USA vs Russia: Who Has The DEADLIEST Warship?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 мар 2024
- If you’re struggling, consider therapy with our sponsor BetterHelp. Click betterhelp.com/subbrief for a 10% discount on your first month of therapy with a licensed professional specific to your needs.
The Russian Navy's "Peter the Great" and the United States Navy's Arleigh Burke Flight III destroyers are two distinct classes of warships, each representing the pinnacle of their respective navy's technological and operational capabilities, but they serve different roles and come with differing specifications.
Peter the Great (Kirov Class): This is a nuclear-powered battlecruiser, one of the largest surface combatants in the world, significantly larger and heavier than the Arleigh Burke class. It has a displacement of around 24,300 tons standard and up to 28,000 tons when fully loaded. Its length is approximately 252 meters, making it more than twice as long as an Arleigh Burke destroyer.
Arleigh Burke Flight III Destroyer: This class of destroyers is much smaller, with a full load displacement of around 9,700 tons and a length of 155 meters. Despite its smaller size, it's designed for efficiency and multi-mission capabilities.
Peter the Great: Utilizes a combination of nuclear power and conventional steam turbines, giving it the ability to operate for long durations at sea without refueling, enhancing its endurance and operational range.
Arleigh Burke Flight III: Powered by gas turbines in a combined gas and gas (COGAG) configuration, these destroyers are fast and agile, with a range limited by their fuel capacity, requiring more frequent refueling compared to nuclear-powered ships.
Peter the Great: Heavily armed with a variety of weapon systems including anti-ship missiles, surface-to-air missiles, torpedoes, and artillery, along with advanced electronic warfare and defense systems. Its armament is designed for large-scale naval warfare and defense against a variety of threats, including aircraft, missiles, and submarines.
Arleigh Burke Flight III: Equipped with a sophisticated Aegis combat system, including radar and missile systems capable of anti-air, anti-surface, and anti-submarine warfare. Its Vertical Launching System (VLS) can carry a mix of missiles, including the Standard Missile (SM), Tomahawk, and Evolved SeaSparrow Missile (ESSM), allowing for a flexible response to threats.
Peter the Great: Designed as a fleet flagship with command and control capabilities, capable of engaging large enemy forces and providing air defense for accompanying ships. Its size and firepower make it more suited for major combat operations and power projection.
Arleigh Burke Flight III: Primarily designed for multi-mission capabilities, including air, surface, and subsurface warfare. It is also capable of ballistic missile defense, making it a versatile component of carrier strike groups or operating independently.
Both ships are equipped with advanced sensors and electronics, including radars, sonar systems, and communication suites. The Arleigh Burke Flight III destroyers feature the latest advancements in radar technology with the AN/SPY-6 radar, enhancing its tracking and targeting capabilities.
In summary, the "Peter the Great" is a large, heavily armed nuclear-powered battlecruiser designed for major naval engagements and power projection, while the Arleigh Burke Flight III destroyer is a smaller, highly advanced, multi-mission vessel capable of dealing with a wide range of threats across different domains.
📫 Contact Gene Dayhaw gene@solaromgmt.com for paid promotion.
🐦► / subbrief
🕺► / subbrief
⏰► / subbrief
😃► / subbriefmedia
🏴☠️► www.SubBrief.com
💵► / subbrief
🔗► / aaron-amick-9538a4171
💌 Contact Aaron ► Aaron@subbrief.com
🦃 Jive Turkey / @jiveturkeylive
Aaron's PC Spec
------------------------
CPU: Intel i9-10850K @3.60GHz
RAM: 64GB
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce RTX 3080
Accelsior 4M2 16.0TB PCIe M.2 NVMe SSD
sub brief, sme, subject matter expert, naval, policy, technology, tactical use of the ocean, sonar, submarine tactics, weapons employment, aip, air independent power, 21st century, aaron, amick, aaron amick, sonar, sonarman, sme, SME, subject matter expert, naval, games, wargames, testing, tactics, news, history, tactical use of the ocean, hide, find, search, jive turkey, jive, subbrief,
If you’re struggling, consider therapy with our sponsor BetterHelp. Click betterhelp.com/subbrief for a 10% discount on your first month of therapy with a licensed professional specific to your needs.
Better Help?? GTFO. Won't watch video.
