Why is rearming missiles at sea crucial for US Navy? And why is it so hard?

[@laughingkiwi-b5h]

The arsenal ship concept is starting to look a lot more attractive

[@Vendell_23]

You forgot US bases in the Philippines they could easily resupply there

[@stefanschleps8758]

Sshhh......the CCP are listening.

[@entertexthere1127]

Philippines? Naaahhhh we don't have Typhon, Tomahawks, F22, F35 and radars in the Philippines. "Wink, wink" the 9 EDCA sites are for humanitarian right? Right?

[@shanerooney7288]

"Easily"

[@kawaiiarchive357]

Kermit and Binkov are only the only good puppets.

[@indianastan]

They are brothers

[@frenzalrhomb6919]

I know. All the rest are evil 👹

[@JinKee]

Kermit sexually harasses baddies on Omegle

[@cbeaudry4646]

Don't forget about both George Bushes, Bill Clinton, Obama, & it looks like nowadays Trump

[@TFY-v8l]

​@@cbeaudry4646Trumps never been a puppet to anyone.. not even the Deep State controlled him. Trump does his own thing

[@billykorando]

One wonders, maybe the answer isn’t finding a way to reload VLS systems in the ocean, but instead develop cheap, possibly attritable(sp?) drone ships that hold a lot of VLS cells. The turn around time might not matter too much if you have enough slack in the system that you have other ships that can simply replace ships as they have to return to port or are destroyed. With ships that are attritable you can also put them more in harms way. Which could also have downstream benefits or developing cheaper and smaller missiles because you can place them as a screen in front of ships you need to protect along likely missile paths. Because less travel time from launch point to target, you might not need as sophisticated of missiles. Separately/relatedly could also put other weapon systems like lasers on such ships.

[@SpaceShipDee]

This idea is being heavily considered by several navies and is known as an Arsenal Ship. Similar concept is evolving to be SOP for air combat as the F35 platform is excellent for deep penetration with its stealth and sensors relaying targeting information back. For USAF, this currently would be a F15EX which can carry a loadout of 10 AMRAAMs and two AIM-9X (for close range self defence). If utilising dual or triple racks (which is currently not yet approved) this count reaches 16 AMRAAMs and 4 AIM-9X For US Navy, this would be the F18 Super Hornet equipped with 4 AIM-174 (basically air launched SM6 which gives it exception range and speed), 3 AMRAAM and 2 AIM-9X. This loadout is currently being tested but not yet approved. In future, these would be replaced by "loyal wingman" type teaming drones/unmanned aircraft similar to the X-47 or MQ-28 GhostBat.

[@billykorando]

Yep, what I was thinking at as well. Realize my idea isn’t novel. Was pondering if the reason it wasn’t being as seriously considered is perhaps “political” in nature. Not left/right politics, but preserving business relations with contractors, or preserving existing power structures (i.e. there might be a perceived loss of prestige in destroyer command if what you are primarily doing is commanding missile drone ships to fire on incoming targets).

[@danpatterson8009]

Massed missile/drone attacks is one reason to continue development of laser weapons.

[@johnallen7807]

Ironic really, the US Navy had the largest fleet resupply chain in the world in WW2 now they are rushing to design a few ships!

[@dgthe3]

They still have the largest fleet resupply chain in the world, by a massive margin.

[@Romanellochw]

This is why the US invested so much in Rapid Dragon.

[@blurglide]

They need a little transporter-erector caddy. Load the case onto it horizontally, have it lift the case vertically, and put tracks around the cells so it can reach any cell and drop the case in. This would eliminate the swaying problem. Alternately, there could just be a cable system that does the same thing for the bottom part of the case while a crane lowers it in. Edit: well, looks like that's exactly what they're trying.

[@jypsridic]

I was about halfway through designing the tram when it showed up on screen.

[@sancocho1718]

Looks like they need to revisit the arsenal ship concept.

[@shanerooney7288]

* *Board meeting* * "Okay, Okay, hear me out... what if _More."_

[@sancocho1718]

@@shanerooney7288 mor dakka

[@56mikefagan]

Good, but isn’t this just a bandaid to cover the fact that the U.S. Navy doesn’t have enough ships, and the U.S. doesn’t have the shipyards and other industrial support to build enough ships anytime soon?

[@tylerromero]

I think the lack of ships isn't the biggest problem, it's crewing those ships even if we had them already. Maybe if automation is really more advanced than we know you can have crew sizes be 30% of now and then we could use those saving to crew more ships.

