Deep-sea tugboats can transform into light corvettes. Just covered the aft deck with a new deck, and built a hangar and a convoy for the helicopter. For underdeveloped countries is a quick option.
The battleship HMS Iron Duke weighing in at 30,000 tonnes was built in 10 months, today it's taking 9 years to build a frigate! So no point in putting a time limit on any warships built in the UK!
The whole carrier debacle is just absurd. When they were going to have catapults there was somewhat of an argument for them, but they're just oversized jump jet carriers anyway! The Italian Cavour cost under the equivalent of 1.2 billion pounds. She's smaller, but can carry 2 dozen fighters to the QE's maximum of 3 dozen F-35s...When the 2 QEs cost almost 8 billion, before all the repairs that have already happened since. The RN could've had literally bought 6 of the damn things, or 4 and saved some money while having a larger fleet. A Cavour has a well-deck too, eliminate that to prioritize carrier operations, it might've even been cheaper.
@@garyb5998 if any attack on UK Nato or Europe were to happen the air bases and RAF staff and pilots would be attacked first so I think those two white elephants are floating airfields for defence of UK
@@HeliBoyVR I agree, because it's unreliable, essentially fabricated and so is imbalanced, It often uses incorrect English - that's the giveaway - and aims to pander to a neurotypical norm, making it about as intelligent as a beer-swilling biker.
The US Navy has had Stern Landing Ships since the end of WWII. Landing Ship Docks (LSD's) and Landing Platform Docks (LPD's) were used when I was in the Marines 1980 through 2000.
So why do we need many of these? Who do we propose to invade? I think some more hardware to ship around the world might be a good investment first. Better still if we could recruit people to the forces we might have some crews!
@@niweshlekhak9646 I agree but at the moment we don’t have ships to reach it and planes to overfly it. We have reached the nadir of our strength with little from the public bar the singing of outdated patriotic songs. Most school children have little idea of history and few of the public have any figment of post WWII history bar old buggers like me who are more likely to be planning their funeral than looking for their old goon suit. First we need troops of all capacities.
@@glynluff2595we do have both, called refuel in air and sea, there incase British marines are needed for any deployment, as if there situation they are needed with various areas boiling up for a war or potential one with Argentina president wanting to take back the Falklands with force if needed which shown with Argentina getting F-16 not newest but threat
I wonder if they are at the front and being pulled along rather than pushed, or something else like water jets who knows what they can get up to nowadays
@frankmenchaca9993 Sails and oars to please the green lobby. Each can hold 1,000 horses and their fodder for a week long trip and so long as they can keep the bow strings dry and stop the knight's armor from getting rusty we should be good to go.
Want to land 100% capacity on a beach & move as fast as a modern battle fleet needs to Take a double hull oil tanker. Move the superstructure forward. Power it w four elec motors on pylons. Hollow it out. Rear ramp. Then float in 4 WWII LSTs ea fully combat loaded. Cover hold w accordion hatch covers that stack against superstructure Bonus - all the kinks worked out of design
The Govt tried this when they announced the through deck carriers of the invincible class. They soon found that they were not fully up to the task and only able to operate one type of fixed wing aircraft (Harriers). Then they sold/scrapped them leaving a huge hole in the navy's capabilities. until they built the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers. Even then they were restricted to a single fixed wing type of aircraft and a cross deck is being talked about along with Cats n traps launching gear. IF! they do build these smaller assault ships each one will require an escort to get the troops and equipment to their destination. Where are they going to get these escorts AND the people to man them? Rant over. Carry on.
I think it's signposting a future trend to dispense with main guns on future warships to make space for teams of highly trained archers able to fire deadly volleys of poisoned arrows at enemy combatants. In that context it probably makes sense to start referring to the pointy end of ships as the "bow" as pronounced in this video.
The reason why many navies opt to larger vessel is due to weapon carrying capacity, evert limited human resource pool and equipments getting larger and larger. Assuming a vessel’s service life is 40-50 years, many countries will have demographic cliff in recruitment. Tanks post WWII and modern tanks have a huge weight difference. Most of all, UK has very small active personnel and small size equipment (only 148 tanks as an example). Given small size, would it be better to specialise in other areas than landing crafts…? Where are we going to land our lads to?
One of these with a helicopter and boats provides can be used in anti piracy duties. Container modules for SAMs or SSMs I suppose could be installed. A helicopter and the necessary container modules gives anti submarine use. Light escorting duties. No idea if any of that is true, just musing.