I heard a bunch of our very good sea lift ships are bottled up in Baltimore harbor behind that collapsed bridge. The whole bridge didn't fall, is it true they can't get out?
If you're looking for better therapy regarding the US vs Russian ANYTHING, you're an idiot; every major warship Russia has has been either drydocked or sunk. Allow me to start with the Moskva - the pride of the Russian fleet - has been garbage since it undocked, and a turd farm when it sank.
Solid beginning segueway, good to get the ad out of the way first.
This is easy, the Soviets have the deadliest warships because they've killed more of their own sailors then we have
They also have to the only cruiser that is capable of spontaneously becoming a submarine. CGSSBN power!
Well… you are not not right
The Russian Navy has my sympathy, it's dangerous duty in peacetime and they've done a lot of good fighting these days, but do take it in the face also.
Quite right. The Kursk is a great example.
Damnit, you beat me to it. Lol.
Easily the US. Russia do have some interesting corvettes and frigates but their blue-water capable ships are all extremely outdated.
Well when the US put billions of dollars into LCS program and now they are all being scrapped......
@Viper-ms9eg
You do if you want a global navy, rather than regional shore patrol.
@Viper-ms9egThe Black Sea fleet has done a poor job at addressing USVs. Comparatively, 2nd CSG has been successfully addressing USVs within a sea that is much smaller than that of the Black Sea.
They dont plan to invade any oil rich country on the other side of the world ! That's a US business !
@@Gridlocked Black Sea Fleet never been the "best fleet", even since USSR. Even pacific fleet isnt to the level of the northern fleet !
From what I have gathered from the long term ship building plan, the Flight IIIs will replace the Ticonderogas. So it makes sense to give the Flight IIIs capabilities that would allow them to assume all of the roles that the Ticonderoga was designed for and the role of command ship in particular.
Agreed. As the Flight llls are commissioned and brought into the fleet they should each replace a Ticonderoga one for one for each of the 11 carrier strike group. The Reagan has in it's group at least 2 Ticos and more Arleigh Burke's than your standard carrier force.
For the time being, until ~2030 when DDG(X) starts production...
I was privileged to be present at the Tampa, FL, commissioning ceremony for the USS Jack H. Lucas, first of the Flight III Burkes. I even got a guided tour of the ship. Magnificent warfighting machine. I wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of that when it's angry.
This is so Jive - getting DoD wiped while describing a previous online incident in which he was DoD wiped. Too funny.
At the last company I worked at I was part of the design team that designed some of the components of the SPY-6 radar. That radar is a fundamental leap forward in capability.
I agree.
I bet the Burkes can likely sprint at 32-35 knots.....with the only constraint being fuel level. Anything with Adm Burke's name should never do less than 31 knots😚
bro peter the great is a 100k + ton ship! with 90k horsepower! A.B. is 100k HORSEPOWER at 10k tons!!!!! A.B. has to hit like 45 knots maybe can sprint up to 70 knots! I Heard from a sailor that out aircraft carriers can do 75 knots. soo they have to keep on with them big boys! dont tell anyone but if a ship take 5 day trip to somewhere... if our ship was to take the same trip it would take 2 days tops. that's freaky fast! JIMMY JOHN's FAST lol
@@JayD-fx4wc 76 knots? Why not then attach wings to it and a stabilizer and let it fly.. No more silly high waves. Lets call it The Atlantic Ocean Monster
@@JayD-fx4wcdamn I had no idea kirovs were more than 100,000 tons. Must have depleted uranium and composite armor everywhere
@@JayD-fx4wc kirov is not even near 100k tons bruh. Plus a ship that goes 75 knots is ridiculous
@@JayD-fx4wcPeter the Great is 28K tons. Max speed is less than 40 knots.
If you're going to call a ship the Arleigh Burke, you should release a public speed figure of 31 knots. Talk about a missed opportunity!
This isn't even a contest
Based on the witnessed performance difference between Black Sea and the Suez Gulf, looking at the entire system (boats and boots working together)... Gonna have to give it to the USN
We are failing miserably in the Red Sea
@@jakemocci3953 Can't fail when you don't try... The only thing failing in the Red Sea is US leadership. And pathetic Houthi attacks on USN ships.
The Admiral 'Knock-Him-Off" looks to be a formidable challenge.
