How US Navy Made The Most Successful Destroyer ... But Now Has to Replace it.

[@NotWhatYouThink]

Even if you have an existing account, you can still get a premium vehicle. Just click here: playwt.link/NotWhatYouThink Play War Thunder for FREE on PC, PS5 and Xbox Series X|S.

[@bananenkuchen2164]

.

[@thedeterrentforlife]

What the.. I commented that I am first and I don't know how it's just removed I am not asking for credit but for the problem

[@benlecluyse]

😄

[@benlecluyse]

@@thedeterrentforlife KARMA 😝

[@thedeterrentforlife]

@@benlecluyse no it's not Think logically not foolishly

[@dogloversrule8476]

It’s ironic that the guy who came up with a cost saving way for designing ships got a ship that was so expensive it was canceled named for him

[@virajkharat1515]

Zumwalt? Edit : why does me asking have 104 likes?

[@captainbroady]

@@virajkharat1515 yep

[@anarchyandempires5452]

Sexiest ship in the seas though.

[@MR2Davjohn]

Zumwalt had nothing to do with those money pits. I don't know how you seem to feel that Admiral Zumwalt designed the ship that was named after him. He would have known that configuration would not save money. That bow rake has been obsolete since pre WWl. That ship is a hot mess.

[@Ideo7Z]

@@MR2Davjohn Woosh...The OP wasnt saying Zumwalt designed this ship. He was saying how ironic it was that an admiral known for advocating a wise and sensible way to procure the right mix of ships to achieve a nation's strategic goals would have a ship class, the poster child of everything he stood against, named after him by the Navy.

[@cpanw]

“What are you doing in a minefield?” “31 knots” Best line

[@Palmtop_User]

My guy is an absolute chad

[@philippbehrend5559]

but it was Admiral HaLsey, not HaSley, who asked him

[@dougreid2351]

Best line: General A. McAuliffe reply to German demands to surrender Bastogne, Belgium during the Battle of the Bulge: "Nuts." It is believed his actual word was "Balls" but sensors didn't appreciate the crudeness of a vulgar word for testicles. "Balls." DOUGout

[@ScottRothsroth0616]

Rough timestamp: 3:34

[@pierregibson6699]

🫡

[@stevenbass732]

Fun fact, when Admiral Burke toured his namesake destroyer, he was asked how he would have liked to have her in WW2. His response was "son, if I had had this ship there would not have been a WW2".

[@lasselund1643]

I think you can say the same about alot of the US military equipment

[@belvinananda]

Ofc he said that

[@duncancallum]

WW11 Started in 1939, so that is a load of Bullshit that statement.

[@johndoh5182]

Good thing the world didn't have ballistic missile capability then, though the Germans were close. The US had to grab many of their scientists to work for the US to finish their work.

[@ad_astra5]

Zipang be like

[@CallMeWB]

Love that the Arleigh Burke's -- about $1B apiece in 2000 -- is the "low cost" option for the USN

[@gabrielmora8403]

welcome to america

[@billhanna2148]

Yeah you haven't seen the price tag on the new Frigate yet 😱🤪

[@Aaron-wq3jz]

Ehh not the worst deal ever

[@CallMeWB]

@@Aaron-wq3jz its the best destroyer on earth and well worth it just shows the USN;s power that it's the low cost option! when most countries can't afford anything like it,

[@rebelgaming1.5.14]

@@CallMeWB considering the Russian Navy has mostly corvettes and frigates half the size of the Burkes and smaller, these things show American naval power more than anything.

[@duartesimoes508]

On top of that, they're beautiful ships. Once, my cruise ship was overtaken by one of these, near Gibraltar. We should be doing perhaps 16 knots at most and she passed by our starboard very close as if we were dead on the water! Magnificent sight.

[@Roberta_Esposito]

Every morning I walk into work and see the sunrise over these magnificent machines with a tear in my eye

[@heuhen]

Cruise speed for those destroyers are 20 knots, a cruise ships cruise around 13-16 knots and tops at 23-26 knots, some do faster, like "Queen Elizabeth 2" some can do 34 knots, but then she is designed after Ocean liner standards and not Cruise ships standards. An Arleigh Burke-class destroyer is capable to do more than 30 knots.

[@duartesimoes508]

@@heuhen I once read that the SS United States crossed the whole Atlantic at 42 knots, but it seems quite a bit exaggerated to me...

[@dboi1656]

ok but what was your cruise ship doing lol

[@ComradePuss]

@@duartesimoes508 a ship can do more its top speed but it mostly unrecommended for a reason especially in heavy seas

[@alexalbrecht5768]

“This ship is built to fight. You had better know how.” - Admiral Arleigh Burke

[@T3858]

The Last ship : Captian chandler to admiral Ruskov. One heck of a show. Please recommend me some shows like it

[@alexalbrecht5768]

@@T3858 it’s a pretty unique show. The Expanse has some pretty neat naval combat but it’s set hundreds of years in the future and isn’t modern.

[@BrowncoatInABox]

@@T3858 honestly one of my favorite lines of any show I've watched

[@T3858]

@@BrowncoatInABox ❤️

[@T3858]

@@alexalbrecht5768 Thanks for the suggestion ! Will watch it !

[@captain_commenter8796]

Even though I’m a ww2 ship enthusiast, the Arleigh Burk class is such a cool and iconic ship of the modern day Navy

[@seankirby8892]

In your opinion what was the most influential ship of ww2?

[@kungkungz1321]

@@seankirby8892 USS Enterprise. Period.

[@aldosigmann419]

WW2 ships had a utilitarian style that ended up being appealing aesthetically...modern ships by contrast i find look 'boxy'. I get it that it's about reducing radar signature etc but still if there was an opportunity to incorporate a bit of pizzaz....

