UK Builds 10,000 Ton Destroyer, Making It The Most Feared Warship On Earth | Navy's Type 83
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 1 ต.ค. 2024
- The UK's next generation air defence platform, The Type 83 Mega Destroyer, is a 10,000-tonne, 180-metre-long. The new mega ships, scheduled to be deployed in the late 2030s, will replace the existing Type 45 class destroyers and introduce a range of new capabilities with the vessels including ballistic and hypersonic missile defenses and directed energy weapons.
Thanks for watching, please like, share, and subscribe
![[Live] ศึกมหึมันส์มวยไทยสังเวียนเดือด เวทีมวยชั่วคราวสวนสยาม | จันทร์ 30 กันยายน 2567](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/pM1k6f7JXUc/mqdefault.jpg)
Still on the drawing board. No budget yet and no confirmation this class will be built.
They'll cancel it like getting rid of toilet paper 🧻🤣
Since we have a Labour government in power this class of ships will never get off the drawing board.
Depends. When Gordon Brown, finally agreed to build the Carriers he insisted that they were assembled in the Rosyth Naval Dockyard in his constituency.
Both, Vickers - Barrow-in-Furness, and Cammell Laird - Birkenhead, yards would have been better choices.
The highest part of the Carrier, is only 10 foot from the lowest part of the Forth Bridge.
Sadly, I fear you will be absolutely spot on, as Labour couldn’t give a S**t about our country, let alone our sovereign defence!😞
@@nathanielwhite8769what on earth are you basing your view on? It was the Tory party of 2010 that reduced defence spending by a greater amount than any other government! Please check facts.
Last LAbour government wanted 9 Destroyers, Tories cut it to 6. LAbour wanted more money for the defence.
@@nathanielwhite8769 you talk as though torys havent gutted our military over the last 14 years
M0D AND R0YAL NAVY NEED T0 WATCH THIS BECAUSE THEY D0N'T KN0W AB0UT ALL THESE CLAIMS. IT IS PRESUMED THAT THE TYPE 83 WILL REPLACE THE TYPE 45 BUT WITH A SH0RTAGE 0F F-35B AIRCRAFT, N0T EN0UGH F0R 0NE CARRIER, WILL THEY BE NEEDED?
uk has to decomission healthy ships prematurely because no available personnel...
Rule Britannia from Glasgow 🇬🇧💙😎
The Italian Navy is building 2 of these 13,500-ton ships with 96 launch cells per ship, to be in service in 2030.
Another ship will spend more time in the dry docks, than on the sea.
Hope their built better than the last ships we have been supplied they are spending more time being repaired in dock than being at sea
No they aren't.
All well and good but the question is can we man them
Why do we advertise to the world what new weaponry we hope to build in future?
Even if we didn't say anything it would be pretty obvious that we are going to build new ships, our current ones will have to be decommissioned at some point.
We dont, we put out requests for bids on projects but yt channels like this assume a lot.
Look at russia, they put out a lot of bs about its weapons and the world believed them😂
Now the truth has been exposed and countries like Armenia are not buying russian any more.
Propaganda and gaslighting
Too many eggs in one basket? Can't afford more than a dozen. Also there is a changing nature of threat to warships, especially close to shores.
All 7.62 mm LMG and miniguns have been replaced by 12.7 mm .50-cal HMGs.
Well, just to play Devils advocate. It was, in fact, Gordon Brown's Labour government that commissioned the Royal Navy's two super-carriers. HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales.
Well, Gordon Brown also systematically raided and destroyed the pension pots. One of his most idiotic decision ever made. and then he likewise sold 395 tons of gold bullion reserve by the BoE. When it comes economy, he is truly a disaster, His folly says a lot. Lest, you forget those government funded PFI's..
He did that to keep his seat in parliament after he bailed out the banks and almost bankrupted the UK. The two Ships were "nailed" together in his constituency in Scotland. They have not proved to be very reliable, just like "boom & Bust Gordon The Gold Seller'...
If it's like any of the other ships produced,won't even get out off the Harbour!!!
😂😂😂 So all those ships are imaginary😂 Birds aren't real either.😂
Stupid comment
If it's anything like other British forms of transport, water/cold/heat/use.of any kind will make it break down and cause delays.
That's going to be an awesome ship. If it gets built.😅
Doesn’t the Chinese navy already have the 13K ton type 55 destroyer? Is it feared yet?
Sure. How abt being able to man the 2 new carriers simultaneously?
Naval strategy is built strategy, and wishes don’t cut it. 😕
Pre concept phase ….says it all
SPY 6 cannot defend against Hypersonics.
BUT WILL IT STOP RUBBER DINGHYS>
surely a warship over 8000 tons is a cruiser, not a destroyer?
