How powerful is type 45 destroyers

How powerful is royal navy warship type 45 destroyer - the type 45 destroyer or Daring class destroyer is more than just a ship: it’s a symbol of Britain’s eminent place on the world stage and a powerful deterrent. It is a new class of Anti-Air Warfare Destroyer to replace the Royal Navy's existing Type 42 that had served during the Falklands War, with the last Type 42 being decommissioned in 2013. After the launch of Daring on 1 February 2006 Admiral Sir Alan West, a former First Sea Lord, stated that it would be the Royal Navy's most capable destroyer ever, as well as the world's best air-defense ship.
The 5 Deadliest Russian Navy Warships: • The 5 Deadliest Russia...
This video is collaborated military tv with www.navalpost.com and Naval Library. The world's most comprehensive naval database. You can find out both vehicle specifications and detailed descriptions. And Get access to Naval Library service by using the link in the description.
Naval Library is a database that you can find out both vehicle specifications and detailed descriptions. It is now very easy to follow the developments in the world navies.
Google Play:
play.google.co...
Apple App Store:
apps.apple.com...
As like everything, there is an incredible change in world navies as
well. Military technologies that pioneer the civilian technologies
continue to progress at a dizzying pace.
The importance of information is increasing day by day. Those who have
valuable information are more advantageous than ever before, compared to their competitors.
As the Naval Library Team, we have gathered all the information
necessary for the people who are working in the defense industry. This
information will help organizations and individuals to enhance their
situational awareness about the current and future capabilities of the
World navies. It can be used as an education tool, decision support system, operation aid and reference book as well.
The app data includes technical information and numbers of naval ships
and naval aircraft, submarines, unmanned systems, missiles, weapons,
sensors and equipment of 92 countries and the ones in development as
well. Naval Library is the only source of Naval Data in the market.
Subscribe Now :
/ @military-tv
/ militarytv.channel
defense-tv.com/

[@Macedthur]

Dont forget the Royal Navy also have a BBC Reporter as a primary part of their ship's Electronic warfare and decoy's

[@johnnyc613]

Sounds like a kick ass destroyer … good work UK 🇬🇧!!

[@Brian-om2hh]

You wouldn't find out exactly how powerful it was until you attacked it.

[@xXRobbie98Xx]

Imagine being a Somali pirate and coming up against that

[@georgebarnes8163]

@@xXRobbie98Xx the pirates would win, only one of the six type 45 built is seaworthy due to rubbish turbines.

[@simonbird1973]

@@georgebarnes8163 Old news!

[@georgebarnes8163]

@@simonbird1973 What is?

[@homeofathletes5029]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[@martindornan1667]

A £500 million upgrade to the type 45 has been announced. The plans are to facilitate the introduction of CAMM , a new 24 CAMM silos will be added in front of the present 48 Astra 30 silos. Increasing the missile capacity by 50% and result in a capacity of 72 anti-air missiles per destroyer.

[@themc.kennyshow6585]

Holy crap nice. Unpar with the USN Ardleigh Burke destroyer

[@jtpenman]

Was needed

[@comanderx5677]

Sm-3 Sm-6 are only good against non Manor able large targets I.e cruise missiles. They aren’t good against Manoeuvrable fast fighters

[@MostlyPennyCat]

The upgrade is two-fold. First, you're getting 72 VLS tubes. Second, all of the 48 Sylver cells contain the long range Aster-30 instead of a 30/15 mix. The 24 CAMM missiles do the job of the Aster-15 so now there's only Aster-30s. And because the Aster's terminal dart guidance is so good you only need to launch a single Aster to guarantee a kill. One Aster One Kill SM-2 and AEGIS requires salvo fire, 2 missiles to guarantee a hit, effectively halving the number of shots you have. And magazine depth is _life_ in this game.

[@MostlyPennyCat]

@Drew Peacock What's CAMM good for? Killing anything and everything that is

[@wicaksono6474]

Just right after Crimea 👍

[@PitchBlackTales]

@Un Know "Flew from Crimea after Russian ship started firing" Not really, just stayed its course as they fired warning shots, zero shits given.

[@samahmadoke8704]

Russian fleet is stronger.

[@JB17521or]

@@samahmadoke8704 in 1v1 yes, mass>class but theres a thing called NATO..

[@marmite5599]

@@samahmadoke8704 lol

[@moRaaOTAKU]

@@PitchBlackTales Russia could have easily sink it so...

[@johnvincentcarpio9136]

britain poked a bear using a powerful stick

[@bentos117]

i say - fuck the bear :D

[@noodles169]

That's the thing though. We ain't talking about the Soviet Union anymore. Those days are gone. Russia is a shadow of its former self. Aging military, aging population, tiny economy and isolated. The royal navy has nothing to worry about

[@RealCherry8085]

britainica rule the waves

[@XxRemixerzxX]

@@noodles169 And don't forget that russia has got one of the worst strategic positions in the entire world, every single access to the sea that Russia has can be blocked off and blockaded

[@Guinness1066]

More like a sledgehammer 💪🏽

[@brentsummers7377]

Very powerful against attack from the air. However, only 4 of the six ships have anti ship harpoon missiles & these may be removed in a year or two. Against submarines they would be relying on their helicopter to defend the ship. Against other ships they have one 4.5 inch gun and some smaller weapons for dealing with pirates etc. What this seems to mean that in a war situation the Type 45 destroyers would protect the carrier and other ships from air attacks. The other frigates and US ships would protect the Type 45 destroyer from submarines and other naval vessels of the enemy. So off the coast of Crimea the Type 45 is vulnerable to surface vessels and submarines but not vulnerable to air attack. So in this sabre rattling or charade the Russians only threaten with aircraft, & small ships, & no submarines or large destroyers. By doing this it does not escalate the tensions. Both sides know what is going on.

