As part of trials we did that figure of 8 quite a lot, but after that we did 16 minutes of 35 degree of wheel to port and the the same again to starboard. Going round in a tight circle leaning over miles with the MFR nearly in the water wasn't pleasant! I had to go up the mast during that evolution and it felt like you were about a mile away from the ship itself as we were leant over so far!
This really makes me miss being on these things. They were hard work, but and not good in lots of ways, but being at sea on them was wonderful at times.
Lol y'all aren't even in the Top 5 for having the "best Navy." There's a lot of false claims in this documentary. You guys didn't modernize Ship building, nor did you revolutionize anything. America will always be #1. Google it.
@@GJones462-2W1 George is not telling the truth. If you check Wikipedia here you'll see that they are all complete and seaworthy: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_45_destroyer I suspect the comment is based on the fact that the engines needed to be updated because of cooling issues with their intercoolers which is explained on Wikipedia but this was completed during standard maintenance procedures between 2019 and 2021. I live near Portsmouth and regularly see them go out amongst other Royal Navy ships and they are impressive to see.
I brought Ship 2 out of build, also served on Ship 4 and helped develop the GT training for these ships. I also worked with Ross McClure on Type 26. It's a shame BAE built T45, as aside from the weapons and radar, they were not good. I also served on a Type 42 (HMS Gloucester) and they were amazing, just outdated.
No vessel is without its Achilles Heel, especially in combat. Nearly every ‘unsinkable’ warship has hit the bottom. Using American equipment, strapped to RR WR-21, is/was such an Achilles Heel… It’s not uncommon for Russian Tugs to accompany their warships…
Since 2010 the British armed forces have had their budgets squeezed until the pips squeaked. RN admirals said they have mortgaged everything. I do not pretend to be an armchair general or admiral, but any fool knows armed forces are not worth having unless they are fully equipped with the best weapons, training and support systems to win, and that cannot be done on the cheap. In 1979 the defence budget was over 6% of GDP, as against 2% now. Source: former minister David Howell. To have a viable defence the budgets have to be allocated. This cannot be done while government is dominated by ideological libertarians who keep cutting corporate taxes and allowing City of London interests to take advantage offshore tax havens. It is unacceptable to put political donors before our servicemen and women.
Britain should spend 5-10% on her defence. It would create a huge amount of jobs and also protect our citizens, which is the main purpose of government. Get rid of our wasteful aid budgets, instead help get jobs for our kids, working on our ships or building our ships in our shipyards.
@@Spartan-jg4bf What I think Craig meant to say was be more like Germany and spend more money on defence industry rather then defence and build ships and submarines for export. Its pretty much an open secret that the German Navy has warships and submarines but hardly any ammunition also skimping on training and maintenance.
Mostly correct, however actual Defense spending is actually under2% last year, 2020. To get to 2% the government, added military and some civilian pensions (retirement pay and benefits) to the accounting for defense expenditures. And of course, such expenditures do nothing for actual war fighting. You were, deceived on purpose. Many in the government called he 2% goal, "an arbitrary" and meaningless " goal. numbers for 2021 are not yet generated... Retirement pensions, for UK military personnel, exceeded 1.2 billion pounds in 2020. Look it up. That amount of money would cover the entire existing purchase price of all the F35s on the HMS Queen Elizabeth, now at sea.
@@Kxy2x nah, the US truly has the best. This documentary literally says they are behind in digital technology and had to adjust and test their ships after 2004. What's even funnier is them claiming they revolutionized ship assembly. They just picked up on assembling their ships in sections in the 2000s.... That's way way way way way way way behind America.
The French had 45 design first. Daring was a disaster and treated as an experiment with it's unusable RADAR technology linked to its experimental missile system. The computer system on board was woeful and kept on crashing, needing a reboot even after being commissioned. This documentary highlights the discrepancies int he construction of modern warships. It was expensive, and the skills base had to be highly skilled in order to match up the unit builds from different parts of the country. It didn't work! For example, holes in bulkheads did not match up. Eventually Daring was launched after a nightmare during construction, yet what followed was a fiasco. This documentary is very generous in its kind of truth. How do I know? I worked for MoD with RN when this fiasco was constructed.
So they showed D32 Daring, as well as D35 Dragon, bit hard to miss, but the blank spaces in the footage showed the invisibility cloaking worked really well 🤣
Shame there’s only 6, should have been double that. Needs to have been really with the issues they’ve had 😁 Here’s to the Type 26, 31, 32 and 83 🍻 You need to be building these things all the time so you minimise the risk of the type of issues the Darings have had. Same goes for the Astutes and Dreadnaughts. Could use at least one more carrier too…. but manned by who? 🤷🏻♂️
I'll never understand these comments. What wars are you wanting to fight? Any scenario where you need more capability than the most powerful Navy the UK has ever put together all that conventional weaponry is *worthless*. What we should be doing is increasing the size and capability of our nuclear deterrent and maintaining the level we're at with conventional forces going forwards.
These will be a great addition to our Naval Strength, enhanced also by the two new Aircraft carriers. It is a shame though, that our once great merchant fleet, flying the Red Ensign has all but disappeared. I believe that the largest fleet flying th ‘Red Duster’ is at the present Caledonian Macbrayne ferries,with 82 ships - large and small. They are always a pleasure to travel on, with or without a car.
Lol y'all aren't even in the Top 5 for having the "best Navy." There's a lot of false claims in this documentary. You guys didn't modernize Ship building, nor did you revolutionize anything. America will always be #1. Google it.
Yeah but our government is being run by utter pricks and they think only six is good enough we should have at least 10 anti air 12 anti ship and 10 anti sub destroyers hopefully the next person to run this country can put the best foot forward in building up the baby's capability and size becAuse this is embarrassing
I think you mean Type 26? Both Australia and Canada will be using Type 26 in the AAW role and will use different radars. The Australians are having difficulty making their radar mast work with the dimensions and stability parameters of T26. Some of the differences are listed in Wikipedia.
This video & others I've seen on Royal navy ships, including the QE carrier, have all mentioned how the UK government over the decades has cut back on this or that, reducing capabilities due to cost etc. Now, in light of current world events, this doctrine has come back to haunt them. Can you imagine how we could've boosted our navy and air force with that £37 BILLION our government found for the COVID track and trace app? It always appears that politicians fail to see what many others do and then react too late.
Lol y'all aren't even in the Top 5 for having the "best Navy." There's a lot of false claims in this documentary. You guys didn't modernize Ship building, nor did you revolutionize anything. America will always be #1. Google it.
I just hope that the RN / BAE Systems designers are a couple of steps ahead this time around. Can she take out the latest hypersonic missiles coming in at many times the speed of sound ? Can she deal with hundreds of small drones coming in all at once ? How resilient is she to the latest Russian electronic countermeasures such as the latest version of Khibini ?