[@Roberta_Esposito]

Thank you from the folks at Bath iron Works

[@Braindamagedpotato]

@@kungkungz1321 someone hasn't heard of the Brooklyns

[@shannonpace9433]

I helped build 26 DDG's, 5 LHD's, 6 CG's and a couple of overhauls on frigates at Ingalls Shipyard in Pascagoula Mississippi. So Proud!

[@rileyrelatores8155]

How was Pascagoula? Any advice?

[@jtough7499]

Thank you!

[@donraptor6156]

Fairly good place to live. The rural areas are better. The yard is OK to work at.

[@txryder79]

I understand that you guys got your first flight 3 in the water. Our 1st flight 3 is STILL in preassembly but thankfully many of our units have gone to erection. We've lost a good 1000 highly experienced shipfitters in the last 5-10 years and it shows.

[@scottsmith9438]

Cool, I was pre com on the 47 and the 49 there in Pascagoula

[@P99-e2x]

How cool to think we got a 21st century version of the Fletcher class

[@swaghauler8334]

I actually say that the Burkes are probably closer to Cleveland Class cruisers than Fletcher Class destroyers based on their size and weight (they go nearly 10K tons in displacement).

[@LuckyFlanker13]

@@swaghauler8334 if that’s the case, what’s the best modern analogue for the fletchers, both in role and size?

[@Aahmpower]

​@@LuckyFlanker13 Perrys and Spruances maybe?

[@LordInquisitor701]

Fletcher class was more closer to the LCS class why the hall was not known to crack the fletcher class was a fire hazard was not capable of traveling very far because because of fuel requirements And the British mocked it considerate very poorly designed it’s also the same destroyers by World War II When the British was having such a shortage of destroyers And having u-boat problems we basically took all the destroyers and gave them to the British

[@cnlbenmc]

I think they're being called that because there's over 60 of the things, which is an astonishingly large number for a ship class of its size and capabilities. Plus there's another 20 Ticonderoga Class Cruisers on top of all that.

[@sim.frischh9781]

"What are you doing in a japanese minefield?" "31 knots!" LOL Some historic conversations are just hilarious.

[@Rob_F8F]

Loved all of the LCS footage when discussing the low-end. Those were just too low-end to be useful.

[@swaghauler8334]

They are unreliable. That's the BIG issue. Perrys were low-end too, but they were tough, cost-effective, and, most importantly, paid for! We got 30+ years out of those Perry Class Frigates. Not too bad for a design supposed to only last for 20 years.

[@Rob_F8F]

@@swaghauler8334 The LCS are unreliable and underarmed. Maybe the reliability issues could not have been foreseen, but the weapons (37mm main gun, RAM self defense missile system) was horrible from the outset. The Perry's were designed to be able to escort merchant convoys and could shoot the SM-1, had a 76mm gun, and a CIWS. All the LCS can do is loiter in the littorals and be dependent entirely on other ships for protection.

[@BeingFireRetardant]

@@Rob_F8F Clearly the Navy didn't play Warship Gunner II... Because my LCS builds could dominate the shallows at high speed. For a ship designed primarily by thinking outside the box, they sure didn't carry that concept to its potential.

[@jessicacolegrove4152]

well not useless they do make very good patrol boats of course they are way over priced for a patrol boat. however if they could find a way to fit a few VLS into them then they might make good corvettes

[@Rob_F8F]

@@jessicacolegrove4152 It's the SLA that was referenced in the video. There's just no room for VLS on the LCSs.

[@alexis_ian]

One of the most iconic guided-missile destroyers in the late 20 century to first half of the 21se century. Gonna be sad to see when they eventually all retired in the coming decades 😔

[@kitkat47chrysalis95]

yeah it is pretty good, we should consider selling the designs to china since we don't need them anymore

[@spanner8850]

@@kitkat47chrysalis95 not to china but to nato members

[@volatile100]

@@spanner8850 don't worry, China probably already has the design for it.

[@spanner8850]

@@volatile100 probably

[@twotailedavenger]

@@kitkat47chrysalis95 You mean Taiwan, right? ...right?

[@timeflex]

11:15 And most importantly -- Aegis allows the integration of multiple ships (or indeed, platforms) to a single network with a single set of data (ID, importance etc) for each target, making it highly capable of mitigating a saturation attack since all targeting and intercepting measures of the entire network are used in an integral way, hence no under- or over-targeting. This is the only way to stop a swarm of missiles.

[@masonborden5594]

Aegis is the united states strongest weapon. Our biggest stick. Our best plan. Ive seen a joint combat exercise where an arleigh burke, some carrier (i forget. Its been years and i love destroyers not metal islands) an air recon plane from the airforce, an apache, and 4 squads of marines with radios, small recon drones and a few tablets, all of these things linked. I was in the apache. My nav hud suddenly showed me the entire field of the exercise. The acting commander of the exercise designated targets, gathered data, and called for execute. 3 minutes and it was over. 30 cardboard man silhouettes, 5 mock tanks, 4 wooden patrol boats and one empty hull of an old destroyer. All confirmed to be destroyed, sunk, or kia. Aegis lets one man see the whole battle. Not just maps and toy soldiers. Hard data of the entire situation, being fed live. We came to call the head of aegis exercises the position of "zeus". Because they were sitting in a gods throne watching rhe whole battle and dictating it all.

[@masonborden5594]

In short. Aegis is like the fking eye of sauron. But it cant be blinded by a single event. It sees all and watches all. Having done training and exercises with other countries, seeing their systems. And what intel we have on russia and china. Nobody in the world has anything close. Sure, each single piece of our military, down to the bones of each sailor, soldier, airman and marine. All of that is some of the best the world has to offer sure. But when you have a system that is the sum of all these things, sees all, knows all. Its unstoppable. Aegis can tell all nearby allied forces anything they want to know.

[@nic7048]

yep and when one ship runs out of missles it can pull back but still be usefull sending targeting data to other ships to get a lock and they can fire instead. A aircraft carrier group with a few allies might have over 1000 missles total to use in attack and defence and that doesnt include what the carrier wing can use

[@timeflex]

@@nic7048 Exactly.

