoped that the US Navy's new Sea Command Ships (None were ever built, but the USA paid for Spain to build the design "Principe de Asturias" and helped with Thailand's "HTMS Chakri Naruebet"), that were to operate the supersonic "Rockwell XFV-12" but its advanced concept never achieved its hoped for capability and was cancelled.
*****
Destroyer. Changed from being its original purpose of a fast vessel designed to Destroy Fast Motor Torpedo Boats, that attacked larger ships in the Cruiser, Battlecruiser and Battleship class.
They are now classed as, Anti Air Warfare / Air Defence Vessels.
With Advanced Radar (and other Sensors and secure Communications) and Surface to Air Missiles.
Usually larger than a Frigate.
*****
Frigate. Role has continually changed.
But since WW2, when they were first equipped with Sonar and Depth Charges to hunt Submarines.
They have since evolved into much more capable, Anti Submarine Warfare Vessels, but also with Main Cannon, CIWS, Anti Ship and SAM systems.
However, their are also General Purpose Frigates, that don't feature the latest "Towed Array Sonar" systems.
Such as the Type 31e - Babcock international Arrowhead 140.
Which will only have a small 57mm Bofors main Cannon.
****
Corvette. The last British Corvette was "HMS Oakham Castle" which decommissioned in 1950.
If the old Vosper Thornycroft Type 21 Frigates, had been fitted with the 76mm OTO - Melara Cannon, rather than the Vickers Mk8 4.5 inch (114mm) then they would most likely have been classed as Corvettes.
Corvettes are popular in the Baltic, Mediterranean, Arabian Gulf, Indian Ocean and South China Seas.
They are usually the smallest ship commanded by someone with the rank of Captain.
They tend to operate close to the coast, rather than in the deep water environment.
Usually from a max of 3,500 tonnes, down to 600 tonnes in some cases. Length under 110 Metres.
Rarely do they have a main Cannon greater than 76mm.
Most have Anti-Ship missiles and short range SAM systems fitted.
Usually fitted with an Helicopter Hangar and equipped with a smaller Helicopter like the Leonardo AW109 E Power or Eurocopter AS565 Panther.
Equipped with RHIB / Fast Sea Boats.
Sometimes with a rear ramp recovery conveyor belt.
Used for Stop Search and Seizure of Smuggling and Piracy. Or deployment of troops / insertion of Special Forces / Divers.
Now seen as the best vessel to take on Iranian and PRC Fast Attack Boats equipped with Anti Ship Missiles, as part of protecting a larger Carrier Battle Group.
Many would class the Littoral Combat Ships, as Corvettes.
However, if they don't have the Speed or the Missile Systems, they are usually called Offshore Patrol Vessels.
Great info👍
It’s almost like we was talking about the US navy it’s almost like he only compared us navy ships and he’s talking American English
this is UK based..
Cool
@@rakheem351 no such thing as American English
The USN’s interest in LCSs has significantly declined. They are cutting the numbers and retiring early hulls.
The Navy seemingly has shifted preference to the frigate with the Constellation class frigate program.
Which makes sense as LCSs have underperformed on their promises, and the USN is shifting back to a near-peer focus ( *cough* China *cough* )
Only the Freedom class has failed. The Independence class has a continuous in the South China Station and has a higher availability rating that the DDG.
I perceive the primary way in which LCS has "underperformed on its promises" isn't so much in a warfare capability sense, but rather that they've just wound up costing a lot more than originally intended. This happens with many platforms and weapon systems, of course, but LCS in particular was supposed to be a relatively cheap option for lower/middle-range missions that didn't necessarily require the high-tech/high-cost (or that could be done by the deeper-draft) CGs/DDGs.
The USN, whether actually using the term or not, has long sought a satisfactory "high-low" mix of warships in terms of tech, capability, and cost, decades prior to LCS. We've largely done pretty well on the "high" end (carriers, Aegis CG/DDGs, etc), but have often struggled more with getting the "low" bit right. Perry-class frigates did become a successful, numerous, and heavily-used class, but even they had issues, particularly with manning. Their original manning concept eventually had to be abandoned in favor of larger (therefore more costly) crews. MCM/MHC mine-warfare ships were a, um, "less-than-wholly-successful" program, for a whole host of material, organizational, and logistic reasons. I don't know much about the upcoming Constellation-class, but I hope the USN thinks back to these earlier programs and tries to avoid some of their pitfalls.
