Here's the Royal Navy's New Type 83 Super-Destroyer
Вставка
- Опубліковано 24 бер 2021
- The Type 83 destroyer is a proposed concept for a Royal Navy destroyer to replace its current Type 45 destroyers.
The Type 83 was announced by the command paper Defence in a Competitive Age which stated the intention to proceed with "the concept and assessment phase for our new Type 83 destroyer which will begin to replace our Type 45 destroyers in the late 2030s.
#RoyalNavy #Type83 #Type45 - Наука та технологія
My best regards from Zaporozhye (Ukraine).Many thanks for video. 🇬🇧🤝🇺🇦,🇬🇧⚓💪👍👏
This time, make sure their about 12-20 Destroyers and not repeat the mistakes like the 45. Because 6 is not enough if you want the empire to strike back.
We need 12 destroys and 24 frigates
@Drew Peacock frigates should have some armour but I do Believe destroys should have a lot more Armour and should start put anti ship guns on ships and it may even be time to get some battlecruisers i think we should get 2 battlecruisers with rail guys and missiles they would be use in Britain’s Carrier strikegroups and they would be designed to do bombardment,anti submarine,anti air ,anti ship and I think key feature of a battlecruiser it would be able to Control unmanned frigates
@Drew Peacock 12 destroys is returning it back to the original number and the 24 frigates would very for different jobs but I do Believe 20 destroys is too much and the max should be 12 as I think there should be 3 class of Frigate type 26 really Advance and quite a bit of armour type 31 a cheap and Fast frigate with no extra armour and then type 32 as a mothership for drones but I think they should reclassify the type 26 to a heavy frigate
This is what my ideal Royal Navy would look like
12 heavy destroys 16 heavy frigates 10 light frigates 2 Aircraft carriers 2 battlecruisers 11 submarines 1 amphibious ship 4 support ships
Originally, the Type 45 were to replace the Type 42 on a like for like basis, however Labour's John Reid cut this to 8 and then Jim Murphy (also Labour) cut this to 6. Which did make Scots do a double take in the 2014 Indy campaign when Murphy said how strong the Union's commitment to Clyde shipbuilding was! Nonetheless, the increase in the River class OPV is welcomed, and commitments to retain the current number of frigates with a mixture of Type 26 and Type 31s. (It should be noted that design chosen for the 31s, will not be Clyde built, only assembled).
I have seen all this before over the last 30 years, a class of ship is ordered in some numbers and another defence review then reduces the numbers. After the Falklands war came the realisation that John Knott and Thatcher had been wrong in their plan reduce the fleet to disastrously low levels. During the eighties a lot of ships were proposed, the actual numbers never materialised.
To face modern day threats the RN should have a minimum of 40 frigates and destroyers with at least three aircraft carriers. This will not happen and I can see the RN being involved in a conflict before there is a frantic attempt to reactivate vessels and build more.
John Knott, possibly the worst Defence Minister the UK as ever had. Their were lost of Air and Naval Bases that could have been closed with not 1 Royal Navy Ship being cut.
How can the uk afford 40 ships and 3 carriers if our economy is so shit
@@commodorce6431 I am not aware of the academic term 'shit'. describing the UK economy but we do spend far less on defence than we used to do when I was younger. Meanwhile the health expenditure has risen to £180 Billion per annum providing a far worse service than I used to enjoy. The money is there, the political will is not.
You sir, are correct.
Woah... what a beautiful looking ship. I'm really jealous from Germany.
Germany? I thought this was a British destroyer?
Edit: I’m sorry I read from as of
Also gutentag from America
We probably won't ever get this
that's actually a fan made design from 10 years ago
Are better the spanish f110 frigates
ua-cam.com/video/t9VayFudtyQ/v-deo.html
ua-cam.com/video/5psvyfnX-tI/v-deo.html
@@a10thunder46 WITHOUT the Help of USA during WW II 1939-1945 - all lBritish celts would be speak German language , now...!!!
ua-cam.com/video/5Hsgr414EX8/v-deo.html
Too nice video showing powerful abilities of type 83 destroier of UK naval forces ❤🇺🇸🤝🏽🇬🇧❤
What a pity it is complete and utter bullshit.
@@marcbiff2192 And you know this how ?
This destroyer should be a canzuk programme built for at least 3 countries
Can't see either Canada or Australia having any Budget left for Destroyers once their Type 26 based Frigates are Built.