[@skywatcher3133]

Correct, one torpedo and it is game over .And it's madness to remove the Harpoons.

[@iainansell5930]

@@skywatcher3133 not really, the whole premise of the type 45 was air defence.... its designed to be part of a carrier group- which would include an attack submarine- more effective than any ship..

[@brian8861]

@@skywatcher3133 in an actual war you wont see a lonely type 45 on its own, it will be with a carrier etc

[@loyalist5736]

We do have ASTUTE Hunter killers. ..which kill other subs .

[@Andrew-yb1uv]

Idiot. It has ONE job: AIR DEFENCE.

[@V14-x6n]

Type 45 Defender could easily take out all twenty russian aircraft and whatever they could have launched at it.

[@malikben930]

Keep telling yourself bullshit and hope for best

[@V14-x6n]

Malik Ben Any arguments why not? No? I didn’t think so. Hahaha. Another idiotic Putin-lover.

[@overlord4404]

@@V14-x6n ok lets see, the patrol boat that fired warning shots is armed with anti ship missiles, the defender itself was less than 20 km off the coast, a coast riddled with ASMs mind you, there were dozens of other much more heavily armed ships in the vicinity, by the time brits aquired firing solutions it would already get no less than 4 ASM fired at it and thats the best case scenario , and at that distance the only thing brits can do is watch and say oh bollo..

[@V14-x6n]

Overlord Another expert. Lol

[@overlord4404]

@@V14-x6n you asked for arguments and I provided them, this can all be deduced from information that is publically availabel, for examole you can search up rubin class for the patrol boat and see that it has asm or you can callculate how long it would take for something that can travel mach2+ to cover what looks like 5-10 km. And if you want to nitpick I can ask how do you know that type 45 could take them all on

[@phonix4956]

That ship always kick my ass in modern warships

[@mcred9512]

True hahaha 🤣 even I have INS Chennai wuth Good Anti Air, HMS Duncan break my Defense haha

[@mcred9512]

And Also That ship is Fast althouh HMS duncan is weak in Close Combat, His Firepower, Range, and Speed will dominate the Tier 2 Warships.

[@drandrewallan]

Pity you didn’t mention the propulsion system had to be replaced because it kept breaking down!!!

[@12309.]

But there’s only one currently available. The other five are sick. Again!

[@raywhitehead730]

6 August 2021, it was reported, that only One type 45 is currently sea worthy. Apparently 5 of 6 undergoing some type of repair or waiting repairs. The type 45 has been a nightmare of propulsion type problems even when new.

[@TT-hd3zi]

That’s not quite correct, HMS Dragon is also sea worthy and is just undergoing light maintenance alongside in Portsmouth.

[@alvintapia4943]

This is the reason why russia made a warning shot only it look like a gun salute to the destroyer 😅

[@unglaubichuberlieber8048]

ask the sailors on that destroyer if they had felt the salute

[@l3gionmusic814]

@@unglaubichuberlieber8048 They probably didn't even know it happened the shots were that insignificant.

[@Вася-ш3щ]

@@l3gionmusic814 Yeah, that's why they changed their course and run away out of Russian borders. And the thing is - will they repeat such incident next time? Cuz Russian defence ministry has warned them, that next time bombs will be thrown not just on path, but on target.

[@boyteebah3794]

@@Вася-ш3щ i hope they do… looking forward to WW3

[@Вася-ш3щ]

@@boyteebah3794 It's up to Brits and the rest of West. If Brits want WW3, they can try again. In case of their pan will be sunken or burned, the West will think twice - do they need do die for that british clown Boris's idiotism on not. I think, they'll decide to stay alive with peace. And yes. i'm as the citizen of Russia approve burning british pan next time if they repeat it.

[@TheOriginalJAX]

Also fun fact you cant break this ships back (hint she's got no spine) , you can punch a hole in it (although good luck trying) These were built with being tough as a main priority.

[@scotwilson4169]

Plenty of water/oil within every ship the the world, leaks/floods hardly ever come from any part of the hull, 99% of the time a flood is from within and not usually a big deal. More like someone accidentally overfilling a tank or not doing a connection up properly 😂

[@TheOriginalJAX]

@@scotwilson4169 You know to much about what happens in the Bilge..... Haha lol.

[@TheOriginalJAX]

In defence of BAE and the MOD, my government was being run by idiots (still are), the original order was for at least 10 vessels. Blair cancelled half the order.

[@juanmanuelrodriguez1823]

Son eso y más.

[@milespostlethwaite1154]

Blair was a twat

[@hypersonicmonkeybrains3418]

@@milespostlethwaite1154 He STILL is!

[@naz.tanzeem5982]

His a war creminal,needs to be at the hague.

[@derf9465]

Every government cancels orders. The tories cost millions for a contract breach regarding f35. One government wants it the next doesn't.

[@ВалераКапитан-у8ч]

"Just How helpful is Type 45 Destroyer." --- That how this video should be named!

[@grahamlongley8298]

Defends the aircraft carriers by supplying anti missile support capabilities that the carrier does not have

[@ВалераКапитан-у8ч]

@@grahamlongley8298 I'm russian. Hi! _))))

[@rnf1227]

Never, in recent times, has there been a more impressive looking warship than the Type 81 Tribal class frigate.

[@alanjack7524]

1960's vintage - not as impresssive as the 1950's vintage T47 and T53 Surcouf classes of french destroyers. Great looking ships.