Actually late WW2 tanks were very heavy. A fully loaded King Tiger weighed 75 tons. A current Challenger 2 tank weighs the same. There are limits on how much a tank can weigh and still be a practical weapon. Bigger tanks cost more. Bigger tanks require bigger engines, greater fuel usage, higher maintenance costs. More difficult to recover if damaged in combat. Can bridges take their weight without collapsing? Will they get bogged down on soft or muddy ground. How fast will a very heavy tank move? How do we get them to the combat zone? What size aircraft would be required to fly them to the battlefield?
Flexibility - One of these alone would have been enough to have secured the Falklands in 1982, given the leap in technology since and not many future adversaries would be as difficult as the threat posed by Argentina then !
@ reluctantheist5224 It is much better for LHC or destroyer for each purpose. The top speed is ca 20nm. Hardly enough for pirate patrol…. FYI the small boats pirates use has top speed of 25-30nm.
The Marines require blue water ships that are capable of disembarking an MEF ( Marine Expeditionary Force ) and that can support aviation units. See: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_air-ground_task_force
A good concept but they have to be able to traverse oceans and the troops be fit enough to hit a beachhead, landing craft by their very nature are flat bottomed which makes for a very uncomfortable sea passage
@@SirWhiteRabbit-gr5so we do…just. The US is in the same boat. Both used to have lots of major warships yards. Now down to diseased eaten bones for both. Compared to the 80s, both struggle to do maintenance and build much. Lots of go slow in builds. Typical short sightedness from politicians. Infrastructure takes decades to build. But a year and stoke of a pen to destroy.
Shipyards classical had slipways down which you launched a vessel, and the vessel was built on the slipway. Modern vessels are constructed in sections under cover, so not affected by weather or time of day, and transported to a dry dock where they are then assembled into a fully functioning vessel. The old shipyards are redundant and there is no need for slipways anymore, what is now needed is a number of large construction sheds, a couple of large dry docks, and the cranes and transporters to move the parts around. And yes the British and Americans have these modern shipyards, and the ancillary equipment, even if it is bought in from Germany. The vital infrastructure is already built, that’s the dry docks, all the rest can be quickly constructed, and it wasn’t lack of foresight by politicians or industry. It was instead the rapid change in construction methods in the last few years, that saw the decline of traditional shipyards.
Except the RM is now all about dispersed raiding in very small groups so I’d argue you aren’t talking about putting large numbers of vehicles ashore anymore
I assume the content creator types in text that he/she wants the AI to narrate. At least for the "bow" (bow and arrow) / "bough" (bough of a tree) issue heard all through this video the creator could presumably have deliberately misspelt "bow" as "bough" to force the correct pronunciation there. It's pretty lazy to not have at least done that (assuming it would work).
Learn from Ukraine ADAPT, ADAPT, ADAPT! Smaller ships spread risk of single ASM's stopping a mission, option's for multiple smaller assaults and if they keep the price down (Yes IF) international sales (Which will drop per unit price)
18 months to to construct ones of these things. We used to build all up gun destroyers in a year. This thing is a landing craft. limited weapons and electronics compared to a modern frigate or destroyer. So WTH will it take 18 months.
If you’re only building a few ships and build them fast you cause boom and bust in the ship building industry and destroy the industrial capacity to build future craft.
All hipe and no substance talking already of cuts in spending like our destroyers notice a lot of talk about new frigates to deflect from destroyers being replaced in 2032 a pc that we brought that make TROOPS sick and headaches reducing amount of tanks to 143 from 183 when Poland over 2000 and Germany and France 're arming we are now joke to our allies cannot even stop immigrants crossing channel😅😅
@@spaceskipster4412 True but how many of them sank to U-boats and how many due to manufacturing faults? There are disadvantages to rapid manufacture of a complex mechanism on an industrial scale.
