Proud Canada choose the Type 26 frigate. Can't wait to see this beauty out in sea. And hopefully its named the Haida class, bring back the fightigest ship in the RCN.
I know that we're probably past this concept, but the Navy at one time in the late 80s and early 90s came up with the idea of a Stabilized Weapon Platform system. It's was a small mount that fired Hellfire and, possibly, Stinger missiles, had a small caliber gun on it and other types of ammo. But, it was canceled to instead make the Phalanx CIWS do the job. By the way, how well did that work out?
TheFreshman - yes it's certainly looking like a massive success,not sure the Salesman got his figures right though,sure he said there are 15 ships in production for the Royal Navy which is not the case,maybe I heard him wrong.
When did Canada pick the Type 26? Just few weeks back they announced nothing official and that only looking to modernize existing fleet we have so there can be jobs at our ship building docks.
Actually all final decisions on hold and Lockheed had been chosen for the contract not the Type 26 from Britain. globalnews.ca/news/4686905/legal-challenge-canadian-warships/
Thank you for finding this article. I've been confused for a little while about this because I'd heard "Canada is buying a variant of the type 26" but also "lockheed martin is building a ship for canada based on the type 26", and was very unsure of what was happening there, but this article finally answers it: "...BAE, which originally designed the Type 26 and partnered with Lockheed to offer the ship to Canada." So it is the base design of the type 26, built pretty much under license by Lockheed martin to the specificaions Canada requies. Thanks again.
Lockheed should add an adaptor; rocket booster, for naval use of the Hellfire missile and then sell it on smaller warships, or new class of larger warships...
@Gar not actually true. Heavyweight torpedoes can't be launched by helicopters. They are launched by ships and subs. And they have large range, so ships doesn't need to be close to threats. And the chance of survival of a torpedo attack by a surface ship is much higher than a submarine. They carry more decoys and hard kill equipment and they're also generally faster. And, even after a successful hit, there's a chance that surface ship might not sink and actually retaliate. If a sub gets hit, it's either surface immediately and surrender or die at the bottom of the sea. So most subs are more scared of surface ships than the other way around.
@Gar I forgot to mention that surface ships carry literally BOATLOADS of torpedoes and anti submarine weapons. Subs carry a very small amount of weapons. Usually the number of torpedoes is in single digits. So a submarine's only chance is to get a fatal hit by the first shot, otherwise they're screwed. Meanwhile, surface ships can launch weapon after weapon until they get it done.
globalnews.ca/news/4686905/legal-challenge-canadian-warships/ We have given up on our military and to modernize it now over a decade which is just as bad as Greece but they went through a financial crisis while our government simply dumb. One year it's Naval Group, then British firm to get Irvine construction going, then they recently pick Lockhead and now it's up in the air again.
@Gar Yes it will but it won't need the target to be illumnated by targeting radar. Just a guess here but I think the Sea Sparrow is too heavy to soft launch reliably. I wish it did! I really like the SeaCeptor for smaller warships.
@@mburnzy9269 actually sea sparrow isn't hot launched because it's too heavy. It's not designed to be soft launched. That's all. And soft launching is expensive and more complex. Heavy missiles are actually launched only as soft launches. Because their rocket motors are too large to be ignited safely within the ship. All slbms are soft launched because of this.
The us need to do a game changer and make the essm-er adding a booster to the very short essm you could make it 4.7 meters the length of the sm-2 to fit the mk41 self defense legth and have the first quad packed long range missile because it's going to have a range of maybe like at least 70-80 kilometers
It always gets me thinking about a battle ship that has all those buttons and switches and all it takes is one good hit from a rocket and boom nothing works hahahah ya fucked
As cool as it would be for the Irish navy to have some proper frigates it never going to happen! I'm amazed we have as many ships as we have already, the Samuel Becketts I feel are the limit, although there are plans to procure a ship like HMNZS Canterbury! If we join NATO(which we should, but never will) I'm sure we would get a proper military!
Yeah well maybe Israel can start building ships for themselves. Their navy stinks and it's size. But when you got America's entire 6th fleet in area and feeding you near 4-5 billion USD's free money for your military, guess you decide to build a corvette for export market.
I don’t know anything about these boats, you would think that one gun on the front of the boat should be two or three story? Three guns better than one 🧐
i have been thinking about it a lot but can you or someone explain to me why you would put a gun turret in any other place exept the center? cus right now that ship has a weakness on one side? it just doesn't make any sense why you would do that
I don't think it really makes much difference, in terms of where the gun can target. As for why it's usually in the middle, I'd assume its just easier if a ship is symmetrical, and because having it mounted centrally maybe leaves the most bellow deck space due to the typical angle of a ship's hull? Not really sure.