[@rnf1227]

@@alanjack7524 Disagree.

[@squadman3376]

The argentinians taught the royal navy hard lessons. This must be the result.

[@DonWan47]

How did that war turn out again?

[@sadnanmamun1583]

Lol

[@SirZanZa]

pretty sure that lesson was dealt out by the British they travelled half way around the globe in a period of massive dis-armament and military overhauls and kicked Argentina's butt in it's own back yard.

[@bepolite6961]

Really? They attacked the war ships and left the logistic and landing ships alone. Clever! really clever! Back to BA for slaps on the back and medals. Meanwhile some of the world best trained professional war fighters are landing ashore.

[@OldAgeTeddyboy]

Lucky for russia they decided not to start anything, this is the wrong ship to try and prove a point against..

[@fuke1345]

not against mach 3 missiles, they can't be scanned by radar

[@TT-hd3zi]

@@fuke1345 and what is your source for that obviously false claim?

[@chrisbooth7889]

Great video but you didn’t answer the question

[@cheeseandonions9558]

These videos are well produced, but obviously they're approved by Pentagon, so they're not going to respond anything resembling intelligence.

[@voicesofsanity]

Six type 45's built, only one operational.

[@krackerman3628]

That's some fine French technology there. A great European design.

[@Crusty_Camper]

Shows what you can do with top technology of a whole continent behind you.

[@Crusty_Camper]

@Raider Primus You have missed the point, but Krackerman and I get it.

[@whitepony8443]

Britannia rule the waves! Again!

[@cursedcat281]

Boris is right that wasn't a warning shot, that was a gun salute.

[@donaldlee8249]

HMS Defender has the capability to destroy the whole Russian Black Sea fleet

[@alexanderfoster3628]

There are only four sets of Harpoon for the entire T45s. A T45 will only have 4 Harpoon missiles.

[@donaldlee8249]

@@alexanderfoster3628 Russian Black Sea fleet has only two gun boat currently at Sevastopol, I doubt you even need harpoon.

[@muhammadrevan854]

Russia🔥🧨🇷🇺 satan avangard powerful weaphon👍👍🔥🇷🇺🔥👍🇷🇺

[@robertduklus6555]

its not 1805 Trafalgar, any pommy ship in the Black Sea can be vaporized without any Russian ship leaving the port. Its called anti ship missiles launched from the coast or the air. Now enjoy your beans for brekky and dont forget to keep up with oral hygine.......

[@muhammadrevan854]

@@robertduklus6555 Kinzhal,belgorod👍👍👍

[@philchristmas4071]

Great destroyer by our beloved British ally. 🇺🇸🤝🇬🇧

[@ianmckinney3446]

You forgot to mention HMS dragon just shot down a Mach 8 sea skipper.

[@TT-hd3zi]

No it didn’t.

[@onaponap8168]

Rusky Coast Guard hoping harsh words might scare off a type 45 Destroyer. Good Luck with that.

[@FDDFGGSHORTS]

If "get away from my territory" is harsh word for u, that means you're idiot

[@juniorleslie4804]

The very procurement process that the MOD created, is causing the very cost overruns, that the government criticized. Lol

[@stephenco862]

Need to add anti-submarine weapins

[@aegg9915]

That’s what frigates are for

[@kevinjones6328]

To add ASW weapons you’d also need to add a whole suite of dedicated sensors as well. It’s not quite so simple as sticking a couple of torpedo launchers on her, there’s the passive and/or active sonars, their associated systems and crew to operate them, not to mention adding some sort of transport system from the magazine. The Merlin or Wildcat are capable of engaging subs but the Type 23 is a dedicated ASW platform, so in any environment where the ASW threat is substantial then a Type 45 wouldn’t be the asset you use or you’d pair it with a 23 or other NATO ASW asset.

[@gazza7uk646]

it has anti sub weapons,do your homework

[@kevinjones6328]

As I pointed out the helicopter has ASW weapons, there’s a difference to them being fitted on the ship with the associated sensor suite. If you want to rely on the fit of a Wildcat to find and engage an SSN then be my guest. Not that I’d know, I’ve only served on ASW frigates hunting Russian SSN’s during the Cold War.

[@scotwilson4169]

The anti-submarine weapon is not at all being designed for anti-submarine warfare.... And deafening the subs searching for it 😂

[@drawingdead9025]

48 missiles isn't enough for true fleet defense. Literally twice as many cells on US Burkes. AND, those Burkes will have 10ish of those cells filled with ESSM (50Km range) that are quad packed so 40 missiles in 10 cells.

[@78XT500]

Nice, but can it stop rubber dingies crossing the channel from Africa?

[@bobthebomb1596]

If given orders to do so, yes.

[@cheeseandonions9558]

I'm frigging afraid of destroyers... :( But I suppose all the surface ships are afraid of a single nuclear submarine.

[@alpearson9158]

nope

[@puellamservumaddominum6180]

It all depends. Submarine very powerful and stealthy . Also can die easy from sigle air launched torpedo if know where it is. Certainly will take a submarine over any number of Zumwalt destroyers

[@michaeljohnson4258]

@@puellamservumaddominum6180 modern subs are very very quiet so getting attack criteria on a modern sub to drop a torpedo and get a kill is very difficult

[@ecoflex]

Uk has stealth submarines does Russia no

[@puellamservumaddominum6180]

@@michaeljohnson4258 submarines especially boomers are tracked and followed as soon as leave port

[@pastorrich7436]

Interesting if not a timely review of sea power in the news! Good show. Cheers!!