@@paultanton4307 actually, my country (canada) is supposed to be building them in increments in such a manner that we won't bleed ourselves dry like last time.
I can't see the NZ government buying into this, our politicians lack the political will to do so, let alone make any decisions. They prefer popularity over commonsense.
@@tinman3586 barring Ron Mark, it's been her, and all of the rest of the female politicians and most male politicians as well that are too weak to make a decision
The Italian DDX will be a similar ship, so I think that a joint program would be great
I bet by the time this is built either 1 of 2 things will happen:
1 cutbacks set in and we get 2 with advanced engines and weaponry none of which works correctly for the first 5 years of service or,
2 cutbacks set in but reality doesn't for the demanding people who ordered it so we get the full order but they get stripped back so it's basically a firework barge and realise we only have enough manpower to field 2 while the rest lie in port
Either you work in MOD procurement or you are a jaded ex-Matelot like me!
Like the Astute Class Submarine ? , We will build 7 ? Oh we have . We will build 2 Carriers ? got them too , hmmmmm fail to see your logic MR McKee ...............lol
@@colinbrown4719 well the astute replacement program planned for 7 vessels of which 5 got commissioned as of the 21st apr, the mighty type 82 destroyers planned 8 commissioned 1 the current type 45 destroyer planned 12 commissioned 6, and the prince of Wales was considered for mothballing however we would of still lost a massive percentage of the 2bn (which ended up around 3.2bn by completion of sea trails) price of it and resulted in restructuring and recruitment pushes to ensure the vessel was fully manned
@@colinbrown4719 ..and one carrier will always be in port because we don't have enough crew or planes for 2.
Someone who actually speaks sense, manning them would be the hardest part
Are you seeing a pattern developing here? We retire two T23s (still immensely capable ships) in order to increase funding for a future ship class. We might be about to sacrifice...what? scores of F35s to help fund the Tempest. We lose an entire class of ship to fund some (4) remotely operated submersibles. We're losing Hercules, cut the number of Atlas, reduced the order for Wedgetails, cut the number of Apaches from 67 to 40, we're losing the fleet of pumas and cutting the older chinooks, we're withdrawing Harpoon without an adequate replacement ready ...and on and on it goes. If the navy or RAF is larger in ten years than it is now, I'll be astonished.
Burn meeeee!
30 yrs we will have a paper tiger !
Monmouth is 28yrs old, Montrose is 27yrs old, they're getting to the end of their working lives.
Their is a Harpoon replacement.
The Royal Navy want the NSM that the US Navy has replaced their Harpoons with (A development of the Norwegian Penguin Missile).
But the MBDA, the French/British/Germany/Italian firm, working on a Supersonic or Hypersonic with Sea Skimming for the last 30 miles, Missile, the CVS401-Perseus.
The French have just ordered an improved MM40 Exocet version, and are awaiting a new Cruise Missile possibly based on Storm Shadow/SCALP-EG.
RAF, would love to kill off the UK Carriers. They already tried to change the F-35 order for the conventional A model, instead of the B, STOVL.
Apache's were already cut to 50.
The opening illustrated ship is armed sufficiently to count as a frigate. As a destroyer, it is WOEFULLY underarmed.
It needs more VLS cells fitted into the design.
You know this is a mock up ? Like moaning about ....an imaginary friend
In these times where uncertanty could change very quickly, and navies chose to decommissioned ships, I never seen the logic within that.
Cost-effectiveness
Heard of Jackie Fisher?
The RN, RAN and RCN need a dozen each now
Stick a couple of extra 30mm on there and all of a sudden it’s ‘super’. You can stick a 30mm on a barge , it’ll have the same effect
I want to know when the much heralded rail guns will enter service. Now that beast will be SUPER in every sense of the word.
They actually have a significant gun armament, this thing is more like an updated version of the Tribal (ie, really a light cruiser in disguise)
@@themanformerlyknownascomme777 My cousin served on HMS Zulu. As a school boy, I remember enjoying a VIP tour that lasted a full day. Leaving the ship with a big bag of goodies and grin from ear to ear.
I hope I live long enough to see this wet dream actually take to the oceans. Sadly, if current trends continue, there will be two of them built and leased part time from the builders.
May be they just build them as models for Johnson's desk.
The type 83 destroyer and the Italian DDX program should be incorporated in one project, they’ll be both similar and powerful destroyers, and the Anglo-Italian collaboration work pretty well (Tempest, CAMM, Typhoon)🇮🇹🇬🇧
I agree the Italians have provern themselves very able.