Lol y'all aren't even in the Top 5 for having the "best Navy." There's a lot of false claims in this documentary. You guys didn't modernize Ship building, nor did you revolutionize anything. America will always be #1. Google it.
@@drossgamessports9480 You stupid uneducated yank. Your dollar is facing imminent collapse and the U.S. will almost certainly descend into civil war. Better stock up on plenty of ammo and banjo strings 🤣🤣🤣
I wouldn't worry about the hypersonic missiles quite yet. Yes, Russia says they have a working one, but Russia also says a lot of things that turn out not to be true. Also, the cost for one hypersonic missile it's not to be between 10 to 30 million dollars, well rush I can barely afford to pay its soldiers. I still think that we are a decade away from having to worry about hypersonic missiles doing anything aside from potentially hitting extremely large targets like cities or military bases. And a decade from now, a lot of military technology will be obsolete as seen by the rate at which in his progressing literally month over month.
Since this film was made the world has changed again back to planning A cemetrical warfare, Russia is back and China is moving forward faster in terms of warfare than the Americans did during WW2, their growth is frightening and they already have more warships than the US, we already have the 6 type 45's now but im sure the MOD would have rather built the extra 6 it had planned (i think it was 6 more, i know we cut the amount we planned). The type 45 is a great looking ship and it will have one of if not the best trained crews in the world along with the rest of the Navy, however i do feel our ships are not armed enough, Russia and Xhina have adopted the philosophy of relatively cheap missile attacks from multiple platforms on mass, saturation attacks, so Destroyers need plenty of missile silos, Arleigh Burke has 96, type 55 has over 100, we have 48, it would be a real shame to be knocked out of a battle and sunk because you have ran out of weapons half way through! For me this is one of the British biggest mistakes over the decades, we always under arm our fighting machines, it would be really nice to see something over powered with weapons for a change!
Lol y'all aren't even in the Top 5 for having the "best Navy." There's a lot of false claims in this documentary. You guys didn't modernize Ship building, nor did you revolutionize anything. America will always be #1. Google it.
@@drossgamessports9480 the industrial revolution? The worlds history didnt start after 1776 you know! Your even speaking our language! Get an education!
I'm afraid you are right. CNO Admiral Gilday USN: need to get away from wrapping “$2 billion ships around 96 missile tubes” to “fight a potential adversary that is producing capability and platforms at a very high rate of speed.”
57:06 "RAS, Refueling At Sea". At sea refueling was not developed by the royal navy...simply because it was never needed by them. Thanks to their colonial holdings and centuries of maritime mastery, they had always had a string of friendly bases and massive logistical infrastructure in place so that they never needed to develop a technique like that. It was developed and perfected by the US navy. The USA did not have bases or infrastructure in place in the pacific, except for a couple bases that were taken by Japan at the very outset of the war, therefore a technique of refueling was needed. The royal navy learned from the USN while serving in the pacific alongside them. Prior to the transition to oil fired boilers from coal, there was no feasible method of quick refueling, coaling was a slow, strenuous and dirty task that required the whole working crew to complete over the course of days.
Lol y'all aren't even in the Top 5 for having the "best Navy." There's a lot of false claims in this documentary. You guys didn't modernize Ship building, nor did you revolutionize anything. America will always be #1. Google it.
Am i wrong or once the vertical weapons are depleted she has to hit port to ammunition ship as it cannot be done at sea which would make her pretty much a target?
That is correct, but that does also apply to other ships. The majority of weapons in modern warships have their missiles are in VLS. Type 45 does have torpedos that can be launched from a Merlin or anti-ship weapons from a Lynx helicopter and there is also the 4.5 inch gun. T45 is getting an upgrade with 24 extra VLS silos for sea ceptor, meaning there will be 72 VLS on board. They are having a pretty bad day if all 72 missiles are consumed.
I still can’t remember the name of the vessel that sailed doon the waater I think it was 2006 or2007 because I was a coach driver with a party of ice hockey players at the ice arena at the braehead arena
Those poor sailors on the small boat during the small craft attack exercise... when they came aboard afterwards I can just see them being told "You're dead mate. No lunch for you, bloody terrorist."
It’s great to see the royal navy with two super carriers. It’s very sad. They were not made CATOBAR super carriers. An immense mistake! The radar on the Darings is excellent! However, if the Royal Navy is only going to build six escorts for two super carriers, these ships are grossly under sized, and carry far too few missiles!! Either build six more or you will always be requesting a U.S send Arleigh Burke destroyer to give you another 96 missiles, which in the flight three can also intercept ICBMs. I’m glad to see the royal navy come back as far as they have! As an American, who is an extreme anglophile, I am so disappointed in the decisions which made your carriers STOVAL instead of CATOBAR and although an excellent escort, these ships should be carrying 96 missiles like do US in Arleigh Burke flight three. It makes me sad. Britain has come so far yet decided to stop 10 m short of finishing 100 m race in restoring the royal navy! In my opinion which ships this size you need twelve not six. to adequately screen your two super carriers!
The Type 45s have been going through a project to see the number of AAW missiles increased to 72, The Type 83 replacement is expected to have a lot more missiles and feature Mk 41 sylos. I fully expect to see a CATOBAR solution in the future for new aircraft/drone types. The ships have a 50 year life span and can be configured for CATOBAR. However at the time the decision was made our version of EMALs was too risky to go with and the ships cannot generate steam for a traditional catapult. STOVL isn't so bad, these carriers can generate a sortie rate just below that of a Nimitz and we can interop with USMC, Italians and Japanese.
You are propably refering to liberty ships which were built by 18warfs. How many warfs were involved in ths construction of this ship? And everybody knows that commerce ships are much simpler then warships (sarcasm).
@@juliusraben3526 Lol y'all aren't even in the Top 5 for having the "best Navy." There's a lot of false claims in this documentary. You guys didn't modernize Ship building, nor did you revolutionize anything. America will always be #1. Google it.
@@drossgamessports9480 cool. But you are answering a question, nobody asked. Somebody from Swittzerland can never comment on something related to ships since it is a landlocked country?
What a shame.. As Japan produces more Ships then the UK..As they understand the value of the skills needed to build them. Should never be lost. Then the 10+ years it takes to train the Crews.
@@thegrinch8161 At the moment the ships are unreliable rubbish because the marine turbine engines overheat in humid climates. The existing diesels will be swapped out for more powerful units to replace the power provided by the turbines. The turbines will only be used as a power boost for high speed runs. www.navylookout.com/final-cure-for-type-45-destroyer-propulsion-problems-announced/
@@RouteDeTours I was a coach driver at the time and due to a head injury I can't remember the exact date and time so I'm truly sorry for not remembering the date or vessel
Must be completed in 5 1/2 years? I know the ships were a lot less sophisticated but in WW2 the Americans could put a carrier in the water in just over two years and a destroyer escort in about 10 months.