It's in dry-dock. So it's only a matter of time before the Ukrainians hit it with some drones from Home Depot.
@@w0mblemania Even if they get the stupid thing sailing there is only one. Its not even a thought this boat.
@@w0mblemaniaWhy waste any ammo on that thing ?
It will (again) catch fire on its own sooner or later, just as it usually does...
So why wast expensive ammo on the Kusnetzow ?
But the tug boat that is constantly towing that thing is a valid target to be honest.
In a one-on-one fight? Sure. But since when does the US Navy go after anything more substantial than a bass boat with a single ship?
@@Canthus13 assuming they go after the bass boat with JUST a ship and not overwhelming air cover to boot.
I love your VS series. Please do more.
Hmm. Interesting you're putting a cruiser up against the destroyer, given that a Carrier Task Force would turn either one into Swiss Cheese inside of an hour. And the US has 11 of them.
For fun??? Or is that now allowed?
The Flight III is the CG replacement. So it's valid.
Yes, obviously, Russian air defense can’t do anything and American missiles hit perfect, all the time…
Interesting that you put a cruiser up against a Task force?
Do you believe that’s how it work?
Maybe some reality in it all?
Do you believe Kirov sail out alone?
No support?
An Carrier task force with 6 Cruiser/Destroyer 2 submarines and a Carrier, facing of with Kirov task force including 3 Admiral Gorkshov, 3 Udaloy and 3 Yasen, supported by an Mig-31 and 2 Backfire regiments.
That’s how they would do it.
Do you think that USA just sailing in, flag waving and just sink them all?m within an hour?
How would this task force handle 250 super and hyper sonic missiles that get the first shoot?
No problem at all?
@@MrCastodianthree Gorshkovs, three Yasens, and three Udaloys? Is this the entirety of the North Fleet? Also where is your scenario taking place? Why do the Russians get MiG-31s and TU-22s? Those aren’t naval aircraft.
@@MrCastodian yes
I'm sorry Jive, but my bias goes to your battleships of WWII. You can't deny that aft in the Iowa class.
I've watched the documentary about an Iowa-class being pressed back into service to defeat an alien vessel that had proven more than a match for the Arleigh Burkes.
I don't know why Hasbro was credited, though.
The Burke, every time... Because it'll actually be in proper working order.
I would ~not~ want to fight an Aegis and SPY-6. I strongly suspect every projectile the Burke throws to sink ships would be purpose-built to slip past the sensors and active protection of a Kirov.
I doubt the Peter would even know it was under attack before it sustained terminal damage.
If it somehow got its Granits off, I suspect they'd all be scrambled by ECM or wrecked by SMs long before they even got in CIWS range.
This wouldn't even be close.
This was fun! I enjoy a little frankness when discussing the capabilities of US combat systems. They're very powerful. And the newer ones sometimes feel like they belong on an episode of Star Trek. "Target their sensors!" The resolution of our sensors and the kind of data-fusing that battle-management systems do is truly not understood by most civilians. They don't yet understand the nature of the missile age, let alone the drone age. It's just nice to hear someone say what we know: We'd kick their asses.
That block 3 is gonna be ridiculous
Probably the US, simply because of the crew, training and drills - it's not jsut about the kit, plus the kit is more likely to work and be maintained. That said on a purely equipment basis I'd actually look at the Chinese type 055 as probably the best all round surface combatant design.
Does anybody remember this Class of ship being the big baddie in The Last Ship TV show?
Have the latest flight removed the forward CWIS?
Thanks Jive! Whats the difference between flight 1, 2 and 3 of the Arleigh Burke class? How does it and Constellation class compliment each other? Maybe a video about modern US Navy composition?
Frigate are normally ASW or AA specializing
@20:10- 'The Burke will be able to choose the time and place [of an engagement]'...
That sounds like the modern equivalent of having the 'Weather Gauge' in the high age of sail (roughly 1650-1820)...
Is that an apt analogy?
Not so much. In the age of sail you at least knew the other ship was there, even if you couldn't control the engagement. Having missiles appear from nowhere is much worse.
Power and hull form math the Burke can easily do 30+ carriers do 30-35 so it's at least that fast
heavier ships tend to retain their speed better so the power to weight doesn't scale linearly.