No the DDX design is a tragedy, and is only 10k tons, this Type 83 is not a destroyer, it's a cruiser.
What is it with Italian defense systems, they are joining us (UK) and Japan believe it or not for the next gen fighter, now combat ships ? How does this work, if at all Italy being a EU country 🤔
@@aleccap5946well Italy are also NATO members
hey HBB Defence Military, you should do a video on australias new LOYAL WINGMAN AI DRONE, or (BATS) BOEING AIR TEAMING SYSTEM, it really cool, just had its maiden flight on the 1/3/2021
The Uk defence budget needs to be increased so the Secretary of defence can sign contracts without having to retire old ships to fund things and instead of getting rid of helicopters and planes we need to buy more and then we should build more destroyers that have anti ship capability instead of just anti air destroyers and the new frigates shouldn't be stopped they shouldn't have politicians stopping funding
We’ll probably end up with two of these by the pattern of the navy’s numbers
greeting from Japan🇯🇵 JMSDF🤜🏻🤛🏻Royal Navy
Now this looks like a warship.
Cool looking ship 👍
God save the Queen
Now it's God save the King !
Bravo Royal Navy Bravo
OutStanding Improvements,The Ship Looks Amazing ,real eye ball pleaser to a destroyer sailor.I like weapons all over the place on every possible mounting platform surface and roll them out off the sides too.Badass
These new Destroyers are gonna be beast
Yeah bro ,too strong
What is the Name of that A140 Vessel@5.23
The inclusion of sequences showing a new Canadian ice breaking AOPS Arctic Patrol Ship at 3:11 is really weird and bizarrly "off topic". The Type 83 will not be able to go anywhere near an ice cube, let alone break through 1.2 meter thick sheets of the stuff.
Anybody know what the name of the 2nd track used is please?
The type 45’s have really just come out. What hell is going on on the RN
I think Admiral Fisher has an answer for that
@@marseldagistani1989 I keeps youtubers in a job churning rubbish out.
The navy shrank expenentially
24 type 42’s to 5 type 45’s is despicable
Nothing, it's a fake ship mad why clickbait UA-cam channels
@@admiralmallard7500 Its not fake, but a concept, to go into service in the 2030s.
Why do they have such limited VLS? Or am I missing something.
As if we’d get anything this good, well we might get 1
Wow that's crazy I thought the Type-45 just came out. But I have heard the Type-45s can't really do much besides anti-aircraft defense.
They were designed for AA and as they were also designed to operate solo often they need a focus on AA. If for example an arleigh Burke operated alone while it has a good offensive firepower just a couple of missiles and its sank. So the type 45 works of its better to have a weaker ship never hit than a stronger one sank fast
The Royal Navy's surface fleet is all built around the idea of Carrier Strike Groups... So the new destroyers and frigates coming into service are designed to primarily be escorts for the carriers, since that's the main means of power projection. Type-45 destroyers being primarily designed for long range air defence, and Type-26 frigates primarily for anti-submarine warfare. They are capable of other roles, but they are specialised ships.
The Type-31 and Type-32 frigates in development are designed to be more "jack of all trades" general purpose warships, not as capable as the specialised Type-45 and Type-26, but more versatile. Apparently they are to be modular, to allow different weapon systems to be fitted and removed to alter their capability. The Type-83s when they eventually arrive will also be specialised air-defence destroyers, but designed specifically to counter hypersonic cruise missiles, which is probably the biggest threat to a modern Carrier Strike Group/Carrier Battle Group these days.
What's the displacement?
In the 2030's to 2040's how much would the Type 83 cost estimated 2.5billion each, so with running costs, salary, training and upgrade we may have 3 or if lucky 4 made
@3:14 That's the RCN Arctic Patrol Vessel, Harry DeWolf class.
Not exactly (even close to) the same thing. Lol
me thinks you need moar VLS tubes. or atleast the ability to reload at sea from a magazine.
u should also add some recessed tripple torpedo tube turrets in the hull behind a door.
Both retired Type 23 ships are going to Greece after being overhauled. Good thing because Greece needs newer surface ships and these will fit right in.
Lets hope they work better than the aircraft carriers!!!
How many will they build
I would say that, if the hull numbers ordered are to be the same as T45, then T83 ought to, at least, be a far more capable vessel across the spectrum, than the Daring class are.