[@flaviomonteiro1414]

@@masonborden5594 That's impressive... I'm glad we are allied...

[@bend3rbot]

I just love the authentic torpedo splash sound at 06:37. So real

[@nickkonzen2369]

That was just so random, in the background you hear serious warship stats and then *splash* haha

[@trifitrob]

I wanted to add one piece of information, insight into another, and a fun fact. I was a Fire Controlman (FC2) who served on a Perry Class Frigate (FFG) in the early 90s. I was one of the sailors specially trained on the MK 92 fire control system. I conducted maintenance, troubleshot any problems, and operated the system. I was privileged enough to have been the operator during a missile exercise where our ship scored a "skin-to-skin" hit on a telemetry missile. The information indicated the FFG's fire control system could only update the target information every 4 seconds. That's not entirely correct. The MK 92 system had its own search radar separate from the main search radar system. It was called the Combined Antenna System (CAS), which also incorporated a tracking radar as well. It is the "egg" looking thing above the bridge. The MK 92 search radar updated target information every second. Secondly, the video highlighted CIWS (Close-In Weapon System) or Phalanx on the Ticonderoga Class Cruiser (CG). Just for the audience's information, the FFGs were also equipped with them. Fun Fact, a Pegasus class hydrofoil was also shown in the video. That ship had the MK 92 fire control system as well.

[@TheLampMan-JaE]

It's truly fascinating how focusing so much on cost-efficiency can lead to engineering feats.

[@dgthe3]

The bulk of engineering revolves around cost. Any idiot can design something to be expensive. It takes a good engineer to design something both low cost & effective.

[@jackmclane1826]

Efficiency is a key part in cost efficiency... so it makes some sense!

[@gabrielmora8403]

Cost efficiency? What???

[@matthewdarnell7313]

That old maxim. "Necessity is the mother of invention" seems to apply.

[@wolf986]

@@DieselDog1982 Well, not many people admit to being a moron, but you've done it. I applaud you sir.

[@woodysworld1585]

The same way that they took the USS Kitty Hawk CVA-63 class carrier and modified it into the USS Enterprise CVN into the 10 USS Nimitz CVN's, and now into the USS Gerald Ford CVN's, thru modernization updates. The hulls and flight deck are basically the same layout design, except CVN-65 eight nuclear reactors, the Nimitz class hull was modified with two large reactors. Both classes are rated at 280,000 shaft horsepower. All have approximately 1,110 foot length hulls, hull beam is basically the same. The flight decks dimensions about the same. The Gerald Ford CVN has 3 deck edge aircraft handling elevators, compared to the Kitty Hawks, Enterprise, and Nimitz's 4 deck edge elevators. Of course the most striking visual difference is the Gerald Ford's island superstructure. The Enterprise and Nimitz CVN's have 4 rudders compared to the 4 Kitty Hawk CV's and Gerald Ford CVN's having only 2 rudders. All carried approximately the same number of air squadrons. All of them could do 30+ knots.

[@cassidy109]

IIRC the only post-WWII USN aircraft carrier with 4 rudders was the Enterprise CVN-65, all other carrier classes had two. Additionally, in a way USN aircraft carrier lineage predates even the Kitty Hawk class. An argument could be made that it goes all the way back to the Forrestal class and maybe even the cancelled USS United States CVA-58.

[@douglasboyle6544]

I knew a guy way back in the day he joined the Navy and got assigned to the Arleigh Burke when it was basically brand new, he was so god damned proud of that assignment.

[@lgd1974]

My best friend is a Plank Owner of the USS Arleigh Burke (DDG-51). He is ridiculously proud of it. As he should be.

[@Idahoguy10157]

The Ticonderoga’s had their own issues. The Burke’s were an improvement. Where the navy went very wrong was replacing the Perry class with the LCS

[@twotailedavenger]

Supposedly the USN is seeking to correct that error with the Constellation-class FFGs, but they're a long way off.

[@Idahoguy10157]

@@twotailedavenger … twenty years behind schedule

[@spirz4557]

@@Idahoguy10157 Better late than never, right ?

[@gotanon9659]

Except that Iran,China and japan says otherwise as they are building ships that is similar in role to the LCS.

[@drawingdead9025]

@@gotanon9659 If LCS was what it was supposed to be they would be useful ships but what we got were lemons with a 57mm gun and short range self defense missiles.

[@wiffy1346]

11:58 actually, the increase in VLS cells didn't come from additional units they abandoned the onboard missile reloading crane (which was proved impractical) that took up 3 cells worth of space in each VLS unit, one fore and one aft, so that they can use for more missiles

[@_R-R]

Impractical in peacetime, but *if a practical VLS reloading method could be developed* without sacrificing missile capacity, that would be very useful.

[@donraptor6156]

Explain how you are going to load a delicate missile at sea with the ship rolling? I used to do the Safety, security and fire protection loading them on dock!

[@_R-R]

@@donraptor6156 "If a practical system could be developed..."

[@kevinclarke1222]

When I was in Zumwalt was my CNO . His philosophy of subordinate free thinking brought innovation and flexibility to the fleet.Also his open mindedness toward race at that period in history brought the Navy into the modern age. All these years later I consider it a privilege and honor to serve in his command.

[@MillerFourFingers]

This made me think of why the Fletcher's were so successful. When they were built, they had quite a bit of room for wartime additions. There were classes after them in WWII but, the class the Navy wanted to replace, repeat the successes of, was the Fletcher and not the others.

[@collinwood6573]

The Allen M. Sumner and Gearing classes were basically upgraded Fletchers anyways

[@cleverusername9369]

11:56 I'm 99.99999999% sure that's my brother's ship, USS Lassen DDG-82, I've been on a Tiger Cruise aboard her, incredible experience.

[@shannonpace9433]

I helped build that ship.