@@hughmungus2760 i understand that but it's safe to assume the screening ship is at least as fast as what it's supposed to be escorting, ie the carrier
@@anareel4562 sure. maybe under ideal conditions with no concern for fuel. But thats like arguing which fighter jet is faster with afterburners and a clean loadout.
I’ve always enjoyed your videos, but my big question is: despite multi mission platform capability, why wouldn’t you compare cruiser to cruiser? Why not show us what the Ticonderogas can do? We never seem to hear about them.
With some Ukrainian modifications, Russia's warships seem to make great submarines. 😂
Good thing Russia doesn't need a navy to conquer Ukraine. Neverminding that Ukraine isn't doing anything on it's own to fight Russia, especially at sea.
Wake up please.
@@DRourk lmfao. Ukraine doesn't even have a Navy- yet they have decimated the black sea fleet. Keep dreaming.
You mean NATO not Ukraine.
Facts
@@silafaupaulmeredith7251if Russia was fighting NATO they wouldst have a navy within a week. So no, they meant Ukraine.
19:55 Sounds like a target wouldn't be at the circumference, nor near the center of the search area. Most likely IMHO the radius would be a Bell Curve with the center at one end and the circumference at the other.
So how many times does the Battlecruiser have to be hit by missiles from the ABIII before it sinks, assuming slightly better damage control than the Moscow, bigger size and more armour?
S-300 (as well as SA-N-9) actually can be used vs naval targets as well, to some extent. So its not jush SS-N-19.
SM-2 and SM-6 as well, not sure if the S-300 is limited to LOS like the older SM-2s were, but SM-6 can be fired from over the horizon
It's just the same as russian land warfare doctrine - EVERYTHING is artillery. S-200, S-300, S-400, all the other SAM systems... Pretty much everything Russia builds has a land attack mode. They really, REALLY love their indirect fire.
I think we are doing great. One issue is. we dont seem to have many modern capable anti-ship missiles, I herd they are retro fitting the sm-6 for anti-ship. but that warhead is too small. the harpoon is strong but slow. speed and maneuverability is key i think. also, and in numbers to saturate defense.
They have a new missile called the Naval Strike missile and it's pretty capable and it's actually stealth.
On my first ship the USS Newport News (CA-148) was over 700 feet long and developed 120,000 shaft HP Peter the great was a wimp.
The Kirovs remind me of Knights of the late 15th century when firearms were becoming more common. Its one of the few modern warships that still has armour but relies primarily on missiles.
@@hughmungus2760 Yes and the dinosaurs were also once mighty. My ship was also a dinosaur that went to the Scrappers, 25 February 1993.
All that Russian advanced systems looks cool but requires constant upkeep and upgrades. High expensive for a Military unwilling too put reliability and safety first. More Russian junk.
They dont put 10% of their GDP into arms business and arms companies !
@@Real_Claudy_Focanand it's all junk. They can't even stop losing ships to a smaller country with no navy.
they put my DDG on babysitting detail on a Russian trawler trying to get the sonar signature on the USS Ohio when she changed homeport to WA.....it was 3 years old and already looked ready to sink from lack of maintenance
I remember a couple years back when you did an analysis on the Kirov, in particular something about it's active sonar, you seemed like you had double dosed your Adderall or something, it was hilarious. RAAAAAH RAAAAAH, imitating the Kirov's active sonar. I'll have to find it now again, it was so awesome.
While block 3 is great, the anti ship weapons are lacking. Sure you can tell the SM-2 to go in, but that's not the real deal. It needs NSM, long-range anti ship Tomahawk and VLS LRASM.
AFIK, all modern flights of Tomahawk have anti-ship capabilities. A Flight 3 Burke would almost certainly pack only the freshest, shiniest tomahawks.
Idk what sort of ship-defeating shenanigans are aboard those missiles, but I suspect they've been building them specifically to defeat the Kirov for decades.
Yeah, I heard they (Navy) are VERY impressed with SPY-6. Like, WAY more capable than they had expected...
So much so that they don't necessarily need the much larger arrays (~60 RMA's as opposed to the 37 of blk III and ~24 back fitting onto blk IIA's) they thought they had needed to properly perform AMD as well as future hypersonic defense...
Fortunately they're building them real fast too!