[@RJ-py2zc]

Only four of the destroyers will receive harpoon missiles but they will be withdrawn from service in 2023. After that those ships will have no dedicated anti-ship capabilities because there is no immediate replacement available. That is absolutely insane. They also don't have anti-submarine capabilities, so no torpedoes or something like ASROC. Only the heli can engage submarines. They are also lacking serious land-attack capabilities except for that little gun. Furthermore they can only carry 48 missiles in those vls cells since they can't quadpack them like ESSM missiles on american destroyers. 48 missiles isn't much. One or two saturation attacks and these ships will be out of ammo. Comparing all this with american or japanese destroyers raises the question what the actual fck were the people in charge of this program thinking when they decided to aquire those half-assed ships. It should be a no-brainer to have them equipped with all types of weapons like their american counterparts for example.

[@KARL-el3hr]

Good analysis my friend, I actually laughed when u said " Wht the FCk were the people in charge doing w/ this etc...

[@danielmonk7451]

I agree it's potential is huge and it has hugely advanced technology but it's not used correctly the UK has no bollocks anymore

[@ThatCarGuy]

Perfectly stated. IMO the UK should have just bit the bullet and bought Arleigh bruke class destroyers, that are mostly stripped(if they wanted, and would help the price differential) , this way the UK could add Sampson and whatever other radars and control centers they wanted(while still creating UK jobs) and keeping the US VLS, but then mixing and matching as now the UK would also have AEGIS and could use the SM3 and ESSM, etc from the US VLS. You would then have a tested design, keeping R&D prices down, making how much the AB class cost negligible.

[@danielmonk7451]

@@ThatCarGuy yeah hopefully they learn from the mistake

[@danielmonk7451]

@ENGLISH KNIGHT what ship and what fleet

[@John-bv2ft]

Great ship

[@tsuna111]

DARING class ship hmmm

[@TheAndr3nalin]

Which one better between type 45 and type 55 (PLA), both destroyer ?

[@PitchBlackTales]

Are you joking? 😂😂

[@ali_kazmi]

Type 55 is better ofc. But that's because it was made to be - it's a ship killer. Type 45 was made to be an air-defence ship and it does that really well.

[@JB17521or]

@@ali_kazmi T45 is designed for AA operations in a Carrier strike group, right?

[@ali_kazmi]

@@JB17521or Basically, the British Royal Navy has planned to make ships for the carrier strike group. On their own these ships are decent (not amazing) but together they are very effective. The Type 45 will act as an air defence ship, the Type 26 Frigate as an anti-submarine warfare ship and Type 31 as a general purpose frigate. These ships (and the astute class submarines) will protect the two Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers.

[@JB17521or]

@Raider Primus *heavy cruiser to a battleship*

[@juhall]

The issue is not how technologically impressive a Type 45 is. It clearly is impressive. The issue is that that close to the Russian littoral, any ship can be overwhelmed by a multitude of attacks from a multitude of different angles. Hopefully that never happens, but it’s also worth mentioning that everyone also knows that this incident allows Russia to collect some serious ELINT on Type 45 capabilities.

[@oldgreggscreamybaileys6618]

It was an exercise to see how the Russians would respond. There was a US spy plane up in the air tracking the Russians response. Also there would have been an astute class sub close by as we know as one popped up in the med days before.

[@scotwilson4169]

That made up video only shows what's Public knowledge, they literally did a serious filming inside a type 45 (Duncan I believe?) Which shows a lot more than this video, and that's on public TV, probably on iPlayer right now 👍

[@EnglishScripter]

Type 45 can track 1000's targets at once. Very hard to overwhelm this, especially due to Russian missiles, be terrible at stealth

[@neilgriffiths6427]

Damn I want to serve on one of these babes!

[@nationalist5422]

Total armament: 48 anti-air missiles So all I need is 49 cheap loitering munitions to destroy the radar. Got it.

[@Twirlyhead]

+ 2x Phalanx CIWS

[@Colonel_Blimp]

That’s like all the nerds who talk about 1V1 battleship fights. Never happens. Ships are units in a task group.

[@Mulberry2000]

Wrong you do not understand the type 45 radar and sensor system and the missles its carries. They are one shot high kill. The type T45 can fire 32 missiles and control them at the same time to their targets. No other ship in the world can do that. The US burke has 96 missiles and US doctrine says fire 2 per target, also their radar is not up to scratch so part of the targetting is done manually. This means it cannot fire most of missles at the same time, bascially it has to limit missles fires to below 20 per salvo, that is a big thing in the age of 4 mach missles coming at you. So you have limited radar targeting capability and firing two missles per target, which nulifies the missle advantage of the burke. Effectiviely the Bruke class has problems dealing with saturation attack of 20 more missiles. Better to have one shot per kill and before you say it, the Type 45 could and should have more missles it just means more targets to lock on and destroy. No other ship can do that or could in future except a modified burke.

[@allmarshall2890]

I'm not watching this video because the secrets of this ship was found on a bus stop. Everyone already knows. If you don't watch the tv show, Google she and the page's. On a bus stop

[@CommonSenserules1981]

Planted, clearly..

[@allmarshall2890]

Shame to say it yes. Wish I found it. Omg I'd read and love to give back

[@daryl198920]

Can we see these ships in war thunder 😜

[@alfiemarsh1774]

We need them!

[@valamaas]

2006... 2016

[@Rtgv123]

Basically a Kolkata class with poor anti ship and non existent anti sub.

[@robertnemeth6248]

It will also get a radar upgrade and C3 upgrade. It will have a ASTER 39 upgrade to the block 1 standard. Tge new misike is ABM capable. Sea Ceptor san also target surface targets.