[@inteallsviktigt]

@@tylerromerofinding crews isn’t an issue, but if you can have more crew raised than you can build and replace in case of war is problematic

[@persistentwind]

One way to look at it is the services, anytime they buy something new, find ways to keep the people they have. Essentially picking "the way it was" versus integrating automation.

[@tylerromero]

@@inteallsviktigt do we have that issue? Do we actually have more people qualify to crew ships than ships?

[@tylerromero]

@@persistentwind I'm assuming they would try to staff these ships as they go. My thought is that even if the build rate is substantially increased I don't think the recruitment / retention rate can keep up.

[@GrigoriZhukov]

The tram needs to be organic to the recieving ship. And as you suggest, palletize the cells. A 6 pack might be optimal.

[@adriantepes-qu8wm]

6 pack is always optimal

[@GrigoriZhukov]

@@adriantepes-qu8wm considering the size of each cell. You can't go bigger from practical stand point.

[@charleswomack2166]

Sir, you do not mention the Philippines. They have multiple deep water ports, including Subic Bay. The Philippines is good for two reasons #1 strategic location and #2 the will to fight. If what my grandfather told me is true, they are not only friendly but when they fight, the put everything they have into the fight.

[@evilwelshman]

5:45 As an alternative to Guam and Japan, I suspect one alternative port might the the Philippines; as it is increasingly becoming a steady US security partner in the Asia Pacific region.

[@AMOUREDD]

Says the government and not the people,if war comes,note that there are people ready to work for them

[@evilwelshman]

@@AMOUREDD Though, at least for this purpose, they only really need the government's support. The port could be staffed by US personnel if necessary.

[@stephend50]

Didn't someone say something about arsenal ships?

[@milcearry]

Sometimes, the best defense is offense, a few b2 with radar defeating bombs at missile sites.

[@louisquatorze9280]

Philippine ports are also an option.

[@funwithmagnus8570]

The problem is that we're now in a technological age where you can't bring enough missiles on ships to defend yourself from shore based missile attacks. The shore will always have the numbers advantage (in a peer to peer encounter). Directed energy and or small caliber smart projectiles will be the only sure solution in defense against such barrages. Ships will likely need a combination of auto cannons with programable AHEAD ammunition and laser defense. The VLS systems can then be dedicated for ship to ship and ship to land munitions.

[@nobodyherepal3292]

You say that, but that assumes shore batteries aren’t hunted down from things like stealth aircraft launched from carriers, or maybe next-generation one-way loitering munitions from far outside the battery’s reach.

[@funwithmagnus8570]

@@nobodyherepal3292 yeah, but who wants to take the chance of not having gotten all of them lol.

[@jascrandom9855]

Maybe something like the Excalibur Artillery Ammo, but for the 127mm canon that could be guided by radar to hit areal targets. That should hit the perfect balance between price, range, speed, and quantity.

[@MM22966]

Have you checked on ranges and response times for things like autocannon and (assuming) lasers? You are letting AsHM's get awfully close.

[@nobodyherepal3292]

@@funwithmagnus8570 the US navy? Because historically shore defenses have failed to ever stop enemy navies from successfully establish blockades or shore bombardment support. Especially in the age the submarine and aircraft carrier.

[@trailblazingfive]

Unmanned VLS cells that swim behind a destroyer like a school of fish

[@MrJoergenfoged]

No - the Missiles to be ready Inside the Vessel - Case here, you have to stop - fish the VLS - secure they can fire, load them in the Siloes - no - besides this will slow the speed the Warship can sail ..🐑

[@joekerr3638]

Have a master ship that is a cruiser/destroyer that is followed by hundreds of drone ships that contain VLS.

[@danpatterson8009]

Yes, dispense with transfers during combat altogether. Missile-laden barges follow warship and have secure data links to pass targeting and firing information from the the warship. Missiles fired from the barges.

[@AMOUREDD]

Yh! but that would cost another billion

[@dgthe3]

To all saying "LASERS!!" as the solution, there are some serious limitations on range of high powered lasers. Forget what distances are cited, but they're closer to CIWS than SM2's. Maybe about the same as an ESSM. Which means that they'd be good for self protection, not so good for escorting. And even then, there won't be too many captains who'd be comfortable letting enemy missiles get to the horizon before firing on them. Getting the lasers airborne might help, in multiple ways. But there are issues there too.