This video talks about the old Kirov class, the modernized version would have many of its sensors and radars replaced. Also the 3M22 missile will be part of its armament. This missile other than having a very high speed, has also much better range to even the upcoming BGM-109 Block Va. SLQ ESM suite is certainly impressive but it seems to be directed at sea-skimming threats and does not cover upper hemisphere. If the Zircon has a programmable flight path and would approach the target from the top, it would be devastating weapon. Not only it would be fast, forming a plasma cloud around the body for big chunk of its flight it would be undetected, and if on the final approach it would close in from the top, Burke onboard defense systems would have very little time to react if they would be able to do so at all. Russians have had a top attack antiship missile before with their KH-15.
One ship doesn't make a fleet.
I wonder if in some strange future, the Russians decide to swallow their pride and build their warships in chinese shipyards. Jiangnan could probably produce 4 Kirovs in little over 18 months.
@@hughmungus2760 imagine going from the jewel of Europe and an ally to the most powerful and prosperous countries, to a resource colony for their Asian masters. I would have crashed out if I were Russian😹
@@hollister2320 Russia is half asian you know. At least china respects Russia while the west hasn't stopped mocking Russia since 1991
whats going to be sadder is europe which will devolve into a de-industrialised backwater that can't compete globally.
@@hughmungus2760 Mmm... Tofu Dreg Ships. I can't wait.
@@Canthus13 Apparently 58% of global commercial shipping is tofu then because china absolutely dominates that sector.
Fun fact the LM2500-30 engine core was originally developed for the C-5 Galaxy.
I wonder how much of the equipement on the Russian ship actually works? Look what happened to the Moskva when attacked with a 30 year old missile.
Im pretty certain some of the rust buckets slated for decommissioning in the US fleet wouldn't do much better.
Heck did you know the moskva was 10 years older than the oldest Burkes? And it didn't get any midlife upgrades either so it was essentially comparable to the Spruance class which have almost all been retired.
@@hughmungus2760 Yet it was the flagship. That implies it was the best ship. Su you are saying the Russian fleet is mostly junk?
@@sensibledriver933 the black sea fleet sure, because who's going to invade Russia through the black sea?
@@hughmungus2760 Turkey limits naval ship movement through their straits
Shipwreck SSM's will wreck your day. They are shy size of Mig-21, fly at 50-60K at Mach 3.5, and have swarm logic.
Well, with Putin using antique trucks, tanks, artillery, his troops surrendering and refusing to fight, none existent air defence, top people taking flight and him drinking too much ego juice? I would say very, very slim.
Best ad segway - EVER!
Gross defect: Except for the antenna at the very top, all the rest are BLOCKED by the superstructure at the front. Hence, they are useless on an enemy directly ahead of the ship.
Why compare a Cruiser to a Destroyer? Shouldn't that Burke be a Tyco?
No. 'cruiser', 'frigate', destroyer', and so forth don't mean a whole lot any more. Kirovs and Burkes fill the same role.
modern destroyers are as big a or BIGGER than historic cruisers.....ship designation is more the role and armaments anymore rather than size
I think it’s hard to make a reasonable comparison between both navies, they have drastically different objectives and backgrounds. The post ww2 USN was always expected to fight overseas in Europe and Asia, necessitating logistic and amphibious capabilities as well as providing capable air support via f.e. aircraft carriers. On the contrary the soviet navy had a more „defensive“ role in soviet war planning, being primarily tasked with occupying the Norwegian & Baltic Seas and denying nato surface and submarine action in those theaters while the submarine force was to venture into the North Atlantic to disrupt the supply lines between Europe and the United States. Both of those strategies resulted in highly specialized vessels that, for the most part, don’t have an equivalent in the others fleet.
A great video comparison! The internet says there's 73 active Arleigh Burke class destroyers. Those are good numerical odds.
Love ya dude
'The best in the world' ? - quite a confident statement!!
Can the Peter the Great get underway? Deadliest on paper is meaningless if it is broke down in port.
its currently undergoing a major overhaul and midlife upgrade. When its done it'll likely have the latest electronics and missiles.
@@hughmungus2760 I translate as sitting in port and rusting, unmaintained. Also we are talking about a nuclear vessel that has not been refueled in 45 or so years.
Why did Russia use non-euclidean geometry to design their superstructure? There's so much stuff in one ship.
Does anyone remember what the classified stuff was about the ECM? Can it fry the missile's radar or something?