Every ship looked amasing but ehm srry to say what the hell is Germany thinking? a turret and anti missle gun on the left side with a comand tower at the center so making the ship defencless on one side cus the turret and antiairsystem can't fire to the side of where the command center is blocking it? WHY???? it's just a stupid design i can't understand what they where thinking??
@@lol2315189 Dude he is for real. Indians will build everything and have tech support for every single system and down to every single part. You can't beat that.
@@profesormne6174 please don't meme urself even further your pathetic Gorshkov FFG started in 2003 with its program meanwhile the Type 26 started in 1998. Besides u ruskies couldn't afford to make you're own unique design so you've ended up like the Chinese.
Наука
Proud Canada choose the Type 26 frigate. Can't wait to see this beauty out in sea.
And hopefully its named the Haida class, bring back the fightigest ship in the RCN.
Agreed a ship as a lead.
I know that we're probably past this concept, but the Navy at one time in the late 80s and early 90s came up with the idea of a Stabilized Weapon Platform system. It's was a small mount that fired Hellfire and, possibly, Stinger missiles, had a small caliber gun on it and other types of ammo. But, it was canceled to instead make the Phalanx CIWS do the job. By the way, how well did that work out?
Royal Navy Type 26 is very popular. Australia and now Canada. Well done UK.
@@ronniefarnsworth6465 why?
Indeed well done, successfully selling ship that exist only s CGI.
TheFreshman - yes it's certainly looking like a massive success,not sure the Salesman got his figures right though,sure he said there are 15 ships in production for the Royal Navy which is not the case,maybe I heard him wrong.
Looks like the GORSKHOV frigate.
Paul Tanton you're correct he said 15, but it is actually 8.
Those Japanese frigate was so clean minimal cross section.
Where is Russia* in this event? Perhaps the video should be re titled: "The Vessels of US Vassals" * = Half of the European continent.
You have information about representation of Russian Naval industry on Euronaval 2018? What company's appear and what they did show?
Russia is betting on small missile ships, such as the Small missile ships of the project
22800 "Karakurt" is planned to 18 pieces
I guess they are looking vor thier drydock...
A great display of equipment :-)
When did Canada pick the Type 26? Just few weeks back they announced nothing official and that only looking to modernize existing fleet we have so there can be jobs at our ship building docks.
Actually all final decisions on hold and Lockheed had been chosen for the contract not the Type 26 from Britain.
globalnews.ca/news/4686905/legal-challenge-canadian-warships/
Thank you for finding this article. I've been confused for a little while about this because I'd heard "Canada is buying a variant of the type 26" but also "lockheed martin is building a ship for canada based on the type 26", and was very unsure of what was happening there, but this article finally answers it:
"...BAE, which originally designed the Type 26 and partnered with Lockheed to offer the ship to Canada." So it is the base design of the type 26, built pretty much under license by Lockheed martin to the specificaions Canada requies. Thanks again.
After showing the Hyundai's stall, a frigate appeared in the video. Which model is it? Will you cover it?
The frigate that appeared after they showed the HHI booth was a Canadian-spec'd Type 26.
I like that tiny helicopter carrier at 4:44, not like I'm a buyer or anything but it looks cool.
Lockheed should add an adaptor; rocket booster, for naval use of the Hellfire missile and then sell it on smaller warships, or new class of larger warships...
Jason ruclips.net/video/FmYqq3qehDE/видео.html
How come, torpedoes are hardly being used now these days on modern naval ships...
@Gar not actually true. Heavyweight torpedoes can't be launched by helicopters. They are launched by ships and subs. And they have large range, so ships doesn't need to be close to threats. And the chance of survival of a torpedo attack by a surface ship is much higher than a submarine. They carry more decoys and hard kill equipment and they're also generally faster. And, even after a successful hit, there's a chance that surface ship might not sink and actually retaliate. If a sub gets hit, it's either surface immediately and surrender or die at the bottom of the sea. So most subs are more scared of surface ships than the other way around.
@Gar I forgot to mention that surface ships carry literally BOATLOADS of torpedoes and anti submarine weapons. Subs carry a very small amount of weapons. Usually the number of torpedoes is in single digits.