[@MM22966]

Atmospheric bloom? Isn't that just a matter of increasing power and better beam columniation?

[@Bidimus1]

Its a shame that the Virginia class cruisers were not updated / replaced as there top speed was NOT fuel related. An alternate solution but not as quick as TRAM Data - Link launchers on other platforms guided by the Aegis system on primary ship. In effect a Battery of ships with a single or multiple fire control nodes. No the US will not build this as it means more platforms and more personnel but others might (Japan). Possibly mount land based systems that can be controlled by a Burke etc..

[@JeffBilkins]

They needed the yellow loader mech from Aliens.

[@cyrusjalali1571]

just convert retired oil tankers into massive VLS platforms

[@tiglishnobody8750]

Ha, good one

[@davidshi6861]

And if said tanker is hit? That's a lot of missiles at over $1-5M each.

[@noahway13]

Consider all the participants involved on both sides--- with the sky looking like a fireworks show, filled with missiles, anti-missile missiles, ships sank, land targets destroyed, etc--- The first day of a conflict with China is going to be one hell of an expensive day.

[@bearsausage8599]

Those war stocks are saying retirement

[@kaiser3626]

Unless you win a quick and easy war, wars are bad business.

[@MrDredd1966]

Maybe the USN could design or retro fit some sort of missile fire support ship to accompany a carrier battle group with say 200+ VLS and be able to supply the other ships within the carrier battle group and be able to restock its own supply of missiles?

[@LegendaryInfortainment]

Any kind of VERTREP for assets at sea is maximum punishment for the sailors receiving and stowing the stores, of *any* kind. The ones that go boom are much more exceptionally bothersome. Just from personal experience! Taking it over the side from light-lines is just different punishment.

[@marnig9185]

How many Tons of Autonomus ship and Infrastructur u need to serve 32 vls cells 24/7? or why are vls cells are exklusiv on maned heavy war ships?

[@Johnnycdrums]

When I sailed on a CG, the name of the game was to shoot down enemy aircraft before they could launch air to surface missiles at the carrier, and or giving the enemy the chance to shoot down our own combat aircraft we directed to hunt them. Now it's shoot down missiles, because they are probably going to launch outside the maximum theoretical range (220 n.m.) of air aquisistion radars. On the other hand, how would they know where we are, exactly?

[@Squigglydodah]

Satellites and radar as well as EM emissions

[@kaiser3626]

Drones, plenty of drones

[@inteallsviktigt]

Well you can always use smaller expendable ships for finding and guiding incoming missiles

[@ag3116]

I see the only way around this problem is US build like a giant dry dock ship similar like the ship they have that carries 3-4 hovercrafts in it.

[@noahway13]

Have SpaceX design the missiles. They can fly, deliver their warhead, return and land back in its missile pod, ready for a new warhead = )

[@stefanschleps8758]

You've over simplified by many factors. But I like the you think!

[@The_FatGeneral]

​@@stefanschleps8758 if there is a way to implement something like this, it could make missiles a bit more affordable

[@JonM-ts7os]

Lets go to the comments for the experts opinions.

[@monkemode8128]

You'd be surprised at who watches these kinds of things.

[@thinhvcoin]

Why Binkov is avoiding to talk about Patriot. And why is it so hard?

[@tylerromero]

Let's SpaceX design it since they can land a rocket on a crane they can make a crane that can reliably load a rocket (missile, but they're the same thing)

[@erasmus_locke]

How do Elon's balls taste?

[@ShadowPhoenixMaximus]

SpaceX is compromised. Musk's economic ties to China make he more liable to betray the West, than to support the democratic system that enabled him to gain more wealth.

[@jascrandom9855]

Why not use a Robot Arm fixed on the ship it self instead of a Crane?

[@persistentwind]

This. I don't know why the navy didn't split the vls down the middle and place a deck based or slightly inset Crane. I would imagine if a small service truck could lift a 15 liter Cat out of an off road truck somone could make one that would take the space of 3-4 tube's down the middle that works the way it should...

[@sylvainprigent6234]

France does it. The new BRF supply ships can do that

[@entertexthere1127]

The Philippines is the answer.

[@AMOUREDD]

That is also risky,cuz there are people who would sabotage the group for money from china

[@joseph88190]

can they just make the entire MK41 module plug and play?