@@chance6245 LCS is suited for defensive rather than offensive operations. US Navy is more towards offensive rather than defensive therefore the LCS requirement is less relevant. Also since that US has highest funding, they don't need frigates neither which is considered poor man's ship for offensive operations usually applies to countries that can't really afford destroyers.
Like cars segments A (compact), B (sub compact), C (small), D (mid size), F (large full size) getting bigger by today's standard, the same applies to ships categories displacement with cruiser (>9000 tonnes), destroyer (7000 tonnes), frigate (4,000-5,000 tonnes), LCS (3000 tonnes) then the 1000 tonnes corvette followed by gunboats. By right the length for cruiser, destroyer & frigate varies much but due to US shipbuilders cost saving, they came up with universal hull shared by the 3. Refer Russian & Chinese ships that don't share hull platform for clearer picture on Slava & Type 55 cruisers, Udaloy & Type 52D destroyers, krivak & type 054 frigates on the length & displacement.
In terms of armaments, the larger the ship, the more sensors equipment, CIWS, VLS, ammo storage & crew it carries. Rich countries get more cruisers & destroyers, moderate countries would get more destroyers & frigates while poorer or smaller countries get few frigates & more corvettes, gunboats. If a country at war with nearby neighbors, the LCS would be useful for being smaller, agile and comes with good CIWS, medium & short range SAM, AESA radar, anti-ship missiles, land attack missiles, anti-submarine sonar, ASW, etc.
Very informative, thanks!
Respect from Pakistan, youR video enhanced my knowledge about naval ships. Thank you
Great Information 🙏👍
My first ship in the Navy was a Knox class frigate, you don't get much more of a tin can than that.
Great Video! Same goes with the terminology Blue Water Navy, Green Water Navy and Brown Water.
May that htar swe.
Well done. Good explanation. 🇺🇸⌛🚢
So why not those are classify as : Boat, Small Ship, Medium Ship, Carrier, Mother Ship(Noah Ark class warship 😆) and Submarine?🤔
Respect from a Desi American this is a very methodical organized and pragmatic as well as an educational video it would be good how during the Cold War the United States and Soviet Union made naval unit formations of these naval ship types along with submarines and aircraft carriers.
It's Litt-or-al not literal. Littoral means coastal waters LCS's are coastal defense ships that extend a coast guards capability. If you are not under threat of invasion you don't really need them. The US should give theirs to Taiwan, they need them.
The LCS lacks any serious firepower, they were designed to pick off terrorists and conduct recon not win naval engagements, the stealth and speed is there to help them avoid naval engagements. What Taiwan needs is a metric fuckton of anti-ship missiles and air/missile defenses, enough to hold the PLA off long enough for US intervention to arrive.
There are also Corvette warships. For example the French Gowind-class, the Swedish Visby-class or the Greek Roussen-class.
Also, "Aviso" and "Buque de Acción Marítima", before we get to Offshore / Ocean Going Patrol Vessel and Patrol Vessel.
Though I suppose US Coast Guard, Cutters would be the USA equivalent of the last 2.
A LCS is basically the US equivalent to a Corvette I believe, though I am not 100 percent sure.
sailed with some Canuck corvettes...those things take a pounding on the open ocean
@@dawsonreum8096 not US LCS....they make a corvette look like a service class boat comparing sizes
Traditionally, one of the biggest differences between destroyers and frigates was that destroyers had 2 screws and frigates had 1, which limited their speed to about 25 knots. Don't know if the newer classes of frigates have 1 screw or 2.
many 2 and some are over 8500 tons
It seems an 18th century terminology is coexisting, unhappily, with a 20th century one.
Basically almost everything about the LCS has failed. The mission modules have suffered numerous problems and cost overruns. Swapping the modules out was supposed to take a few hours but instead takes several days. Both the Freedom and Independence have suffered several mechanical failures. The number of ships has been reduced from 52 down to around 32. In response to these failures the US Navy instead sourced a new frigate, the Constellation Class to make up for these short comings.