Modern US shipbuilding is more equivalent. Yes, the ships are more complex and also there's not the same imperative so you take your time and don't rush it. CARRIERS USS Gerald R Ford (first of class) - first steel cut 2005, delivered 2017. USS George HW Bush (last of class) - 2003-2009 DESTROYERS USS Arleigh Burke was launched 10 months after being laid down but spent another year and a half being fitted out. It was a different type of construction, so can't be compared. More fitting out is done ashore these days as the ship is being constructed. Most ships of the class are about 2.5 years from laying down to commission.
I don't get it. Just like Airbus. How is shipping modules long distances cost effective? I find it hard to believe they aren't burning up money needlessly. They obviously have a reason, I guess, but it sure don't make sense on the surface.
I suspect it greatly reduces the time/cost to build a ship in modules and by three seperate boat yards all effectively working in parallel. The long distance aspect is obviously is going to add cost but out weighed by the advantages...
the world best aegis destroyer, you wont get a more attentive crew than in a royal navy CIC simply because of the falkand war, they take ship protection very seriously.
Type 45 is not a multi role destroyer like the Arleigh Burke class. Her capabilities except air defence is limited..She was designed to provide air defence for Q2 class carriers. To describe her as the most advanced warship is hugely exaggerated..One of the most advanced destroyers definitely buy warship hell no...Gerald Ford class carriers are warships as well 😂😂.
From my understanding they are capable of ASW (Anti Submarine Warfare). As your rightfully said, they don't carry onboard torpedo launchers but their Wildcat helicopter (or Merlin) can be equipped with Sting Ray lightweight torpedoes to counter any submarine threat :)
RN needs to have a fleet of 33 brand new 8,300 ton stealth guided missile multi warfare destroyers powered by fuel cell & Li-ion marine propulsion system!!! this will be complimented by a fleet of 19 brand new 10,600 ton stealth guided missile multi warfare destroyers propelled by the same fuel cell & Li-ion power pack!!! total acquisition cost of 52 stealth guided missile destroyers of different specifications €13.0 Bn to €26.5 Bn approx!!!
A single Type 26 frigate costs £1.25 billion and doesn't feature a destroyer radar like Sampson. No way would 53 destroyers cost 26.5 billion. The RN wouldn't even have enough crew for half that number.
Stop smoking cheap grass, lad. Not enough money is coming for the RN in the foreseeable future. CSG21 is currently relying on the US Navy (1 Arleigh Burke destroyer + 10 F-35Bs) and the Dutch Navy's HNLMS Evertsen. Incidentally, the HMS Diamond, which was escorting Big Lizzie, is out of business due to a fawlty turbine engine failure. Yes, the same revolutionary turbine engine mentioned in this video has been constantly experimenting technical difficulties and is well-documented.
Perhaps this would be the fleet of the British empire if it were still around. I would say 10 CVNs, 20 cruisers, 60 destroyers 30 plus nuclear attack subs and around 10 ballistic mission subs plus a large fleet of support vessels
The title card; _"Building Britain's Ultimate Warship."_ doesn't appear until 6:23 (ish) _(everything up to that point is the usual, totally skippable, spoilery-ass, "coming up, on this episode of..." crap.)_ _(You're welcome. ✌)_
@Rob Wilton It is a change (or jump) of an electron from one energy level to another WITHIN AN ATOM. The colloquial use has no grounding in the original meaning.
The Type 45s are amazing ships but we should have made more of them. Originally we were going to have 12 but then successive governments have cut the budget for our armed forces and reduced the total number. I wish we had a government that really believed in and supported our brave men & women in the armed forces and funded more ships which is really what we need right now.
And build their own vessels. Australian Government buys overseas, Our Shipbuilding Industry has been virtually Destroyed by Government that won't back Australian Made.
6 August 2921, it was reported, that only one Type 45 is currently sea worthy. This type destroyer has a very long history of being plagued many times with propulsion problems.
@@leandro9311 May 2016, Warship Technology. And cataloged in many other publications, before and since. The British failure to completely change out the propulsion units themselves, because they tried the cheapest way possible to keep the poorly engineered and constructed systems in place has lead to the entire class of Type 45 destroyers being unseaworthy. Many of that type, and there are only 6, spend an inordinate time in port. The Royal Navy, and the UK government have themselves reported on it. You should read up.on it. It originated with the original choice of propulsion systems at the beginning of the Type 45 construction.
@@raywhitehead730 In fact the Type 45 does have long standing propulsion problems but once again they are largely related to warmer waters then everthying else. I give you the fact the Royal Navy went a bit cheap in the main components but they have held up so far, they just need modernization after some 15 years of service which is expected
@@leandro9311 then why did the last Type 45 already in transit withe the QE on her maiden cruise have to turn back ?? Wasn't it scheduled to make the whole cruise? As of today only one Type ,45 is sea worthy. You should read a very well detailed report on the propulsion system in royal institution of naval architects may of 2017. And Warship Technology may 2016. In the parlance of US Navy Jargon, the Royal Navy is taking a bandaid approach.
Type 45 is mainly for air defence with limited capabilites in other areas. Arleigh Burke destroyers are multiple mission warships overall they are far more capable..
@@ricky1231 imagine the enemy launches 49 anti ship missile? Type 45 is doomed. Besides a 48 to 48 score is highly unlikely. No matter how advanced the radar is, it's still a 30rpm rotating radar, a low flying supersonic sea skimmer can always find a gap between rotations.
@@barracuda7018 I agree with you there You need EASA radar and more missiles The UK could built the Arleigh Burke in the UK under licence with Agis missile defence system & that would protect carriers as well as the UK isles again ballistic missiles. Two birds with one stone or build a ship with same capability as the Burke. Home grown is not always the best for National defence at any given time
A detailed account of the this class, Type 45, propulsion failures and problems can be read at, The Royal Institution of Naval Architects, May 2017....those problems persist even now August, 2021. Many many times these ships suffer complete electrical power failure throughout the ship. Thus their inherent unseaworthiness.
@@NJTDover A LM2500 gas turbine engine on a Spurance class destroyer could be replaced in two days. but they were very dependable and seldom had to be replaced. That British ship should have been returned to service in time to rejoin the cruise...
The T45s are going through a programme to rectify this. An extra diesel generator is being installed into the ship. The issue isn't the WR21 turbine but the intercooler.
Actually they are not. One RN officer told me that a couple of the T45s sound like a bag of spanners underwater. T23s and T26s are very quiet but this noise reduction is very pricey.
look at it lads, tis will b the most powerful ship in the UK navy with awesome anti air capabilities. *proceeds to send a single working one to provoke a county with the best anti ship missiles in existence and less than 20 km from a coast filled with those missiles
The Chinese ballistic anti ship missile has so far successfully hit a barge. A barge that they knew the position of. Secondly a freedom of navigation exercise is not a provocation. China is more than welcome to steam up and down the English channel if they wish.