[@timpoling8634]

I just got orders to go to that ship

[@lablabdog]

your channel changed my life. i’ve been in the navy for a year thanks to your content

[@TR-zx1lc]

As a kid I went to the commissioning ceremony for the USS Decatur. Definitely an experience.

[@tedhernandez2394]

Years ago I took my kid to the Commissioning of the Arleigh Burke Class Destroyer "The Sullivans". A cold misty day in Staten Island, New York, but a fine day it was! A buddy of mine crewed on that ship as a retiring CPO. Got my kid a personal guided tour on board. Commander Roncolato was running the ship at the time. And invited my son and myself to a missile firing simulation in their CIC. He ask my son where he lived....gave the Commander the address....Up came our home. My kid looked at me and whispered.....Hey dad, that's our house! The order was given to fire the missile. The running dialogue of the "Missile" in flight towards the "Target". screens lite up with an explosion! Target destroyed!.... Commander Roncolato looked down to my son......So buddy, what do ya think about that? My kid looked at me in all seriousness.......Dad? I think mom is gonna be pissed off that the Navy blew up our house!!! The whole CIC lost it!! A Big Thank you to the crew of the USS The Sullivans! You guys provided an unforgettable and wonderful day for my son and I. A note here...Our family shares our home to USN Sailors when their ships come into New York Harbor........It's the least we can so for those fine men and women who have our backs 24/7 365. GO NAVY!

[@mrs6968]

Love your dedication to content information and the jokes are always top notch

[@spikespa5208]

Andmiral Hasely?

[@aaronpaul9188]

AEGIS combat integration has been adopted and adapted for us by the rest of the US military, and its a rather unique capability. Russia has clearly stated that that level of integration was their goal during the most recent modernization program, but they admittedly failed to achieve their goals. That level of integration across platforms and even branches is the most powerful aspect of the US military.

[@nic7048]

Yep and other allies of the US that have similiar tech like Japan and Australia can use there network and back the US up even more. The AUS hobart destroyer has command and control capability like the ticon US cruisers. The hobart can pass on radar and target data to another US ship who can then fire its missles at the target from a different location. Each ship in the network can see what the other ship can see giving them all fantastic situational awareness

[@aaronpaul9188]

@@nic7048 Yes, though I am not only talking about across ships. Its across branches which allows for levels of coordination that Russia and China are admittedly quite envious of.

[@ulrichkristensen4087]

It is also incorporated in European NATO, Romania nd Poland have Aegis Shore

[@swoo6979]

Correction for the above deck launcher part; the mk13 arm launcher was capable of launching Harpoon Anti-ship missiles but at a significantly slower rate and so could upgraded mk11 launchers

[@NotWhatYouThink]

thanks, we did a short fact check, the original USNI article said "only SMs" but then we found out about antisubmarine. Looks like missed on harpoons thou

[@paulbeaney4901]

Im English and i can thoroughly appreciate a ship design that has been in production for 40 years! Well done to the US Navy 👏 👍 👌.

[@CarbideSix]

19:37 “But, and it’s a big but, I cannot lie…” this took me out. 😂 😂 Your videos have come a long way, love your channel. Don’t ever change. Thank you friend!

[@WavyB1]

Me: @5:14 is that really you playing the game? You: Its not what you think

[@javierherrera179]

Thanks for the satisfying splash at 6:34

[@nic7048]

The mk13 lancher is still used on the Taiwan destroyer that used to be a Kidd class US destroyer in the 80s. It was the last ship to use the mk13 and it about the same firepower and size as the burke , just that it can only fire 2 missles at a time before reloading. For Sm2 and over 100km shots against aircraft that should be fine and make little difference its only when you get swarmed by heaps of anti ship missles where the VLS really comes in handy. Australia did a test on its Anzac class frigate and it shot down 8 missles that were all fired at the same time towards the ship in training something that the mk13 would not be able to do

[@GRIGGINS1]

Back when I was in the Navy. The Burkes were brand new ships. Damn I'm old now.

[@yetsmahinay8783]

Man I love this destroyer I wish i can see that in person😔

[@jimboyarab1072]

Yeah same

[@Roberta_Esposito]

We watched the sunrise every morning over these ships in production …takes your breath away

[@god1246]

They’re pretty damn cool. I work on these ships and whenever I have free time after completing my work I go exploring. All the cool stuff is locked up though with signs all over the place saying it’s a federal crime to enter areas with classified material without authorization

[@Bebbsy40]

''But, and it's a big but and I can not lie'' lol I see what you did there 19:35

[@gorgonzillahthecheesemonst4273]

The ship collision incidents in the Pacific in the last few years ("USS McCain and Fitzgerald") uncovered the fact that the US Navy could not provide a full crew for each ship, that the crews were not fully certified, that the maintenance of the radar systems, and all ships' systems, was not up to date and the reliability of radar systems was poor. The frigates were mothballed because the Navy could not provide crews for each ship. Same thing with the A. B. Destroyers.

[@rebelgaming1.5.14]

4:38 One of our family friends here in Minnesota served on one of the vessels that arrived to aid the Belknap and JFK during the Horrific fire. He also later served on a US Navy Frigate from 1984-86.

[@michaelkendall662]

I got out of USN in 1985...it was all Spruances and Perry-class frigates at the time for new ships

[@GungaDan]

This guy does a great job. I at least can't catch him in errors. Not that I have any great expertise, but so many of these kind of videos are clearly lacking in real understanding. As far as I can tell, he actually knows what he is talking about.

[@Recumbent80]

I agree, but his speech pattern makes it very difficult to listen to. I wish he would allow someone with a more nuanced tempo to narrate the vide using his script.

[@jackmclane1826]

The quality of your videos has improved by A LOT! Congratulations, this one was a real treat!