Yup, the LCS was designed for counter-terrorism, not fighting the Chinese navy. Though it is subbornly difficult for the Chinese to track, LCSs have made several infiltrations deep into the South China sea far closer to Chinese territory than our normal warships will go, problem is the LCS has little in the way of offensive firepower to capitalize on that stealth.
isn't the hull made of alluminum? I think that was the reason it was laughed at.
@@thelastdefenderofcamelot5623 I think the independence is, not sure about the freedom
Back in the day, a vn era destroyer mounted one sam launcher,two five inches, a asroc launcher and 6 torps. You would have to look a little bit harder, but a contemporary frigate mounts a bigger weapons load.
Zumwalt is classed as "destroyer" but it's big as a "cruiser"
So, one of my family was Captain of the USS Muliphen, an attack-cargo ship. It's classification is not so cut and dried. You can still visit "the mighty mule" as the crew called her.......... if you're a recreational diver!
cool thanks
my Vietnam era Adams class DDG had multi role capability and was only 4500 tons 450 ft long.......AA, ASW, ASuW and NGFS all were a part of our mission
hi to you too
Japan Mogami Class Frigate is basically what US navy want in a LCS/Frigate, them Mogami's is multirole, ASW, stealth frigate with mostly automation capabilities with afordable cost (hence why Japan can built them fast af)
the WW II Mogami class was very interesting too
The FFGX which will replace the failed LCS designs will have similar capabilities to the Mogami class.
@@simul8guy75 wonder why US goes for LCS in the first place lul
@@timo7641 - good idea, poor execution. Rather than choosing one design over the other Congress required the Navy to choose BOTH designs so that Congressmen/Senators could employ people in their districts/states. Now the Navy has dozens of almost worthless ships. Four ships (two of each class) have already been decommissioned with another two scheduled for decommissioing this year and more new ships of each class are bring built (COngress shoving the additional ships down the Navy's throat). Pathetic!!!
This video was posted today and the maker of this video seems to have no clue that the frigate class has been discontinued in the U.S..
Aside from the 20 Constellation Class Frigates entering service in the next decade or so...
as a retired MM1, USN. other than carriers, anphibs, supply ships & subs the NAVY needs Destoyer/Cruisers type, Frigates(more heavily armed than the new one being built-76mm deck gun & 60+VLS tubes, Corvettes-76mm deck gun & 30+VLS tubes...and fast cheap arsenal ships 200+ VLS tubes-2 or 3 per carrier, with more in reserve, minimum crew, missiles controled by Carrier or other capital ship. cheap, fast way to bring more to the fight-should be fast enough to keep up with a Carrier! and sea state 5
New frigates soon the Constellation class
In French navy we haven’t any more destroyer we call them FREMM with capacities to do the same job with less équipage and more forces on board for sea to air , down seas , and in land with long range with commandos capacities and connected with the strategic command and the carrier Charles de Gaulle and suffren submarine and many FREMM protecting the force over seas
Do a video about the Russian's battlecruiser.
PLs make a vid about Philippines' budget frigate jose rizal class. I heard that philippines' future Corvettes are more capable that the frigates.
No corvettes can be more capable than frigates as there are no frigates that can be more capable than destroyers. It’s all about the ship’s size and space for weapon’s installation. Corvettes are generally smaller than frigates so it will have a smaller weapons load.
The Philippines chose to buy a frigate instead of a destroyer because of limited budget. That’s understandable. But what confuses me is the Philippines’ choice of buying two cheap frigates (Jose Rizal Class frigates which is an upgrade of Korea’s old Incheon class frigates) Instead of buying Korea’s more capable Daegu Class frigates. The Philippines should have bought only one of the latter class of frigate instead of two because it’s more expensive. The Philippines could of course buy more later, maybe another one every after two or three years.
The Chinese Destroyers that are violating the Philippine waters could easily overwhelm the Jose Rizal class frigates because of its inferior armaments.
@@patriotgameplayer6020 I hope Philippines could add frigates that are more capable and focusing on performance than cost. like the ones used by germany
Honorable mention: the Battleship class
The ship on the left (THUMBNAIL) looks like an offspring from the Cone Heads XD
That's the U S Navy Zimmwalt class destroyer which wasn't mentioned at all in this video. 🤔
Did you remake this video?
Back then warships were beautiful pieces of technology with distinct features, now they look like low-poly Unity assets.
Yeah, distinct features is really not what you want on your warship.