[@adriantepes-qu8wm]

Just build a large container ship with hundreds of tubes and have it trail the command ship. Have another such ship to launch drones.

[@charliedontsurf334]

I hope it is A year. But that isn’t how procurement works sadly.

[@donm5354]

Missiles are so 20th Century. Need Directed Energy Weapon like ones Raytheon is developing 2 microwave based weapons - initially for defense. But up the power output and you can literally fry the crews of planes and ships. Then theres Quantum Energy Weapons.

[@stefanschleps8758]

Great minds think alike!

[@196cupcake]

I've thought, for reloading at sea, maybe a crane system, but with cables at both end with some play, might work. When the cell is hanging just from a crane you can imagine the bottom of the cell wobbling around. But, what if the bottom of the cell had cables going down to the hole it was to go in, and then you adjusted the tension, elasticity, play - whatever you want to call it - of the top and bottom cables? As the bottom of the cell got closer to the ship the bottom cables would get tighter until the point where the ship could really grab onto it and then guide it into the hole. The thing with the China scenario is that you could probably expect other actors to take advantage of US forces being spread thin at the same time.

[@riskinhos]

you missed school didn't you?

[@Evan_Adams]

It's not going to be slow is a double negative.

[@MyTakeOnLife001]

The war between israel, Iran, and her proxies is also going to have a significant impact on how many ships the US has available for a hypothetical China Taiwan war.

[@steampup8834]

OMG i hated doing that nonsense. We had to rearm at sea because of Japanese law which allowed us to keep our arsenals on their bases, but wouldn't allow us to rearm while docked. We had to do it at sea. I suspect that its probably because Japan is so densely populated that its a safety issue to do this sort of ammo handling.

[@thepopcornmonger3434]

At least... they don't have a puppet for an admiril. Advice wise... should have stayed with wraps right?

[@Shrapnel-tj3il]

What is the production rate of SAM and ABM missiles for the US?

[@GrigoriZhukov]

Not enough and no real surge capacity to the best of my knowledge..

[@nobodyherepal3292]

Last I checked, close to 500 a year, with an expected 700-750 a year by 2026, with further production increases following until 2030

[@GrigoriZhukov]

@@nobodyherepal3292 SMH, too few too slow in my opinion. But I think of each missile as any other ammo and in that case, there is never enough.

[@nobodyherepal3292]

@@GrigoriZhukov that number was just patriots systems I think. Ship based interceptor missile production is also increasing too. And it was arguably higher in the production numbers then our land based systems where to begin with.

[@GrigoriZhukov]

@@nobodyherepal3292 eh, I was on the sharp end and you'd be amazed how much guys at the shap end to read all sorts of things and adapt the views. You never have enough ammo i.e. bullets, missiles etc. Those ships need a better way to reload and do it fast.

[@hongjian3714]

And a bunch of stationary destroyers and huge transport ships filled with explosives sitting in open sea will be more survivable than a naval base how? China can track US ships as small as destroyers with their satellites (both optical and Synthatic Aperture Radar aka. seeing through cloud and at night) in real time and would love to see them bunched up and ripe for the reef transformation.

[@mattBLACKpunk]

Tbf if they're not out of air defense bunched up is the safest they could be

[@007999999999999999]

anything that moves has a higher survival chance than a stationary object that will never move even when fired at.

[@stefanschleps8758]

China's radar sucks! They can't even float a submarine without it sinking!

[@ShadowPhoenixMaximus]

Chinese satellites aren't as sophisticated as their western counterparts. The CCP would have to contend with the hundreds of bases/docks it regularly rambles about on a monthly basis. It wouldn't be as simple as them assigning a team to track each US ship 24/7. More likely the US naval would operate at night and any naval base would be on high alert for Chinese spies.

[@oculosprudentium8486]

It's one thing to try and reload these missiles into the vls cells It's another this altogether when the are only making about 100 per year due to the long term problems caused by mergers, buyouts and downsizings by the military defense industry whose main goal is only making huge bucks profits and less and less weapons but charging more $$ for it Just take any random old soviet or Russian missile they had on their ships and they fly further and have much more explosives warheads than Western weapons by a factor of at least 5x

[@jordibt1789]

yes ,but that's a bad thing, aereal defenses are complex and difficult to beat, that's why you need to saturate the defenses, for that you need to fire a lot of them, and for such they need to be small, look at the soviets, they needed massive cruiser to fire a single barrage of those big p-700, while a single hornet could carry 4 harpoons, the US apporoach didn't need to put ships at risk while the russian fleet was always in dire straits.

