China's Type 055 Destroyer Is the Most Powerful Warship - Here's Why

[@thetruthhurts9750]

It is currently the most powerful destroyer. Most people don't want to admit it because it is Chinese.

[@Absolut531kmh]

Ikr

[@Baz.007]

What about when against the aircraft carrier, battle cruiser or cruiser?

[@洪国力]

@@Baz.007 df-17,df-26:what?

[@Baz.007]

@@洪国力 no need to be all defensive my friend. My point is, 055 may be the most powerful destroyer. But how does it compare to cruisers? As with the unproven missiles you've mentioned. The PLA needs to do a sh!t load of testing and training before the missiles represent as a credible threat to a carrier group.

[@洪国力]

@@Baz.007 very simple, the Ticinderoga and kirov are too old, no match to 055, any problem?

[@nostradamus2642]

The function design of the 055 actually makes it look very handsome and powerful at the same time.

[@EurasiaNaval]

I should have mentioned the good looks somewhere!

[@nostradamus2642]

@@EurasiaNaval China's naval architects are probably world leading at the moment. Not sure if you've seen the following doco about the 054 story of 2 decades ago. kzbin.info/www/bejne/pJS9gaCJbbOGq9E

[@EurasiaNaval]

I believe I have watched that one - not too closely though

[@nostradamus2642]

@@EurasiaNaval Look forward to seeing the ASW version of the Z-20 being in service (on DDGs and 075 LHD). So far all videos show Z-9 and Kamov on China's DDGs.

[@EurasiaNaval]

There is this tweet from Collin Koh of a supposedly operational Z-20F: twitter.com/CollinSLKoh/status/1347685332121051137?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1347685332121051137%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Feurasiantimes.com%2Fchina-reveals-plan-to-develop-armed-z-20-helicopters%2F I don't follow him at all, by the way - someone else showed me the tweet

[@western-hypocrisy1898_.]

Keep going China! I will donate money to build warships . Love from HK China

[@desmond89]

Lol donate? Brainwashed

[@CanonWong228]

❤❤❤

[@littlebaby3980]

❤❤❤❤❤

[@自然醒-b9j]

多抽烟酒行了（🐶）

[@guogaijun]

❤❤❤

[@godzillamothra5983]

in just twenty years, China has changed from barely green water navy into one of the strongest navies in the world, and keep growing. Calling it a revolution is an understatement. This ship has hypersonic missile, and the Chinese rail gun is also in the work, once finish and install in this ship, this ship will probably become the most powerful warship on the planet.

[@DunedinMultimedia2]

You certainly have an imagination!

[@Coxman]

They can't get the rail gun technology to work and they won't now because China is part of a technology ban. Wishful thinking.

[@swedhgemoni8092]

@@DunedinMultimedia2 Well, in that case, the Pentagon does too because they've stated that the PLAN puts their control of the West Pacific in jeopardy (unheard of since WWII - even during the Cold War, the Soviet Navy couldn't contest them).

[@MultiMagnis]

no chinese rail gun are in development. just thoughts and theories but the prime issue at hand is to have a ship which can support a rail gun power needs and still perform all its other duties.

[@CC-ns2ds]

Personally I don’t think we will see rail guns on ships in our lifetime the amount of maintenance the rail guns would require over the conventional 130/127mm that most navies currently use would make most governments think twice about the “upgrade”.

[@joey3291]

Isn't this the US next-generation DDGX? Wow, China has launched 8 of them, while the US is still researching on it.

[@whyserious9082]

lol

[@anonanon7235]

The US put decades behind the DDG Zumwalt, which was an utter fail. It's engine is garbage, and it's body is rusting through, and it doesn't pack any punch.

[@davidmoss2576]

@@anonanon7235 The Zumwalt was designed by Emma two moms.

[@kevinthegreat3572]

US is still trying to steal the super destroyer tech from China.

[@tracyk5022]

US Navy DDG055 is under development😅

[@tony-pr9xv]

The warship is beautifully designed ,and its displacement is over 10000 tons,which provides potential to carry more advanced arms.

[@PROLIFIC_TRAVELS]

Until proven in combat its just scrap metal 😂

[@olinanilza]

@@PROLIFIC_TRAVELS why?

[@PROLIFIC_TRAVELS]

@@olinanilza can't say it's good until it's been in combat. That's just common sense

[@ar-pharazon.80]

@@PROLIFIC_TRAVELS so you will hope the China use this metal scrap to invade countries nearby?

[@a.m.armstrong8354]

​@@PROLIFIC_TRAVELS Then you're in no position to determine whether it is more or less scrap metal than say a Gerald Ford class aircraft carrier..

[@felixsu375]

Ship launched ballistic missiles are confirmed as of 4/22/22. China showed a video of one launching from a Type 055.

[@sebastijanglozinic8630]

That pretty much makes the 055 THE most powerful warship in that size and weight cathegory.

[@patthewoodboy]

are you sure they are what china says the missiles are , propaganda , something China is good at , I call it BS

[@scottw4208]

Type 55 is the most powerful destroyer ever. Absolutely incredible.

[@howaboutno5249]

PLAN just released a video of a type 055 launching ASBMs yesterday

[@EurasiaNaval]

Yes, I made a short news video about it

[@williamc9578]

The Type 55 has integrated the newer YJ-21 Anti-ship Hypersonic missile (Mach 6 or higher) to its VLS with up to 1500km range. Making it even more formidable.

[@嘉和ゞ]

能携带YJ-21就具备了摧毁航母的能力！

[@zenntoshi]

over Mach 10

[@williamritchie693]

Lol. That missile doesn’t work. Not even a little bit.

[@williamc9578]

@@williamritchie693 i think you mean Patriot Pac3. We had a recent demo in Ukraine. What a nice fireworks show in 1min and 20secs.

[@azbgames6827]

the vls cells must have a lot of space for a hypersonic missile with that amount of range

[@ML-po6vy]

It is the best Destroyer. I think the concept of Cruiser will be eliminated very soon since Destroyer get stronger and stronger& do multi things.

[@felixsu375]

I am amazed that your channel is the only channel that is giving an unbias review and look at the Chinese ships. I saw another channel by a retired US submariner. The first thing he said was that the Type 055 had a radar like the AN/SPY-1. I was thinking, wow, could he be more biased. Why not say that a US destroyer from the 1950's can easily defeat the type 055. Amazing what Americans will say just to get more views to get more money.

[@EurasiaNaval]

Thanks for your support, sir. I know the channel of the ex-US submariner youtuber you are talking about. Everything he said in that Type 055 video reflects a complete lack of research and/or any pretense to objectivity. He said in response to criticisms that the claim that China has AESA radars is just 'Chinese propaganda', and banned everyone who used Chinese sources to call out his errors, myself included. I frequent Russian defence forums, and this youtuber is often criticised for lacking a strong understanding of Russian submarines, despite making dozens of videos on them. Anyway - I'll stop my rant. I hope you stick around for a while to watch more content - they are slowly improving!