[@mughug9616]

The Simple Truth - In 1980, the U.S. Navy initiated design studies for what would become the Arleigh Burke-class destroyer. The first ship of the class was commissioned on 4 July 1991. The core design, the foundation of these ships was designed at least 30-35 years ago, in a time when no-one enviaged that they would need greater capacity to handle the needs of 2022. Plain and simple reason.

[@Kiyoone]

Love the compilation of videos you make to explain about army. It is not like the other channels that gather shots and scenes that have nothing to do with what they are talking and mash together without any deep thinking... Very nice to see the "actual thing" and not drawings or 3d generated ones

[@NotWhatYouThink]

Gald to hear this. We do try to use actual footage as much as possible, as opposed to images or animation. Of course, this is not always possible :-)

[@amaneyugihanako-kunofthesi8849]

Oh, finally a video about the DDG (X)! Aside from the new hull, the DDG (X) is also designed to be modular enough to be given extra space or "modules" if future threats or future technologies call for it. In short, the overall hull length can be greatly increased per flight! And it's not just 3-5 meter increases, but much more!

[@seanj4119]

They're designing into the DDG(X) the ability to literally cut it in half, add a new hull section, and weld it back together. They got the idea from the Virginia Class submarines.

[@amaneyugihanako-kunofthesi8849]

@@seanj4119 Technicaly, Modularity was already a concept that was tried (And failed) on the LCS, but it worked better on larger vessels like the Virginia. Guess that was another lesson from the LCS program and the Virginia-Class subs that they're applying to the DDG(X). And given that the DDG(X) is gonna succeed both the earlier flights of Arleigh Burke-Class Guided Missile Destroyers and the Ticonderoga-Class Guided Missile Cruisers, it should have all the room to host future technologies, and if it runs out of room, it should also have the ability to expand within reasonable margins

[@amaneyugihanako-kunofthesi8849]

@@seanj4119 And definitely due to this capability, we might possibly see latter flights of DDG(X) outright exceeding the Zumwalt-Class in terms of both length and displacement.

[@Builttobeat]

I miss the perry class, I remember running around on them when we went to eat with my dad in the 90s. They were neat little boats.

[@petesheppard1709]

If not screwed up, the _Constellation_ class should be a worthy successor, unlike the LCS speedboats.

[@pcguysoffgridcabin]

Bring back the Fletchers

[@petesheppard1709]

“When you’re out if FRAMs, you’re out of cans.”

[@merafirewing6591]

​@@petesheppard1709 the Perry-class is the true chad among Guided Missile Frigates.

[@petesheppard1709]

@@merafirewing6591 True; they fulfilled their missions extremely well, and proved they could take hard punch!

[@mikedrop4421]

Obviously having extra power for the SLA requirements makes sense but the fact that every ship, plane and vehicle under design or testing currently are focused on the ability to produce massive amounts of energy makes me think direct energy weapons are closer than they are telling us.

[@passolcso695]

Honestly the US was rumored to be just on the brink of laser weapons for half a century now. It's a very easy fantasy to believe in but there have honestly been no real developments in the field to really suggest that. There are numerous much more realistic contenders. Batteries for one, have you heard about them recently? Oh they only underwent insane evolution, and have become way more capable, and have been put into a position that helps this development further. Battery powered early warning and other surveillance aircraft sound like a dream to me, especially on an aircraft carrier. Radars of course are definitely one to watch out for. But for a new field of warfare, computers. There's no such thing as an impossible to crack encryption, only one which takes too much time. But what if computers become even better? There's a good chance that we just won't have an algorithm convenient enough, to multiply the time it takes to crack the code, but not the time it takes to use it. In that case the encryption strength can be raised symmetrically. In a way that would increase it's difficulty both for user and intruder. And this will no doubt require powerful computers. Also better guidance for missiles, maybe for autonomous vehicles.

[@bdub1682]

A few Arleigh Burkes are already being tested with laser systems, designed to dazzle or fry the targeting systems of drones or missiles.

[@angusmatheson8906]

Anyone thinking the US isn't 10 years away from mass deployment of hard kill directed energy weapons and or EM mass drivers/gauss/rail guns is wrong.

[@CrayonEater255]

Flight III will have HELIOS installed so

[@Laotzu.Goldbug]

Directed energy weapons aren't close, they are already here. However they don't work quite like they do in science fiction. They are great for damaging Electronics or even like aircraft but you can't sink ships with them or even shoot down fast jets, at least not yet. The simple reality is that even a little handheld laser in science fiction is basically a superweapon whereas in the real world there are a number of inconvenient physical factors that make them much less effective (diffusion, the fraction, blooming, ablative interference, etc). The first truly capable laser weapons introduced into serial production for active service are going to be defensive for a very long time.

[@victorskwrxsti7899]

Most Nations: Yes we have Corvettes and Frigates as our naval fleet. Aegis Destroyers? Nah nah nah... we can't afford them... Some Nations: Yes we have Frigates and Destroyers as our fleet backbone, and some DDG Aegis vessels as fleet flag ship. THE UNITED STATES NAVY: ALL 70 OF OUR ACTIVE DESTROYERS ARE DDG AND ARE AEGIS VESSEL!!! (blasts out Anchors Aweigh in max volume)

[@chesterlynch9533]

Good video but there's some slight errors. USED Belknap got it's superstructure squashed due to the weight of aircraft carrier deck and even a steel superstructure won't survive that encounter. There's a reason why Navies still continue using aluminum superstructure due to weight savings. Most of the time, the problem isn't on aluminum superstructure but on the spaces where aluminum and steel is joined due to the difference properties of the two metals. Secondly, USN could still improve or make the Burkes larger but it's the electric generation which the Burkes are already maxed out at 12 MW is the problem. DDG(X) isn't supposed to only have 32 Mk41 VLS shown in the earliest since the Navy wants DDG(X) to have either 96 VLS or more. You can see on the model that you've shown that it still has a VLS launchers amidship and USN could install a VLS payload module for CPS HGV.