When T45 was still under construction on the Clyde, BAE Systems, I understand, proposed an enlarged "cruiser-sized" variant, with additional hull inserted into the design, midship. This would allow the addition of several strike length VLS tubes, capable of firing everything up to and including Tomahawk. This is the way to go. Yes, T45s are being retrofitted with additional missile cells going forward, but the Navy and the MoD needs to think bigger with the successor.
The design looks very much like the danish Iver Huitfeldt-Class frigates.
The Type 31 Frigate for the RN Essentially is an IH Design with some Modifications .
HER MAJESTY'S SHIP (HMS) 😍
Build it in space and you have a super star destroyer.
The Americans are building their DDG-X to replace their powerful Ticonderoga class ships and will be ready around the same time as this.
The British know how to build ships and this looks just as capable as the Americans.
I can't wait to see the Type 83. It will be a worthy protector for our 2 state of the art carriers.
What about hyperbaric launchers, hypersonic missiles, anti aircraft/missile, drone, launching battery? Will it be armed to win or only to look pretty? Have you seen Russian missile destroyers?
Unlikely to be built. The bean counters will say it costs too much. There aren't enough crew to run a ship of that size. So at least 2 Frigates will be de-commishened to crew it.
Looks fancy, are the Royal Navy going to crew it with Mannequins after the latest round of government defence cuts to personnel levels?
They claim to find technical solutions which they fail to do.
Equal standing for mannequins! Mannequins Lives Matter, etc etc.
Just struck me that mannequins made from polystyrene float and therefore will not need ships. For gods sake Cedric, don't tell the accountants in the MoD.
@Leigh Garfield All the things you mention simply augment the role of the soldier and cannot replace him. To lay claim to territory, we still need human boots on the ground.
When it comes to cost and value, it will be a very long time before affordable mass produced AI's can out perform the flexibility/adaptability, utility of the properly equipped and trained soldier. Just look at the base line processing power and sensor suite we humans are born with. As well as the intuitive ability to imagine, design and build AI's in the first place. Add to the equation that we are self replicating and easy to train. Yet still retain further capabilities.
BTW An independent combatant AI, would break the first law of robotics. Asimov would turn in his grave. Have you seen Terminator.
Cambridge be damned!
@Leigh Garfield Oh come 2 assault ships HMS Bulwark & Albion are to be taken out of service in 12 yrs time ,they were totally refurbishment a few yrs ago & marine cuts ....... This ain good no more troop cuts !!! We have the need for assault ships !!!! For beech & coastal assault .....
@Leigh Garfield recruit as many new staff for the force but keeping them is the problem,
Looks like it has superfiring turrets on the bow.
My favourite ship at modern Warship
About time, Food to see that the future proposal is a ship armed to the teeth let’s hope that they will be designed to take a hit unlike the latest patrol craft.
It's a patrol boat, it is supposed to patrol things not fight an armada.
@@themanformerlyknownascomme777
And yet the River class has more tonnage than many classes of WW2 Frigates which would eat it for breakfast.
River B1: 1,700t
River B2: 2,000t
VS WW2 Frigates
River: 1,830t
Colony: 1,264t
Captain: 1,140t
Bay: 2,530t
Loch: 1,435
5 classes of Frigate used by the UK in WW2 only one of which has tonnage surpassing a Batch 2 River class OPV.
Whilst it's great to have the best of this that and the other we need to build some lower cost vessels to prevent us being spread too thin
Nice and about time we had a ship with a bit of clout. 🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧🇬🇧
Yeah we'll see if they actually build these ships. Great Britian has a bad history of killing off ship designs. Or rushing in unproven equipment before it is fully tested and proven. Case in point the engines on the Type 45s. I just hope that the UK learned their lessons from their blunders in the past.Now if only my country the United States would learn from their blunders.
The type 45 issue stems from entering to instal American parts for the engines which compromised them.
@@Gary-bz1rf correct....the Yanks love T45s....
@Drew Peacock I work with them ;)
@Drew Peacock they're one of if not the best modern destroyer.
@Drew Peacock the yanks love the type 45, whenever possible they always ask for one to be in their carrier task groups for the simple reason it is the best AA destroyer in the world. No it doesn't have the offensive power of an arleigh Burke but it has 48 definite hit missiles. The arleigh Burke has 92, but their missiles have to be fired at least 2 at a time to definitely hit. And the type 45 has an absolutely brilliant radar
It's just a concept.