All these ships had serious flaws. One was the generator engines which over heated in hot climates. The other was the harmonic voltage distortion (THDu) due to her 2 x 20MW of electric propulsion. The THDu is four times the limit set in Stanag. She also has common mode voltage in kV on the hull. The THDu was known about in 2001 but nothing was done.
Find and read the declassified and released reports on the Falklands War as to why the Hermes kept to the East of an internationally agreed position line in the South Atlantic. To do with certain weapons. Woodward vindicated. UK plays by the rules we signed up to.
Yeah Ajax is bad but the carrier? Highly advanced design that the Americans think is impressive. The sortie rate of QE is in the same league as a Nimitz carrier.
@@aethellstan i think its politcal engineering wining vote by providing jobs to area that makes no sense if this was to be build by a privite contractor.
@@patthonsirilim5739 The entire project is built by private contractors there are no ship builders or electronics companies owned by UK government. They're built according to specialisms in the various areas. Yes there may well be politics involved in regards to keeping jobs in the industry around the country but by saying what you said is really disingenuous to the workers themselves.
Because it's faster ti build a ship when you build it in segments as multiple locations can build multiple parts of the ship at tge same time and join them at 1 time cuts ship building in half its how all cruise ships are built now a days too
The RN's Type 45 destroyers are faulty and operationally unreliable. To call it Britain's ultimate warship is not only a ludicrous exaggeration, it is an insult to knowledgeable viewers. Could be better edited.
32:45 “It throws a huge protection zone, hundreds of kilometres wide..” 😂 Yeah, right! 😂 At 30 miles distance, using the curvature chart, the drop is 600 feet! 600! Thats 182 metres! So, unless the enemy ships are 140 metres high, your “sophisticated” radar cant see F all! And thats only at 30 miles distance! So what hundreds of kilometres is this fool dreaming about? Its only good for aerial targets. Unless, of course, the water is totally FLAT
"Its only good for aerial targets." - that's literally what it's for. Still the most advanced and capable naval air-defence radar on the face of the planet and you're saying its useless? Nice try.
So much “Scotty” in the narrative when shipyard guy talks, it’s awesome.
As part of trials we did that figure of 8 quite a lot, but after that we did 16 minutes of 35 degree of wheel to port and the the same again to starboard. Going round in a tight circle leaning over miles with the MFR nearly in the water wasn't pleasant! I had to go up the mast during that evolution and it felt like you were about a mile away from the ship itself as we were leant over so far!
I think I would have barfed and then fallen overboard! Good work!
This really makes me miss being on these things. They were hard work, but and not good in lots of ways, but being at sea on them was wonderful at times.
Thank you for your service!
That Lt. Commander Angus Essenhigh @ 01:11:25 is now the Captain of HMS Queen Elizabeth currently on deployment with CSG21 in the Indo Pacific.
One helluva warship! This yank is very impressed. It shows Britain's mastery of the sea has never waned! Well done, Brits! Quite impressive!
Hardly, out of the six that were built only one is seaworthy at this time.
@@georgebarnes8163 What? So there's 5 laying around, incomplete somewhere?
Lol y'all aren't even in the Top 5 for having the "best Navy." There's a lot of false claims in this documentary. You guys didn't modernize Ship building, nor did you revolutionize anything. America will always be #1. Google it.
@@GJones462-2W1 George is not telling the truth. If you check Wikipedia here you'll see that they are all complete and seaworthy: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_45_destroyer
I suspect the comment is based on the fact that the engines needed to be updated because of cooling issues with their intercoolers which is explained on Wikipedia but this was completed during standard maintenance procedures between 2019 and 2021. I live near Portsmouth and regularly see them go out amongst other Royal Navy ships and they are impressive to see.
It didn't function and ended up as a very expensive training ship!
They should show this to all school kids in the last year of school. I personally think it's great recruiting potential , in a different way ...
I brought Ship 2 out of build, also served on Ship 4 and helped develop the GT training for these ships. I also worked with Ross McClure on Type 26. It's a shame BAE built T45, as aside from the weapons and radar, they were not good. I also served on a Type 42 (HMS Gloucester) and they were amazing, just outdated.
No vessel is without its Achilles Heel, especially in combat. Nearly every ‘unsinkable’ warship has hit the bottom.
Using American equipment, strapped to RR WR-21, is/was such an Achilles Heel…
It’s not uncommon for Russian Tugs to accompany their warships…
The Australian Navy could use three or four of these. Love the systems, as an ex combat systems chief (RAN) they are superb
we need a carrier, destroyers, subs, etc etc, all nuclear, and all american made.....
No, they are not superb
Thanks for making this available, it's very interesting.
Since 2010 the British armed forces have had their budgets squeezed until the pips squeaked. RN admirals said they have mortgaged everything. I do not pretend to be an armchair general or admiral, but any fool knows armed forces are not worth having unless they are fully equipped with the best weapons, training and support systems to win, and that cannot be done on the cheap. In 1979 the defence budget was over 6% of GDP, as against 2% now. Source: former minister David Howell. To have a viable defence the budgets have to be allocated. This cannot be done while government is dominated by ideological libertarians who keep cutting corporate taxes and allowing City of London interests to take advantage offshore tax havens. It is unacceptable to put political donors before our servicemen and women.
Britain should spend 5-10% on her defence. It would create a huge amount of jobs and also protect our citizens, which is the main purpose of government.
Get rid of our wasteful aid budgets, instead help get jobs for our kids, working on our ships or building our ships in our shipyards.
@@craigduncan4826 Not even the US spends 10% , infact not major power spends 10% of GDP on defence, you aren't very clever 🙄
@@Spartan-jg4bf What I think Craig meant to say was be more like Germany and spend more money on defence industry rather then defence and build ships and submarines for export. Its pretty much an open secret that the German Navy has warships and submarines but hardly any ammunition also skimping on training and maintenance.
Mostly correct, however actual Defense spending is actually under2% last year, 2020. To get to 2% the government, added military and some civilian pensions (retirement pay and benefits) to the accounting for defense expenditures. And of course, such expenditures do nothing for actual war fighting. You were, deceived on purpose. Many in the government called he 2% goal, "an arbitrary" and meaningless " goal. numbers for 2021 are not yet generated... Retirement pensions, for UK military personnel, exceeded 1.2 billion pounds in 2020. Look it up. That amount of money would cover the entire existing purchase price of all the F35s on the HMS Queen Elizabeth, now at sea.
@@craigduncan4826 I couldn't agree more with you. Unfortunately it's only a wishful thinking to increase the defense budget.