ECM can do lots of stuff....spoofing, jamming, misdirection......do not believe it is powerful enough to give the return signal capable of knocking out a radar
Is the Nakhimov nuclear propelled as well?
I was on a CG 378', which has twin turbines. We flew the birds a few times, that boat topped out at 32kph. I recall they added some 'trim' tabs to the transom of one of these boats and they picked up a knot or 2 more. Quite impressive.
my Adams class DDG speed trialed at 36+ kts in 1984 after overhaul and she was 24 years old at the time
@@michaelkendall662 Thats cruising!
@@robwilcox9296 all 4 boilers online turning max RPMS with a good rooster tail out the back......MM hole snipe here.....#2 Engine Room
The one that gets its weapons on target without getting hit!
How did you get so sunburnt? 😆
Russian ship: has to be hauled out of port be tug boats because propulsion system defects. 1/4 weapons systems operating due to admiral stealing all the budget for private mansions. Radar never installed. Has electrical problems after a week at sea, tugboats need to be called back. Sinks on its own anyway.
American ship: Underway two weeks behind schedule. Social Security and Medicare have to be defunded to fund the fleet deployment. Navy redistributes the money to new ship class that turns out to be a huge lemon. Existing fleet has its service life extended thirty years to compensate, taxpayer billed accordingly.
The US never ceases to amaze me. Their engineering prowess is incredible.
The Kirov is a gorgeous ship. It looks awesome.
the russian cruiser is supposed to be the very poor man's carrier and even then the russians could afford only 1.
No you're thinking of the aircraft carrying cruisers like the Kiev class, the Kirovs are proper frontline surface combatants.
@@hughmungus2760 no it is a flagship carry massive amount of missiles to achieve force projection similar to a carrier. US destroyers act as compliments to a carrier in a battlegroup.
@@donfully You could say that for all russian warships. Their surface warfare vessels were designed to perform an anti-surface role from the start.
No more ciwis under the bridge of the block three??
They removed it, eventually they will add a DEW. For now the SLQ-32 can do the job.
@@BravoCheesecake could you explain DEW please
@@youngstunna1594 Directed energy weapons. Systems like SSL-TM, ODIN, HELIOS and HELCAP. They're mainly meant to counter swarms of UAS where the standard Phalanx will quickly run our of ammunition.
It’s being replaced by a laser system (Directed Energy Weapon)
mr aaron, i am a admirer of your channel from India,
do US submarine officers esp sonar officers learn oceanography/ am currently doing a PHD doing on the subject(.
The Kirovs are cruisers not Destroyers. Tonnage makes a hell of a difference. Hardly a fair comparison.
@15:30 was u talking bout turning the pier into a Nikolai Tesla lightning show? I worked on the SLQ-32Aa(v)3 for years - the v(3) and v(4) can turn an area the size of a football stadium into the world’s largest microwave oven in a hurry brah.
I wonder if the Radar works?
Concerning?! If that think gets within 20 mi of a Mk48 it's scuba wreck. Fish Jaw or not.
While it isn't mentioned in this video for obvious reasons the CRY warfare suite on a burke is one of if not the most advanced in the entire world. The burke would know about the kirov so much sooner. Just a little plug for my fellow CTs out there
Are not Arleigh Burke Flight III destroyers designed and fitted out to work within a carrier battle group.
Therefore would have reduced antiship/anti surface capability due to the carrier will be used mainly for those tasks thus would have increased anti air and anti missile capability with networking and more sophisticated technology.
The Russian ship with all that goes with her or not with her i.e. lack off carrier escort, less capability in networking and situational awareness, and we have seen in Ukraine war lack of training and earlier technology... older , no matter how big she is she is far less capable.
Arleigh Burke Flight III destroyers current and upcoming missiles will have multi use capabilities with antiship capability given to Tomahawk, SM6, SM2 and even ESSM not forgetting VLS launch capability of NSM and or LRASM.
Lest not forget the Aussie designed Nulka, a (hovering electronic counter measure rocket) that hovers away from the ship to lure anti ship missiles out of harms way, very useful against old Russian anti ship missiles with active radars.
Wouldn’t a Tico comparison to Peter the great be a better analysis?
You think a tico could hold out against a single Pete?
@@youngstunna1594Probably, yeah.