[@Au60schild]

My dad said the first time they threw the switch to power up the AEGIS system on the "Ti", it drew so much electricity from the power plant that it dropped the entire ship's load. I would love to know how they worked around that and especially how they shoehorned it into the destroyers.

[@MostlyPennyCat]

That's what I love about the Royal Navy's SAMSON radar. It has the electronic (near) 360° near instant contact detection and AESA panels, just like SPY-1's PESA panels But then, to make it _even faster_ they then _spun_ the panels! 2 panels and they spin at 30 revolutions per minute, so you add those two rates together and scan is very fast and, sadly, very classified. But until the release of SPY-1's AESA upgrade, SPY-6, it was the fastest and most powerful radar in the world. It is currently looking at an upgrade to 4 panels, 3 vertical to replace the current 2 and 1 horizontal for ABM duties with the new Aster missiles with ABM capability.

[@peterson7082]

While the power requirements for the rotating arrays are generally less over a given amount of time- the update rate for fixed arrays will always be far quicker.

[@Linusgump]

15:00-15:17 is the Willamette River in Portland, OR. It must have been filmed during Fleet Week. As soon as I saw the Fremont Bridge (the first bridge in the clip) I knew exactly where it was.

[@Ravenscaller]

We toured one of the early Burks which came to Seafair. I don't recall the year. I do recall that a young officer conning the ship almost crashed the dock and presumably the captain took over and ordered flank astearn to slam on the brakes. We were passed in our sailboat by a Burk running fast in the Strait of Juan de Fuca headed toward Seattle. We were working though what was heavy chop for us but the big destroyer was a stead a rock and passed us like a bat out of hell. Even at least a half mile away she was quite the show.

[@dahandsomeguywithcoolglass8949]

The design is very iconic for modern warship to me despite the origin might be political. I mean the limitations truly shown the designer to be more creative and smart

[@bigdmac33]

Amazing presentation. And here's a scary thought - It is roughly 2.5 miles ( directly ) from 1 World Trade Center to the Statue Of Liberty. A Boeing 737, flying top speed, would cover that distance in about 16seconds. The world's ( allegedly ) fastest anti-ship missile would do it in about 4.

[@mattsiede443]

This was a WONDERFUL video! Thank you for all your hard work researching, developing, producing, and posting it and ALL you videos!!!

[@jhmcd2]

The Zumwalt only failed because the Navy itself. Half the tech meant for the ship wasn't even ready by the time they started construction, and instead of making the design flexible enough to be outfitted down the road, they tried to force incomplete systems onto the ship. Actually it's an excellent platform that they should bring back, but just in a more affordable way. As for LCS, it actually does exactly what it was designed to do. The problem with LCS isn't the ship but the Navy. With their budget constraints, they figure if they drop this ship which would be perfect in places like the Red Sea, they could build one massive destroyer. They have big shiny ship syndrome.

[@marknelson463]

As the US has less cruisers each year the destroyers have to do the work. Less cruisers means bigger and heavier destroyers.

[@herbsuperb6034]

Just heard that about a month ago they announced one of the new Flight III Arleigh Burke Destroyers will be named USS Evans. Namesake is the true blue American Hero Ernest Edwin Evans, Commanding Officer USS Johnson at the Battle Off Samar. He was posthumously awarded the Medal of Honor for his absolutely heroic actions on that day, and how valiantly he fought his ship. The US Navy should ALWAYS have an Evans. He and his colossally valiant crew upheld the highest traditions of the US Navy, and saved an untold number of US Navy, and perhaps US Army, lives.

[@nbrpwng]

Absolute madlad actually playing naval in WT wow

[@verticalflyingb737]

the most interesting wt naval battle be like

[@maricalcantero1269]

one of the best seals onto the goverment off philippines because he the need more warship to guard and protect the teretory in the west ph sea

[@kappazo2268]

9:50. Your comment is not accurate. The Mk-13 GMLS (One Armed Bandit) could shoot Harpoons and Perry class normally carried four. You even had a clip of one launching earlier in your video. The Mk-41, while capable of the SM family, VLA (vertical launched ASROC), Tomahawk, and Sea Sparrow (quad pack version) cannot launch Harpoons. That’s why the Ticos and Burkes have the above deck Mk-141 crossed launchers as an ASuW weapon launcher. Additionally, the older Mk-16 above deck ASROC launcher could carry Harpoons and ASROCs but not SMs.

[@napobg6842]

The Burke-Class revolutionized what a modern navy should look like. Capable in both defense and offense. Ofc as everything it gets old. With new threats like drones and hypersonic weapons being more and more relevant the class's age is starting to show. I hope the new next generation destroyer will be a good replacement for the old legend

[@CorePathway]

Woefully under-defended against drones of all size, especially swarms of smaller ones. The entire military is.

[@retiredguyadventures6211]

Between 1970 and 1972 I served on the Farragut class USS Dahlgren DLG-12 as a Radarman RD. She was later re-designated as DDG-43 a few years after I got out of the Navy. Between 1972 and 1973 I served on the Leahy class USS Richmond K Turner DLG-20 as an Operation Specialist OS. She was re-designated as a cruiser CG-20. I would have loved to serve on a Arleigh Burke class destroyer!

[@tedntricia]

Lots of good stuff, but you are forgetting how the TIco-class cruisers got built in the first place. The SPRUNANCE class destroyers were upgunned and up-sensored, and poof! We turned bargain basement ASW destroyers into AEGIS wielding super-cruisers. Also, the Tico's were originally desginated DDGs, not CGs. That was a DOD marketing move because the US NAVY only built one true cruiser in the guided missile era: CGN-9 USS LONG BEACH. That was a real cruiser. Ahhh, what could have been.