But that's the rule of cool I guess
@@larry-solowingpixy-foulke8321 i mean like they had a shape to them, now they look like low-poly assets
Any corpsman on these types of ships? How is it like
see 1st post. use missiles from arsenal ships 1st, save missiles on CG/DDs. fwd deploy Corvettes to Guam, Diego Garcia, Rota, al areas where have support-reccomend 100+ Corvettes. expand small riveriene/costal patrol boats & give them 2-4 Naval Strike Missiles
I always wanted to know what is the difference between these ships and a corvette type
Corvettes are a littoral defense ship, generally slower than fleet ships but usually well armed for their size. The LCS is a type of corvette, but trades firepower for stealth and a LOT of speed (LCS is much faster than a traditional corvette). Problem is the LCS role is unclear. It's main offensive capability is in the form of drones, and current US drones are mostly intended to pick off terrorists not take on the Chinese navy.
LCS is basically just a more modern tri-hull Corvette. I have to say, Frigates and Destroyers are really beginning to confuse me, it's barely based on size or weight now, especially since Australia's Hobart-class Destroyers compared to the Hunter-class Frigates are almost identical.
It's more come down to only the armament, and even then they're similar, may aswell just call them one or the other if they're the same size and tonnage.
why u dont cover about Corvet and OPV?
What’s the name of the background music?
Well I think destroyers are larger than frigates. Please check once again.
Please do cover space/satellite weaponry
What about corvettes? Weren't corvettes a class of naval ship? Where do those fit in the lineup?
The difference between designations is academic. I have just uploaded the 'Why is it a Frigate'-video to my channel. It's a bit long, but explains exactly how and when all the destroyer/frigate confusion started. It's simply a difference in naval culture.
I like the fact how you use the thumbnail from an other UA-camr.
The LCS has a very limited role and the Navy seems to be moving on from it. The only thing it is good at is infiltration (as it is probably the stealthiest surface warship in the world) and launching UAVs. It has no long term endurance as it doesn't carry an engineering crew to maintain the ship while underway. It was a ship designed primarily around counter-terrorism operations, and the US Navy has changed its focus to being able to deal with China.
And what about the (Corvette) class?
Thanks!
The difference is academic. I have just uploaded the 'Why is it a Frigate'-video to my channel. It's a bit long, but explains exactly how and when all the destroyer/frigate confusion started. It's simply a difference in naval culture.
@@TribusMontibus Thanks!
By size and capabilities: Cruiser, destroyer, frigate and corvette.
The difference is academic. I have just uploaded the 'Why is it a Frigate'-video to my channel. It's a bit long, but explains exactly how and when all the destroyer/frigate confusion started. It's simply a difference in naval culture.
Great video, but isn't it pronounced lit-TOR-al rather that literal? Or maybe thats just a British thing?
English, not British 😉
@@DobbsyLondon there is American English and British English
hah, even within the USN, about half of us said it one way, half the other. I think it's one of those words that has two - if not necessarily "correct" - at least "accepted and widely-used" pronunciations. The whole Po-TAY-to / Po-TAH-to thing.
where the corvet class stands ? can we call them gunbot ?
The difference is academic. I have just uploaded the 'Why is it a Frigate'-video to my channel. It's a bit long, but explains exactly how and when all the destroyer/frigate confusion started. It's simply a difference in naval culture.
Yeah the LCS won't be very effective at deep sea long range power projection, but that's not what it's for. That's like saying a minivan wouldn't be very effective in a Nascar race. Sure but then again a Nascar wouldn't be very effective at taking a whole family and friends to an event but a minivan does that job great.
The nickname for the LCS is in the US Navy right now is little crappy ships.
I would think a destroyer specific purpose would be to destroy
so a Cruiser is a gay vessel then? Huh.
Zumwalt??
Стоило упомянуть советские крейсера проекта Орлан
Здесь классификация именно флота США
@@IonPerseus тогда ничему приводить изображение итальянского фрегата
What happened to Corvettes? Aren't a bunch of European Union nations working together to build a Corvette platform that can be shared among a bunch of the nations? Why isn't the Littoral Combat Ship considered a Corvette or Frigate?
The repetitive background noise detracts from the information.