[@chien7541]

No matter how powerful the Type 45 Destroyer is, it matters how many potential corpses are on board. And the decibels of howling Britain and its flock after this epic burial alive. From Russia with Death.

[@matty2076]

made no absolutely no sense

[@khanf2936]

The Harper sonic rackets just like that gonna sink

[@kartikthakur256]

NO GRENADE LAUNCHERS , IT MIGHT TAKE OUT AIR MISSILES BUT WHAT ABOUT TORPEDOES , BOMBS,ANTI SUBMARINES WEAPONS AND SEA MINES ? . IT CAN BECOME A EASY TARGET FOR THEM .

[@jamesstorr390]

I think people with more brain cells than you have already thought about this

[@matty2076]

torpedos are considered pretty primitive weapons nowadays, they travel significantly slower than missiles due to the water resistance, and with the radar capabilities on these ships nothing submerged can really get close enough to hit them.

[@TT-hd3zi]

@@matty2076 ship’s radar cannot see underwater.

[@Jo-rz6bs]

Afaik, it has a towed sonar, and mainly relies on its helicopters for submarine defence before they can teach torpedo range

[@kartikthakur256]

@@Jo-rz6bs helicopter has limited use.

[@joeson7700]

Newly developed HYPER Resonance missile ( Mach 6 ) , will out- matched the out-dated Mach 3 missile

[@nozem7184]

Remember the russians ,learned from the the uk and the netherlands how to build ships ,and they used the intelligence and know how of the dutch to lift the submarine Kursk ! Never forget many saylors in ww2 ,on the cold run to deliver equipmnent to Murmansk ,many saulors lost there life this is never Given much attention ,look at a large memorial in Rotterdam for the diseased saylors .

[@hypersonicmonkeybrains3418]

It would be good if each missile could launch and then split into 2 or 4 smaller missiles when needed such as during a saturation attack.

[@RR-us2kp]

Or it can simply shoot multiple missiles.

[@hypersonicmonkeybrains3418]

@@RR-us2kp well lets say its shooting down a fighter jet it needs a warhead of a certain size but what if its attacked by small drones, its a waste of a big warhead, it would be nice if that one missile could split into 4 including the warhead and each independently seek the target.

[@scotwilson4169]

@@hypersonicmonkeybrains3418 Phalanx for that

[@nikkip3385]

If a t45 is under a saturation attack, we're already in ww3. So it doesn't really matter does it.

[@Vincent-xd8nu]

What’s is your opinion about the Fremm program?Thanks .

[@TP-ie3hj]

I love when these videos go on and on about how powerful a weapons system is. Using the manufactures info. Yet totally unproven. Better to see how they stack up in battle. Type 42 was praised as high tech in the early eighties, aluminum superstructures and sea dart. Argentinians helped correct the manufactures data on those weapons systems and technologies. Truth is no idea how well it will work in a full scale battle, tell it happens, problem is there is so much hype tactics grow around the hype. That becomes a recipe for disaster. Just watch a video of KSA's Patriot Pac 3 trying to stop a old seventies Houthi missile! The Patriot Pac 3 takes out the 7-11 and a few residential buildings, fails to hit anything.Yet it can track 1000 targets small as a humming bird able to intercept missiles at mach 3 blhaaa blhaa blhaa.

[@quadg5296]

The US gave the British zero chance to take back the Falkland's, due to being faced by a large navy, a land based air force and having no AWACS. not to mention the distance from home. look how that turned out.... sea dart actually performed better than it did on paper. even hitting a 4.5 inch navel shell in flight. and it got the first intercept of an anti ship missile ever in actual combat. yes the type 42 got lengthened due to hull cracking. but they did spend months in the worst seas on the planet.. the southern ocean in autumn/winter. All in all the campaign left the American navy a bit bemused. we chased the argentine navy into port, gutted their air force. and trounced their conscript army. with a single large taskforce.

[@Mk1Male]

No idea what point you are trying to make. Of course nothing is proven until it's proven in actual warfare so what is your alternative? Are you suggesting that countries should go to war to test their newest weapons? You're not making sense.

[@themc.kennyshow6585]

Ur speaking facts bro. No system is perfect. No weapon is perfect. No ship is perfect. Period

[@quadg5296]

@@Mk1Male The OP used sea dart to try to prove that weapons are not as good as their sale sheet. ironically sea dart performed better than its sales sheet at both low targets and at high targets at range. in an actual war. i was agreeing with him that "on paper" and "in real war" are two different things. hence the US thinking we could not win the war on paper. but both are examples of overperforming, not underperforming. which is the exact opposite of the point he was trying to make.

[@TP-ie3hj]

@@Mk1Male No I am suggesting that when one reviews a weapon and makes a video about said weapon claiming to be a military channel presenting themselves as an authority on the subject they should do more then read the manufactures sales pitch. To each his own and all that, they can make what they want and I can comment on it. This is where we are. Now to me I am not sure if it makes sense but thats how its set up.

[@endurofly]

Perhaps it will be more lucky then HMS Sheffield or more capable in electronics then USS Donald Cook

[@paulevans7742]

HMS Sheffield sank more due to crew failings than equipment failings. Primary failure was that the IO aboard Sheffield thought they were out of range of the Super Etendards, not realizing they could refuel air to air, so the ship was at a more relaxed state than it should have been. The main radar was switched blanked out at the time due to other ship to ship communications.