How long will it take to make?.
It should enter service around 2038.
The music is way to loud in sections it makes it difficult to hear what is being said
Looks like any other and seeing as we are struggling to recruit enough sailors and they probably won't have the money to pay for the weapons
what's the point
Why was there no funding for the new frigate type 32 ? Now the MOD are playing with us about this replacement for the type 45 ???
Highest priority should be for all Western allied militaries to fully integrate as much as is feasible. Then they can all draw down while still maintaining enough force to easily defend against any aggressor.
the highest priority is to stop warmongering and profiting financially from war
Does the type 23 ships still have a good hull in not being detected and if so, it could still be a platform with new missiles and inforstructure. But my guess is, from berxit, the MOD well they have well I dont understand them however. The building of new ships places money back into the economy to help the UK in that regard, but why not gift the ships to allies if they are still good for the job, its just a thought being placed out there.
of
Gifting doesn't get money. Sell a ship for scrap and you get a few million. But yeah I do agree, I'd prefer to see them sold for much reduced if it's that or scrapping
They'll be sold either to Chile or Brazil or more likely both.
all wrong,the newest type 23s have been upgraded with new radar,missiles ASW radar and defence
so where was the type 83 in all that ?
How long till built 2050
Retiring ships? For what? Better keep those ships than to reduce british naval strength. Retiring capable ships isn't a good option.
It costs money to keep ships afloat and operational.
Why the designation 83?
great news ;new ships and new tec installed for the 2030.s oh to be 18 again!
There is absolutly no chance with our post Brexit economy that we will able to field 24 escorts with any meaningful capability. These not aspirations but pipe dreams.
Cut benefits and we'll do that tenfold...
We are joining the TTCP which will add a few billion. And also 72 trade deals with countries. And talk of CANZAK which I can't see not going ahead
Hope it's fitted with the EAGIS radar system
Is that similar to the AEGIS system?
@@monsieurcommissaire1628 same thing, I'm just a dunce but you got it 👍🏻lol
I dunno but i seems like less VLS?
2083 is about when it will be ready.
Can I ask how many missile launcher are there?
I would expect 1 per 100ton of ship weight.....
Why?
@@davidstephen2015 that's the missle/tonnage of the current 🇺🇸 ships.
I had an argument with another guy somewhere about the no of missles carried on board the 🇬🇧 T45. I think it's too little at 48.
@@michaelwong4303 I agree that 48 is a bit light but if you had 1 cell per 100 ton, you would have 80/85 cells (8/8,500t). The Type 45 has room for another 16 VLS which would give 64 cells, which I feel is about right. Though if the Type 83 has 80 cells I will be very happy. I predict 64 cells and maybe space for 8 deck launched ASMs for the Type 83 and about 10,000 tonnes.
@@davidstephen2015 um....For a ship that weights 8000 tons it should (by the standard of 🇺🇸 design in the 80's) have 80 cells, or carry at least 80 missles. Otherwise what's the point of building one that weights 8000 tons if you only equip it with 64 missles? Build a 6000 ton ship instead!!
@@michaelwong4303 but the RN is not the US Navy and they have different design philosophies. The Type 45s are built for a AAW and 64 cells, especially with quad packing some is felt sufficient for that role. A Burke class Destroyer with 96 cells will have some devoted to TLAM and ASROC so probably only carries about 64/76 SAMs. The RN can’t afford to have ships like that. If the Type 45 had 80 cells, a good sonar and carried ASROC & TLAM, then the RN wouldn’t get 8 Type 26 Frigates.
If it is supposed to be stealthy then why does it still have lumps and bumps everywhere instead of completely smooth upper structure.
Type 45 is stealthy still has bumps, yet is the size of a small fishing ship on radar. Arleigh Burke is stealthy (ish) has bumps. Look
@@jacobkingsford5209 your 30 stone mum is more stealthy than the arleigh burke class lol
@@glennmontgomery1593 the ish was understated. It's stealthier than on old 70's/80's destroyer but no, it's not really stealth against the modern competition
you could do what the french and Russians do..just park the ships somewhere and leave them to rot
Hopefully it will be battery powered they can be charged by placing a wind turbine on the stern.
Keep it up Britain 🇬🇧.
Thanks:)
Being island nation UK needs strong Navy
Yeah bro we need more ship
Here is the proposed new ship
British former Colonial : Crap... I'm in Danger
?