Thanks for posting this documentary beautiful stuff! Need more VLS bring back Tico 2033
I just love the naff lazy narration! Phrases like; "construction jigsaw", and "precision household furniture". Real engineering savvy people!
Cool video. Awesome ship
Fantastic doco
The British and Europeans design handsome warships.
@@Kxy2x nah, the US truly has the best. This documentary literally says they are behind in digital technology and had to adjust and test their ships after 2004. What's even funnier is them claiming they revolutionized ship assembly. They just picked up on assembling their ships in sections in the 2000s.... That's way way way way way way way behind America.
She is a beast!
THANK YOU, we love you. Your prodigal sons America.
We try to stay away from American ships they tend to fire without checking
@@gowdsake7103 Russian troll?
@@petertwiss4215 Ummm no try again ?
I will give you a hint the US killed more than were killed by the enemy !
@@gowdsake7103 I highly doubt that. Yes friendly fire happened but I doubt it was anywhere near that amount.
That Was Freaking Brilliant God i miss Being at Sea
Brilliant. Thanks for uploading.
IMO it is shortsighted of the UK treasury to halt construction at six ships when they should've built the originally planned 12 ships.
The Warfare Officer at 1:12:10, is now appeared as Captain of the HMS Queen Elizabeth in the new documentary BBC Warship: Tour of Duty.
The French had 45 design first. Daring was a disaster and treated as an experiment with it's unusable RADAR technology linked to its experimental missile system. The computer system on board was woeful and kept on crashing, needing a reboot even after being commissioned. This documentary highlights the discrepancies int he construction of modern warships. It was expensive, and the skills base had to be highly skilled in order to match up the unit builds from different parts of the country. It didn't work! For example, holes in bulkheads did not match up. Eventually Daring was launched after a nightmare during construction, yet what followed was a fiasco. This documentary is very generous in its kind of truth. How do I know? I worked for MoD with RN when this fiasco was constructed.
First of class, issues such of these are expected.
engaging 36 incoming is a substantial defensive juggernaut
If only it was reality
Yup, one salvo, then out of the fight.
So they showed D32 Daring, as well as D35 Dragon, bit hard to miss, but the blank spaces in the footage showed the invisibility cloaking worked really well 🤣
Knob jockey
Klingons on the starboard bow
Despite all the bad press it's performing better than any other destroyer in 2024
Using wonderware InTouch SCADA as well.
To be honest that’s what I would use as well.
Shame there’s only 6, should have been double that.
Needs to have been really with the issues they’ve had 😁
Here’s to the Type 26, 31, 32 and 83 🍻
You need to be building these things all the time so you minimise the risk of the type of issues the Darings have had.
Same goes for the Astutes and Dreadnaughts.
Could use at least one more carrier too…. but manned by who? 🤷🏻♂️
I'll never understand these comments. What wars are you wanting to fight? Any scenario where you need more capability than the most powerful Navy the UK has ever put together all that conventional weaponry is *worthless*. What we should be doing is increasing the size and capability of our nuclear deterrent and maintaining the level we're at with conventional forces going forwards.
These will be a great addition to our Naval Strength, enhanced also by the two new Aircraft carriers. It is a shame though, that our once great merchant fleet, flying the Red Ensign has all but disappeared. I believe that the largest fleet flying th ‘Red Duster’ is at the present Caledonian Macbrayne ferries,with 82 ships - large and small. They are always a pleasure to travel on, with or without a car.
One already hiding in Portsmouth and the other poorly in Guam…
@@romeo9017 how are they hiding?
@@TT-hd3zi refit is code for hiding, apparently.
Lol y'all aren't even in the Top 5 for having the "best Navy." There's a lot of false claims in this documentary. You guys didn't modernize Ship building, nor did you revolutionize anything. America will always be #1. Google it.
Wish we had a much bigger navy
Where was this film obtained please? I need a decent HD copy for training. VMT
There is no HD version unfortunately
@@alexanderfoster3628 Ta. Is a copy available anywhere?
@@fa0676 era.org.uk/tv-radio-resource/channel-4-building-britains-ultimate-warship/
Should build about 24 of these, upgrading with lessons learned all the time.
Yeah but our government is being run by utter pricks and they think only six is good enough we should have at least 10 anti air 12 anti ship and 10 anti sub destroyers hopefully the next person to run this country can put the best foot forward in building up the baby's capability and size becAuse this is embarrassing
It will be interesting to see how different the British type 45 will be from the Canadian type 45 when we finally get them built.
I think you mean Type 26? Both Australia and Canada will be using Type 26 in the AAW role and will use different radars. The Australians are having difficulty making their radar mast work with the dimensions and stability parameters of T26. Some of the differences are listed in Wikipedia.
The Canadian version will cost 10 times as much, got to grease some palms !
@@johnwillatt7162 because candian version use
aegis
@@johnwillatt7162 82 billion so far HAHAAHA!
More ships need to be built in Britain
This video & others I've seen on Royal navy ships, including the QE carrier, have all mentioned how the UK government over the decades has cut back on this or that, reducing capabilities due to cost etc. Now, in light of current world events, this doctrine has come back to haunt them. Can you imagine how we could've boosted our navy and air force with that £37 BILLION our government found for the COVID track and trace app? It always appears that politicians fail to see what many others do and then react too late.
Lol y'all aren't even in the Top 5 for having the "best Navy." There's a lot of false claims in this documentary. You guys didn't modernize Ship building, nor did you revolutionize anything. America will always be #1. Google it.
Somebody points an RPG at the ship and you're firing warning shots? Really?
I just hope that the RN / BAE Systems designers are a couple of steps ahead this time around. Can she take out the latest hypersonic missiles coming in at many times the speed of sound ? Can she deal with hundreds of small drones coming in all at once ? How resilient is she to the latest Russian electronic countermeasures such as the latest version of Khibini ?
More importantly can they actually keep it powered long enough
@@gowdsake7103 Some people are very gullible.
Lol y'all aren't even in the Top 5 for having the "best Navy." There's a lot of false claims in this documentary. You guys didn't modernize Ship building, nor did you revolutionize anything. America will always be #1. Google it.
@@drossgamessports9480 You stupid uneducated yank. Your dollar is facing imminent collapse and the U.S. will almost certainly descend into civil war. Better stock up on plenty of ammo and banjo strings 🤣🤣🤣
I wouldn't worry about the hypersonic missiles quite yet. Yes, Russia says they have a working one, but Russia also says a lot of things that turn out not to be true. Also, the cost for one hypersonic missile it's not to be between 10 to 30 million dollars, well rush I can barely afford to pay its soldiers. I still think that we are a decade away from having to worry about hypersonic missiles doing anything aside from potentially hitting extremely large targets like cities or military bases. And a decade from now, a lot of military technology will be obsolete as seen by the rate at which in his progressing literally month over month.
