China's Type055 Destroyer Ship Brief

[@EWP-i8t]

The scariest part everyone hasn’t realized is that the Chinese had the capability to time travel 10+ years to steal the design for DDG(X).

[@avr8844]

Just wait until everyone realises penguins have had time travel down for close to 25 years now. Chinese shminese. It's the penguins we should be worried about

[@lluc9946]

“Eagle Strike” actually means “strike down like an eagle”. It was derived from Mao’s famous poem “Eagle strike from mighty sky”. Mao himself borrowed from ancient Chinese poem which is very elegant and romantic. Sorry Bro, this name is not for anti-America metaphor.😂 20:10

[@比强]

@@lluc9946 鹰击长空，中国人都知道这个词🙏

[@cheungchingtong]

Not everything is America-related, hope them realize it soon enough. lol

[@siroyiryuu]

@@cheungchingtong Most overweight Americans are narcissists, LOL

[@picardtseng]

"Eagle Strike" is the word-to-word translation of "Ying Ji"(鷹擊), which is common prefix for Chinese anti-ship missile designation. And "YJ" is the abbreviation of" "Ying Ji", apparently. You got "Eagle Strike 62"(YJ62), "Eagle Strike 8"(YJ8), "Eagle Strike 83"(YJ83), "Eagle Strike 12"(YJ12) and "Eagle Strike 18"(YJ18)

[@gelinrefira]

@@cheungchingtong Yup, USdefaultism.

[@luihinwai1]

This is very typical of American review of Chinese military equipment. "We don't really know enough about them, but they are not as good as ours"

[@andresmartinezramos7513]

It's one of the few terrible things about this channel. The hubris and arrogance often detracts from what otherwise would be fantastic content.

[@Ravege98]

Hi China.

[@YoY664]

"we don't know enough to say for sure that its not as good." 0:33. I understand your sentiment. But you are being disingenuous.

[@Mr.mysterious76]

@@luihinwai1 China builds it's own space station, has a robot in mars, moon, Build's all kinds of satellites. That tells me all i need to know about China's technological ability. Arrogant westerners are stuck in the past

[@NASWOG]

@@Mr.mysterious76temu sucks

[@svenottke2073]

What a beautiful ship!

[@oglordbrandon]

Maybe the US can buy some of these from China since it can't seem to figure out how to make a frigate.

[@The_Seeker]

The U.S. probably will at some point start buying warships from South Korea and Japan. China's total shipbuilding output is ~1500 times that of America. If there should ever actually be a Sino-American war and that industry is turned towards warship production, then the U.S. would have no hope of matching Chinese warship production whatsoever, without Japanese and Korean help.

[@khnelli4918]

All we'd need to to do is Nationalise a few shipyards, with the right investments we could be very quickly back to making 10-15 ships per year. Of course Congress has to find that money somewhere, and then they have to agree on it as well. Maybe outsource Frigate Production to Korea or Japan so we can focus on Destroyers and up?

[@EthanX1ao]

@@khnelli4918 Do you really think put your warship building capablility within Chinese and even North Korean missile range is a good idea?

[@josephahner3031]

​@@khnelli4918you think the US government knows how to run a shipyard? The reason why the Constellation class is so messed up is because the Navy keeps changing the requirements. The Constellation class was supposed to be an off the shelf design with some American systems integrated. It has become 80% US Navy good idea fairy and only 20% off the shelf FREMM.

[@Chounubis]

Do you seriously think a nation of multi-gender redditors and taco home depot gangs who jumped a fence are capable of building anything? Nationalize all you want. 4 years of missing recruitment numbers + a widespread disgust with the Mossad/Jeffy Eppy owned gov. is only going to lead to a national azzwhooping handed by the Chinese.

[@EWP-i8t]

I think the PLA always appreciates influencers like this channel for spreading info to underestimate them.

[@treeinafield5022]

absolutely

[@turtlesoup8134]

well these youtubers need to food on the table too. its infotainment not real info.

[@paulshang7270]

@@EWP-i8t 战忽局藏不住了

[@xbbypg]

@@EWP-i8t 是的，我希望这样的声音越来越多

[@GoriusBungo]

100%.

[@bobbyr8071]

I don’t know how practical it is to assume that Chinese can’t operate the equipment correctly that they have built. Never underestimate your opponent 🤔🤔

[@andrew6815]

This happens repeatedly with industrializing countries. It always starts with "they make junk" and it's usually true but also always self corrects. The Chinese case seems particularly absurd though. This was the center of advanced technology, manufacturing, military technology and tactics for millenia (understanding why that situation stopped when it did would go a long way to understanding modern Chinese politics). It's very strange

[@cbhlde]

Don't worry; the Russians were running out of missiles two years ago, so we have to take Western intelligence/assumptions very seriously! :)

[@Notme012]

Well we did overestimate Russia so who knows.

[@andrew6815]

@@Notme012 did we? What makes you say that? Present your case

[@tomprice5496]

He didn't say anything about China misoperating equipment, only you did. Why do you think that Chinese sailors can't operate their equipment correctly??? Seems like kind of a derrogatory thing to say about Chinese people...