[@Ifraneljadida]

I think its worth mentioning the Ghost Fleet doctrine. The Navy will be over half autonomous in a couple decades. It might be more like the Air Force in that it makes small batches of a new ship every few years with specific applications - this would work well for a battle group. One ship (autonomous) acts purely for carrying missiles, another for detecting submarines, a submarine specifically for attacking submarines and all of this around a manned ship acting as a data and command hub (but it is 200 miles behind the battle group to stay out of range) .

[@williamlilleston1595]

Actually, if you look at pictures of the USS Enterprise and USS Long Beach from back in the 70's, you will see the original "SPY 1" radar. Yes the predecessor to the AGES Radar system used today. It has been a long time in development. (USN 74-84)

[@davidsyes5970]

But, those were vacuum tube tech panels. They drew enormous amounts of power, but, more importantly, as I understand, too many critical component parts broke down and not enough spares were aboard. (I didn't serve aboard the Big E, but did visit her several times, one being an 8 hour dependants day cruise/tiger cruise off San Francisco in 83). Eventually, those mid-era NTDS panels came down and other radar replaced them tol the Ticos got the SPY-1A/etc stuff.

[@klausstock8020]

​@@davidsyes5970 I know just about the USS Norton Sound as a test platform for the AN/SPY-1 (1973) and the preceding phased-array AN/SPG-59 (1962). Since the USS Norton Sound's engines could only produce 9MW, there was a natural limit to the amount of power which could be diverted from propulsion into the radar system. I doubt that it could draw as much power as the AN/SPY-1A and later series (up to 6MW at full power). Well, it is probably true that the SPY-1A and especially the SPY-1B (and later) had a "tighter beam", allowing for more efficiency and lower average power (only 58kW), and the option to run it on lower power with still sufficient capabilities - in situations when no threat is present. The SPY-1B was so efficient that it would have only halved the range of a Ticonderoga-class if it had been operating constantly at full power! Well, no wonder that they chose to install the early system on the Big E (which I wasn't aware of!) - it had quite a bit more power to spare than the Norton Sound.

[@SpencerBurkett]

You'll get me so immersed into your videos, and then pull something like 19:36 and it cracks me up every time.

[@demonorb8634]

That splash sound as the torpedo hit the water 🤣🤣🤣👍

[@PBurns-ng3gw]

"What are you doing in a minefield?" "31 knots." **BOOM** "Now what are you doing in a minefield?" "The backstroke, sir."

[@travelinman70]

greatly enjoy the presentation of in-depth information and analysis. Great job here!!!

[@benraddatz9128]

Even Britajn did this high/low, that's why despite their fleet sizes, it's ships could be found outgunned by other ships of the same class. It had to be a large enough navy to police the world, where the like of other nations were focused on specific regions.

[@VivyX2]

the irony is that the destroyers are now invading light cruiser territory

[@jaffacalling53]

Zumwalt is already bigger than Ticonderoga. Destroyer and cruiser basically just merged into one class.

[@Karle94]

@@jaffacalling53 Even funnier since the South Korean version of the Burke is both heavier and more powerful than the Ticos, while still being destroyers.

[@crazychicken7125]

Arleigh Burke flight III DDG 9500 tons 510ft Over All Length/66ft Beam/30.5ft Draft Ticonderoga class CG 9600 tons full displacement 567ft OAL/55ft B/34ft D Zumwalt class DDG 15,656 tons 610ft OLA/80.7ft B/27.6ft D For reference Omaha class CL 7,050 tons 555ft 6in OAL/55ft 4in B/20ft D Brooklyn class CL 9767 tons standard/12,207 full 608ft 4in OAL/62ft B/23ft D New Orleans class CA 9,950 tons standard/12,463 full 588ft 2in OAL/61ft 9in B/19ft 5in D Pensacola class CA 9,100 tons standard/11,512 full 585ft 6in OAL/65.0ft B/19.5ft D Kearsarge class BB 11,540 tons standard/12,850 full 375ft 4in OAL/72ft 2.5in B/23ft 6in D

[@VivyX2]

@@crazychicken7125 man they should just call them light cruisers at this point lol

[@taiwandxt6493]

Ultimately, less ship specialization saves money and resources and given how warfare is heading, it's becoming less necessary. It's cheaper to have a class of ships which can do basically everything than multiple different ship classes. The former is cheaper in terms of ship building costs and justifies a smaller navy which saves on other costs.

[@davidlowson100]

While it doesn't take away away from your point regarding older rotary radar, the vessel shown at 7:36 is actually the HMAS Melbourne of the Adelaide class. While the Adelaide class was developed from the Perry class (the first 4 hulls were built in America, 2 short 2 long and even given USN hull numbers before transfer), the Melbourne and Newcastle were built in Australia and the others were upgraded to match, making them different from the Perrys.

[@jonathanmatthews4774]

Can you do a short on why the Navy uses "flight" to signify new updates to a class versus the the Air Force "A, B, C" designation?

[@cleverusername9369]

"Flight" is just another term for "variation"

[@nayhem]

So more "flight" as in a flight of beers? I suppose we are quite some decades off from actual flying naval vessels.

[@Nr15121]

@@nayhem yeah flight block etc mean similar/same thing it’s just showing the generations

[@Nr15121]

Air Force uses block not abc like f16 block 2 or so on and so forth

[@jonathanmatthews4774]

@@Nr15121 They use block for minor revisions, but still "a, b, c" for major revisions. Ie, F-15 a, c, e, ex

[@matthewcozon4686]

Really enjoyed this one. Thanks for putting it together

[@bryonslatten3147]

The new Constellation class frigates are going to put the LCS classes out to pasture.

[@jessicaregina1956]

Don't know what u talked about since they already being sent to the glue factory!!!

[@williampaz2092]

The LCS should never have been built in the first place!

[@stavinaircaeruleum2275]

My most favorite class ever. Why? In "The Last Ship," there was a Burke class ship called "Nathan James."

[@incomingvirus5569]

Could you please give me a channel where I can watch all the episodes on?

[@Mikey-cc2ny]

On point brother!!!