Say that to america and india
3 years (Years) on now - March, 2024. And on the Royal Navy website, Addressing the proposed Type 83: you can't learn anything about what this destroyer will do or have or even Its mission , it's still called a "concept" in work. Typical.
Wtf , Type 45 just came out
This just might be called a cruiser instead of a super destroyer
Size and cost aren't the same thing in warships. Steel is 10 to 15% of the cost of a warship.
WOW !!!! What a shame it won't happen.
Liars
I'll take 'ship that will never be built' for $1000 Alex (rip).
HHHHhhhhhaaaa !!! Yeah right !!! : D
Yeah this is such BS I'll believe it when I see it
@@danielmonk7451 Yup !!
Oh come on we’re the a10s
You have forgotten that HMS Monmouth and HMS Montrose are getting replaced by HMS Glasgow, HMS Cardiff.
Get your fact right.
Until we sort out the way we procure and stop the gravy train of civil servants and ex mod staff screwing our system over all of this is just a pipe dream
Fingers crossed the RN has.
Seems a bit low on launchers.
Looks same as Dutch LCF zeven Provincieen LCF.
We need at least 12 of these not 6
We need 20 frigates not 8
And we really need 12 fleet submarines not 6. Minimum. Or we really should just shut the shop.
Ain't worth a crap if it can't take a pounding
No ship can take a pounding anymore. The only option is to not be hit in the first place
Cripes, the type 45 "destroyer" already has a displacement of close to 8 000 tonnes. That's cruiser territory. The 83 will be even heavier, for sure. Why not call them what they are?
This is the standard displacement for destroyers, cruisers now 12 - 15000.
@@andygass9096 The USN's Zumwalt class is over 15 000 tons displacement, but they're still calling it a destroyer. What's in a name? Is it an attempt to kid the taxpayers that they're only building minor ships?
The weight is not the only factor that determines the classification of a ship. Even more important is the actual armament and capability of the ship. The modern british ships Like Type 23/45 are only good for Air Defence, nothing else. Since they don't have any Land Attack missiles, nor any anti-submarine missiles and no effective anti-ship missiles (the Harpoon are pretty much useless against any modern ship's defense). So they are not true multi role ships. They don't even deserve the classification of a Destroyer, because that would imply that they are multi-role ship, which they are not. The Type 45 is only a large Air Defence frigate, nothing more.a
@@militaryanalysis5028 Thank you for that. It would appear that the suspicion I have, that the taxpayers are being forced to pay more and more for less and less, is well-founded.
@@puffin51 Well, to be fair, at least the British navy still has 6 very powerful and modern Astute-class Hunter-killer submarines, which are some of the best in the world. They have the mission to kill enemy ships, not the Type 45. And the new Q.E. carriers take the mission for Land Attack capability. So there you go. Just because the Type 45 is not a real Multi Role Destroyer like some other ships, doesn't mean that the British navy is useless or underpowered. It is the combination of all ships working together in a formation that define the Power and effectiveness of a Navy.
Philippine navy is need that type of warships
These ships are very very expensive, Philippines wouldn't be able to afford, many billions or trillions of peso each ship
As an Island nation, the UK must do better at projecting their naval strength.
Well they have enough power to beat Russia in the north and Black Sea while sending the QE carrier strike group to scare China. So I would say they are doing quite well.
Type 42 was destroy for Argentine air Force and continuous....type..????
Does the brits got money to build this ship. With current budget cut.
Chinese designer:I can copy that and I can make 20x more than British😂lol
Shocking! British type 45 has 48 VLS! OMG, this is China's old 052C level. 😂😂😂
If you guys want to play this kind of ship and other modern ship that active in the world just download modern warship in you playstore .
Next time build a new best battle cruiser on sea battle for enemy ships and air craft and submarine.
A cruiser would be nice only U.S. China Russia and India have Cruisers . However I think you mean guided missile cruisers battle cruisers are from WW2
@@patricofritz4094 Russia still operates three battle cruisers
@@Battyj Oh yeah those ones still in service
Not any time soon.
The moment you see caution sign on phalanx you know the idiots rule and the end of the world is near:))
🇲🇨🇲🇨🇲🇨💪👌👍
You need 15, with increased armament. Of course we will get 5 with reduced weapons. Cheaper, innit.
3...
It's being so cheerful what keeps you going !
Rule Britannia from Glasgow 😎🇬🇧👍