[@Aendavenau]

Nationalize it.

[@stefanschleps8758]

@@Aendavenau Theoretically, sounds like an idea, but history has proven, China, Russia, Venezuela, that it seldom works out in real life the way it does when one is daydreaming.

[@miaudottk9080]

Why reload at sea?! Can't they just drop a barge into the sea and have the destroyer tow it, or even better have the supply ship follow the warship that commands the missiles.

[@gamingrex2930]

Barges are very attractive targets, much more so when they are reloading destroyers.

[@AlexLukovkin]

Agree! Why not to have a dumb self driven launcher platform? The only purpose of which would be store and launch rockets. Actually you don't need to place all eggs in one basket - it could be light drone-jet with few rockets - something similar to Ukraine sea drones.

[@kaiser3626]

Drone ships was had been used by ukraine with some success. We can expect more advanced drone ships in the future

[@stefanschleps8758]

No. Not a very good idea to put all your eggs in one basket.

[@andrewells7441]

This entire clip is nothing but click bait, our naval commanders know how to fight at sea. When the shooting starts the process will be as followed. Norad will identify incoming missiles in league with Space command, these position will be immediately loaded for destruction. It might take a day or two for the Air Force and Navy to collect all the targets then the stealth bombers and submarines will handle that business. On other instances other black platforms will be utilized to intercept hypersonic missiles in flight with 350 kw onboard lasers. These lasers are already aboard certain ships and all the new Ford class carriers. You do the math a missile traveling at let's say mach 20 is about 15,345 miles per hour, where a laser travels at 186,000 miles per second. Well the defense contractors want to sell these expensive missiles for big dollars like a tomahawk block V cost 4 million per shot, most of the rest cost about 2 million per shot. There is a financial reason to suppress laser technology.

[@roo_stonks]

Somebody remind me why the US navy doesn't just take a semi-large container ship (or hell, purpose-build one but that would take forever) and slap like hundreds of VLS-cells on it, transforming it into a missile carrier with ridiculous ammo capacity. It could sit in the back and rely on all the other, actual combat ships to provide targeting & tracking capabilities. The only issue i can see so far is concentrating too much of existing missile stock on one asset, making it vulnerable. But in light of other ships like aircraft carries with thousands of lives on board also being in harms way, a missile carrier that would probably need much less crew doesn't seem too bad. It would probably make sense to have it disguised as a civilian vessel and "accidentally" be in the area, so it can deal with the first waves of incoming missiles and retreat before the PLAN figures out whats happening, leaving the actual combat ships to do the rest while it retreats to a far away port to rearm, having done its job, spent its ammo used the element of surprise. I would not be shocked if this was a thing already and they're just not telling anyone for obvious reasons. I just wanna see footage of a giant missile carrier lob dozens of missiles at once, how fkin sick would that be.

[@zakiducky]

There's less profit in that for the 'defense' contractors compared to designing, building, and then shelving some uber expensive bespoke system.

[@roo_stonks]

@@zakiducky yeah this could obviously be one factor (should the idea actually be feasible) - but was we saw with rapid dragon sometimes they do thing practical, and this would basically be a massively up-scaled, floating rapid dragon type solution.

[@the_rzh]

The arsenal ship concept has been round since the 80s. The last serious program was killed off in the 90s. As you speculated, cost goes up when you try to give it any onboard defense measures. You could think of the four Ohio class subs that had their ICBM silos replaced with 154 VLS tubes as an adaptation of this concept. Of course, they have the same replenishment at sea dilemma as surface ships.

[@gamingrex2930]

Sir the Ohio class even has the ability to become a submarine!

[@kaiser3626]

Putting to much ammo in a single vessel make it very vulnerable to damage and a very high value target for the enemy. Put all the eggs in the same nest is risky.

[@gugurlqk]

I will never be able to understand why those ships are not entirely replaced by nuclear powered submarines? The submarine outperforms any ship in any measurable metric. Even potential reloading between two submarines is theoretically more feasible since the they pretty much can stay still and are quite stable under water.

[@charlesharper2357]

Because submarines can't do air defence.

[@Chuck_Hooks]

More reason to build 200+ B-21s

[@zachjordan7608]

B-21s are quite limited, they need very large well functioning airports and can't react quickly. they're large bombers, not naval attack aircraft

[@Chuck_Hooks]

​@@zachjordan7608B-2s have operated out of Keflavik. And that is done on purpose: to learn how to operate from relatively sparse bases.