[@Dinglesmckringles]

This ship doesn't need much range to accomplish China's goals in the Pacific

[@GrahamCStrouse]

Exactly.

[@ThePadadada]

thats the Point NATO ships have the long ranges to Defend NATO worldwide so much for defensive alliance...

[@Dinglesmckringles]

@@ThePadadada don't hate-o on NATO

[@ThePadadada]

@@Dinglesmckringles i have nothing against the original goal of nato but they since eclipsed that

[@scottelaurant9747]

In this respect PLAN has the same advantage as WWI German High Seas Fleet. By only designing for short range PLAN ships can carry more weapons and systems on a given hull size. To me this is logic (design ship around CONOPS) not inefficiency.

[@henryorcustus3412]

This channel is so US-biased that really detracts from the effort of making a 30 minute video. There are a lot of wrong information (e.g. engine, helicopter, VLS, missiles etc) coupled with personal opinions based on those incorrect info. I guess this channel primarily caters to the US audience so they feel comfortable in the echo chamber. There will be a rude awakening if there is ever a conflict breaking out between China and US.

[@siroyiryuu]

Excellent people can perceive the strengths of their enemies and their own weaknesses. A mediocre person always thinks they are excellent and is enthusiastic about accusing others of having the "shortcomings" they have fabricated. The United States today is a country controlled by a group of self proclaimed mediocre individuals who have not received a good education, and you cannot correct them. In the end, they will only drown in the illusion of 'America First'. Let us pray that the next generation of Americans will be more pragmatic, knowledgeable and intelligent.

[@ashvandal5697]

I actually almost never watch this channel as an American because the comment section is entirely commieboos larping over Wikipedia stat blocks.

[@tttt-ni3mr]

All information are correct.

[@phil-jo8px]

Based on who you're subscribed to I'd say you have a pro-china bias.

[@nvelsen1975]

@@tttt-ni3mr Are they? Is it true that a Ticonderoga class is superior to something he doesn't understand at all? And yes that's a sarcastic question, I know the answer to that is "Sub Brief drinks the Newsmax-Russia Today Koolaid at times".

[@siroyiryuu]

To be honest, any content related to China on this channel is usually a joke that can be treated as a 20 minute humorous comedy, watched with popcorn and beer.

[@Gongolongo]

True but good on this guy for trying! A lot of wrong info but it's hard as a Westerner.

[@stingerrgb2754]

Same thing about Russia, this guy is so biased that it's just funny at this point.

[@mirage2154]

As a Chinese, I would like to add something about the range and speed of the vessel. As you were saying that is a weakness. But I think it's the intended design as it is a defensive vessel. As for us Chinese, the long-range vessels are useless as we do not need to sail anywhere outside of our border. So the type 55 will always be close enough to our shore and that is its intended theatre of battle. What the Chinese need is a vessel that is cheap, and easy to build and replace. The same reason we are not building nuclear-powered carriers is because it accomplished nothing. Type 55 is the best vessel for our needs, in my opinion, it has a versatile and powerful missile system and great sensor system that is never intended to go far without resupply. It's a mobile defence platform.

[@YoY664]

"As for us Chinese, the long-range vessels are useless as we do not need to sail anywhere outside of our border" This is a flawed and short sighted assessment. The US Navy isnt going to come to your doorsteps where you have home ground advantage to fight you where you stand, Plus US Navy is not China's only adversary(though not as formidable the Indian Air force and Indian Navy create their own challenges). USN is a blue water navy and despite their current challenges wrt production and repairs, America is rich enough to spin up a couple of new production sites in two or three decades. If conflict with US is on the minds of Chinese officials then they would have to consider one of the hardest to match advantages that the US Navy possesses, its long range naval assets. China's reliance on foreign inputs for sustaining its economy and its people means Chinese Navy's mandate cannot be confined to coastal defense. US doesnt have to worry about that, Americans built their blue water navy first to fight the Japanese and Germans, then to fight the Soviets, It was never intended defend shipping lanes that fed American citizens or American industry. Neither American Industry nor American citizens rely on import of basic commodities, what reliance there is, is a product of economic disadvantage in the presence of a more cost effective alternative not absence of resource(food, energy, metals, minerals).

[@stingerrgb2754]

@@YoY664 Stop repeating CNN, and open your eyes.

[@EZ-rs5zv]

There is a very good reason why Chinese ships do not emphasize range and fuel efficiency or nuclear power: China's objective is to overcome US domination of the first island chain, i.e. their front yard. Global domination is not on their plate, at least not yet. Since they assume they will be fighting the US close to home they don't need range. The US should really think twice about getting into a shooting war with China since 1) it will likely go nuclear 2) Russia won't sit silently while their neighbor is attacked by their worst enemy, 3) Asia is a long way away (remember Korea and Vietnam?) and the US will be bringing battle to China. I really wish the US had a President with diplomatic skills who could work out a peaceful coexistence with China and Russia.

[@andreahighsides7756]

USA wants it to go nuclear, it’s the only way that we can retain our spot as the dominant world economic power. Sad times

[@GrahamCStrouse]

I agree that we don’t want to get into an attritional war in China’s backyard. I disagree with your presumption that it will go nuclear. Also Russia might not sit on the sidelines in a conflict like this but they ain’t besties with China.