[@felixsu375]

@@EurasiaNaval Your videos are great. I will keep watching. But if you want to make money. Do another channel that is entertainment based...But keep this one going...

[@felixsu375]

@@EurasiaNaval I like to use US government's own publications to make people like that submariner guy look like an idiot. Just quote something from the Pentagon reports. There are lots of them. People kept saying that China can not guide ballistic missile to hit moving ships. The latest report from the US government declared that the 2 DF-26 and 2 DF-21 fired from different sites in China hit their moving target, a ship, in the SCS. End of stupid argument.

[@upperclass5310]

@@EurasiaNaval tell the truth is a real man should do. Support

[@qiyuxuan9437]

Yeah, that guy is a submariner, he really isn't that knowledgeable on other area of Naval eqipments, not just on China, even U.S eqipments as well, he pretend he know everything, but when he talk about carriers, there are a lot of misinformations lol😂

[@mochen9282]

Despite how good 055 is, nobody seems to notice how cheap it is. It only costs 1/3 of Burke3 to build one 055.

[@MaCcAM40a3]

It makes you wonder how. Obviously wages are ludicrously cheaper in cheaper, but most ores are imported etc. For it to be that cheap it raises questions on all round quality for me

[@AlvinYap510]

@@MaCcAM40a3 Because military industries are mostly state owned in China. You dont need to pay big fat salaries to corporate CEOs, Directors and Shareholders

[@freeride61]

@@MaCcAM40a3 Because you have been brainwashed by the media, the military-industrial complex relies on the manufacture of weapons to suck up the national economy. In China, there is no such worry, only costs, and all domestic parts are purchased at cost, low labor, low cost, low and high world's highest efficiency, and The largest and most shipyards, and the old workers with the most right-hand experience, create the advanced 055 design. Don't worry, you can see within a year, the upgraded 055 is launched, and the displacement should reach 15,000 tons

[@jeffreylai6796]

@@MaCcAM40a3 1) low labour cost 2) lower profiteering by state owned companies 3) well-established supply chain (45% of ships in the world are built in china, they got all the parts they need within an arms length)

[@luckmichael]

The point out

[@joosiekawk]

8 already built. the 2nd batch, Type 055B will have a larger full displacement tons (>14k tons), estimates are the next generation Type 055B's could be equipped with railgun and laser weapons

[@MrSuperunix]

第一批是10艘！9号10号已经开建了。10艘什么概念？1000个垂直发射单元。1000发齐射，地球上谁能抗的住一轮？

[@boboweiqi]

@@MrSuperunix 兄弟一坑四弹了解一下，每个448, 10艘 4480

[@Gogogo955]

@@boboweiqi一輪1120，四輪4480 都沒說錯

[@mikelin6960]

Gotta say this ship looks beautiful

[@ex0duzz]

Yep. When even usas newest destroyer concept design for irs "next generation destroyer" looks EXACTLY like the type 55, and USA is now the one "copying" and taking inspiration from Chinese equipment now, you know China has made it. Undoubtedly the beer destroyer in the wield right now, and will be for the next decade or two, or more, since it is designed to be upgradable and has big power plant for future upgrades like potential rail guns, maybe even emals for drones, who knows.

[@kevinthegreat3572]

US lies, cheats & steals said Pompeo.

[@junpengxiao5431]

No my friend, the Chinese copycat just copied this destroyer from the future of USAS lol

[@MarvinChenFantasy]

Quote a famous Chinese elder painter "who learns from me successes, who copys from me loses"

[@keithrussellberondo8880]

😂😂😂😂😂

[@michaelkendall662]

what an idiot...most of the DDX design has been on the drawing boards for over 20 years...TRY AGAIN DIPSHITZ

[@jesusdiaz3776]

See the Type 055 destroyer is like see a Star Wars Imperial Star Destroyer.

[@陈飞-o4n]

Americans imagine it, we make it happen

[@arunjith9397]

​@@陈飞-o4n 😂😆🤣😭 Just 1 bramose is enough for this CRAP

[@AbsoluteGhazi]

​@@arunjith9397 funniest bullsh!t ice ever heard

[@AreaWest1]

😆😆😆

[@Anonymouse0538]

@@arunjith9397yo thanks for the 3 brahmos batteries dude from india - am from the pelepens

[@Strategy_Analysis]

Like your work ENI. "Super" Destroyer indeed!😉 I think the Type 055 is a more significant warship than many people think!

[@fanllawf]

Imagine the 055A coming out in 2023.

[@JD-dm1uj]

Stellar video, excellent geopolitical overview, capturing the importance of such a design and capability, as it pertains to national prestige and power projection. The Type 055, IMO, is without question the top destroyer in the world, one could argue the Admiral Nakhimov, though it’ll never be fielded in substantial numbers, the same for DDG-1000, the Lider Class will be amazing, though given the current situation, it may never arrive. The 055’s sensor suite and its larger and much more flexible VLS gives it a great advantage. Fantastic work on this, the best Type 055 video on YT!

[@EurasiaNaval]

Thanks for your great support. Strictly speaking, calling any vessel "the most powerful warship" is always ambiguous - e.g. most powerful in what sense (air defence or ASW, etc)? Can you say more powerful than an aircraft carrier? The phrase is suitable for generating a simple and effective video title, but obviously lacks nuance. Breaking the picture down further: I would say the Lider destroyer, if it ever gets built according to current design specifications, will be the best air defence destroyer. The DDG-1000 is probably the best land attack destroyer, as it is designed for supporting land operations rather than combat at sea. The Kirov class once it gets refitted should probably be best for anti-ship platform. The Type 055 - best looking warship?

[@JD-dm1uj]

@@EurasiaNaval I couldn’t agree more, though it’s hard to not put the 055 as the top destroyer, on its own, it’s exceptionally flexible, it currently can cover the widest range of missions, these are also the first batch, they’ll greatly improve as subsequent hulls are laid.They can interchange the load outs with the flexible VLS, hot and cold launch capabilities, 112 large cells provide a lot of options…the radars are world class as well.

[@zhanxu125]

055 will build a lot. I think it should look like 30-40 ships. Because this is not China's most advanced warship! China's most advanced destroyer is the next generation of warship integrated all-round ship on the road. The displacement is 20000-25000 tons. All weapons on the warship are AI intelligent. The firepower is the same as that of the Arsenal ship. The strike force is more than 2500 kilometers on the land and 1500-2000 kilometers on the sea. It is equipped with the most advanced medium voltage DC system, stronger gas turbine, directional energy weapons and a stronger integrated mast than 055, And stronger multi-functional anti stealth radar (quantum radar and terahertz radar, China has made a breakthrough). The latest towed ShenNa and AI submarines and AI unmanned anti submarine cooperate with submarine operations.

