Type 42-class destroyer | Her Majesty's indomitable warrior

[@WeaponDetective]

Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Legends videos kzbin.info/aero/PLEMWqyRZP_Lq9j4Wz2QHo6dptTW3-tdIo Please click the link to watch our other British Systems videos kzbin.info/aero/PLEMWqyRZP_LrA_rFwr_1Gk4JBymGPNxSJ Please click the link to watch our other Weapon Legends-Sea videos kzbin.info/aero/PLEMWqyRZP_LqMGUzwZdeFlgQ9LHuY32ZX

[@brianshipman5313]

I served on 3 type 42`s and they were great ships to work on. I served on HMS Cardiff during the Falklands war. Out of the 5 that tookpart in the war only Exeter and Cardiff returned undamaged. RIP those still on patrol. We will remember you.

[@seanireland2188]

pompey here thanks for your service

[@darrenjones3681]

@@brianshipman5313 I also remember Devonport based ship’s returning which visible damage in some cases particularly my neighbour who was on HMS Argonaut which the two bomb entry holes in the side were clearly visible which if I remember correctly killed two crew despite not exploding, I also remember Atlantic conveyer and Atlantic Causeway being loaded with extra Harrier and chinook in plymouth sound only one chinook managed to take off Atlantic Conveyor before she was his fatally , god rest alll who were lost at sea and on land least we forget them , something I will always remember

[@gowdsake7103]

Served on Glasgow after the Falkland's she was bolloxed

[@williamdodds1394]

Really ? Sheffield sunk one sea dart launcher and they had to remove the boats to install close in weapons brits never designed nice ships just look at Hood all firebombs should never attacked a real battleship the mighty Bismark.

[@1oriss]

I also served on 3 type 42's. HMS Coventry in both surface and sub surface mode, plus Newcastle and York. Was quite fond of the old 42's.

[@stephenpickering5968]

Good video but you missed out HMS Gloucester shooting down and Iraqi Silkworm missile in the first Gulf War thus becoming the first warship in history to down a missile with a missile. It's also worth mentioning that the Sea Dart missile could also be used against ships giving T42 a limited ant-ship capability.

[@peterharrington8709]

Two very good points. Additionally many commentators mention that the Argentine AF was restricted in operating it's Mirage fighters at higher altitudes due to Sea Dart. This allowed the carrier's Sea Harriers to engage them effectively.

[@ChiefTiff]

No aluminium was used in the construction of the Type 42’s; only the Type 21 frigates and Round Table class Landing Ship (Logistics) had aluminium superstructures. The later Type 23 frigates also used it but only for non-essential areas such as the funnel, masts and bridge.

[@habahan4257]

Thanks for re-uploading, it was nice to watch this excellent video again.

[@mohammedsaysrashid3587]

It was a wonderful video about Type 42 class destroyers designed by UK 🇬🇧..video clearly explained all characteristics of this Royal navy vessel...thank you an excellent ( weapon detective 🕵️‍♂️) channel for sharing

[@TristanCutler01]

Nice to see a video on the 42s even if there were a few inaccuracies. I served in Glasgow. A bit cramped but great ship.

[@itzyaboimemez2074]

Excellent video again! I really want to see you guys do a video on the Philippine Navy's frigates (Jose Rizal-class and/or Miguel Malvar-class) or the MPAC attack/assault crafts.

[@makegaminggreatagain3907]

Interesting that all the Type 42 Sheffield Class Destroyers have been retired, but nine Type 23 Frigates are still active. Had HMS Sheffield be equipped with GWS.25 Seawolf, it might still be sailing.GWS.30 Sea Dart and GWS.25 Seawolf were retired for the VLS launched Sea Ceptor which the Type 23/26 Frigates employed. Weapon Detective: In our next four videos we take a look at the Type 23 Duke Class Frigate, HMS Bristol, point defense systems GWS.25/30 and Sea Ceptor and finally MSI Defense DS.30B

[@marzipan1560]

The installation of Seawolf into T42s was seriously looked at post Falklands but, they just didn’t have the space for launch systems and deep magazines. Introduction of T23s was delayed to allow lessons learnt in the Falklands to be integrated into their design, hence why some are still in service.

[@MarkoZalad-x4j]

I recall that Denis Healey cancelled the automated Reloading system planned on the first batch and replaced it with a winch and pulley as the argument was cost, and the fact that all 22 Sea Darts would be fired off in a matter of minutes!

[@jonellison9832]

Former RN weapons engineer here. This is BS. The Type 42 GWS30 Seadart reload system was fully automated. No winch. No pulley.

[@davewood6339]

Nice footage of the T42's i served on two Newcastle and York both brilliant drafts. I feel the negative twist on the narrative was unjust, considering the length of service they gave to the UK

[@bobbyrayofthefamilysmith24]

But they were a crap design.

[@davewood6339]

@bobbyrayofthefamilysmith24 you must have served on them then ? Or are you an armchair Admial

[@bobbyrayofthefamilysmith24]

@@davewood6339 No I've never been in the military I'm just an engineer with an interest in military vehicles and to me they seem very weakly armed with poor redundancy. No doubt as a result of MPs deciding to save a few bob. I'm not criticising the people who served on them. They deserve the best kit available but it appears the government never wants to pay for them to have it.

[@oliversteward2011]

Great video 📹 👍 👏

[@patrickpirzer4080]

The Type 42 destroyers were not bad. They just had the misfortune of running into the Exocet in 1982. Further - after the sinking of the israeli frigate "Eilat" by an egyptian "Osa" fast attack craft - the europeans had to know that anti-ship-missiles can be a danger.