[@tomriley5790]

Well the US isn't in a war with China and Russia so you do have a President who has managed that.

[@xuansu9036]

@@tomriley5790what the US presidents have managed is not push US into a war with China YET, and it not through lack of trying either. If it’s Russia in China’s place, war would have started already.

[@bolu7971]

智慧

[@Fedaykin24]

The whole section about the gas turbines used by the Type 055 is wrong and needs correction. The GT25000-derived QC-280 is not a development of the American GE LM2500. The GT25000 is a wholly Ukrainian design and is completely different from the LM2500 in configuration and size. I believe what has confused you is the similar designation and the fact that China used the LM2500 on the original two 052 Destroyers Qingdao and Harbin. The arms ban due to the Tiananmen square massacre stopped the supply of more LM2500 to China forcing a switch to the Ukrainian Soviet era design the GT25000.

[@JvmCassandra]

@@Fedaykin24 the propulsion system was indeed of Ukrainian origin. Ukrainian Motor Sich Joint Stock Company was the premier ship and aircraft propulsion systems manufacturer during the Soviet era. Chinese Skyrizon bought 41% of the shares, later tried to acquire the whole company. However, this didn’t come to fruition due to external pressures from a third party. The current Ukrainian administration forcibly tried to re-nationalize the company. Like you said, the propulsion system was of Ukrainian Origin and not a reverse engineered model.

[@nathanzylla4961]

@Fed thank you you

[@sampanyofella5832]

I think what this comment shows is how damn good this community + Aaron himself is. Hopefully the video will be edited in due course but it's brilliant (as always) besides this ;)

[@ChristianSamsel]

The 150MW can also be misleading. It's for all 4 turbines combined

[@Flightman453]

This Sub Brief guy is always poor on China-related topics.

[@moss550]

This is the first time I see someone confusing the HQ10 with the HQ7. The size difference between the TY90 helicopter AAM based HQ10, and the Sea Crotale based HQ7 is huge. HQ7 was the primary SAM for PLAN in the 90s and long obsolete. Only the two old 052 still carries them, with other ships replacing those with either HQ10 or HQ16 after refit.

[@tonykriss1594]

He probably just googled it and didn't even finish reading the wikipedia page.

[@tttt-ni3mr]

That's FL-3000N point defence missile system housing HQ-10 SAMs

[@moss550]

@@tttt-ni3mr FYI, FL3000N is the missile in HQ10, it was developed from TY90, which was a blank sheet design and the only purpose designed helicopter AAM in the world. It's intermediate size between MANPADS and fighter sized missile. Every other nations either went with MANPADS (e.g. Stingers) or fighter IR missiles (e.g. Sidewinder) for helicopter air to air.

[@YSKWatch]

after the 12th, they'll build the version 2 of type 055.

[@TheKkpop1]

Hmmm, we know little about 055 but we know its weakness and limited capabilities...bla..bla..😅

[@iraviya]

The materials science that goes into turbine blades is incredible stuff. Some of the most advanced metallurgy you'll ever see.

[@jonssonnicolas]

@@iraviya i can imagine, must be very precise.

[@MarkGriesemer]

I work at scrap yard where we get material from a turbine manufacturer, lots of exotic, proprietary and even custom one off alloys.

[@AZ-hj8ym]

And it's not that difficult for China now. These was old stories. Things changed rapidly .😊

[@iraviya]

@@AZ-hj8ym Investing in industry and infrastructure pays off. China seems to be pretty good at that. Not to mention how many engineers they've probably got working on just that one problem.

[@ryanhuang3875]

@@AZ-hj8ym it's still difficult, multiple engines r&d have been pushed back again and again.

[@eymeeraosaka2954]

If the Ticonderoga class destroyer is so good why decommission? The Ticonderoga was first deployed in the 1980s while the Type 55 in 2020 but because the Type 55 is Chinese made, it is not as good at the Ticonderoga class destroyer. Yes I agree!

[@sidharthcs2110]

They are old . Probably reached the limit of upgradation the design would allow.

[@chongzhouliu7893]

like my huawei mate60 not as good as motorola v3🥱

[@MrGtubedude]

@@sidharthcs2110yes this is correct. The Ticonderoga was built on a Spruance class destroyer hull if I’m not mistaken. So it is very limited with upgradability

[@MrGtubedude]

He also said in the same sentence that it’s as good as the flight 2 Arleigh Burke, which is a much newer ship than the Ticon. Did you miss him saying that??

[@eymeeraosaka2954]

@@MrGtubedude Didn't you hear him said the Type 055 is not as good as the Ticonderoga in the opening sentence?

[@boxtears]

Seems really disingenuous to say the USN has a 70:8 advantage over the PLAN, as if the PLAN doesn't have scores of Type 052D/052DL destroyers. Are we just going to assume that in the event of war (such as over Taiwan), those won't factor in at all? Not to mention all the Type 054 frigates and frigate variants. What kind of channel is this?

[@erwinlee2842]

USA exceptionalism. Or maybe... USA patriotic. Don't be surprised.