[@kingdedede1066]

@@zhanxu12520000 tons is just silly

[@zhanxu125]

@@kingdedede1066 You have such an idea! Prove that you are ignorant. China has disclosed that the detection range of the next generation of dual-band radar for warships has reached 3,000 kilometers. And the new technology overcomes the influence of earth curvature. The radar uses the latest gallium oxide technology, which is more powerful than current gallium nitride technology. The power of the gas turbine on the 055 is much greater than the actual demand. The new generation of power system has been improved on the basis of the existing technology, which can ensure the speed of 33 knots for a 20,000-ton ship and meet the energy supply of the new generation of radar. And it can carry more anti-ship ballistic missiles with a range of 1500-2000 kilometers.

[@aa1944-k2r]

a highlight of this ship is the ability to launch ballistic hypersonic anti ship missile, i think they unveiled it like a month or two ago.

[@Ironfangzu]

A single type 055 destroyer, with its hypersonic anti ship missile array, would post a significant threat to an American carrier battle group. American carriers are very heavily defended, but currently the U.S. does not have any operational hypersonic misslies, not any reliable defense against hypersonic antiship missiles. If war breaks out in the South China Sea, for example if Chinese forces move on Taiwan and the U.S. decides to directly respond, American carrier groups will be under the threat of YJ-17 antiship missiles from 055 destroyers wherever they may be, and more importantly they will be within easy range of the numerous antiship missile batteries lining the entire Eastern Chinese coast. The probability of American super carriers, and entire carrier groups, being sunk is very high. This is something the American leadership has to really consider before intervening. This is not like sending troops in against Somalia or Afghanistan. This would be war against a very powerful and well prepared opponent, and heavy American losses are almost certain.

[@cadianzz]

@@Ironfangzu Of the few dozen no-restriction battle sims we did, both of America's west and east coast and most of China's coastal regions are nuclear waste by day 3, day 4 ended with everyone nukes everyone and end of the world xD

[@chunshengzhou985]

@@Ironfangzuj h

[@3MoonEast]

​@@xxrunexx100Then what do you think about China's hypersonic missiles? Do you have any solid evidence or basis for your opinion?

[@patrolmanracv]

@@xxrunexx100says a YANK ..the US hasnt won a war in 70 years despite poverty opposition ..running away after being in Afghanistan for 20 years they had next to no navy ..and very little air force .the US had everything ..plus their homeland was safe ...now it isn't ..this attitude of them thinking they are the greatest at everything is why they always get beaten ..in fact with all that equipment they lose ..i would be pulling my head in ..not great at anything ...brainwashed into thinking so ...

[@nineodes1759]

想想二十年前我们还在用022这种自杀艇,再看看现在的055...我有时候都在想外星人可能没有降落美国的51区而是来到了中国的罗布泊

[@leqiaop1840]

022近海巡逻或快速支援。可不是什么自杀艇。

[@1010thechamp]

Probably won't be long before the successor to this ship will be made, let's see how much larger and powerful a destroyer can get

[@tonychris6809]

A conservative estimate. Larger tonnage, medium voltage DC all electric integrated propulsion system, electromagnetic gun, shipborne laser weapon, new generation GaN active phased array radar, midcourse antimissile system

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

It's a cruiser with the same capabilities as a cruiser literally same exact size and weapon compliment. The Chinese are just calling it a destroyer instead of a cruiser.

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

@@tonychris6809 Not one has a Rail gun or Laser weapon so if you want people to take you seriously I would just leave those two weapon systems out. China doesn't even have one small enough to fit on a ship. You are going to need multiple nuclear reactors just to power one. China is decades away from putting a nuclear reactor on a ship. They have issues with the mini ones they stole from the USSR that have been put on their submarines. Those don't even come close to the power required to even use such systems.

[@zenki4666]

Keep the good work... You are wonderful 👍🤩

[@EurasiaNaval]

Thank you so much 🤗

[@zenki4666]

@@EurasiaNaval Thank YOU so much!... I really enjoying your videos.. Very informative

[@cassius_eu5970]

You make really nice videos! Thank you! :)

[@EurasiaNaval]

Glad you like them!

[@zszs100]

Nice informative video, just information, no political bias noise. Subbed and notifications turned on. Can't wait to see your next upload! As a military enthusiast, I feel like I discovered a gem, that is this channel. I will be going over some of your older videos too. Great work keep it up! :)

[@EurasiaNaval]

Thanks for your support. I will say though that everyone is biased one way or another, but i will try to focus on what people are here for.

[@davidmoss2576]

That is one sexy looking destroyer. Those missiles are quite the bangers too.

[@diezero2483]

I hope my home city Changsha get a named 055A in next decades, its currently a 052D.

[@gillgavin2886]

Our province already has Fujian ship hahahahahaha

[@忽师傅]

@@gillgavin2886 哼，辽宁人路过，早晚福建舰也会变成牛夫人的。

[@gf6977]

只要你们不抢我们广东的核动力航母我绝对支持055A长沙

[@arthurvandeman]

gr8 summary and analysis. tight and no flab.

[@georgeantabi6025]

This channel is seriously underrated, you've earned a subscriber. One question: Do you think it's a good idea for Russia to buy a few of these destroyers (or any large surface combatant for that matter)? If Yes, do you think they should be built at Chinese shipyards or Russian shipyards?

[@phils4634]

Current Russian naval doctrine appears focussed on producing smaller (but very heavily-armed) Corvette-style boats, which may reflect the large number of navigable rivers in Russia - they can easily "stash" such boats well away from NATO forces, yet with the excellent range of their VLS supersonic (and now hypersonic) long range missiles, can effectively (yet safely) provide a significant force projection. Also, Russian navy appears far more invested in sub. technology, since their knowledge of anti-ship missiles would indicate larger, capital ships might be a very attractive target to potential aggressors, and possibly not a good investment from a risk vs. benefit analysis, especially if smaller vessels can provide a comparable defensive capability.

[@simonyip5978]

I'd go as far to say that the build quality would be better from Chinese shipyards than the Russian shipyards, but it might be hard for the Russians to accept that China is in a much better position than Russia is, it wasn't very long ago that Russia/USSR was a respected superpower and China was much poorer and much less powerful and relatively backwards compared to Russia. Yet, now China has a higher living standard than Russia, a much stronger economy, a more advanced technological capability and expertise, more political influence and more financial power than Russia has. This reversal of positions has happened so quickly that the reality of China being a military/political/economic/industrial/technological superpower is still not fully accepted by some.

[@singaporesingapore9729]

just exchange them with a few million of Oil...

[@singaporesingapore9729]

million barrels of oil

[@黄巢待到秋来九月八我]

是的，他们需要，但他们没钱，没技术建造。中国也不会卖。

[@interalia_Y]

To a nonmilifan, this is hands down the most good looking war ship.

[@EurasiaNaval]

I am also more of a warship fan than a milifan - honest!

[@brettdemauna9332]

Good looks certainly may look deceiving but the internals are basically low tech architectural.. somewhat never been in real conflict test proven.