@@CptJistuce I feel like that’s asking a lot but with what evidence we’ve witnessed these past couple years…I agree 😂
@@youngstunna1594 At this point, it is hard to believe we ever thought Russia was a serious military power.
But seriously, even the best ship will fold without proper maintenance, and Russia seems to have been having trouble with that for a while now(as well as a longstanding propensity for overstating capabilities).
@@CptJistuce at their height USSR's subs were no joke
To have a good comparison we should conduct exercises. Where better than in the black sea? 🤔
What would also be interesting is seeing how the Russian ships would compare to the Zumwalt-class destroyers after they get refitted with the hypersonic Prompt Strike Missile. Might have to wait a bit to do that one though.
You'd probably have to go with a new build like the proposed Lider class.
Pretty cool that the Kirov has nuclear power.
I'd think that our biggest ships (destroyers I guess? Do we even have cruisers anymore?) are going to have nuclear power before too long. I'd imagine lasers will be on them before too long and as far as I know those are quite the power hogs so it seems like nuke power would be required for that.
We still operate a few Ticos, and Congress keeps starting and killing the CGX program.
However, I don't forsee nuclear propulsion being in the future for most of our surface fleet. Like Jive mentioned, the gas turbines allow for our ships to be casting off under 30min. Nuclear reactors take a lot of time to safely start up unless you want them running while in port.
The Zumwalts are great test beds for power hungry systems that will be implented on newer and future warships
you can get 100k shp with only 2 lm 2500 +g5 these days. wonder if the new ones have these newer lm2500 giving more power then they are letting on. if the zumwalt came through the 155 l62 couldhave outrangeed the 130. that was an insane weapons system maybe it will be put on something in the future.
Here's a even better comparison to consider
Peter the great V sea baby...
If I were to take an educated guess the AB Flight 3 can hit a top speed of over 30 knots, with ease and for a sustained period.
A Russian admiral, after conducting an inspection, called the Kirov another Chernobyl waiting to happen.
So I'd say it is the deadlier ship.
Maybe in 1992
@@Real_Claudy_Focan Admiral Kuroyedov said that in 2004.
You forgot the SM-3. Block IIA can intercept ICBMs and engage LEO satellites.
Easily the US, Russian maintenance is absolute ass, and severally degraded their capabilities. This also doesnt touch on their loyalty focused officer corp which further degrades crew competence. Russian weapons look great on paper but bad in practice.
Do type 55 vs Ticonderoga
Regarding Adm. Nakhimov. When, if, she is ready to go sea, and be single most powerfull surface combatant, she will have the same problem as Yamato, Musashi, Bismark, and Tirpitz battleships. She will be more or less alone, with FFG escorts, agsinst numerous foes. US Navy is not going to send a single Flight II or Flight III Burke DDG against her. If US Navy means to put her on the bottom or at least out of action, multiple Burke DDGs, VIrginia SSNs, F-35C, F/A-18E/F, USAF F-15E,and USAF B-1B will be sent against her. Not saying that she may Hood one or two Burkes, but in the end she will be on the bottom of the sea. In modern day Air-Sea-Land battle the only capital ships are carriers and SSBN's. Just like in WWII fighting ships will be DDG, FFGs, SSNs, and carriers. Throw in few LCS and missile patrol corvettes for littoral work and screening. These Death Star battle wagons are doomed. Just like Moskva cruiser.
Yes. The Kirov’s Shipwrecks wouldn’t even be an issue once it was detected and engaged by the ABCD miles outside of its envelope
What does that even mean? Who launches missiles outside of their envelope? And the Kirov classes Radars are mounted higher up from sea level, so it physically has longer range. Not sure if serious, when Aaron says "It wouldn't even know it was in a fight, when it gets hit". Tomahawks are a known issue since the 80's too. and SM2 and SM6 are not that hard to detect.
@@Gunni1972 The shipwreck’s envelope
@@Gunni1972And the Kirov’s radars were probably stolen and parted out on the black market while Yeltsin was still in office.
Nice ship US Navy. Where are you going to get the sailors to man it? Recruitment is way down.
I think the immigration through Texas and the Southern U.S. Border will fill the need.
Doesn't a VA class SSN have like 4x the SHP?
my 4500 ton Adams class DDG had almost as much SHP
I was on a 4500 ton Adams class DDG 80-85....we had 70k SHP with our twin screwed 4 D class boiler turbines......90k SHP for 26k tons is not much
For their own troops or the enemy?