[@longhei6323]

立场决定了倾向，尤其很多内容都是西方媒体提供的，所以你认为其中有多少内容是真实和客观的

[@Ottovonostbahnhof]

this is a neo-con channel, these guys get bullied daily by their liberals and seeking comfort on internet.

[@orzdxy]

why do so many people have such an outdated look on any Chinese industry in terms of quality... I mean they did change a lot but the impression seems tp be stuck pre 21st century

[@Flightman453]

Because propaganda and ignorance. They are just repeating what they are told and what they should believe when in reality the facts are right there. They can keep believing it, but unfortunately for them now, China doesn't care or even hears what they're saying, and they just keep working, improving, and growing. I still see a lot of people spewing 90s and 2000s era takes about China even though it died as a stereotype long ago. It's also just racism.

[@zomgneedaname]

people believe what they want to believe to make themselves feel better

[@美利坚人类的灯塔]

If they dont keep saying that what you expect them to say? Say China is much ahead of the WEST?

[@Jeff55369]

Why do so many people view Chinese products as low quality? Because every time westerners buy Chinese products, those products fall apart. Clearly, military equipment China builds for itself is going to be held to a higher standard than the garbage china exports, but the everyday product people interact with is not a quality experience.

[@gibbo_303]

hope we never have to fight this

[@alexnderrrthewoke4479]

If you didn't know ww3 has started

[@ktm8848]

Arguably not as good as the ticonderoga 😂😂 i'm just quitting this video After just 30 seconds because what follows is nothing but BS

[@nangongyiyun]

The 055 is far more powerful than the Ticonderoga class, both in terms of weapon delivery capabilities and reconnaissance capabilities, not to mention it has the latest computer and radar satellite integrated communications system. It's the equivalent of the latest smart phones versus the phones of the 1990s.

[@blazinchalice]

I appreciate the depth of research and overall candor of this presentation. Awesome work, thanks.

[@APDM_Analysis]

Type 055 is not limited to 30 knots. It's at least 30 knots. Same with the endurance. 5000nm was just a number produced by a few sources. Chinese originally reported 7000nm. It also has. six QD-50 turbines for installed power.

[@picardtseng]

Type 055 indeed served similar role as Ticonderoga class cruiser in PLAN carrier group, the center of the aircraft carrier group AAW

[@howardkong8927]

It feels more like a blend of a Tico and a Slava. Air defense, but also big anti ship missiles.

[@Darkestdarkify]

I love that the PLAN is the not just the PLN lol. Appreciate the video.

[@HolyNorthAmericanEmpire]

Arguably the only real rivals for the flight III Arleigh-Burkes. Mighty impressive ships.

[@lagrangewei]

we will see if the japanese build their 20000ton "battleship". =] but ya, US, China and Japan has the 3 most modern warship today.

[@johnsilver9338]

Their is still SK's Sehjong class which even have more VLS than Type 055

[@Phantom-bh5ru]

@@johnsilver9338 yes however those VLS are much smaller than that on the type 055

[@johnsilver9338]

@@Phantom-bh5ru Chinese/Russian missiles are larger to do the same thing American/NATO missiles do. Also Sehjong has additional K-VLS which are larger than Mk 41 VLS and can accomodate larger ballistic missiles.

[@Phantom-bh5ru]

@@johnsilver9338 bruh. Chinese missiles are larger because they can travel further than western missiles.

[@bigsarge2085]

Interesting as always, thank you!

[@kentony7672]

10G+ terminal maneuver Subsonic missiles like nsm or rbs15 are also hard targets for shipborne short range defense especially their trajectories could be more difficult to calculate. Supersonic trajectories are easier for fire control system to predict.

[@karloftinker2832]

Always informative and entertaining. Well done, enjoyable to watch.

[@WildBillCox13]

Interesting stuff, Aaron.

[@lagrangewei]

12 knot is estimation by Janes, it is not the official numbers. given the powerplant configuration, its crusing speed is likely comparible to US Burke. it may not have the range of an Ticonderoga, but China doesn't have deep overseas interest like US. matching the Burke is more than enough for their defence requirement. US build it warship to attack other countries, China build it warship to defend itself. also the gap isn't as big as you claim, the engine older Burke use has an efficiency rate of 37%, the while the one in Burke III has an efficiency rate of 39%. that's really only a 6.5% gap, and the 7th ship is likely to received improved version so the gap really isn't that great, rather the weight of the engine is probably the gap they need to close. there is a reason why 055 is so big, its engines isn't as lightweight. China does have one advantage, its air defence missile can be directed by phase array. USN abandon this for it Burke III as it didn't want to stock up on 2 type of missiles. as for ballistic missile defence, i do not believe they have a missile in the current 055 for that, as pointed out in the video, the ship has the equipment to direct ballistic missile defence, but the ship is not equiped with those missile, kinda like how UK warship didn't have antiship missiles for years... this ability does not seem to be a focus for China like it is for Japan, the ship will have this ability, but I don't think it will be demostrated soon, with only 8 ship in class there are more important things for these ship to do than catch ballistic missile. Z20F is based on blackhawk helicopter that US sold to China for SAR. with notable design changes to improvement in payload in high altitude, which is achieve by adding a 5th blade. so you can easily tell the chinese and american helicopter apart by looking at the number of blade it has. why China has a focus on lift power is to address the problem that existing helicopter they had, has difficulty performing in Tibet where the high altitude eat into the useful payload of helicopter. this change end up being quite useful for naval operation as Z20 was adopted as the standard helicopter... honestly, I don't think they will use this for anti sub, it capability is mostly there for self and fleet defence. they are building like 40 frigate for sub hunting.