So a submarine's only chance is to get a fatal hit by the first shot, otherwise they're screwed. Meanwhile, surface ships can launch weapon after weapon until they get it done.
I hope Canada ends up with 15 of these new toys.
globalnews.ca/news/4686905/legal-challenge-canadian-warships/
We have given up on our military and to modernize it now over a decade which is just as bad as Greece but they went through a financial crisis while our government simply dumb. One year it's Naval Group, then British firm to get Irvine construction going, then they recently pick Lockhead and now it's up in the air again.
The Evolved SeaSparrow block 2 is going to be a game changer! A mini SM-6. Well, for those who can afford it, of course.
@Gar Yes it will but it won't need the target to be illumnated by targeting radar. Just a guess here but I think the Sea Sparrow is too heavy to soft launch reliably. I wish it did! I really like the SeaCeptor for smaller warships.
@@mburnzy9269 actually sea sparrow isn't hot launched because it's too heavy. It's not designed to be soft launched. That's all. And soft launching is expensive and more complex.
Heavy missiles are actually launched only as soft launches. Because their rocket motors are too large to be ignited safely within the ship. All slbms are soft launched because of this.
The us need to do a game changer and make the essm-er adding a booster to the very short essm you could make it 4.7 meters the length of the sm-2 to fit the mk41 self defense legth and have the first quad packed long range missile because it's going to have a range of maybe like at least 70-80 kilometers
It always gets me thinking about a battle ship that has all those buttons and switches and all it takes is one good hit from a rocket and boom nothing works hahahah ya fucked
Hahaha type when he hit some ship he said im sorry im type of sorry😂
The Israel ship would be very useful for the Irish
As cool as it would be for the Irish navy to have some proper frigates it never going to happen! I'm amazed we have as many ships as we have already, the Samuel Becketts I feel are the limit, although there are plans to procure a ship like HMNZS Canterbury! If we join NATO(which we should, but never will) I'm sure we would get a proper military!
Yeah well maybe Israel can start building ships for themselves. Their navy stinks and it's size. But when you got America's entire 6th fleet in area and feeding you near 4-5 billion USD's free money for your military, guess you decide to build a corvette for export market.
Io ho visto delle navi fincantieri spacciate dagli americani nientaltro
And Navantia?
I don’t know anything about these boats, you would think that one gun on the front of the boat should be two or three story? Three guns better than one 🧐
Tony Montano naval warfare isn't about big guns anymore
It's about the missiles
I think Germans are drunk. Their recent navy ship designs look so awful.
i have been thinking about it a lot but can you or someone explain to me why you would put a gun turret in any other place exept the center? cus right now that ship has a weakness on one side? it just doesn't make any sense why you would do that
Looks ugly
That's what I wanna ask too. xD
cu is a helecopter carrier mybee@@bartvanherrewegen8953
I don't think it really makes much difference, in terms of where the gun can target. As for why it's usually in the middle, I'd assume its just easier if a ship is symmetrical, and because having it mounted centrally maybe leaves the most bellow deck space due to the typical angle of a ship's hull? Not really sure.
Every ship looked amasing but ehm srry to say what the hell is Germany thinking? a turret and anti missle gun on the left side with a comand tower at the center so making the ship defencless on one side cus the turret and antiairsystem can't fire to the side of where the command center is blocking it? WHY???? it's just a stupid design i can't understand what they where thinking??
Germany is expecting attacks only from the left.
Hello Xavier :)
navantia ？
only formal presence, here the French dominate.
India is growing man I love it
indian tech support? my pc stopped working ;)
@@lol2315189 Dude he is for real. Indians will build everything and have tech support for every single system and down to every single part. You can't beat that.
😁👍📡🎇
Some of this ships looks like copy of modern Russian navy ships.
Or the Russians copied the French and British designs.
@@jon_3453 How can be when ships like this Russian already have in they navy in service?! You are classic CNN,BBC western citizen.
@@profesormne6174 please don't meme urself even further your pathetic Gorshkov FFG started in 2003 with its program meanwhile the Type 26 started in 1998. Besides u ruskies couldn't afford to make you're own unique design so you've ended up like the Chinese.
@@jon_3453 I would imagine that every nations navies keeps an eye on and where its a clever design copies every other navies designs.
@@Puzzoozoo without a doubt. The PLAN has its Type 055 after the burkes due to its intimidating design.
🇪🇺🥂
USELESS CAPITAL INVESTMENT & LABOUR!
LOL. Russia is the best!