[@brettdemauna9332]

Russia's battle cruiser Moskva of looks to some is highly feared monstrous looking beast hyped up to meet today's modern tactical high-end standards including large array of defensive systems streamed across from bow to stern. Multiple launch missile systems, I mean it's bogged down rested in pieces at the black sea bottom seabed.

[@kanpakloy8212]

Since it is the most powerful destroyer, which mean the bald headed vulture yankies need to steal the design to 2copy to catch up. Woh !!! Does it mean the bald headed yankies r now becoming a copy cat.

[@kanpakloy8212]

Since it is the most powerful destroyer, which mean the bald headed vulture yankies need to steal the design to 2copy to catch up. Woh !!! Does it mean the bald headed yankies r now becoming a copy cat.

[@productguru8323]

9:35 the range of the 130mm deck gun is only 3 km?

[@hotboygoody]

I think it is safe to classify the Type 55 as a cruiser... I particularly admire the bow section of the ship. It allows for the main gun to fire in front of the ship without having to maneuver itself out of the way. This is what a next generation Tico should have evolved into, plus an additional 5in main gun aft for added firepower, as well as a back up for the forward main. Best we can do now is turn the Zumwalts into anti-ship cruisers and let the Burkes continue doing they thing.

[@EurasiaNaval]

Thanks for your thoughts. It's a neat detail you found on the bow section. I haven't thought of that before you raised it. I think given the USN will only be building a couple of Zumwalts, they might need to come up with a new design for an anti-ship cruiser if that is going to become a new thing. DDG-X? Who knows

[@zhe8586]

It’s not in the US naval doctrines to have strong shipborne anti-ship capabilities. Their anti-ship missions are primarily handled by the carrier-borne air wings, as they are a carrier centered navy.

[@MultiMagnis]

@@zhe8586 INCORRECT. all of USN destroyers and retiring cruisers have anti ship weapons. while an air wing or even a few fighters can take out a dd ship. it does not mean usn destroyers dont have weapons to take down ships.

[@tomli9793]

朱姆沃尔特太昂贵了，本来被制造出来就已经严重预算超支，太多过于超前的技术被堆在上面只得到了更低的性价比，更多的改装对美国的财政来说只是雪上加霜。我更看好新的DDGx计划，但是如果美国人不好好整治一下他们武器供应商的腐败状况，预算超支的情况将继续

[@dukesoffluke1381]

@@MultiMagnis America's strongest anti-ship weapons are air-launched at the moment. However, they do have ship launched AShM Tomahawk and hypersonic missiles in mature stages of development to be put in service by 2025.

[@tgsgardenmaintenance4627]

Looks a very impressive warship, hopefully we never have to find out how good it is!

[@EurasiaNaval]

Absolutely, especially the second point

[@不动不静]

but US keeps playing provocation near China, which will likely test out the capability of 055.

[@YunweiPan]

@@不动不静 呵呵

[@雷雷-h2t]

中国人民爱好和平，不喜欢也更讨厌战争。

[@jerryleiisme]

@@不动不静 China is not Russia,they won't react mere provocation with deadly force .

[@ksc4622]

2:40 beautiful shot with shadow of clouds looming over the ship

[@juhantoon6524]

Probably what is known to the outside world on this 055 destroyer is only maximum 70% of its capabilities especially the weaponry. Within a range of 3000 km from China mainland, it can destroy anything that try to challenge it.

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

Hardly doubt that your clueless when it comes to navy and war. Its not a destroyer btw the 055 is a cruiser same size and same armament as the American cruisers.

[@朱文懋]

是驱逐舰啦，至少我们是如此定义的，至于能否摧毁，还希望鲁莽的人出来挑战一下，we will see@@michaelmichaelagnew8503

[@foodparadise5792]

China announced few months ago, they implemented a viable way to keep the rail gun cool from repeat firing. Rail gun is on the horizon, no more dangerous explosives inserted to each ammo. China also working on electromagnetic catapult system for launching missiles. It is the same direct current system on the Fujian Aircraft carriers. Why direct current? Because it makes sense. China is the most advance battery maker in the world, BYD, CATL, etc.....not panasonic nor LG, samsung. China also accumulated tons of experience of electromagnetic systems from developing the magnetic levitation train(similar tech on the aircraft carrier launch system). You know the only such a train existed in the world in operation for the last 20 years.

[@koenigamd]

This ship is the definition of engineering perfection

[@alykkw]

055 is not designed as the main air defense for Chinese aircraft battle groups. It has capability to take down a whole US aircraft battle group with supersonic anti-ship missiles. 055 is fully DC electric driven. It is built to this size to have enough electric power to power rail gun and laser weapons. PLA has already successfully tested rail gun on 055. Laser weapon on 055 is even easier.

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

You do realize it has to go through about 20 of the same type of ship on the American side before it can hit that carrier. America has plenty of ships protecting its carriers with the same exact capabilities. Who do you think China got the idea from. The Rail gun and laser weapon is just hubris you are spouting. Just Chinese propaganda and lies. Any average person who isn't gullible can see through your BS.

[@ex0duzz]