[@defencebangladesh4068]

Thank you

[@timothychung4811]

30 knots to my memory from another blog

[@moquant947]

🤫

[@andrean2247]

Shut up ! Let them guess.

[@Lalramkumhlunsitlhou25300]

How western media underestimate anything comming from Asia n Africa ...

[@Jojo44_Racing]

To think it is not good as the tyconda is just crazy! this is one of the most modern ships in the world with state of the art tech!

[@jimwsh1]

made in China, tofu quality

[@greedyinvader9462]

@@jimwsh1 yes, just like u.s submarine crash with the rock in the bottom of the sea, and the F35 turn to be submarine

[@mikael5938]

best destroyer in world

[@picardtseng]

Yu-8 is mainly deployed on Type 054A/B frigates.

[@你看个锤子你看]

Ticonderoga is too old. 055 integrated radio frequency large active phased array dual-band radar. Similar to 055 is the Arleigh Burke 3

[@kxttd6870]

Is 30 years old Ticonderoga better than 055? So why don't you keep Ticonderoga? The US is so good at making its imagery enemies, as well as bluffing its power and puppy allies!

[@dsong2006]

The propulsion being inferior to a Ticonderoga makes sense to me. However, everything else, especially the main radar of the Type 055 is a generation a head of the Ticos being a AESA radar instead of a PESA radar. Also the primary anti ship missile YJ-18A/YJ-21 is like 30 years newer than the Harpoons on Ticonderoga so I'm curious how you arrived at the conclusion that the Type 055 is overall not as good inferior.

[@definitelyfrank9341]

It's just cope from him. The US Navy has been trying to decommission their cruisers for years, but congress wont allow them due to the billions already spent on their 'upgrades'.

[@Bean-Time]

Hmmm... The slide theme looks familiar (at least at 1:08) Half expecting some visually confirmed loss data and economic evaluation

[@Scottagram]

Every ship needs maintenance, so a group of Type 55 destroyers will rotated through service. The technical term used by the JSDF for this is "Renhai Circulation"

[@paulantony4598]

The type 52D & 55 are pretty good looking ships with a lot of punch...

[@richwen8769]

when compare destroyer strength of both countries , there is also 30+ Type052C/D/DE, and type 052DE and type 055 are still under construction, there will be more to come

[@randyross5630]

2:32 so we saying Point Defense now for Naval Vessels and the sort instead of Close Combat? It makes more sense to just say Point Defense, or was I confused, because I am pretty sure Close Combat Guns was what was being said instead of Point Defense X amount ago?

[@jintsuubest9331]

Point defense is a relative term. Patriot is a point defense system when dealing with hgv and hcm.

[@Michael-c9f5m]

all naval personnel are graduate and phd from university, so saying they are uneducated farmers just show how much BS is in this video.

[@Jeff55369]

He didn't say that. He said they could take an uneducated farmer and make him an ewar specialist, due to how advanced the system is.

[@definitelyfrank9341]

'It's probably not as good as the Ticonderoga' The U.S.N. says otherwise, mate. They want those shitty ships decommissioned ASAP.

[@gelinrefira]

Chinese version of GPS, FFS it's called BeiDou and this is supposedly a semi-pro military channel? It's literally a system that is BETTER than the GPS, more accurate, more survivable and far stronger signal that is more jam resistance.

[@佯谬]

太先进了 送给美国人估计没人会驾驶这样的舰艇。

[@havocrein]

Too much false info there, the efficiency of the chinese Q280 engine at 36% is one of the highest you can find anywhere, the newest American LM2500 version only have an efficiency of 37%.

[@clmk28]

I hate when they call cruisers destroyers. I hope we go back to the days when we distinguish between the two classes.

[@cariopuppetmaster]

It might by for political reasons since cruiser implies offensive capabilities in Chinese while destroyers implie purely defensive.

[@Jeff55369]

@@cariopuppetmaster could also be a reference to the range limitation SB mentioned, assuming those statistics are true.

[@你看个锤子你看]

1. There are several errors in your video. First, according to the data of 052D, the range of Yj18A is 600KM, not 540. 2. Except for the Burke 3 series, the other Arleigh Burke destroyers are Spy1D, and the radar cannot be stronger than 346BAESA. 3. Moreover, HHQ9 and HHQ9B are different. The former has an interception slant range of only 125KM, while the latter has a range of 250-260KM. The SM6 missile is only superior to the HHQ9B in terms of firing height and speed. If it is used for interception slant range, the two are almost the same. The latter is an active radar guidance, not a semi-active one (these are all public information)

[@jacobsmith1105]

I know China 🇨🇳 and America 🇺🇸 do not see eye 👁 to eye 👁 but this Warship is so cool good job 👍 China 🇨🇳

[@corvanphoenix]

These are very impressive ships, no doubt. We'll see what sorts of deployments they can manage logistically. If they have no logistical issues, COGAG will still get a good way out.