Since this film was made the world has changed again back to planning A cemetrical warfare, Russia is back and China is moving forward faster in terms of warfare than the Americans did during WW2, their growth is frightening and they already have more warships than the US, we already have the 6 type 45's now but im sure the MOD would have rather built the extra 6 it had planned (i think it was 6 more, i know we cut the amount we planned). The type 45 is a great looking ship and it will have one of if not the best trained crews in the world along with the rest of the Navy, however i do feel our ships are not armed enough, Russia and Xhina have adopted the philosophy of relatively cheap missile attacks from multiple platforms on mass, saturation attacks, so Destroyers need plenty of missile silos, Arleigh Burke has 96, type 55 has over 100, we have 48, it would be a real shame to be knocked out of a battle and sunk because you have ran out of weapons half way through! For me this is one of the British biggest mistakes over the decades, we always under arm our fighting machines, it would be really nice to see something over powered with weapons for a change!
Lol y'all aren't even in the Top 5 for having the "best Navy." There's a lot of false claims in this documentary. You guys didn't modernize Ship building, nor did you revolutionize anything. America will always be #1. Google it.
@@drossgamessports9480 the industrial revolution? The worlds history didnt start after 1776 you know! Your even speaking our language! Get an education!
I'm afraid you are right. CNO Admiral Gilday USN: need to get away from wrapping “$2 billion ships around 96 missile tubes” to “fight a potential adversary that is producing capability and platforms at a very high rate of speed.”
Should be "symmetrical". No such word as "cemetrical".
Huge hallways and tiny berths.
You don't need to move personnel, equipment and damage control gear at the double rush through a 6 berth cabin.
57:06 "RAS, Refueling At Sea". At sea refueling was not developed by the royal navy...simply because it was never needed by them. Thanks to their colonial holdings and centuries of maritime mastery, they had always had a string of friendly bases and massive logistical infrastructure in place so that they never needed to develop a technique like that. It was developed and perfected by the US navy. The USA did not have bases or infrastructure in place in the pacific, except for a couple bases that were taken by Japan at the very outset of the war, therefore a technique of refueling was needed. The royal navy learned from the USN while serving in the pacific alongside them.
Prior to the transition to oil fired boilers from coal, there was no feasible method of quick refueling, coaling was a slow, strenuous and dirty task that required the whole working crew to complete over the course of days.
Suggest you read the Wikipedia 'Underway Replenishment'. It should point out some facts to you.
Lol y'all aren't even in the Top 5 for having the "best Navy." There's a lot of false claims in this documentary. You guys didn't modernize Ship building, nor did you revolutionize anything. America will always be #1. Google it.
Am i wrong or once the vertical weapons are depleted she has to hit port to ammunition ship as it cannot be done at sea which would make her pretty much a target?
That is correct, but that does also apply to other ships. The majority of weapons in modern warships have their missiles are in VLS. Type 45 does have torpedos that can be launched from a Merlin or anti-ship weapons from a Lynx helicopter and there is also the 4.5 inch gun. T45 is getting an upgrade with 24 extra VLS silos for sea ceptor, meaning there will be 72 VLS on board. They are having a pretty bad day if all 72 missiles are consumed.
@@alexanderfoster3628 None of that fancy stuff on the Type 21 i served on back in the day 😂
I still can’t remember the name of the vessel that sailed doon the waater I think it was 2006 or2007 because I was a coach driver with a party of ice hockey players at the ice arena at the braehead arena
...hope that the engine problems are solved by now!...
1:02:32 Get him some trousers that fit!
Those poor sailors on the small boat during the small craft attack exercise... when they came aboard afterwards I can just see them being told "You're dead mate. No lunch for you, bloody terrorist."
It’s great to see the royal navy with two super carriers. It’s very sad. They were not made CATOBAR super carriers. An immense mistake! The radar on the Darings is excellent! However, if the Royal Navy is only going to build six escorts for two super carriers, these ships are grossly under sized, and carry far too few missiles!! Either build six more or you will always be requesting a U.S send Arleigh Burke destroyer to give you another 96 missiles, which in the flight three can also intercept ICBMs. I’m glad to see the royal navy come back as far as they have! As an American, who is an extreme anglophile, I am so disappointed in the decisions which made your carriers STOVAL instead of CATOBAR and although an excellent escort, these ships should be carrying 96 missiles like do US in Arleigh Burke flight three. It makes me sad. Britain has come so far yet decided to stop 10 m short of finishing 100 m race in restoring the royal navy! In my opinion which ships this size you need twelve not six. to adequately screen your two super carriers!
The Type 45s have been going through a project to see the number of AAW missiles increased to 72, The Type 83 replacement is expected to have a lot more missiles and feature Mk 41 sylos. I fully expect to see a CATOBAR solution in the future for new aircraft/drone types. The ships have a 50 year life span and can be configured for CATOBAR. However at the time the decision was made our version of EMALs was too risky to go with and the ships cannot generate steam for a traditional catapult. STOVL isn't so bad, these carriers can generate a sortie rate just below that of a Nimitz and we can interop with USMC, Italians and Japanese.
5 1/2 years Quicker now .Say that to ship builder of WW2
You are propably refering to liberty ships which were built by 18warfs.
How many warfs were involved in ths construction of this ship?
And everybody knows that commerce ships are much simpler then warships (sarcasm).
@@juliusraben3526 Lol y'all aren't even in the Top 5 for having the "best Navy." There's a lot of false claims in this documentary. You guys didn't modernize Ship building, nor did you revolutionize anything. America will always be #1. Google it.
@@drossgamessports9480 cool. But you are answering a question, nobody asked.
Somebody from Swittzerland can never comment on something related to ships since it is a landlocked country?
What a shame.. As Japan produces more Ships then the UK..As they understand the value of the skills needed to build them. Should never be lost. Then the 10+ years it takes to train the Crews.
I saw a command and control a bit like this on vincennes ticonderoga class back in 1988 no im not an ex sailor or American
When they have replaced the overheating part of the engines they will be great.
Your only echoing what is a badly kept secret since this turd hit the water
@@thegrinch8161 And what ships do you have that are better??
@@thegrinch8161 At the moment the ships are unreliable rubbish because the marine turbine engines overheat in humid climates. The existing diesels will be swapped out for more powerful units to replace the power provided by the turbines. The turbines will only be used as a power boost for high speed runs. www.navylookout.com/final-cure-for-type-45-destroyer-propulsion-problems-announced/
@@thegrinch8161 You're* Come on John, it's really not that hard. Please try to get it right in future.
@@RouteDeTours I was a coach driver at the time and due to a head injury I can't remember the exact date and time so I'm truly sorry for not remembering the date or vessel
No UNREP tune blasting out?!?