[@zachjordan7608]

@@Chuck_Hooks but can they operate their under sustained pressure, and wartime conditions while also staying effective enough to be worth it? worse facilities mean less munitions and fuel to resupply them after all, and less common and fast maintenance due to not as many workers, that all heavily limits their use. and again, they are used against static land targets, they are not designed for naval warfare. you need different types of aircraft than giant heavy bombers for that

[@Chuck_Hooks]

@zachjordan7608 B-21s can takeoff from one base and land at another to refuel and rearm. That is one of the points of B-2s operating out of Keflavik for even a few weeks. Nobody knows where they will takeoff and land from. B-21s will likely be able to carry 8-12 LRASMS, which is certainly an anti-shipping mission.

[@zachjordan7608]

@@Chuck_Hooks they can do that, but that also takes tons of time. opportunities to strike certain ships or fleets can be very fleeting. it's all about reaction time, and the B-1s just wouldn't have that in effect. not enough fueled and armed at close bases at once also, the production cost of each b-1 is 265 million. that would make it take over 43billion dollars just to build, not to mention maintain, pay pilots for and of course arm. those production numbers just aren't realistic. warfare is all about economics and logistics and neither work out for the b-1 being a naval war winning weapon against china

[@maxkoster3836]

Love it puppet guy❤

[@emwyang]

Another solution, try not to pick so many fights especially far away from home?

[@Fallaga762]

Tico is 112 VLS, not 128.

[@StabbinJoeScarborough]

How about cassettes ? Like they do with HIMARS and MLRS ?

[@MalaysDgreat]

and the reallity is China are well aware on these shortcomings.

[@svenskaz3428]

and they don't do anything about it

[@Naylamp21]

There will not be enough ships. Imagine a fleet against a country- continent like china. US never faced that before. Las time it was a tiny island like Japan and a little country like germany that was taken down by Russia mostly.😢

[@GrigoriZhukov]

We've done that level before, with almost as many issues today's shipyards have.

[@kaiser3626]

I don't think a war with China will be against US alone. US had always fight in coalition because it has a very good net of allies. You could expect they manage to carry on the british, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and more with them

[@giganigga9624]

Our entire army was designed to take Russia and China at the same time. China may have the missile and proximity advantage, but trust me, we would take the lead eventually through sanctions, ultra precise strikes , and supply chain disruptions

[@ShadowPhoenixMaximus]

We're talking about a country that has never been in a serious conflict before. It managed to get its arse kicked in India and Vietnam. It got its nose red in Korea and is designed more as a glorified police force than an actual army.

[@sgt.grinch3299]

The US Navy covers the world’s seas and must be able to provide coverage from anywhere. Fighting China will be very challenging and difficult for the crews. War with China will be expensive and costly to our fleet.

[@ShadowPhoenixMaximus]

Allowing the CCP to seize Taiwan and threaten US allies in the Indo-Pacific would be more expensive and costly for the US fleet.

[@tiglishnobody8750]

@@ShadowPhoenixMaximus And try to stop CCP from seizing Taiwan is the expensive and costly due vast number of missiles can reach and some km beyond of Taiwan?

[@kameronjones7139]

​@tiglishnobody8750 no sh*t that still doesn't change what he said

[@AMOUREDD]

​@@ShadowPhoenixMaximusseize?,while the US government recognizes it as China on the other hand

[@Vhvjdow0ajsbcdhcuei3o22-om4sm]

​@@ShadowPhoenixMaximus Will it?

[@josww2]

Great topic, I've been wondering about this

[@Binkov]

Glad it was helpful!

[@CB-bl8sp]

4 months ago posted?

[@TheBKnight3]

​@@CB-bl8sp weird

[@simon2493]

So maybe arsenal ship?

[@MrJoergenfoged]

Yeah - something like that

[@lolmao500]

The big problem with a war in taiwan is that taiwan is like 140 miles away from china... and 7 000 miles from the US west coast... logistics win wars... and china has a HUGE upper hand in the logistic distance...

[@nobodyherepal3292]

*US submarine fleet enters the chat*

[@saurabhpardeshi8435]

This was an patron only video how come it's available for free ❓

[@MyTakeOnLife001]

Because more views = more money 💰💰💰

[@MariaLiebig-l5d]

I really appreciate your hard work! Your videos are always so interesting and informative. Keep up the good work!🌘😆🌙

[@viktor_v-ughnda_vaudville_476]

Early for once!!!