Remember the Bismarck, the most feared battleship in the world when WW2 broke out. Disabled and turned into a practice target by a Fairey Swordfish cloth biplane armed with one torpedo. Airpower beats everything. Big ships are prime targets. Swordfish sank a greater tonnage of Axis shipping than any other Allied aircraft during the war.
Ships now have guided missiles, both hypersonic and regular. Thats air power😂
If the Bismarck had surface to air missiles and computer guided weapons it would have been a different story. We cant live in the past, that's why russia is doing so badly😂
Unless against rubber boats which seem to be THE major threat both in the Red Sea region and the Channel!
and the Sejong the Great class would eat it for lunch - because, well, they are already in the water.
and ditto for the Chinese Type 055
Traditional warships over 10,000 tonnes are Cruisers.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heavy_cruiser#Washington_Treaty
This will be the first Cruiser class in the Royal Navy since HMS Blake C99, decommissioned in December 1979.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Blake_(C99)
Although HMS Invincible, was known as a Through-Deck Cruiser, to stop the then Labour Government having to admit a mistake, in the retirement of the conventional Aircraft Carriers & cancellation of the CVA-01 (HMS Queen Elizabeth) class.
Ssshhhhh calling it a Destroyer instead of a cruiser helps trick the people controlling the budget into paying for them and even then they'll kick up a fuss aint no way theyd authorise the purchase if they thought they were paying for a high end cruiser.
The Type 83 is likely to have 3 core roles. 1) Anti-Air Warfare (AAW) - defence against aircraft, hypersonic and conventional anti-ship missiles. 2) Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) defence for the fleet, and potentially to provide an umbrella over land areas, including the UK mainland. ABM missiles may also have some anti-satellite capability. 3) Land-Attack Cruise Missiles (LACM) to bolster the UK’s current inadequate ability to attack targets ashore at long range.
If it ever gets built it will have a Mandatory Rain Garden, Inside You’ll Find Low Pedestrian Zones LPZ. Where you can Only walk within your inhabitant colour zone.
Up on Deck it’ll be fitted Broom Sticks to scare the enemy .
No way they will even get the sailors to staff it let alone build it. No one will fight for this stupid country anymore its lost. Our Vets sleep on the street and our old people freeze to death without food.
Listen to this and yiud think we were going to build a floating platform for american arms systems. Aegis was never a match for SAMPSON active electronically scanned array multi-function air tracking radar. We are more than caoable of providing our own radar thanks and the BAE Systems, the Mk 45 Mod 4 main gun is probably the best out there right now. The verical launch tubes are just that, it what goes in them that counts.
Well, the Type 45's will need to be replaced in the not too distance future so these will be absolutely vital to our defence. It seems that within NATO, our specific role is to be naval and aviation, hence why the land forces size has been gradually reducing over the years...
Unfortunately, the way I feel things are going at this rate with Starmer’s Regime in Westminster, the UK’s Defence Budget as a whole is going to be Rapped, in terms of the current Equipment procurement programmes in motion or that are currently funded.
This is LA LA land! The total reliance on the US for defence by Europe, has made European countries weak individually! This vessel will never be built, as we always go for the cheapest option!
Even if this Class ever gets passed the design phase, let alone actually funded for construction, arbitrary design dimension figures shouldn’t be presumed in advance, as the exact design of this new class will be carefully worked out according to the inherent capabilities and capacities required of its core mission sets.
Big expensive ship in the era of drone warfare. Expensive targets for cheap munitions.
This isn’t the first Cold War anymore.
It's worth noting that the design for the Type 83 probably won't be chosen until around 2030.
Until then, it is all speculation.
Believe it when I see it . Regardless of what party in power , this country thinks defence can be done on the cheap . We need value for money but we need a defence strategy that is defence led and not treasury led😊
Amazing. A nation that is barely able to feed it's growing army of poor and homeless wants to spend moar and moar on its military hardware and on Ukraine😂
Most feared? I'm going with a Nimitz or Ford class carrier which are literally 10x the size of this toy. 🙄
All that navy power yet thousands of invaders cross the chanel every few months yet Navy does nothing lol
Late 2030s. 😂😂😂😂
With the tech we have today if money is on the table, this boat is built in 2 weeks
At what point does a destroyer become a cruiser if it weighs 10k tonnes
We are unlikely to use expensive inferior US missiles
There are a number of similar ship types planned for in the future by U.S, Japan and others. Can't see how it's the most feared warship on earth unless they're talking about cost.
Most feared that it’ll never exist
There will be no one to crew it look at what's happening to working class people who make up most of the military in the UK I do t know a single person who would join up now
At the rate technology is evolving it won’t be long before the U.K. navy and military will be autonomous. Cambridge university in England leads the world in R&D research into a.i.