[@chfanzaguo]

you don’t know the parameters these are top secrets

[@entertexthere1127]

Why does all warship now look the same. Just look at every new warship corvette, frigate and destroyers. Even the so alled 5th gen fighter jets they all the same.

[@picardtseng]

"Eagle Strike" is the word-to-word translation of "Ying Ji"(鷹擊), which is common prefix for Chinese anti-ship missile designation. And "YJ" stands for" "Ying Ji", apparently. You got "Eagle Strike 62"(YJ62), "Eagle Strike 8"(YJ8), "Eagle Strike 83"(YJ83), "Eagle Strike 12"(YJ12) and "Eagle Strike 18"(YJ18)

[@honfmeilingfleet957]

most Modern Warships players using that Destroyer and its very good

[@ShlomoTenembaum]

AEGIS is the combat management system, not the radar.

[@shilongtang549]

In the next 18 months, China will have total 16 Type 055 destroyers. We are no longer discussing how many Type 052D destroyers ，054 Frigate there are.

[@Zamiroh]

Always very informative brief. I'm sure a lot goes into getting all this information together. Thanks.

[@picardtseng]

Not sure the endurance statistics of Type 055 came from (wiki said 5000nm/12kt ) . Most public information indicated Arleigh Burke class has a range of 4400nm/20kt, which is already inferior to Ticonderoga class cruiser (6000/20kt). Apart from the fuel efficiency of the main engines, another key factor is the hull shape; the "thinner" hull has lower drag and better fuel efficiency. Arleigh Burke's length-to-beam ratios is about 7.7 (154m x 20m), Suprisingly, the ratio of Type 055 is (180m x 23, about 7.82), which means Type 055 didn't take much advantage there. Considering the (alleged) lower efficiency of Chinese QC280 gas turbine, the range performance (without refueling) of Type 055 is not likely to exceed Arleigh Burke.

[@gelinrefira]

A lot of alleged information and wishful thinking in this video.

[@GlenCychosz]

At mach 3 at sea level it takes 30 seconds to travel 19 miles.

[@mikael5938]

so shooting like 5 missles american Ciws cant hit all ?

[@k53847]

@@mikael5938 It's likely to be a bad day. Breaking up a mach 3 missile a km out does not mean that you won't get a few tons of burning junk hitting you still going very fast.

[@artruisjoew5473]

@@mikael5938 you are assuming that Aegis cannot target multiple missiles simultaneously like the russian systems. well, it can. CIWS is never the primary defense anyway, CIWS is your last option. in fact most navies have been phasing out CIWS with RAM as point defense until the pirate/small craft problem resurfaced again in recent years.

[@lagrangewei]

​@@mikael5938 that what the RIMS are for.. there is no way Phalanx can deal with many missiles, it doesn't have the ammo, it intended to be use only if all its missiles fails.

[@gelinrefira]

@@mikael5938 Phalanx can't really intercept high supersonic missiles. Even RIM will have problems.

[@GSteel-rh9iu]

What the US lacks is shipyard capacity and productivity; we messed up building a basic frigate and can't churn out 4 Burkes a year.

[@SilverforceX]

Underestimating your enemy is how Russia after 3 years is still not weakened or defeated despite massive NATO spending & weapons into the proxy Ukraine. Do not make that mistake vs China.

[@ashvandal5697]

“Massive NATO spending” 😂😂😂😂 3 day operation taking 3 years. How much longer before Putin takes his internet trolls and puts them on the front line? Need more meat for the front.

[@gelinrefira]

@@ashvandal5697 It's bankrupting NATO countries so yea, it is massive.

[@ashvandal5697]

@@gelinrefira nope lol

[@tgsgardenmaintenance4627]

Is there any particular reason why the Chinese are pecieved to be years behind the west in technology?

[@xuansu9036]

Inertia in thinking

[@Wvk5zc]

just the usual subjective US good China bad thingy. Infact Type-055 managed to defeat US EG-18G growler in small EW back in december last year

[@sumailagodswill1426]

The us cruiser is no match the for this destroyer face the fact stop lying that old u.s cruiser can face this new model destroyer

[@Naylamp21]

Chinese weapon systems have been improving last 25 years. I see they are still going on.

[@supernodream]

21:05, the guy appears to be unconfident to say "Agis can ________________ , can shoot this (Yj21) down "

[@lyin4rmu]

it's arguably better than the Ticonderoga

[@magnusred2945]

@@lyin4rmu of course it's better it's 40+ years newer lol

[@josephahner3031]

Idk about that. The Tico is a little old but she still packs a lot of whoopass in those old bones.

[@moss550]

If it weren't better, USN won't be rushing the DDG(X) to respond to this. Look at the concept CGI of the DDG(X), it even copied the 055's distinctive beak.

[@HolyNorthAmericanEmpire]

​@@moss550That's just stealth design in ships. The german F126 frigate has a similar design, the russian Admiral Gorshkovs frigates also have a similar design, so do the Shkval DDGN concepts.