The Royal Navy are the best in the world
Must be completed in 5 1/2 years? I know the ships were a lot less sophisticated but in WW2 the Americans could put a carrier in the water in just over two years and a destroyer escort in about 10 months.
Modern US shipbuilding is more equivalent. Yes, the ships are more complex and also there's not the same imperative so you take your time and don't rush it.
CARRIERS
USS Gerald R Ford (first of class) - first steel cut 2005, delivered 2017.
USS George HW Bush (last of class) - 2003-2009
DESTROYERS
USS Arleigh Burke was launched 10 months after being laid down but spent another year and a half being fitted out. It was a different type of construction, so can't be compared. More fitting out is done ashore these days as the ship is being constructed. Most ships of the class are about 2.5 years from laying down to commission.
I have to wonder how all this electronic stuff stands up to an
electromagnetic pulse
I don't get it. Just like Airbus. How is shipping modules long distances cost effective? I find it hard to believe they aren't burning up money needlessly. They obviously have a reason, I guess, but it sure don't make sense on the surface.
I suspect it greatly reduces the time/cost to build a ship in modules and by three seperate boat yards all effectively working in parallel. The long distance aspect is obviously is going to add cost but out weighed by the advantages...
I suppose its 'Mummy S' now instead of 'Daddy S'.
the world best aegis destroyer, you wont get a more attentive crew than in a royal navy CIC simply because of the falkand war, they take ship protection very seriously.
T45 doesn't use AEGIS. T45 is fitted with Sea Viper which is made up of Astor missiles, Sylver launch silo and Sampson radar.
The only thing I don't like about the Type 45 destroyers are that there aren't any torpedos onboard to counter underwater threats.
Type 45 is not a multi role destroyer like the Arleigh Burke class. Her capabilities except air defence is limited..She was designed to provide air defence for Q2 class carriers.
To describe her as the most advanced warship is hugely exaggerated..One of the most advanced destroyers definitely buy warship hell no...Gerald Ford class carriers are warships as well 😂😂.
@@barracuda7018 Wouldn't put the type 45 vulnerable if it were to go alone?
@@alansohn855 yes but they wouldn’t be tasked to sail anywhere near a submarine threat alone.
From my understanding they are capable of ASW (Anti Submarine Warfare). As your rightfully said, they don't carry onboard torpedo launchers but their Wildcat helicopter (or Merlin) can be equipped with Sting Ray lightweight torpedoes to counter any submarine threat :)
@@federicoperi6806 Very true.
Why aren’t they wearing anti-flash?
I think the RN should bring back flogging and grog.
Why can’t we the United States build them under license?Would security be compromised?
UK might want to build six more and sell six more to the Australian's.
RN needs to have a fleet of 33 brand new 8,300 ton stealth guided missile multi warfare destroyers powered by fuel cell & Li-ion marine propulsion system!!! this will be complimented by a fleet of 19 brand new 10,600 ton stealth guided missile multi warfare destroyers propelled by the same fuel cell & Li-ion power pack!!! total acquisition cost of 52 stealth guided missile destroyers of different specifications €13.0 Bn to €26.5 Bn approx!!!
A single Type 26 frigate costs £1.25 billion and doesn't feature a destroyer radar like Sampson. No way would 53 destroyers cost 26.5 billion. The RN wouldn't even have enough crew for half that number.
@@alexanderfoster3628 ur right my friend!!! I apologize!!! the cost will exceed well over €60.0 Bn!!!
Stop smoking cheap grass, lad. Not enough money is coming for the RN in the foreseeable future. CSG21 is currently relying on the US Navy (1 Arleigh Burke destroyer + 10 F-35Bs) and the Dutch Navy's HNLMS Evertsen. Incidentally, the HMS Diamond, which was escorting Big Lizzie, is out of business due to a fawlty turbine engine failure. Yes, the same revolutionary turbine engine mentioned in this video has been constantly experimenting technical difficulties and is well-documented.
@@NJTDover I think he's winding you up...
Perhaps this would be the fleet of the British empire if it were still around. I would say 10 CVNs, 20 cruisers, 60 destroyers 30 plus nuclear attack subs and around 10 ballistic mission subs plus a large fleet of support vessels
Build it tried and true
how the hell can a globe have four corners lol
Because it’s flat so they say 🤣 I was literally thinking the same when he mentioned 4 corners 🤔
What if you get hit with an EMP ? Are you sitting in the dark dead in the water?
Modern warefare equipment is emp proofed.
The title card; _"Building Britain's Ultimate Warship."_ doesn't appear until 6:23 (ish)
_(everything up to that point is the usual, totally skippable, spoilery-ass, "coming up, on this episode of..." crap.)_
_(You're welcome. ✌)_
It doesn't really start until 8 minutes in.
Could someone please explain to documentary script writers that a quantum leap is a very, very small distance/change.
@Rob Wilton It is a change (or jump) of an electron from one energy level to another WITHIN AN ATOM.
The colloquial use has no grounding in the original meaning.
Semantics
The Type 45s are amazing ships but we should have made more of them. Originally we were going to have 12 but then successive governments have cut the budget for our armed forces and reduced the total number. I wish we had a government that really believed in and supported our brave men & women in the armed forces and funded more ships which is really what we need right now.
They are crap nothing but trouble and only one can be deployed.
It's cute that the Brits still have their own little navy.
And build their own vessels. Australian Government buys overseas, Our Shipbuilding Industry has been virtually Destroyed by Government that won't back Australian Made.
Its to show the Yanks how to use their big toy boats.
I would rather spend my taxes on this than road works or people who can’t be bothered to work
just ponders if the Scottish get independence how many more they will build !
Based on the ferry fiasco none! The UK Government have said all warships will be built domestically.
how can a globe have 4 corners?
6 August 2921, it was reported, that only one Type 45 is currently sea worthy. This type destroyer has a very long history of being plagued many times with propulsion problems.
Not really, its ther generators who can´t cope with warmer watters, the ships themselfs are in need of a modernization as well
@@leandro9311 May 2016, Warship Technology. And cataloged in many other publications, before and since. The British failure to completely change out the propulsion units themselves, because they tried the cheapest way possible to keep the poorly engineered and constructed systems in place has lead to the entire class of Type 45 destroyers being unseaworthy. Many of that type, and there are only 6, spend an inordinate time in port. The Royal Navy, and the UK government have themselves reported on it. You should read up.on it. It originated with the original choice of propulsion systems at the beginning of the Type 45 construction.
@@leandro9311 Read Royal Instittion of Naval Architects, May 2017. Also.