This will never happen, under Labour the defence budget will be further cut. The R.N. needs to grow rapidly and building these monsters will take too long and require too many personal. What is required are more smaller ships such as corvettes, which would allow a larger navy in a shorter space of time.
Honestly I'm underwhelmed. Oh the design seems adequate as is but the new systems and the long timeframe make it likely it will be over budget, delayed and thus likely it will even shrink further from three shops to one. Maybe even none as government policies change.
We haven't built it.
Minimum order is supposedly 6.
But you can bet that the Treasury gets involved, and they are equipped with the bare minimum.
"Do you really need 2 Phalanx CIWS systems per vessel ?" " You want both NSM & Tomahawk Missiles !" "Do you really need Torpedo Tubes ?, can't the Helicopter drop one ?" etc, etc, etc
@@madsteve9 You may be right, kind of like the Type 31 was for a time. However, the war in Ukraine seems to have justified the addition of BGM-109 and Spear 5 to it. Hopefully it's made the powers that be realise we need capable naval assets. The Royal Navy has an important role to play in protecting all of Europe.
I say that, but apparently Starmer is floating the idea of reducing planned F-35 acquisitions.
@@madsteve9
Ironically , they wont have that much resistance this time around
The Type-45 performed very well in the red sea however the critics pointed that the US Arleigh Burke showed clear superiority over the Type-45
The Type-45 Aster missiles limited its range to just 75 miles while the US Burkes were engaged targets hundreds miles away with SM-6s and SM-3s
The crux was that Burkes could fire on targets on land with Tomahawks within minutes whereas RN had to rely on the RAF to strike back offensively which would take hours
Lastly, the Type-45 payload was just 48 missiles and the planned additional of 24 Sea Ceptors is still short of the Burke 90 to 96 payload. The US also had Ticonderoga class cruisers with its massive 122 payload deployed to the Red Sea.
Critics noted how much more firepower the US able to deploy while the RN on the other hand
The US only problem was replenishment of missiles but that was negated with use of F-18s from carriers taking over as well existence of the AIM-174
So the RN shouldnt encounter too much resistance this time around
Germany built now the next gen frigates, 11 500tons ! 6 in built now !
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
Please .... the UK ?😂😂😂😂
We haven’t even designed it so I doubt anyone is worried as we almost certainly will not build it but instead pretend something under armed and smaller will do! ( Oh and the American ships are cruisers!)
🇮🇩🇮🇩🇮🇩💂
🇮🇩🇮🇩🇮🇩💂
Its so powerful I like it
Expensive anti pirate boat. Which will be down graded due to funding cuts and will total 3 in number.
Future UK destroyer - it's Type 26 frigate with the 2-3 extra sections and destroyers set of weapons
UK is toooooo poor to own one.
Lets see it first. Would´nt surprise me it this was one of the spendings costs Starmer is presenting.
เสร็จรึยังลำนี้..
india can't make ships like this.
India has made it damn difficult for the UK to build them, now that we are virtually unable to make virgin steel here thanks to TATA closing Port Talbots blast furnaces
Naval gun fire support with a 5" gun ??? Not a chance. 5" gun has a range of 15 miles. No one in their right mind is going to put a 10,000 ton ship costing several billion pounds 15 milles miles, within visual range, from a shore battery. And that's assuming you are shelling the beach and not 5 miles inland. It's not going to happen.
The last time we carried out NGS was the Falklands 82, and things have changed. The Russians can't counter Ukrainian sea drones launched from 100+ miles away.
A bigger problem is, like the Kirov of the Soviet era, you have all your eggs in one basket. It's going to be a missile / drone magnet 🧲. And, if theres only going to be 3 or 4 of them, you'll only have 2 available at any one time. That's 1 per carrier.
A better solution would be to arm the carriers ( like every other carrier in the world) with Aster 30 missiles and have more lighter hulls akin to the Arleigh Burke class with more missiles.
Some of the Arleigh Burkes are near enough to 10,000 tons that you might as well just call them 10,000 tons as well they arent "lighter hulls" by any means
@@Kakarot64.Yeah, true. I was thinking more of the weapon fit and cost of the ships and not the ships displacement. It's better to have more less expensive ships that can specialise in one thing, like Anti Air Warfare, but can still carry out secondary rolls, than have fewer more expensive ships for the same cost. Even the best ship in the world can't be in two places a once.
@@stephennelmes4557
The Burkes benefited from economy of scale so many of them were made that it reduced the per unit cost as things like parts bulk purchasing, tooling up the production lines for the class, the workforce getting more efficient due to working on the same class for so long (with upgrades added as time goes on) and the r&d costs for developing the class were spread across so many Hulls the T45's by comparison only ended up with 6 units so these costs weren't spread out very far which helped to contribute to the high per unit cost.