Making the same mistake most explainers make. You look at a frigate and then describe what you see. If you are going to explain a distinction you should be able to tell why it isn't something else. If you describe a dog, it doesn't suffice to say that the animal has four legs. That doesn't make it a dog. It might as well be a sheep.
The difference in ship designations is academic. I have just uploaded the 'Why is it a Frigate'-video to my channel. It's a bit long, but explains exactly how and when all the destroyer/frigate confusion started. It's simply a difference in naval culture.
The US forgot how to build frigates and corvettes.
An LCS is a Corvette, not a type in itself.
It is one year and your video is already out of date. The USN seems to move faster than you can track them. The LCS the USN found the fast interchangeable modules not so easy to change and had given up the concept. That whole class of ship, many had hull crack problem and are due to be scrapped.
What with Corvettes ˙^˙
Ticos are actually 9600 tons, not 9000.
LIT-TOR-RAL not Literal.
wrong!
Cruisers = land attack, fleet air-defense and abm as primary with asw and anti-ship as secondary capabilities!
Destroyers = primarily fleet air-defense, abm and anti-ship, with secondary capabilities in asw and land attack
frigate = asw and anti-ship as primary functions, and air-defense capabilities as secondary
corvette = coastal asw and anti-ship as prime functions with air-defense for self-defense
Naval categorization of types of ship hurt my brain and this video didnt help. I feel like Naval ships are facing an identity crisis.
I heard that submariners designate these ships as targets.
Until us maintain these forces they will be the best forces over the ocean’s good luck to them
The first time US let the command of over seas operation were with France against DAESH in the war in Syria was a big moment with good results the rafale did the job and the frigate too
Zumwalt is a cruiser by displacement. End of.
Literal?
?and corvettes??
?and battleships??
and...
The difference is academic. I have just uploaded the 'Why is it a Frigate'-video to my channel. It's a bit long, but explains exactly how and when all the destroyer/frigate confusion started. It's simply a difference in naval culture.
Whipping a 🍪is the difference 👌
Americans probably think a corvette can only be a sports car and can't bring themselves to call a warship a corvette , so they have LCS instead.
The video is US-based but the Frigate is not a US ship. LCSes are on the way out. They have been a dismal failure in multiple ways.
Really? Last time I was in Boston, I clearly saw a very American ship moored there; USS Constitution, definitely a Frigate. 😉
The difference in designations is academic. I have just uploaded the 'Why is it a Frigate'-video to my channel. It's a bit long, but explains exactly how and when all the destroyer/frigate confusion started. It's simply a difference in naval culture.
Be a lot less confusing to ID them alphabetically according to size with smallest as A and largest aa whatever letter up the alphabet with each letter having a weight range ...then add suffix ID lletters for individual package capability and viola anyone with a little reference card could tell in 2 seconds what is being spoken of. ...but oh ho we have to bizarre names and blutted lines everywhere to make it as complicated as possible
LCS is more or less a corvette
The distinction between classes of vessels is more obscure with the advent of anti-ship missiles, advanced electronics and radar, aviation assets and drones and the reduction in naval gun calibers. The US Ticonderoga class Cruiser and the Burke class Destroyers are so close in dimensions and weaponry as to be the same ships. The Chinese builds Cruisers and calls them Destroyers. The Russians literally jam pack Corvettes and Frigates with enough missiles to call them Destroyers. The Europeans are so fond of their hybrids...no one really knows how to classify them. So we're at that point were labels like Cruiser, Destroyer, Frigate, etc., etc., etc....have lost any real meaning.
There is very little difference between the Ticonderogas and the Arleigh Burkes, except the Arleigh Burkes have a better version of the Aegis radar and more missiles.
Destroyer > Frigate > Cruiser > Carrier ?
Lot of the info in this isn’t accurate.. I dunno where he got some of this
So all of them you can use to destroy another ships, 😅
Don't worry the USN will manage to crash all classes of ship and maybe even lose a few to fire while in port.
@ j.barrett Strausser, I think you’ve made that statement out of lack of information.
The US Navy’s philosopy on fighting wars at sea is to overwhelm the enemy’s sea vessels with airstrikes. That is why the US Navy has a lot of aircraft carriers. All other ships such as destroyers and frigates serve only as escorts to protect aircraft carriers.