[@elcyd]

@@paulevans7742 the issue was that SCOT (sat comms) was being used which in affect deafened the ships EW kit and therefore did not detect the attacking aircrafts radar furthermore, the Argentinian pilots pecked the lobes of the 965 LRAW radar to get as close as possible before releasing the weapon. Nothing to do with the ships company's failings.

[@stevefarrell9197]

With all due respect, the type 45 destroyer is nowhere near the air defense destroyer of Arleigh Burke. It's definitely the best air defense destroyer Great Britain has ever developed but the 48 tube sea viper launcher limit to Astre 15 and Astre 30 missiles can't begin to compare to 96 tubes of the Mark 41 launcher firing evolved sea Sparrow missiles, sm2MRs, sm2ER's sm6 and the ballistic missile interceptors sm3.....

[@Dazzxp]

Yeah it's more of a long range interceptor and does lack long fire fight endurance due to the limited missile holdings.

[@carlbentley6951]

get a life

[@Andrew-yb1uv]

The US radar is junk.

[@paulevans7742]

Have any of the Arleigh Burk class ever been asked to switch off its radar during NATO exercises because its capabilities were 'constraining the exercise' ? they are different ships with different capabilities

[@stevefarrell9197]

@@paulevans7742 ridiculous!

[@monkigunmkiiflash3110]

Seems lacklustered on the Anti Submarine Warfare side.

[@robertduklus6555]

poor brits clapping, dreaming of the glory years past while at home their government puts a chokehold on their freedom to do anything except enjoy the rain.

[@kondeamani5106]

Remember HMS hood?

[@Ukfairgrounds]

Yeah a ship from 1918 what about it ???

[@ThatCarGuy]

Good for the UK, albeit they should have just bought and integrated some of their technology they like into the Arleigh burke class. But I do understand price is a big factor.

[@ThatCarGuy]

​@ENGLISH KNIGHT Please troll someone else. The AB class is better it's not even arguable. The AB class has ballistic missile defense in both terminal and midcourse phase. It has better anti-ship capability, it has better anti-air capability, it has more about 3 x ESSMs alone then the entire type 45 VLS. "Basically the samspson long range radar can see the furthest in the world" Keep smoking the good stuff man. The longest range radar in the world to my knowledge is THAAD with an almost 5000km range. "The AN/TPY-2 Surveillance Transportable Radar, also called the Forward Based X-Band Transportable (FBX-T) is a long-range, very high-altitude active digital antenna array X band surveillance radar designed to add a tier to existing missile and air defence systems. It has a range of 2,900 mi (2,500 nmi; 4,700 km)." The an/spy-1 from the 70's has a 310km range where as the Samson has a 400km range... The modern An/Spy-6 range is classified, but we know it's 35x more powerful: "the transmit-receive modules will use new gallium nitride semiconductor technology. This will allow for higher power density than the previous gallium arsenide radar modules.The new radar will require twice the electrical power as the previous generation while generating over 35 times as much radar power." The fact you think a ship that can intercept ICMBs in their midcourse phase has a shorter range radars then the Sampson is laughable, but hell you thought it was the strongest radar in the world. LOL.

[@carwyngriffiths]

Nope

[@ThatCarGuy]

@@carwyngriffiths Blocked you were warned to stop trolling. Enjoy trolling others.

[@stephennelmes2537]

@@ThatCarGuy Merciless but true. Type 45 is good but lacks fire power. Fuelled a lot of AB destroyers over the years mostly in middle east and they really are built for battle. Usually get cookies sent over at the end of a RAS too which are greatly appreciated by the deck team, something our own type 45s never bother to do. And, the Americans can carry out a RAS without constantly screaming at each other unlike the RN.

[@alpearson9158]

Arleigh Burke being replaced

[@doogleticker5183]

Six hulls? To do all that? LMAO.

[@Gorsky69]

It is necessary to thank Russia for not sending this beautiful British destroyer to the bottom of the Black Sea .

[@Ooog__]

there isnt any evidence that a Russian ship even shot at a British ship

[@minghaozhong210]

It may be powerful, but can’t handle the Russia.

[@Saikyouuu]

Russia's coast guard and Navy vs BBC

[@blakespower]

its just a boat it can be sunk like any other boat

[@2ndkingsissi]

Rubbish, waste of £’s

[@darkofius]

One compares destroyer with NATO frigate that vent aground and then allegedly being destroyed not to fall prey to unfriendly ayes, in the case and analogy, much is to desire in a sense, that the vessel is allegedly build to keep the peace.

[@worldarmy6545]

Nice

[@derf9465]

Who knows they exactly go to war against their equals.

[@johnkong6193]

just how fast it can run

[@mark-1rc502]

Enough to get the Russians to send out 30 aircraft

[@mikeybrant5595]

Apparently not powerfull enough to protect an aircraft carrier.

[@filli2429]

can you make a video about the f125 this modern german thing?

[@paddydamien8437]

I have the same question for the T45 that I have for China, who has it fought?! Nobody.

[@loyalist5736]

So the same for most ships .

[@freedom14639]

Just good at shooting down planes. Noting more.

[@keshavbhardwaj2799]

Make video on indian ✌️ destroyer

[@chrisck3405]

Smaller than my fishing boat.

[@mathewferstl7042]

I swear most of the comments on these types of videos are just so cancer

[@myominkhine4343]

Zarcon is all out easily destroyed almost of UK warships.

[@redbeard3923]

As long you don't leave the plans in the bus shelter

[@ecoflex]

Maybe they were left deliberately to track the spy system

[@Brian-om2hh]

No, they're on the counter in the chip shop round the corner.....