[@croskerk]

Yesss its a great series

[@dundonrl]

@@croskerk Very few US Navy Sailors will watch that show because it's so inaccurate!

[@croskerk]

@@dundonrl yeah true, its also understandable that it'll be more inaccurate cause Hollywood. Knowledge of something can be a blessing and a curse as some stuff we may or may not unsee

[@Crypto.Minute.]

Although I admonish you for your work on these destroyers, I feel missing the fact that these were not new ships at all was fairly big oops. They were repurposed Forest Sherman class Destroyers, and we would be remised if we do not include their history combined with the Arleigh Burkes.

[@dennisdownes9319]

I was on a Forest Sherman; USS Jonas Ingram-DD938. We knew the Perry class was crap when the super structure cracked up top after some rough seas on an Atlantic crossing. We were in complete awe of the Spruance Class and I never thought they would retire so early. Good video. DD

[@ScottSchapiro]

This was one of your best videos to date, excellent research and content!

[@iceyplayz_2826]

This destroyer is mostly appreciated and I like it too.

[@connorhogsten4895]

NWYT another 10/10video bruh

[@brianfoley4328]

That was a pretty good "30,000 feet" overview of how the US Navy got to the decisions they did....well done.

[@cjheaford]

3:30 It’s not Admiral “Haze-ly”. It’s HALSEY

[@gooner72]

You were absolutely spot on about the unacceptable losses of aluminium hulled warships of the Royal Navy during the Falklands War, it was due to ridiculous budget constraints put upon the Senior Service by successive crappy governments in my Country. The result of this were losses that seriously compromised the ability of the Royal Navy and the loss and horrific injuries suffered by servicemen that came about by poor quality materials used in the construction of our warships. Saying that, the destroyers were pretty capable with the weapons they had but build quality was poor, that's why we went the complete opposite way with their replacement, the Type 45. These are Rolls Royce compared to the 42's.

[@Terran994]

they need to redesignate the Zumwalt class as Cruisers

[@Chriswatt313]

The zumwalt really does look so different to any other destroyer ,even better looking then the brilliant British type 45,the zumwalt even looks like it could semi submerge,it’s a very unique looking destroyer

[@murphyseanm]

You missed Zumwalt's original low mix destroyer the Spruance Class, it was made from the mid 70s to the early 80's and filled the low destroyer gap at the time.

[@dennisdownes9319]

I was on a Forest Sherman; USS Jonas Ingram-DD938. We knew the Perry class was crap when the super structure cracked up top after some rough seas on an Atlantic crossing. We were in complete awe of the Spruance Class and I never thought they would retire so early. Good video. DD

[@garywhite2050]

Great job 👍! " And I can not lie". 😂😂😂😂😂

[@harryb7216]

Surprisingly accurate video. BZ!

[@nathanmccabe1850]

That video earned you a new subscriber. Looking forward to the next vid.

[@toddabbott781]

I picked up on the Arleigh Burke class destroyers around 15 years ago and found them to be one of the most effective ships out there. From what it sound like these ships will get some form of Laser Defense System (LaWS, Helios,...). These thing have layers of defense and the missile defense in the US is FAR better than any other country. My second favorite is the America/Wasp class ships... or better yet pair them together. Mixed with the F-25 and V-22. I wish there was an AWAX version of the V-22.The F-35 though has a pretty advanced radar system and is combined quite well with the Aegis system to extend the capabilities of both. With the US updating several of it missile systems and pushing for far more powerful laser systems as well as the large numbers of F-35, the US is pulling farther and farther ahead.

[@abrunosON]

That yellow/orange haze at 1:30 is spooky

[@JWalker6541]

That one at the beginning is my old ship!! DDG-65, USS BENFOLD! Onward with Valor! -GUNNO, '06-'08

[@azzajames7661]

The Type 45 destroyer, also known as the D or Daring class, for the RN are the best destroyers currently around in the world👏

[@PlatypusBillDuck]

On the contrary it sounds like the politicians were right to impose limits on the scope of the project, even if the limits they imposed were somewhat arbitrary. The real "Bad Politics" is the new High-High strategy and corresponding rash of overpriced do-everything projects.

[@shorewall]

I liken it to new video games. Fans want the base functionality of the old games, and then you can iterate on that. No need to reinvent the wheel each time.

[@leemarkley8496]

Interesting analysis. Regarding Ford v Nimitz class, the Nimitiz class could be re-fitted using the hull, fully refitted, for less than half the cost of building new Ford class.

[@thatmrsketch]

Ya it’s totally awesome when you’re not the one ship playing catch up with a Aircraft Carrier in a sea state of 7, holding onto the toilet for dear life while you’re shitting bricks because it’s Taco Tuesday while the dude in the other stall is puking his guts out cause he’s been on board since breakfast.

[@angrytigermpc]

Don't forget the dude who's completely useless to the division cuz he's blazed on dramamine

[@timothyayling7412]

LOL.

[@grathian]

09:37 Mk11 and Mk13 launchers on USN DDGs and FFGs could not fire ASROC, but they could fire Harpoon. Mk10s on Belknaps and Mk26s on Kidds and CGNs fired Standard and ASROC.

[@cheesyfromindonesia9969]

3:48 Yo its the Battleship movie shooting of the USS John Paul John

[@nilomosquerapazos1207]

OMG I haven’t noticed ahahaha btw love the Missouri scene

[@robertpesche7812]

"It's a big but, and I cannot lie." Groan! 19:37

[@GM-fh5jp]

I always hoped to see a Ticonderoga class guided missile cruiser open up with all its Aegis system on some kind of mass incoming hostiles. It's a marvel of engineering and science that can manage and prosecute the local airspace out quite a long way. The latest Spy model radar suite is very clever. They can put up a ferocious amount of air-defense missiles and ground attack Tomahawks as well...and they go really fast 30K+...WW3 in a can :)