Thanks for this video, and all the other ones you've done, especially the ones about the Chinese Navy. Gotta give you the props you deserve, especially the videos you've done on the Chinese navy, since if seems most in USA and the west have not come to terms with the speed and progress of China's rise and modernisation, and their current abilities, especially when it comes to their navy. Most in USA and the west are completely ignorant and think China os stuck in the 70/80s, and that it just has the numbers, but not the quality. Most think Americas ships or carriers and the techno them are 2-3x better and will just devastate China in any fight anywhere anytime, oblivious to the fact that any fight will most likely take place around Taiwan or the SCS. Also oblivious to the fact that when USA has done war games over Taiwan and SCS, USA has not only lost, but got absolutely obliterated. Not just once, but for yearS in a row now, ever since they started doing these war games until now. And every year that passes, Chiang is only getting stronger and stronger relative to USA and the rest of the world. And this is not even counting the fact that China is STILL only spending 1.5% of GDP on military)and this has been raised like 7% year on year for the last few years in a row now.,some in USA and wear are already crying and calling China a threat for such spending and procurement. In reality they are spending far far more and if china was an NATO member, USA would be crying to China for not meeting its expected commitments and spending at least 2% of GDP. USA spends like 3% or more iirc, and that's not counting the unaccounted TRILLIONS that the pentagon has admitted has disappeared in the last few audits. USA and pentagon also admires that they don't even know how many overseas bases they have! The pentagons top brass had to rely on a publicly available piece of investigative journalism to answer questions from congress about usas overseas bases. Lol. But i digress. As your videos show, China has both quantity AND QUALITY now. The only part they are still behind USA is in nuclear subs and nuclear carriers. Basically engine and power plant technology, which is the hardest and most advanced tech in the world, and you can count the numbers on one hand how ma h countries have this domestic capability to create a nuclear carrier or submarine or a 5th generation aircraft from scratch to finish. However, even if China cannot currently produce as advanced nuclear carriers or nuclear subs as USA, China's doctrine is more defensive and China doesn't need to be out and about playing world police roaming the seas 24/7 or invading and threatening countries on the other side of the world using gunboat diplomacy. Also, in China's case, having a good balanced mix of super quiet AIP diesel subs along with nuclear subs is a good idea compared romusa who only has nicked subs. Quiet diesel subs are begets to defend China's coasts and backyard. Also, imo carriers are vulnerable in a real fight against a true peer adversary, especislly one like China who has focused for decades on countering carriers and who's doctrine is based on A2AD and keeping hostiles away from the hotspots in Taiwan and SCS. Ie in a real war between China and USA, USA won't ever bring their carriers or ANY major surface vessels within 1500 km of China's shore, and even then it will still be easy for a submarine or air launched missiles to take out a carrier since they will always be tracked 24/7 and thus their position(with the battle group) will be known at all times. It's just too risky to use it since losing one is a massive cost that isn't worth the risk. Probably better to use the carriers purely as a carrier. IE a massive non combat transport ship to carry planes, helicopters, armament/ammo, food, whatever lol. I think they will only get more and more vulnerable as hypersonic missiles and hypersonic manueverable stealth drones that either shoot missiles of their own or are kamikaze drones, or act as mobile radar and recon/targeting systems for ultra range ship/land/air launched missiles become ubiquitous, along with "5th gen networked warfare" where all electronics are networked/linked and share recon info and targeting data with each other in real time. Carriers are probably already tracked 24/7 by China. I mean you cant exactly hide a carrier from country that has global satellite network and nuclear submarine fleet. Even worse when you realise that they never travel alone and are always in a carrier battle group which makes locating and tracking them even easier. Anyway thanks again for the video bro. Very timely, up to date and accurate information. Most impotently it was done in an objective and non biased way, since most analysis or commentators on YT are too biased against china and too biased for USA or west, too dismissive, or just too ignorant and arrogant.. IE Dunning-Kruger case studies. Lol Peace y'all. and I'm out.

[@EurasiaNaval]

Glad you enjoyed the videos, and you make compelling points there!

[@rezberry.x]

Looking down at china is a huge mistakes. Do not wake the tiger in the cave. They are quiet but not weak.

[@leesnow-yh1mq]

smart guy!

[@CanonWong228]

@@EurasiaNaval Back then, the United States spent a considerable amount of manpower and resources on researching laser weapons, but it ultimately ended in failure. Later on, they tried to convince China to develop them, but China succeeded in a few years. When China informed the Americans that we had successfully developed laser weapons, they still can't believe it to this day. The United States' military-industrial complex operates through a bidding process, where a significant portion of the annual defense budget goes to military contractors. In addition to the large number of global military bases and the maintenance costs of aging vessels, there is also the occasional need for waging wars, all of which require a substantial amount of U.S. dollars. If the U.S. dollar were to face a crisis, it is highly likely that it would be the military that drags down the country, as General Zhang Shaozhong of China once said: "What may ultimately bring down the United States is a war it initiates at the wrong time, in the wrong place, and against the wrong enemy." In China, there is an ancient saying called "poor troops and rich weapons（be militaristic）" (originating from the "Records of the Three Kingdoms" around 1800 years ago), which means "using force indiscriminately and constantly initiating aggressive wars, describing extreme bellicosity," and it seems to aptly describe the current United States.

[@chenghang2888]

兄弟你说的非常好，中国不干涉他国内政，不侵略他国，只为了保卫自己国家和净土完整，这并不代表中国好欺负，中国永远不会变成美国，那不是世界人民想要的，我们想要的只有和平，和谐，美国政府应该把更多的钱用于改善国家基础建设，和人民的福利，养老，医疗，等方面，美国现在很强大，但要做好带头大哥，要维护全球和平，这才应该是大国该有的担当，我感觉现在的美国政府太让人期望，困惑，不解。

[@tl2245]

In order to guarantee the success of the one belt one road plan, China needs many more 055 warships and other powerful boats. There is only relative peace in this world. If you are strong enough, you enjoy peace.

[@pricewu2835]

我是中国人，我正在享受和平😀

[@ATLAS.XU-CN]

@@pricewu2835 我是中国人，我在摸鱼。。。。。996福报

[@Jok-e5d]

China still has a long way to go and needs continuous breakthroughs in cutting-edge technology in the next few decades

[@AscendedMP]

while that is true, but no one should underestimate the sheer technological capacity and development capacity China has

[@zulkanainbaharuddin2185]

Then will be type 55A. It will be a 15,000 - 20,000 ton, 150 VLS. Rail gun, 20 barrel CWIS, Nuke powered. 2 Vtol UCAV attack craft.

[@EurasiaNaval]

Interesting perspective - I am not generally sold on the usefulness of railguns, but appreciate there's a range of views

[@mochen9282]

@@EurasiaNaval at least it is cheap for each round.

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

So maybe 50 to 70 years from now? That rail gun and nuke power is decades away for China. Nuke power would happen long before they can get a rail gun working and small enough to fit on a ship. They are still probably 2 decades away from having a nuclear powered ship of their own design if they don't use a Russian one like what's in a few of their submarines. Even then those sub plants are way to small for what you are asking.

[@bf799]

Now the 055 destroyer is stronger, I admire the author's analytical ability.

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

055 cruiser lets at least call it what it really is lol.

[@gf6977]

@@michaelmichaelagnew8503 😄是驱逐舰，我们大概不会有巡洋舰这个名字。近海防御不用巡洋

[@rammahesh3349]

Thanks for your valuable analysis 👍

[@dillonnikolausmatteusl3075]

Everywhere I look pics of the 055 seem to show an autocannon type CIWS (Type 730 or 1139) fore"' with a SAMs tube CIWS aft. But the official PLAN website's specification of the Type 055 says they each hold two Type 730/1130 CIWS autocannons. Where exactly is the 2nd one, it's hard to tell at the rear as there're so many radar masts and things that look akin to a 730/1130 CIWS but perhaps not?

[@MrSchwabentier]

might also have changed. Sometimes such things are changed at a later stage. Maybe that info just wasn't updated

[@catrojana3694]

This is one ship I could could have approved. Well done China.

[@kuan-k4m]

#2:47 The background is the flag of the Chinese Navy 150 years ago. Please replace it with the current flag of the Chinese Navy.

[@iqbang9236]

When you look at it, you start to wonder where the Chinese learn to design such a beautiful, powerful and capable ship.

[@worldfight6032]

China has a history of 5000 years, most of the time it is the world's No. 1, this is no accident

[@yours_sincerely48]

Since Admiral Zenghe time. He lead a fleet of battle ship escorting merchant ship for trade. Whst???? Not to conquer other weak nation. Tragically YES they go about doing business like they do it now.... Building bridges, ports and highway so that both countries can send their local products for sale. I buy from you and you buy from me...motto.

[@directorofficer8565]

From India!!