[@angelwhite376]

Only 2 is working they can't preform on warm waters and all need new engines.. They need scraped.. They may have OK weapons but the boats are rubbish..

[@regizeelement8511]

For its time, which was 2009 lol

[@kumarandisamy7468]

Can any member explain does type 45 is design to counter Russian or Chinese hypersonic missile attack. Does the ship is design as it claim to be. A expert member opinion is highly appreciated

[@EnglishScripter]

So you have the Russian Sandstone Missile. Which is not stealthy at all. Stealth for a offence weapon matters much more than a speed. The Asters have very very good accuracy, therefore I do not think the sandstone missile will be a problem, but where you have the YJ-21, that's a different matter its very very fast. I reckon they can shoot them, but the accuracy falls out the window. You then have the problem, being how many offensive weapons a Chinese vessel carries, and the Type 45 would have burned through its ammunition. With the CAMM, that might have been solved.

[@dominationsrebellion6433]

😂 😂 🤣 🤣 Russia: Hold my Vodka

[@bentos117]

russia: hold my soiled pants :D

[@chrishall8705]

@Un Know ok Vlad bot.

[@Вася-ш3щ]

@Un Know Actually russian hypersonic "Zircon" will make it much faster than 5 minutes. Brits even will not have time to leave the toilets or sand a last message to family.

[@anthonyquantrill119]

The last thing the world needs is more British sea dominance and colonialism. Russia should have sunk that royal tub last week instead of trying to play nice.

[@robertlangley399]

What a nice person you are take brake have a cup of tea ☕️

[@4evaavfc]

It isn't new, though.

[@JB17521or]

What is new? T45 is from the mid 2000s, right?

[@JB17521or]

@Raider Primus new in this context. Is 15 years old, new? Thats the question. No need to be offensive.

[@JB17521or]

@Raider Primus 1st year Oberstufe = 9th year (4 Volksschule, 4 Gymnasium Unterstufe, 1 Gymnasium Oberstufe) The 'offensive' part was, your advice to ask my "mommy and daddy". Which would state that I'm 8, which I am not.

[@hugoebenfeldt6615]

Is this an ad? Honestly, the propulsion system has meant that availability of the already few ships of the class has been dreadful and the PAAMS took almost a decade of upgrades and improvements to show any sort of reliability. Being designed to protect a CSG (carrier strike group) rather than Britain, it also has not shown that it can engage ICBMs which the Aegis can. The relatively few missile launcher cells per hull is also somewhat troublesome, especially considering how far potential adversaries has come with regards to swarming attacks with drones and missiles. This is a clear vulnerability, and with too few ships it will just be impossible to provide a CSG with two Type 45 destroyers and counteract this problem in case of a conflict. They are also known to be very noisy and with little capability to conduct anti-submarine warfare (ASW) except if it carries a helicopter with ASW capabilities (this reliance on a helicopter as the almost sole protection against submarines is problematic however simply due to that a helicopter cannot stay in the air for 24/7 or cover a very large area with their dipping sonars) so it operating alone would probably not happen outside peacetime. A CSG, amphibious group or other types of assembled fleets would almost certainly include at least one Type 23/26 frigate with better ASW capabilities (mainly due to their towed sonar arrays) or/and an Audacious-class submarine. However, here the problems of limited quantity shows up again. If Britain was engaged in war with a technologically advanced country, there simply would not be enough Type 45's to protect a CSG, an amphibious fleet, Britain herself, patrols in the north sea, atlantic convoys, mediterranean patrols and British overseas territories. The war scenarios that Britain and many allies are prepared for are those of irregular warfare against military destabilisation efforts, not conducting sea warfare against highly advanced hostile assets. The Type 45 class of destroyers are very highly capable for anti-missile air defence. PAAMS is by now reliable and proven to function very well, and with the Power Improvement Package (PIP) modifications to the class, their poor availability track record will surely improve. Still, the (lack of) quantity and rather limited capability (few cells per hull, little experience in defending against ICBMs and almost no ASW capability) is troublesome.

[@darkofius]

If one takes analogy with a frigate that runs aground and sunk during NATO exercises, apparently they could not detect the shore rock at a short distance, the destroyer is likely in the same class but by displacement bigger and extremely expensive toy in hands of admirals with average intelligence domiciled in the UK. Now we know for sure that admirals' stupidity can be stretched from London to the Black sea.

[@josephmachado1741]

We need nuclear battle cruse ships to compete with Russians but better armed, we do carriers why not cruse ships?

[@procs-9196]

Do not ever provoke the following countries; Russia, China or North Korea, you know that I mean.......you war ship and the royal army is a sandwich to the above countries, in other words, watch your steps, look after yourself bud

[@socialmedianine]

A war is likened to a game of chess . It is a civilised way to determine the winner without losing any loved ones in the battle . Eventually nukes will be used as the battle becomes hotter and serious . HUMAN may not see the skies and turned into rats living underground . Let us live as one Hunan being . Think of MARS , probably the surviving inhabitants are living in underground cities .

[@Klliansimabras]

Nuke will never be used.

[@Brian-om2hh]

What's to say that someone may use nukes as a opening gambit? Like you, most seem to assume they may be used *eventually* to tip the sway of a battle. But what if they are deployed right from the outset? You'd always hope nobody is actually crazy enough to do it, but..............

[@Mr.J.xiansheng]

Type 45 is good ship, Mini MG Rover Jaguar Lotus are good cars, what happened to UK.