@@Kakarot64.We should have bought ABs instead of building the T45s. The ABs have a much larger crew but also far more firepower.
We could also have had 12 ships we wanted instead of the 6 we've got.
There are arguments for building under licence but again tooling has to be taken into consideration.
We built AH64 D Apache Longbow under licence and what a debacle that was. The book " Lions,donkeys and dinosaurs", waste and blundering in the British military, covered the purchase in one of its sections.
Thankfully we are now looking to ditch the much maligned SA80 rifle and buying an American weapon from Knights armaments.
Good for philppine navy
Yeah , the US DDGX will over 13,000 tons
One has to wonder if there will be a change in the trend, I doubt it will just keep getting bigger and bigger for ever,
there are probably also downsides to the growing size of ships.
...yeah, yeah but no one to man them
you will laugh when I tell you that we will see conscription return in our lifetimes,
but I have a hunch that's what will happen.
When it comes down to it, the elites will think their need to supply the staff for the military will trump our individual right to choose our volition freely.
Liebour not even bothered about stopping the channel boats & letting in the enemy through the back door ! So this will no doubt will be scrapped ! According to Liebour we are skint !..but they will just have enough in the kitty to give themselves a pay rise !
10,000 tons? We call those cruisers, right?
It is a moving window,
early 20th century destroyers were 1,000 to 2,000 tons, WW II it was 1,500 to 3,000, cold war it was 6,000 to 10,000.
Now slightly above 10,000 tons ships fill the role of destroyers.
It's definitely close enough to existing destroyers:
Arleigh Burke-class Destroyers (U.S. Navy): have a displacement of around 8,300 to 9,700 tons, depending on the variant.
3:40 The Type 22 Broadsword Class Frigates did not have a Gun!
And they were crap 💩. The batch 1+2 were criminally under armed. That's why the Type 22 batch 3 got the 4.5" gun, 8 Harpoon, and a Goalkeeper.
@@stephennelmes4557 the type 22 was designed for anti submarine warfare, seawolf was its point defense system, at the time of it’s design the primary task for the RN was to close the Greenland/Iceland/UK gap to Russian North fleet submarines. It was never seen to be a general purpose frigate. The batch 3, with the Mk8 gun, was the result of the Falklands, firstly to replace the lost type 21’s and 42’s, and the realisation that more than anti submarine was required. Goalkeeper was not purchased for any ship until after 1982.
@@paulhill1665 Yes, mate, I know. I spent 25 years in the Royal Navy 79 -04, and did 3 years on Brave as a radar operator carrying out 2 × three month towed array patrols in the GIUK gap. My point was the weapons were shit. Seawolf GWS 25 only had a range of 3.5 NM and you only got 12 missiles ready to fire. 2 missiles were to be fired at any one target to increase the likelihood of a hit. 1 from aft, 1 from fwd. That meant after 6 engagements they had to be reloaded manually.
Exocet MM38, only 4 missiles. Range 22.5 NM. Pathetic.
I read a report in 1988 in the Ops room on Brave concerning Exocet missile firings. Of the 10 missiles fired during trials 3 had faulty altimeters and ditched on their way to the target. 2 failed to launch, and only 5 hit the target.
22.5 nautical miles is spitting distance when the Soviets could launch from 160 NM. And for the passive sonar to be effective the ship had to be away from the main force so you'd have little in the way of decent surface to air missile cover. The first batch 2s went to sea with Bofors 40/60. 😂😂
Sea wolf was still a step change from Seacat, saw the Brave once, we used her as a practice target.
@@paulhill1665😂😂 I worked with Seacat in conjunction with the PO ( G ) in the Ops room on the Arethusa. It was said by many to be our primary ASW weapon 😂😂.
I believe the Brave was sunk north of Scotland by a Spearfish and two harpoons. Shame. Good looking ships, just crap weapons.
China already built over 10k ton cruiser and superior radar and technology on board, and Korea navy built over 10K destroyer as well and no one said most feared warship. How come you are so hyped with UK navy destroyer?😂😂😂
We need rid of Labour. What is the best way to try and get them out.?
Fear is good for business.
Preach fear.. Sell hope. ..
Oldest scam on Earth. .
Duh
It’ll be cancelled, to be replaced by row boats under Labiur.
Svejedno Amerikanci i Kinezi su puno jači na moru. Prošla su vaša vremena.
There is a lot of teething problem with the queen elizebert aircraft carrier that today still not solved n you cant eveb built yr nuclear plant,chinese contractor have to walked out fr it that also you cant pay,now this destroyer bickering it is all you have left ?
It's called a cruiser.