[@GrahamCStrouse]

@@moss550Problem is we’re not rushing it. US systems procurement is glacially slow.

[@mattbrown817]

As usual I appreciate the detail and depth of your talks and capabilities and limitations of the various weapon systems.

[@ulaanbataar4479]

Greetings from Italy! On an Italian specialized magazine there was a lot of skepticism about the ability of HGVs to hit moving targets (unless It decelerates a lot in terminal) because the plasma generated by the friction of the missile would impair any radar/IR guidance systems. Any thoughts?

[@EthanX1ao]

This was a true problem for China like 15 years ago, but if you kept an eye on some major Chinese science and technology journals you'll find like 3000 papers per year trying to solve it and now they are talking about guidance over 20 Mach

[@ulaanbataar4479]

@@EthanX1ao thank you

[@mikael5938]

​@@EthanX1aoI guess this tech is their best bet to counter us carriers so they pump resources at it?

[@BRAHMOSPOWER]

I think rather than using Radar/IR Guidance it's better to use Inertial navigation system (INS) because it can guide missile on it's own without any external guidance.

[@EthanX1ao]

@@BRAHMOSPOWER bro inertial navigation is out of the question we're talking about seeking and tracking targets moving at 30 knots

[@trevorstein4603]

Really missed a Golden opportunity calling it "Dragoneye"...

[@mikestewart4752]

Paper-Dragoneye™️

[@stevensutton2252]

Will dragons have two eyes but what about a third eye at the end

[@6haha]

Be respectful, it is a shity name by NATO. The real name is "Star of the Sea" 海之星

[@mikestewart4752]

@@6haha More like “Pile at the BOTTOM of the sea” 🤦

[@6haha]

@@mikestewart4752 look what you say. People like you without education would be so rude and disrespectful. The US naval ships are just like 60 year old men that are full of rust and can't be erected anymore. Just like you 😂. Only can blablabla with your mouth

[@zlm001]

Thanks.

[@新竹主体一般兵]

Save the flow. Sub Brief : Ticonderoga is better than 055

[@tomdarco2223]

Right On Go Army!

[@the80386]

Are you sure the gas turbine is based on a USA design? The information I found says it's a ukrainian (soviet) design. I'm not aware of any US made 'GT2500' gas turbines - are you referring to the 'LM2500' by any chance? You also mention that the FL-3000 is a 'complete ripoff' of a french 'corley'? system. Which system are you talking about? Are you talking about the 'Crotale' by any chance? If so, this is definitely not a ripoff - they're totally different designs.

[@VersusARCH]

@ Sub Brief During your career as a USN submariner, have you ever encountered any of the Yugoslav Sava-class diesel-electric submarines and will you produce a video about them someday?

[@kenoliver8913]

Settling for a simple, very powerful but fuel inefficient drive system is common sense for the Chinese. They have no naval interests to speak of outside the SCS; short range is just not a big problem for them where it certainly would be for the USN.

[@jonathantarrant2449]

The type55 flt2 are larger, and more of a command ship cruiser. These will probably be used along side the carriers cv 16 17 18 etc

[@lagrangewei]

i really doubt it.

[@jonssonnicolas]

I love your objective analasys of modern militsry equipment!

[@EthanX1ao]

055都不如在退役的提康德罗加了，那你们一定已经开始下水比提康德罗加更好的船了吧？🤣

[@DanielBarnes-d7p]

This is the best Naval channel on KZbin. Thank you for keeping it professional and foregoing all the music and other distractions seen on other channels.

[@cbhlde]

Maybe that ship hasn't that range because they do not need it? :)

[@noahlagoe1704]

@@cbhlde I think it’s pretty apparent that China’s policy of power projection, e.g. their bases in Africa, refutes this

[@andrew6815]

@@noahlagoe1704 *base

[@michaelferriss4594]

​@@noahlagoe1704 however a conflict with the USA is likely to take place in the south China sea, the striats of Malacca and parts of the Indian ocean. Even in WW2 Japan was not a true global navy yet it held its own the Pacific theatre for some time. In my opinion China is a paper tiger, they are dependant on imports and fragile supply chains.

[@MultiNacnud]

Staying within the range of land based missiles and aircraft seems to be the plan.

[@BRAHMOSPOWER]

​@@michaelferriss4594yes you're right..... almost 80% of Chinese import export Cargo passes through strait of Malacca. Indian Navy controls the strait of Malacca through Andaman and Nicobar Islands where the only Tri-service command of Indian armed forces are deployed. Andaman and Nicobar islands are unsinkable Aircraft carrier of India against Chinese Navy. India and USA has intelligence sharing agreement to keep close watch on Chinese Navy in Indian Ocean region.

[@CheeSeng-c7o]

Do not assume that they do not have DF17 type of nuke warheads on these..... which makes a strike from Bering to New York under 12 minutes. That is the deterance factor

[@ashvandal5697]

Hi I’m new here. Are the Chinese trolls also trying to bluff their way with nukes too like the Russian trolls? We also have a bunch of nukes. More than enough to spare for all your cities. I like to remind people since you all seem to forget this little fact. You want to play that game, you can cease to exist too. China also has a stated no first use policy. And while I have little faith in that doctrine, bluffing about it doesn’t do you any good.