[@Ukfairgrounds]

Type45 is one of the worlds best destroyers better then Russia or Chinese

[@umu8934]

Fooking not amazing Type45 can track 1k~2k targets, 1k targeting lock but what the fuck , it only carries 48 missile nyahaha 😹😹😹 stupidity on the ministry of defense. It didn't have capability to defend and destroy a submarine of it's own. Why relying only in 1 helicopters when you can launch both torpedoes at the same time. Yeap the Royal Navy needs to start the super dreadnought or super destroyer now

[@WorldEngineersOnline]

A nice movie "Hunter Killer" showed what a Russian Destroyer can do

[@Cartoonman154]

It's a movie, idiot.

[@Captainrave]

More than likely breakdown.

[@samsar785]

If you compare Type 45 with Vishakapatnam Class destroyer of India and Type 52D of China, who is the winner?

[@charlesboyd2905]

Type 45

[@TT-hd3zi]

@@charlesboyd2905 Not in a head to head battle, the Type 45s don't often carry anti-ship missiles (and when they do, they use decades-old Harpoons).

[@jackd6571]

Vishakapatnam Class isnt needed. Kolkata Class Destroyer is miles ahead of Type 45.

[@jackd6571]

@@TT-hd3zi its just not about head to head battle(Anti-ship roles). Offcourse Kolkata or Vishakapatnam class is way ahead due to 16 x BrahMos on them.....but even in terms of Anti-sub capability....Type 45 falls much behind as it simply doesn even have Torpedo tubes . Coming to radar and Anti-air, Type 45 may have just a SLIGHT advantage because it carries 16 additional Anti-Air missiles. However the quality of both radars and Anti-Air missiles(Aster 30 and Barak 8) are pretty much equal.

[@michaellou7101]

052D will sink them all.....

[@dickiemcnutsack3248]

Beautiful ship

[@gurugamer8632]

Can this stop Russians best nuclear weapons?

[@theododds8046]

Small edit, Royal Navy no longer utilises Lynx helicopters, it uses Wildcats :)

[@michaelwong4303]

I like to ask one question: the 🇬🇧 has made a ship of 8,000 tons. Quite a big one, yeah? Then why only fit 48 launchers in it? Afterall the 🇺🇸 Areligh Burke class, bigger at 9,,600 tons, carries ,96 launchers, so logically the 🇬🇧 ship should have the ability to carry around 80 launchers!! OK some argue that there is NO NEED to carry that many missles,.......Er if that's the case then why build a 8,000 ton ship? If the 🇬🇧 only want to carry 48 into battle, then a 4,500 ton FRIGATE is all they needs!! Can somebody explain this illogical setup to me please?

[@michaelwong4303]

@Raider Primus looking at other nation's design/setup, if the 🇺🇸 in the 80's could produce a warship with a launcher for every 100 tons, then today, one should be able to do better!! So a modern 8,500 ton warship should be able to easily carry around 80 launchers!! So using this logic, if the 🇬🇧 Navy only goes to fight with 48 launchers in their ships, then why make a 8,500 ton ship? A 4,000ton ship should be sufficient given improvement in modern design efficiency!! Of course there are ships that Wright 400,000 tons, but that's a different class altogether.....

[@michaelwong4303]

@Raider Primus em.....If you looked at the 🇺🇸 can Areligh Burke class destroyer. It weighs ,9,600 tons and had 96 launchers. The Ticonderoga class weights 10,000 tons and had over 100 launchers. So looking at the design of destroyers, in general，do you not think it make sense to say a launcher for every 100 tons is a logical design standard? Afterall if one country could do it 20+ years ago, then today the design should be even more efficient? Ok the seraj class: it has a 107 mm MRLS and DShK 12.7mm machine gun. Where are the 12 missile launcher?? I think you have confused this Multiple Rocket Launcher with missile launcher!!

[@thanhnguyen-xi8fq]

I visited a Japanese Destroyer, although i knew "on the paper" all the specs of the ship, however, to confirm it, i tried to talk with one of the sailor...and the answer was a "smile"...that's it. One must be naive enough to belive that they will tell you everything about the ship on WIKI or KZbin...Traditionally, Russia will over stated their weapon, NATO will under state their weapon, but secrets or the REAL POWER of the weapon always be kept... That extra "weight" of the HMS Defender might be the Anti Submarine Suite or something like that but you never see it "on the paper"...

[@michaelwong4303]

@@thanhnguyen-xi8fq yes you are very likely to be right about NATO understating its weapon's ability....But i never said the🇷🇺 weapons are that good either..... So we compare "like for like", ie the information published on paper, assuming all NATO countries equally "understate" their true ability....

[@thanhnguyen-xi8fq]

@Raider Primus Again, what the public can see or read does not mean everything...that's the point. That's why we only know how good a weapon system is until it proves itself on the battle field, or real combat experience...S-400 missile for example, praised by Russian's mouth pieces as the best in the world bla, bla...but so terrible in use at Syria..., the same with Pantsir S1...

[@chance-dp4qg]

So no good against hypersonic missiles already outdated

[@TT-hd3zi]

Why isn’t it any good against hypersonics?

[@chance-dp4qg]

@@TT-hd3zi because hypersonic missiles travel at mach 5 and above the missiles on the ship can track supersonic missiles going mach 3 and below

[@TT-hd3zi]

@@chance-dp4qg and do you have a source which proves they can only intercept Mach 3 and below? I find that hard to believe because the intercepting missiles themselves Mach 4.5.

[@chance-dp4qg]

@@TT-hd3zi it say in video they can track missiles going mach 3 google hypersonic missiles not much can stop them

[@TT-hd3zi]

@@chance-dp4qg this video is not a reliable source. I don’t need to Google hypersonic missiles, I know what they are.