[@Jo777]

Logical way to address this issues is to develop new ways to intercept missiles. Like directed or kinetic energy weapons or a mix of both. China has access to most of the raw materials need to produce weapons which is not the case for US or its allies and China have automated factories producing weapons at a rate which cannot be easily matched by other countries. So any effort to gain any edge or level up to China in any traditional way is illogical.

[@jascrandom9855]

Maybe something like the Excalibur Artillery Ammo, but for the 127mm canon that could be guided by radar to hit areal targets. That should hit the perfect balance between price, range, speed, and quantity.

[@Jo777]

@@jascrandom9855 Anything other than complex missiles is a welcome move.

[@ShadowPhoenixMaximus]

The only sources that suggest the CCP could outproduce the West are Chinese state media and David Goldman (who previously claimed that Russia wouldn't invade Ukraine).

[@DianaHettie-i1x]

Your channel is a source of entertainment as well as inspiration. Please continue to entertain us with your talent!‍⬛🏡😹

[@AMOUREDD]

They wouldn't have time to reload,and their SAMs are not going into Chinese territory. You also left out drones😂

[@shanerooney7288]

Nah. Let them reload. You know how many Billions-per-volley a full battlegroup would be shooting into the air. Actually, I want to calculate this 😂

[@ranx9078]

Re arming? You have to have enough weapons to re arm. Lol. It’s for re arm outside of 2nd island chain. Shows USN has no confidence it can hold Chinese navy even with Guam.

[@nobodyherepal3292]

Which we do.

[@ranx9078]

@@nobodyherepal3292 with what? Constellation class? Or LCS？

[@nobodyherepal3292]

@@ranx9078 the Aleigh Burke class, Ticonderoga class, virgins class, and of course the air wings of our carriers

[@ranx9078]

@@nobodyherepal3292 the mighty has fallen. Only if others didn’t advance.

[@LordChlCha]

Its hard because all money is spent on Zelensky and Israel (same religion, actually, both mentioned).

[@plkngtun]

Better spend ammunition on the threat than just storage ;-)

[@ShadowPhoenixMaximus]

Actually it isn't. Despite claims from Russian/Chinese state media (and the acorn-brained individuals who believe them) Putin's invasion is beneficial to the US economy. Namely its drained out Cold War era storage which would cost billions to maintain. Whilst also coaxing the US into increasing its own military production capacity. In short Zelensky is saving the US billions by draining Russia of its offensive capabilities (reducing the risk of further conflict in Europe) and is activating the US arms industry far sooner than the CCP would like.

[@ArinaMcelhiney]

Watching your channel is like being immersed in a world of creativity and inspiration. Please continue to entertain us with your talent and enthusiasm!😨🧀🤞

[@gumby2241]

Ridiculous, of course. The real problem is we don't have a missile surge capacity. In any case, the surface ships are one big juicy target. No one can currently stop a hypersonic missile, plus any defense can be breached in a saturation attack. Even ordinary ballistic missiles are almost impossible to intercept. Typically blinkov, always fighting the last war.

[@kameronjones7139]

The most bot comment I have heard

[@Mediiiicc]

What war are you fighting? The one you made up in your head?

[@AMOUREDD]

Did u not just find out what Iran current attack did to the most protected country in the world​@@Mediiiicc

[@JABN97]

No one currently fields an actual hypersonic missile. The one Russia claims to be hypersonic (but actually isn’t) has been successfully intercepted multiple times by Patriot batteries.

[@amunra5330]

Hey did you get a check from the US state department.??

[@Just_A_Random_Desk]

cope

[@dennisnguyen8105]

Ask Elon Musk to send the missiles via rockets, these rockets will steers the missles to land precisely inside the VLS slots upto sea state 5. Musk is brilliant, almost as brilliant as an 8 year old Trump so he can solve this problem sitting on a lunch counter doodling on paper napkins.

[@jonahhekmatyar]

Y'all are delusional

[@MrJoergenfoged]

Binkov - Bingo - I agree that the US Navy shouldn't call any Port for reloading those Missiles, but should be replenish at Sea - like a tanker replenishes any Turbine / Diesel propulsion Battleship at Sea. 🤓😎🥸👍👍👍👍