It's wonderful just how much we know about Russia's radars.
What? Why would you compare a Kirov class Battlecruiser to a Destroyer? The later Ticonderoga class is a better choice, but the ship that was specifically refitted to deal with the Kirov class was the Iowa Class, and that is the most comparable ship.
While I'm fond of the Iowa-class, they've all been decommissioned. There's none today which could engage an active military vessel.
@CptJistuce The've all been decommissioned before. The Wisconsin, Iowa and Missouri each 3 times and the New Jersey four or five times (I forget which). The New Jersey is currently in drydock at the Philadelphia Navy Yard undergoing maintenance. But if the US Navy were to go up against the Russian Navy,it is likely to be a USS Virginia Class or F-35s that deals with any Kirov class ships available, creating some new coral reefs.
My point was that a Burke class is the wrong ship to compare to the Kirov class.
Burke top speeds are listed as 30+ knots
The twin of the Pyotr Vilikiy called Admiral Nakhimov is currently undergoing modernization. Wonder what it's capabilities will be then...
TBH, my money would still be on the Burke. Even if Russia conducted a full, proper modernization, the targeting systems on a burke are just so ridiculously good...
If Habitual Linecrosser can only say "AEGIS IS A SCARY, SCARY BITCH" (that's a direct quote) that's all I really need to know.
If you have to ask... you're in range.
If you don't have to ask... You're still probably in range.
Better Help sells their information to the tech giants.
Imagine a nuclear powered destroyer with todays tech, When america goes back to nuclear surface ships it will be a big step forward!
Would never happen. Destroyers with a nuclear reactor are a ecosystem time bomb waiting to light off. Cant contain a breach when a torpedo literally god smacks a destroyer in half.
As far as the admiral Nokhimoy , if and or when it is actually built then we can see if it actually works like it’s supposed to or if it is a port hiding ship in the real world
Lol 100,000hp I bet the Burke can just about get up on plane hahaha probably damnear 40knts. Think about it the big J got up to 38! The Burke can probably run circles around it.
I'll bet a turkey sandwich on it
Top dome, not Big Dome
When you look at the Moskva, one of the the most capable ships in the Russian Navy was hit by two missiles, without even an alarm going off, and sunk. You have to question Russian capabilities and competence. There is also a huge difference between propaganda claims and actual capabilities.
Historically, you can see that the Russian Navy hasn’t really performed up to par.
@@Gridlocked you are correct, during the Cold War Russia never came close to rivalling the West. Hundreds of lives were lost using unsafe technologies, bad nuclear reactors and faulty weapons.
Also might question every navy around the world !
On paper the Moskova should have downed 2 missiles several miles out. Had Jive ever war gamed just a harpoon or two sinking a Slava or Kirov they'd laugh him out the room.
It's less about the design specs but the level of upkeep and training as these ships age.
British ship hit by Exocets without even an alarm, US ship hit by Exocet without even an alarm,….
It doesn’t mean Russian (ex-soviet) ships are bad, it just means that for some reason the ship wasn’t capable of detecting the threat at the time.
So AdmNkmov is their Bismarck, got it.
Hopefully we will have a DDG(X) in operation by the time the Russians finish refitting the Kalinin into the modernized Admiral Nakhimov.
I wouldn't hold my breath. They can't even decide on the specifics on the DDGx much less get something built and tested and commissioned.
Is there somewhere in the ship that doesn't stop the mission when hit?
There is redundancy in some systems and control spaces. You will just be reduced in capability.
@@NavyVet4955 I think it was before sound powered phones a ship was torpedoed where the only generator powering the internal communications system was at. The word to abandon ship didn't go very far. Many lives were lost.
@@greggweber9967 that's quite possible however sound powered phones with multiple circuits have existed for some time now.
Edit sound powered phones were commonly used on navy ships from 1944 on.
Didn't the Ukrainian Navy promote the Knochimov into a submarine earlier in the year? Also, are our Ticonderoga class Missile Cruisers all retired? That was one hell of a fleet cruiser for offence and defense.
…
Russia and navy are antonyms. America is being compared to a bar so low, we can’t even see it
The most important difference is who has a zircon and who doesn't, hipersonc is way to go..