[@thechloromancer3310]

As of 2021, China's share of the global ship building market was 48.4%. Their experience in ship building is pretty recent, but it is rather extensive.

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

@@worldfight6032 try 3500 years. Chine didn't even exist till 1500 BC when the first emperor created china. It's only the worlds number 1 in lies and deception. China has never had a number 1 navy in any recorded history except the one the communist party conjures up.

[@kunkun_thecat]

I'm more interested in the placement of their AESA radar.. No radar coverage for the 180 degree behind the ship?

[@harrykuehb8938]

They need advanced new generation submarines to protect against Virginia and Los Angeles class subs. Yes anti-submarine capabilities exist in both the 55 and 52D destroyers but have a further submarine component will help.

[@EurasiaNaval]

I think it depends on what your goal is. If it is about screening the Type 055 against enemy submarines, smaller surface combatants like the Type 056A corvettes and Type 54A frigates can help by forming a defensive screen. The point is not that they will necessarily detect enemy submarines pre-emptively, it is more about closing the space available for the enemy sub to get off a torpedo shot safely. A torpedo in the water exposes the sub's presence, which can then be tracked down by active sonars. Active sonars will usually not be used unless one is sure of an enemy sub in the vicinity. Submarine crews ultimately care about their own lives, and the submarine will not take a shot if they don't have a reasonable chance of surviving the aftermath. If you are talking about tracking down enemy submarines rather than screening high value targets, I agree one needs silent nuclear-powered subs (conventional subs would not have the speed to maintain contact, but can lie in defensive chokepoints)

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

Well they better get moving but the problem is the Virginia and Los Angeles subs will be getting replaced soon with a new type that the navy has been working on. BTW the 55 is a cruiser not a destroyer. Same weapon loadout and size.

[@silversurfergw]

the surplus power would be necessary for future weapon systems.. like the rail gun.

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

They are going to need allot more than coal or diesel power for a system like that once they can make one then shrink it to the size of a ship. They have to get a working one made first that doesn't fry itself in one shot.

[@es-lipittaja]

Why is it not classified as a cruiser?

[@magnaviator]

Politics aside, the design looks beautiful. So sleek!

[@乔·拜登-d6p]

中国政治制度全世界最好，从我们一穷二白到世界第二，

[@acejericho8616]

How much this one this destroyer i want to use for my vacation but disarm the weapons.

[@btkt6464]

now armed with YJ-21 worlds first ship-borne hypersonic anti ship missile

[@Kurio71]

Amazing. How much to build in USD?

[@bearpolo3618]

Between $900MM to $1B.

[@ALWH1314]

055 has larger than US and Russia VLS to house larger missiles; and like US VLS each cell can house four small missiles.

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

Are you comparing the 055 to Americas cruisers or destroyers. Sounds like destroyers, btw the 055 is a cruiser not a destroyer its way too large and has the same arsenals and capabilities as American cruisers as well as being the same exact size.

[@CaiZhongwen2023]

⁠​⁠@@michaelmichaelagnew8503its destoryers

[@goldreserve]

Passive surveillance can't locate it. They removed the propeller?

[@AnarchyJesus]

and most Americans still believe its an easy win vs china

[@user-ot2nh8qb7d]

Look at all these American comments lmao. I hope they keep thinking the way they do. They talk too much as well, they need to test China already on a 1v1. Everything in China is a "copy" and everything is "weak" blah blah blah. Look at US infrastructure and China's. Americans put your money where your mouth is, fuck around and find out already.

[@yanaaliu]

也许他们忘记了朝鲜战争，这场战争以僵局告终。 双方签署停火协议

[@AnarchyJesus]

@@yanaaliu 当年咱们小米加步枪都打个僵局

[@dvdhr1]

where is the battle history?

[@edwardzhang8667]

Great informative video as always! I was waiting for this one! Do you think it's the best naval destroyer atm? I see at least 2 type 055 escorting the Type 003 carrier.

[@EurasiaNaval]

Thanks for your support! In my opinion it is the best destroyer at the moment from an all round perspective, including cost

[@edwardzhang8667]

@@EurasiaNaval I heard it costs roughly 2x less than Alright Brurke 3. Very capable destroyer, apparently future developments includes install DF17 hyper sonic missile and Railgun.

[@EurasiaNaval]

@@edwardzhang8667 I am not sure the DF-17 anti-ship ballistic missile will be installed on the Type 055, because the VLS cells are estimated to accommodate missiles up to 9 meters in length (and 0.85 meters width). The DF-17 is 11 meters with a large diameter. In comparison, the DF-11 is about 8.5 meters length and 0.8 meters diameter, so it is likely the Type 055 can use the DF-11. That said, I suppose they can install a deck-mounted launcher for DF-17, but that is likely to compromise stealth capability.

[@sevrent2811]

@@edwardzhang8667 China dosen't make cost of procument public so we don't know the actual number. Also you have to look at PPP costs as well as cost of things and currency value are different in the US and China. Also I don't view a deck launched version of DF 17 as plausible at all, its too big, and the rockets are designed to be launched vertically. As an example the US is developing the LRHW which will also be ship launched and the US said they're making a larger VLS cell to fit it in

[@edwardzhang8667]

@@sevrent2811 true, but state owned enterprises will cost much less than private enterprises. This is a fact. Hence whether it's made public or not I highly doubt it is more expensive than US procurement costs. Indeed, to add hypersonic missiles in the type 055 will be challenge, perhaps I am speculating here a modified DF17 or another version similar to the RU Zircon. I can't see China not adding hypersonic missile on their ships. And I think china rocket forced is way ahead of US right now.

[@michaelwong4303]

Er....How does it compare to the Japanese Maya class??

[@justme6275]

Chinese Navy is growing leaps and bounds - World Number One!

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

Well not really when 90% of their navy is fishing boats and merchant ships. They still have hardly any cruisers and destroyers. When they have 70 of each instead of like 8 then they might be able to be talked about in that catagory.

[@JunJiang-ct3yj]

@@michaelmichaelagnew8503我觉得你说的非常对，这是秘密请不要在告诉别人了。

[@wx-qk3ol]

what r u talking about?us zhanhuju? Don't talk nonsense, Chinese warships are basically converted fishing boats, the crew are fishermen, malnutrition caused most of them close to bald. By the way, the 055 is actually powered by human hands, pedaling with your feet.

[@waynethorpe1341]

Great Info. Thanks.

[@benganchan1420]

Today’s chinese navy only wants to beat 15th century ming dynasty chinese fleet of 314 ships crewed by 28,000 sailors under admiral Zhanghe as the ming armada sailed from china to persian gulf

[@timo7641]

currently China is developing Arsenal Warship which could lead to one thing. obsolesces of Super Carrier for country that didn't have Arsenal Ship

[@sevrent2811]

arsenal ships are a terrible idea. The USN explored them, and determined they are massively expensive because of all the missiles they carry, and losing one is a massive loss in capability. Its literally putting all your eggs in one basket. Modern missiles, and of course submarines make sinking modern ships quite easy. The advantage is on the side of the attacker, not the defender. As an example, the US is investing more into smaller unmanned ships to diversify and spread out their fleet, so that sinking one ship means you don't lose a lot of capability.