[@EdMcF1]

Yes, and the RN also had Exocets, so they knew what they were capable of. The lack of serious missile defence was a massive flaw, as for the use of PVC, criminal neglect of sailors' lives.

[@brunol-p_g8800]

@@EdMcF1indeed, not only did the RN also have ship launched Exocets, but they were briefed by the French navy on how aircrafts would use the Exocets before leaving for the Falklands.

[@michaelhearn3052]

It was the styx missiles that did the damage.

[@rat_king-]

First Cold war..... Welcome to the second Bro's !

[@WALTERBROADDUS]

Nice video history.

[@arunta5]

They were on the "Front Lines" during the Falklands Crisis and its doubtful without them the British would have won the battles on sea and land. Admiral "Sandy" Woodward was a very capable commander and was able to get the job done.

[@MrLorenzovanmatterho]

She was our girl and we loved her, eternal Father long to save...!

[@Idahoguy10157]

The US Navy studied the Falkland war for lessons learned

[@stephenchappell7512]

the biggest being the lack of AEW following the Gannets retirement without replacement

[@darrenjones3681]

@@stephenchappell7512 yes because they couldn’t operate from the pocket carriers like Invincible and illustrious, Ark Royal and ocean which is why the sea king Baggers were developed

[@gowdsake7103]

Never fucking helped tho

[@JHunt-l4s]

Hms Sheffield is the unfortunate type 42......

[@givenfirstnamefamilyfirstn3935]

The Argentinian ones escorting the General Belgrano showed great speed when they relocated.

[@Crissy_the_wonder]

Could the batch 3s carry more Sea Darts? I have books that have conflicting info on Sea Dart capacity

[@WeaponDetective]

We used the Jane's Warships.

[@stephenpickering5968]

Yes. 44 missiles instead of 23

[@darrenjones3681]

@@Crissy_the_wonder there were two types of launcher, originally the two launcher as on Sheffield, later ships had multi tube in deck launchers

[@paultanton4307]

@@darrenjones3681 They didn't - they all used the same Twin Arm Launcher.

[@TheSubHunter1]

Some errors here the type 42 were all steel construction Type denotes its role and the type 82 had a different mission set In 2015 it was determined from a wreck survey the Exocet did explode The fire couldnt be put out as the Exocet took out the single main

[@yunsemreyazcoglu9732]

Abi aksanından dolayı uzun süredir merak ediyorum Türkmüsün?

[@WeaponDetective]

Good ear. Our narrator is a Turkish-American.

[@yunsemreyazcoglu9732]

@@WeaponDetective 😂

[@JustOnce-qw9jz]

🎉

[@erkanylmaz5564]

Thanks for video.

[@lachbullen8014]

The type 42 destroyer was capable of fighting the Soviet Union but the Royal Navy severely underestimated Argentina..

[@dna6882]

No I don't think so. To underestimate someone implies the ability or opportunity to prepare for something but then not to because you do not think that thing is a significant problem. That's not what happened. I think from studying the conversations of the admirals in the the weeks leading up to the conflict they were aware of the threat but they just did not have the ability to change their tactics to counter the threat. That is being uneqqiped, not underestimating.

[@ChiefTiff]

The Argentinians had purchased two type 42s themselves and therefore knew how to exploit every weakness in their design, particularly in regards to the long range air search radar and Seadart engagement parameters.

[@dna6882]

@ChiefTiff exactly. A fact I'm 100% sure the uk admirals knew about, didn't like, and could do precious little about. Also, the fact that the UK went out of their way to leverage all their political and espionage ability to prevent Argentina from acquiring any more exocet missiles once again shows they knew they were facing a threat but all they could do was try and limit the proliferation of that threat. (Stop them getting any more of the dam things). For anyone curious, the story of how the UK did that is a fascinating tale in itself.

[@darrenjones3681]

It’s weakness was more the two round sea dart launcher, as with Sheffield she had already engaged two targets and if she had sea wolf (6 tube launcher) no doubt she would have not been fatally hit

[@FinsburyPhil]

@@darrenjones3681 It takes less than 10 seconds for the reload of a Sea Dart missile from the magazine on to the launcher.

[@brunol-p_g8800]

Great coral reefs.

[@paulandsueroberts4121]

No CIW symptoms fitted which was a huge mistake,spoiling the ship for a 1/2 penny worth of tar.

[@darrenjones3681]

@@paulandsueroberts4121 cIw was still in its early stages later ships had phalanx and goalkeeper to be honest it was the first modern naval engagement by aircraft with modern day weaponry , also the other major lesson learned was that the navy and Royal Marines senior officers were absolutely right about unloading ships with troops in daylight the army was warned against it but it still happened and with terrible consequences

[@WikiWijaya-ul3cm]

🇮🇩🇮🇩🇮🇩

[@WikiWijaya-ul3cm]

🇮🇩🇮🇩🇮🇩

[@lancsladgaming7146]

this channel is awful for inaccuracies. Type 42 having aluminum construction. what a load of bollocks

[@michaelhearn3052]

There is an earlier post that makes a similar comment. Yes, Sheffield was an all steel build, and so was the rest of the T42s built. Whereas the T21s were an aluminum build.

[@markwarner7399]

Some utter bollocks about HMS Sheffield. She was not made of aluminium nor was she hit on 10th May.

[@bobbyrayofthefamilysmith24]

Designing the ship with only one missle launcher that can only fire 2 missiles at a time just seems like a completely useless HOPELESS design to me. Designed to fail. Did they think the enemy would fire single shots at them and give them 10 minutes to reload every time? Brave sailors USELESS and CLUELESS designers and engineers.