[@RichardsMiscCorner]

Good overview of the type 055. one thing that you didn't mention about the YJ18 is that it doesn't even have to strike the target - it's sea-skimming at mach 3, and even if you shoot it down, there's a good likelihood it's going to inflict a significant amount of damage to the ship.

[@GrahamCStrouse]

China’s weapons layout is quite well thought-out. They basically standardized everything around a modular VLS system. They don’t waste any deck space with this ship.

[@zhli4238]

If this Type-055 will be used for carrier fleet defense, then its engines must be improved for speed and range. China will built a nuclear powered carrier after Fujian.

[@nangongyiyun]

055 will be the main attack force of the fleet, used to destroy the enemy fleet capital ships, aircraft carriers and other frigates will be the air defense and anti-submarine force of 055 only.

[@jeraldleung6009]

Nowadays, warships have no need to be fast because they can not outrun jets and missile, so defense in radar and stealth. Once face to face, speed of the ships are not important

[@nangongyiyun]

All the anti-ship weapons that the US Navy has are a few subsonic anti-ship missiles of 300-400 km. These ships can't even get close to 055.

[@kevinmills3329]

White coloured warships make me blush😊

[@araynortassadore3056]

I thought this was classed as a cruiser by the PLAN?

[@Galileo1491]

It kinda makes the Tico look generic in comparison just from looking at the two.

[@ranx9078]

Out source shipping building to China. They build better and cheaper. Love the way author feels about little uneasy to talk about it but have to put is down as not as advanced as American ones. lol.. it’s a tough job.

[@alexnderrrthewoke4479]

No its called bias arrogance. Admit your faults and never underestimate your enemy. You americans have a bad habit of doing that.

[@koffeekage]

We should have kept R&D of Nuclear Cruisers.

[@randyross5630]

Yeah, in theory, but in Practice, do we really want that many Ships and Subs with Nuclear Reactors? Than Maybe the People we are Fighting have them too, and after the War there is 200 Nuclear Reactors Lying on the Sea Bed.... IDK, in Theory Sounds Great, However it just might not be the Best Long Term Practices...

[@koffeekage]

@@randyross5630 reactor tech is much better in the 21c and if there were proper R&D we would have that as An option instead of being shackled to oilers. Imagine a cruiser going as fast as as carrier at flank speed and just never stopping.

[@andrew6815]

Why build nuclear cruisers when you have SSBN's? Even attack subs now have significant long range strike capabilities. The main purpose of these cruiser style surface vessels is area air defense and, believe it or not, most countries have no need for an area defense surface combatant with no energy resupply restrictions. Perhaps if you don't have the ability to resupply such a vessel, you shouldn't be remaining on station there indefinitely. Why can you not resupply locally? Perhaps, if that is the case, the solution is political and not the application or threat of force. Just a thought.

[@koffeekage]

@@andrew6815 missiles have not replaced the mission of guns. Having ships with guns is still mandatory. Having ships that rely on oil is optional.

[@andrew6815]

@@koffeekage Ok... what does the power system have to do with the ship's gun?

[@JKSelama]

We don't know how good it is, but we know it is not as good as ours. (The same has been said about the Chinese EVs.)

[@magnusred2945]

Why is this a destroyer and not a guided missile cruiser?

[@92HazelMocha]

By US standards it's a cruiser, but China reffers to it as a Destroyer.

[@andrew6815]

Perhaps its the anti submarine capabilities? I agree with you that it should be a cruiser but, if that is true, there are a whole heck of a lot of frigates in NATO navies that are not frigates.

[@shura0107]

Sometimes it's arbitrary. The Arleigh Burke class is bigger and heavier than some cruisers, yet it's designated a destroyer.

[@mikael5938]

they are planning for 20k ton cruisers to be built with 200 vls. 55ers is just experimenteal build before they build 6 kirov like copies. 2 to each fleet as bodyguards to their planned 6 carriers. They are aiming for 6 battlegroups with 1 carrier 1 cruiser 4 destroyers 52 55, and 8 friagtes each +unknown number of subs, prolly 4-5 each. 2 battlegroups make a fleet, north central and south.

[@HolyNorthAmericanEmpire]

​@@shura0107And everything in europe is called a frigate

[@randyross5630]

Great Info, Thanks for the Brief...

[@1ycan-eu9ji]

Hey man often your videos are serious and well researched, but this one I do have to make a comment on, the QC-280 is not more advanced than the WS20, WS15 or WS19 engines, those require even more advanced alloys and are already under production. The WS15 is between an F119 and F135 (F22 and F35 engines), so yeah, no, it's been years since China solved the material sciences problem...

[@Voxabonable]

This is how you stay in a bubble. While them Chinese are building jedi force sheilds.

[@xcstart]

To be honest, as a Chinese, I hope there will be more Americans like KZbinr, but unfortunately, it seems that there are still some people in the military who are not fools. What's more interesting is that you often say that China's weapons and equipment are copied from the United States. Now why not take a look at the design drawings of the US DD GX and compare it with the 055. I understand that China must have traveled through time to copy the US weapons and equipment.😂😂😂