The Russian Navy on the other hand only have one (and very old) aircraft carrier. They have no plan of building another because they have chosen the cheaper option of making their entire navy a floating missile platform. Their new anti-ship zircon missile is too hypersonic that literally no anti-missile countermeasure would work against it. The installation of the new S-500 Prometheus missiles on their ships also make all fighter aircrafts on this planet uselesss. Even the stealth capabilities of F35 Lightning and F-22 Raptor are useless to the new active/passive radar of the S-500 missiles.
Have you ever wondered why the US have been fighting smaller wars only on third-world countries?
@@patriotgameplayer6020 Go read my comment again.
I'm well aware of modern anti-ship missile development.
Now go read up on the USS Bonhomme. USN cannot even perform damage control while in port. It's laughable to assume US fleet would be resilient enough to sustain damage and be war fighting capable.
@@DensityMatrix1 I don't think you understand how damage control works. Most of the crew was off of the ship making it very difficult to stop the fire from inside the ship because no one was there to stop it. Hell if this happens at sea it probably would have been saved. With that being said your extreme bias has completely ignored all the actual combat damage control the USA has done successfully. I would highly recommend dropping your bias before talking next time
@@kameronjones7139 The USN itself found the leadership and crew lacking. Go read the report.
BUT IT's NOT FaIR We WERE in PORT!!
Right because an adversary has never dealt a surprise blow to Naval assets while in port. Laughable.
Let's not forget to mention, the fire was the result of Arson. The enemy doesn't even need to defeat us as we defeat ourselves. One disgruntled sailor, destroyed at $3.2B asset. I'm sure our enemies love to see that and will plan to exploit that in the future.
I have question. When those Chinese ASBM slam into the carrier group, will the crew even notice or are they too busy violating OPSEC by uploading tiktok videos with GPS enabled? :)
@@DensityMatrix1 I did read the report apparently you didn't. They said the reason it got so bad was because of the lack of crew. I also like how you have ignored all the other combat incidents and much worse accidents that show the USA has very good damage control. You also sound insanely paranoid no enime is getting on to a ship during the event of a war and most ships are attacked at sea during combat
The LCS is being g fitted with a net system... this will allow them to catch shrimp and help support the fleet.
Frigate were never between a destroyer and a cruiser .. always smaller than a DDG
during the age of sail Frigates were medium size warships just below a ship of the line. Destroyers didn't exist until the era of the battleship, and cruisers were a sub-type of frigate during the age of sail, basically just a heavy frigate designed to operate solo rather than in pairs or trios as was normal for frigates.
The difference is academic. I have just uploaded the 'Why is it a Frigate'-video to my channel. It's a bit long, but explains exactly how and when all the destroyer/frigate confusion started. It's simply a difference in naval culture.
LCS has no business being in the Navy, what a short-sighted waste of money. Put them in the Coast Guard or scrap them
May that htar swe.
Dude you've just basically stolen this from the channel "not what you think" it's near 1 for 1
لماذا لا يدعم اللغة العربية 💔
Is it just me or do our ships look more and more like paper airplanes?
It's just you.....
Actually they look like bathtub toys.
conflict of nations world war 3 , gangs, where are u guys
Lih-tor-al is correct pronunciation, not lit-er-al.
Is submarine a ship? 🤓
submarines are technically ships.
this has nothing to do with world navies and their classification...far from it...this is just for US Navy
Meh, what used to be called a destroyer in the vietnam war wouldn't even count as a frigate these days. Look up charles f adam class and compare it against a Lafayette class 🤣
The difference is academic. I have just uploaded the 'Why is it a Frigate'-video to my channel. It's a bit long, but explains exactly how and when all the destroyer/frigate confusion started. It's simply a difference in naval culture.
LCS do not exist in the world they are called Corvettes
还行
so many mistakes... smh
Why did you add LCS and not Corvettes more navies around the world operate corvettes more than LCS Bro
When I started to watch this video, I thought it would be useful, but first 7 minutes of this video are useless. Place the last minute of the video at start, and then explain each ship class. With several countrys ships examples.
He’s talking about America what do you people not get
Because navy italien is the most advanceded of EUROPE and Turkey and Russia they are miserable?
LCS- Literally crap ships. Frigates are coming back.
Not accurate at all
Хня. Надо одновременно и читать и смотреть. Если транслируйте нам то на понятном языке а у вас ещё и телетекст неправильно переводит.