[@magnaviator]

@@sevrent2811 Depends where you use them, defensively close to land support or all over the world as the US Navy operates.

[@Doggiedogedog]

I think larger ships are now better for all our war. It’s more about detection and anti air and anti missle capacity which requires a large ship for aa and radar. Having small ships in the past was advantageous due to speed and how aircraft and subs score hits based on size and luck. Now with how accurate ornaments and how engines allow for large ships to have more speed. Alongside with large ships needing less resupply is just a no brainer

[@edwardtang1977]

There is one thing that China counts that are overlooked: number of VLS across the whole fleet. Total firepower is important. US, the only airforce good enough, have trouble bring 1000 fighter jets to China. Chinese have enough defence missiles on its boats to deal with them. On Indian warships, 16 VLS on their warships is easily overwhelmed and they don't have the range.Chinese fleet has large number, very capable defence with long range that would make any nation think twice about the costs of fighting China, not to mention long range, very capable anti-ship missiles in large numbers too. The all digital AESA tracking makes them difficult to jam and they are stealthy. Underwater, disel electric submarines are more difficult to detect than nuclear submarines will be around to protect these surface ships. American said, "fighting Chinese warships is with the Arleigh Burke is like bringing a knife to a gun fight."

[@懂不懂-i3g]

Yj21

[@iqbang9236]

And not all VLSs are the same, the Chinese cells are larger in diameter and longer in length than the US Navy's, plus one cell can hold four missiles if needed.

[@mi-fb4mp]

@snsproduc Yes, Chinese warships are rubbish and vulnerable

[@hjhghj462]

@snsproduc Tested what? through bullying small middle east countries without navy and air force and air defense nets and missiles just pretend tested?😏 China submarines are notoriously loud? Are you on site? Who told you? As early as 20 years ago, your people have been ceaseless saying that China is about to collapse.😂

[@georgedang449]

@snsproduc Historically, defense strategy that depends on your opponent's weaponry to not work as intended tend to lead to diseasterous outcomes. Unless it's a bluff to begin with, weapon systems work as intended, period. How soon an outside observer witnesses it, has no effect on the hardware itself.

[@drumsandlego]

Me reading the title: Those 2 local kirov class ships peeking around my shoulder:

[@EurasiaNaval]

Could do a comparison video at some point!

[@oklahoma1232]

Continual improvements will keep these warships competitive.

[@wuyou_]

As an objective Chinese person, I would say that there is still a significant gap between the Chinese Navy and the United States. However, that doesn't mean we will be bullied by the United States in our own backyard. On the contrary, we have confidence in delivering a strong blow to the U.S. Navy in our own waters. This is the Taiwan Strait, this is the South China Sea, not Hawaii, and certainly not the U.S. West Coast. That should be more than enough.

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

Your the one (China) trying to bully the American Navy constantly in international waters on a consistent basis what are you talking about? It's more like harassing though lol.

[@taurustrex5134]

I believed you should catch up and remove the Qing dynasty dragon background, the empire has been gone for more than 100 years!!!:) :) :)

[@乔·拜登-d6p]

爱新觉罗溥仪：什么？我大清亡了。

[@ahuon9946]

the Qing is gone, but the dragon will be around for a while ;)

[@aareview8258]

Seafaring capabilities? What about survivability against subs? Also crew experience. Has it even gone out of the island chains? Dosnt the US navy already have these capabilities? Sure it's great but has it done anything at all? Has it proved itself in any way? So many questions.

[@definitelyfrank9341]

Zumwalt hasn't proved itself in any way whatsoever yet is considered to be the best of its class, just like most western weapons.

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

Yep its a Chinese cruiser class ship using stuff the American cruiser have already have.

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

@@definitelyfrank9341 Zumwalt is a destroyer, the 055 is a cruiser same size and same armament as a cruiser which is bigger than a destroyer. So lets talk about Cruisers not destroyers which are a different smaller class to the 055. Trying to compare a bigger class ship to a smaller class ship to make it sound better just makes everyone look dumb who does it.

[@definitelyfrank9341]

@@michaelmichaelagnew8503 Zumwalt is bigger than Type-055, mate. Besides, size isn't the only class-determining factor. You don't call a small amphibious assault ship (~200 tons) a coastal patrol boat just because of the size similarities. U.S.N. determines the class of a ship based on how it'd be used, and they believe that Type-055 will function similarly to their Ticonderogas.

[@definitelyfrank9341]

@@michaelmichaelagnew8503 American cruisers lack stealth (in every aspect), powerful AESA radars, potent anti-ship weapons, and feature a lower level of automation and digitalization.

[@maolo76]

China can have 10 of these type 55 escort a carrier.

[@天动万象-i1m]

远远不够，会有更多更多

[@懂不懂-i3g]

已经都8了

[@BadwolfGamer]

Larger then a UK Type 45?

[@EurasiaNaval]

Yes

[@BadwolfGamer]

@@EurasiaNaval Royal Navy is going to have some problems then.

[@EurasiaNaval]

Perhaps, sir. It depends on what the royal navy wants to do...

[@primalmonitor2527]

It's even bigger than the Ticonderoga class cruiser :o

[@lingmg4ling256]

No Laser Gun?

[@williamquigley852]

Great video. But no, the PLA Navy has not grown 'exponentially' in recent years. That is not possible given the amount of effort required to design and build a ship. The PLA Navy has grown from 275 or so ships in 2010 to approximately 340 ships in 2021. That equates to 25% growth in ship count. Impressive but hardly exponential.

[@tvgerbil1984]

The net growth in tonnage is probably more significant than the growth in the number of ships, especially when major assets like aircraft carriers, amphibious assault ships, large destroyers are being built at high rates in recent times.

[@williamquigley852]

@@tvgerbil1984 Yes. But not exponential. If the growth in ship tonnage were growing at an annual exponential growth rate (200 -> 2,000 -> 20,000 -> 200,000) you can see how quickly there would be more ships than people on the planet.

[@sagiri-yui]

​@@williamquigley852Based on the fact that its navy was once weak, the Chinese government formulated a "small steps and quick steps" naval development strategy.

[@user-gong442]

Your questioning indicates that your head is filled with cow dung, like an Indian. Below, I will tell you that firstly, the United States defines the shape of the 055 destroyer as the shape of the next generation destroyer, and 2 has always played a backward role in missile convenience for the United States. As long as 055 is present, your carrier battle group cannot approach the 2000 kilometer range of 0550 at all. All your fighter jets are nothing, understand? A 055 can completely destroy an American aircraft carrier battle group at 2000 kilometers.

[@fafdus]

what can it do to submarines and what can submarines do to it?