@@raywhitehead730 In fact the Type 45 does have long standing propulsion problems but once again they are largely related to warmer waters then everthying else. I give you the fact the Royal Navy went a bit cheap in the main components but they have held up so far, they just need modernization after some 15 years of service which is expected
@@leandro9311 then why did the last Type 45 already in transit withe the QE on her maiden cruise have to turn back ?? Wasn't it scheduled to make the whole cruise? As of today only one Type ,45 is sea worthy. You should read a very well detailed report on the propulsion system in royal institution of naval architects may of 2017. And Warship Technology may 2016. In the parlance of US Navy Jargon, the Royal Navy is taking a bandaid approach.
Drones
Royal Navy is the best
Type 45 is mainly for air defence with limited capabilites in other areas. Arleigh Burke destroyers are multiple mission warships overall they are far more capable..
Yea only 48 Vertical Launching Systems, that needs to be doubled
@@ricky1231 imagine the enemy launches 49 anti ship missile?
Type 45 is doomed. Besides a 48 to 48 score is highly unlikely. No matter how advanced the radar is, it's still a 30rpm rotating radar, a low flying supersonic sea skimmer can always find a gap between rotations.
@@barracuda7018
I agree with you there
You need EASA radar and more missiles
The UK could built the Arleigh Burke in the UK under licence with Agis missile defence system & that would protect carriers as well as the UK isles again ballistic missiles. Two birds with one stone or build a ship with same capability as the Burke. Home grown is not always the best for National defence at any given time
@@ricky1231 Arleigh Burke Aegis radar system provides 360 degree situational awereness..
@@ricky1231 I'd rather have a T45 than a Flight II Burke for AAW
A detailed account of the this class, Type 45, propulsion failures and problems can be read at, The Royal Institution of Naval Architects, May 2017....those problems persist even now August, 2021. Many many times these ships suffer complete electrical power failure throughout the ship. Thus their inherent unseaworthiness.
You nailed it, champ. HMS Diamond had to be detached from CSG21 due to a serious defect (WR21 gas turbine engine failure).
@@NJTDover A LM2500 gas turbine engine on a Spurance class destroyer could be replaced in two days. but they were very dependable and seldom had to be replaced. That British ship should have been returned to service in time to rejoin the cruise...
The T45s are going through a programme to rectify this. An extra diesel generator is being installed into the ship. The issue isn't the WR21 turbine but the intercooler.
@@raywhitehead730 Ray on another British video!
Obsessed....
@@geoffreyleonard99 Anything, untrue?
Hardly at all about building them
A big rotating radar is not a good idea to defend against swamp attacks
" he will lead his men and women " Why don't you call them crew?
Fwd mast is to fwd it doesn't look right.
Where shipbuilders?Where fitters?Where pipeliners?Where electriсians? Who build this ship?
very quiet ships
Actually they are not. One RN officer told me that a couple of the T45s sound like a bag of spanners underwater. T23s and T26s are very quiet but this noise reduction is very pricey.
@@alexanderfoster3628 was just going off the sound from the film, good to know.
Just add engines next time
look at it lads, tis will b the most powerful ship in the UK navy with awesome anti air capabilities.
*proceeds to send a single working one to provoke a county with the best anti ship missiles in existence and less than 20 km from a coast filled with those missiles
Correct! But they feared to provoke China, and as of yesterday are in Guam.
The Chinese ballistic anti ship missile has so far successfully hit a barge. A barge that they knew the position of. Secondly a freedom of navigation exercise is not a provocation. China is more than welcome to steam up and down the English channel if they wish.
I think he is referring to Russia unfortunately
Isn't naming ships after ships that have subk un war like bad luck? 🤔 should be the hms Elizabeth
If a ship is named after a previous ship it inherits the previous ships' battle honours.
All these ships had serious flaws. One was the generator engines which over heated in hot climates.
The other was the harmonic voltage distortion (THDu) due to her 2 x 20MW of electric propulsion. The THDu is four times the limit set in Stanag. She also has common mode voltage in kV on the hull.
The THDu was known about in 2001 but nothing was done.
So the most expensive ship in the RN is a destroyer. What does that say about their carriers?
This programme is about 13 years old - long before the carriers.
It says a lot about your intelligence, because a monkey could figure out this was made well BEFORE the QE carriers came along...
Surely you mean coward Woodward
Find and read the declassified and released reports on the Falklands War as to why the Hermes kept to the East of an internationally agreed position line in the South Atlantic. To do with certain weapons. Woodward vindicated. UK plays by the rules we signed up to.
32:12 Scaffold Class Destroyers. Just how they look alongside ha ha
Unlike the disastrous Aircraft carriers and the Ajax tank programme…
Yeah Ajax is bad but the carrier? Highly advanced design that the Americans think is impressive. The sortie rate of QE is in the same league as a Nimitz carrier.
They could have just stayed in port saved some fuel and run the computer simulation
it was about as realistic as WWF.
Because they showed about 2% of what actually happens.
a baby burke?
wtf why would you build a ship of that size in 3 different areas it makes no financial sense at all.
I think the businesses involved know more than we do so don't worry about it.
@@aethellstan i think its politcal engineering wining vote by providing jobs to area that makes no sense if this was to be build by a privite contractor.
@@patthonsirilim5739 The entire project is built by private contractors there are no ship builders or electronics companies owned by UK government. They're built according to specialisms in the various areas. Yes there may well be politics involved in regards to keeping jobs in the industry around the country but by saying what you said is really disingenuous to the workers themselves.
Think it is to reduce the time spent building the ship as the blocks can be built in parallel instead of building them one at a time.
Because it's faster ti build a ship when you build it in segments as multiple locations can build multiple parts of the ship at tge same time and join them at 1 time cuts ship building in half its how all cruise ships are built now a days too
the video should of been it running from the russians
5 years is a quick build for you? I'd call 6 months to a year a fast build.
LOL UK and USA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
They didn't do a very good job as most of them are alongside with engine problems.
None of them are currently alongside with engine problems.
The RN's Type 45 destroyers are faulty and operationally unreliable. To call it Britain's ultimate warship is not only a ludicrous exaggeration, it is an insult to knowledgeable viewers. Could be better edited.
32:45
“It throws a huge protection zone, hundreds of kilometres wide..” 😂
Yeah, right! 😂
At 30 miles distance, using the curvature chart, the drop is 600 feet! 600! Thats 182 metres! So, unless the enemy ships are 140 metres high, your “sophisticated” radar cant see F all! And thats only at 30 miles distance! So what hundreds of kilometres is this fool dreaming about?
Its only good for aerial targets.
Unless, of course, the water is totally FLAT
That's the point... it's an AIR DEFENCE DESTROYER. It destroys incoming missiles, airplanes and UAVs like no other ship out there.
"Its only good for aerial targets." - that's literally what it's for. Still the most advanced and capable naval air-defence radar on the face of the planet and you're saying its useless? Nice try.
@@streaky81 He's a Putin bot working from a checklist or a 14 year old.
@@petertwiss4215 im actually your father. Ask your stinking mama
@@ronjeremy5826 14 then!