[@moizmughal5363]

Comendable job for indept analysis,best wishes from Pakistan

[@EurasiaNaval]

Best wishes to you too, sir

[@乔·拜登-d6p]

055能不能给巴基斯坦打印度

[@jarodrussell8365]

​@@乔·拜登-d6p 054ap就够了

[@Absolut531kmh]

One of them is called Type 055 Renhai right

[@EurasiaNaval]

Actually, no. The class name Renhai is a NATO classification - like the Kilo class submarine. It is not the name of the lead ship. There is no Chinese DDG called Renhai, and China does not itself refer to the ship as the Renhai class

[@Absolut531kmh]

@@EurasiaNaval ahh ic

[@neocohen139]

@@Absolut531kmh all the Type 055 will be named after some large and important province ruled cities or the captial city of provinces

[@Absolut531kmh]

@@neocohen139 ye. Like lhasa for example

[@TheRealIronMan]

Awesome video as always, I still think Zumwalt-class is the most powerful destroyer on a 1 vs 1 basis, but it costs over $4.2b while Type 055 only costs $890m, I doubt Zumwalt can win a 1 vs 5 fight XD At the end of the day, all the speculations about weapons techs specs don't matter really, war all comes down to production and logistics, it just happens China has truly mastered such skills.

[@EurasiaNaval]

Thanks for the support, sir. The title 'most powerful warship' is always ambiguous - because most powerful in what way? It is useful only as a succinct and effective video title. I think it is hard to compare between the Type 055 and the Zumwalt class, because they are fundamentally designed for different missions. The Type 055 is built for air defence and surface warfare at sea. The Zumwalt is actually focused on land attack, including naval fire support. Its original gun was intended to fire 'long-range land attack projectiles' (before it got cancelled). Which ship is better depends on the job is, although as you say the cost factor provides a common benchmark for comparison (another may be stealth).

[@谭某人-b1v]

@@EurasiaNaval Chinese military fans generally look down on Zumwalt, this is not a warship used to fight against big powers. Everyone thinks that 055's opponent is Burke III. And, I would like to ask what do you think about the relationship between j20, f35, f22?

[@谭某人-b1v]

@@EurasiaNaval 对了，兄弟怎么看俄罗斯最近这段时间的军事打击行动。用苏34低空投掷非制导武器，导致战机被击毁，飞行员被俘。俄是真的穷的没法了还是怎么滴，这也太无语了😅。

[@EurasiaNaval]

The Zumwalt was designed during the unipolar moment when US naval power was unchallenged, and they did not foresee a rival navy emerging that can credibly challenge the USN for sea control. The priority then was to support littoral operations and strikes against land targets in areas where US land forces are engaged. Given that background, some of Zumwalt's design features make sense (e.g. medium range SAMs only), although not all (ridiculously expensive). As for the fighter aircraft, I honestly don't have a strong opinion. The PLAAF has produced only a relatively small number of J20s, so maybe they were not fully comfortable in the design. But with the latest domestic engines, and the fact that they were willing to share specifications of it with the Russian air force, it might suggest they are finally confident with the current version.

[@EurasiaNaval]

My impression is that the Russians wanted to test the strength of Ukrainian resistance, and see if they can achieve a quick victory. I've read a few articles suggesting Russia has not utilised most of its airpower, partly to minimise losses. The attack seemed very unexpected even by Russian troops, so they would not have time to prepare mentally for the operation, which would affect morale. Running down supplies while previous negotiations were ongoing didn't help. But I would also caution against believing everything in the western media on the difficulties the Russians are facing - there is clearly an information struggle to control the narrative. But let me know what you think! (sorry it is much easier for me to type in English, as I have lived outside of taiwan for too long)

[@fanyu-i3v]

I'm Chinese.do not worry.It's only a fishing boats.

[@alanxu537]

such a beautiful ship😀

[@EurasiaNaval]

It really is!

[@Music5362]

I think super destroyers are called cruisers?

[@岳岭]

The warship is beautiful！

[@kaspernielsen9149]

TWO DECADES of evolution... holy shit. I heard like "Two Dickheads of evolution" and I almost choked in my food hahah :D 0:15

[@asiftalpur3758]

Yeah I think Pakistan Navy needs to get a couple of these, probably on a massive discount because these things are stupid expensive

[@leesnow-yh1mq]

India: I refuse! I oppose!

[@gillgavin2886]

It's not expensive. It's great value

[@Das_Red]

been war before? if not i cant tell is it good or not

[@taiwan_sausage]

type 055 looks like a sterdy and beautiful castle

[@EurasiaNaval]

I'm from Taiwan too!

[@taiwan_sausage]

@@EurasiaNaval嗨嗨

[@Beta_Orionis318]

Definitely the most POWERFUL destroyer on earth. Love from Shanghai China🇨🇳👍

[@sctm81]

Very elegant looking destroyer.

[@michaelmichaelagnew8503]

Very elegant looking cruiser. There fixed it for you.

[@davidhyb1]

I heard that one Type 55 destroyer could take on the entire U.S. aircraft carrier fleet.

[@preplic]

rumor

[@davidhyb1]

@@preplic actuallly, that is the fact. it is hard to accept for Americans but it is the truth.

[@Shuzhou-no3tu]

可以做到同归于尽

[@theelitespinach465]

​@davidhyb1 yeah you if you think that it is that simple you're delusional, you better provide me with some hard evidence.

[@hectorwillie]

您的視頻非常客觀精彩，感謝。同為炎黃子孫，其實只要放下成見，大陸和台灣的海軍建設成就都是屬於全體中華兒女的。我平時用簡體字，為了表示對作者的尊敬，特意改成正體字，希望看到您更多的精彩的視頻，加油！

[@ar-pharazon.80]

他不是台灣人吧

[@CanonWong228]

不礼貌的回一句，我会写小篆😂

[@brianbassettnumber1]

*_“Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.”_*

[@古本澄]

カッコいい 最近の水上戦闘艦ではいちばん好きな艦

[@danapeck5382]

Thanks, good looking ship. I bet TR and Mahan would like it more than the Burkes. Personally, I think surface ships will be hard pressed to survive against drone swarms and submarines once their on board weapons loadouts are depleted and their support ships are gone

[@Chinese--food]

China is not a country that enjoys war. Its current military development aims to safeguard its territorial integrity and is not in conflict with the interests of other countries. China is currently one of the safest countries in the world. Some individuals want to separate Taiwan from China, which has led to Chinese warships and aircraft circling around Taiwan. Which country in the world would allow its territory to be split apart and controlled by another country?

[@mandyjerry-k5z]

油管的土鳖懂个屁，我们坚定自己的信念就行。

[@rebelliouslord7646]

Type55 is larger than teconderoga, so it is fit to called cruiser.

[@raymondtay3532]

Well done China most powerful 055D and powerful weapons. Built by China. 💪💪👍👍👏👏❤❤💯💯

[@jarodrussell8365]

055D is not exsist, but 055A is on schedule

[@shaung8182]

What about the type 26?? Royal navy??