To be fair that's more down to the change in industry, the ever increasing complexity of ships and the lack of an infrastructure dedicated to warship construction. ww2 era ships could be put out by highly skilled engineers and construction workers in a year because we had a non stop developed shipyard construction business for the best part of 200 years. Everything was well established and standardisation of parts was very useful. You came to design a warship and most if not all of the major parts from the ammunition lockers, to the main guns were all standardised parts made by workers specialising in making that part of the ship. They could take a schematic drawing of the warship and know almost instinctively how to make it from that drawing. Post ww2 we lost most of our ship building industry and the types of ships we were producing changed dramatically from nuclear submarines to guided missile destroyers so most of the standardisation became non standard now. Take those ww2 era battleship schematics that were used to produce the original and hand it to modern shipyards with better design equipment, manufacturing processes, just as skilled workforce and it would probably take them more than 3 years to build such a ship again. Just some of the many great skills lost to history.
Best craft for getting French migrants off the beaches for safer crossing the Channel.... don't forget more money for training the French helpful Gendarmes
Sadly this isn’t what we need, but the company that builds them was just acquired by an Israeli company. You will see more and more contracts going to Israeli owned/partially owned companies in the UK as the government stealth funds the IDF.
BS Labour has already started cancelling defence orders for Israel. Many on the left have sympathy for Islam, how many grooming gangs were prosecuted when sir Keir was DPP.
Not impressed at all! Mexico has addressed this issue, Mexico has sent a million man force across the border to steal property without ever needing a ship! no ramp required just use the back door!
It would be far better and more authoritative if it had a real human voice doing the commentary rather than the AI which makes it seem like a cheap, knock-off 3rd world effort.
![Eminem - Fuel (feat. JID) [Official Lyric Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/t5H_CewqpKA/mqdefault.jpg)
More patrol boats in the channel is preferable
Blasphemy....go straight to jail😊
Best idea anyone who has ever commented on a video before has come up with
Deep-sea tugboats can transform into light corvettes.
Just covered the aft deck with a new deck, and built a hangar and a convoy for the helicopter.
For underdeveloped countries is a quick option.
The battleship HMS Iron Duke weighing in at 30,000 tonnes was built in 10 months, today it's taking 9 years to build a frigate! So no point in putting a time limit on any warships built in the UK!
In one word: tooling.
Hope they work better than the 2 Awesome, World-beating, Advanced and Expensive Aircraft Carriers...HMS Never Leave Port and HMS White Elephant
Whilst people need to go to food banks to feed their families. 😵
The whole carrier debacle is just absurd. When they were going to have catapults there was somewhat of an argument for them, but they're just oversized jump jet carriers anyway! The Italian Cavour cost under the equivalent of 1.2 billion pounds. She's smaller, but can carry 2 dozen fighters to the QE's maximum of 3 dozen F-35s...When the 2 QEs cost almost 8 billion, before all the repairs that have already happened since.
The RN could've had literally bought 6 of the damn things, or 4 and saved some money while having a larger fleet. A Cavour has a well-deck too, eliminate that to prioritize carrier operations, it might've even been cheaper.
@@garyb5998 if any attack on UK Nato or Europe were to happen the air bases and RAF staff and pilots would be attacked first so I think those two white elephants are floating airfields for defence of UK
The British had several SLVs in the 80s Fearless and Intrepid I think
Why not just get a human to read the script? After four minutes I just couldn't bear it any more.
Agree, can’t even pronounce words, ie ‘ bow’ as making a bow, not as in a ships bow, the pointy end. Pathetic.
How do you know a human even wrote this, checked it for accuracy, or reflects current military thinking? It's one long button-push.
I ban all channel with AI generated content... and it's getting worse.
@@HeliBoyVR I agree, because it's unreliable, essentially fabricated and so is imbalanced, It often uses incorrect English - that's the giveaway - and aims to pander to a neurotypical norm, making it about as intelligent as a beer-swilling biker.
Make a better video then.
The US Navy has had Stern Landing Ships since the end of WWII. Landing Ship Docks (LSD's) and Landing Platform Docks (LPD's) were used when I was in the Marines 1980 through 2000.
I wonder if a catamaran or tri-hull design could be used ?
So why do we need many of these? Who do we propose to invade? I think some more hardware to ship around the world might be a good investment first. Better still if we could recruit people to the forces we might have some crews!
There is an Island called Falklands, you must always be prepared for the worst.
@@niweshlekhak9646 I agree but at the moment we don’t have ships to reach it and planes to overfly it. We have reached the nadir of our strength with little from the public bar the singing of outdated patriotic songs. Most school children have little idea of history and few of the public have any figment of post WWII history bar old buggers like me who are more likely to be planning their funeral than looking for their old goon suit. First we need troops of all capacities.
@@glynluff2595 They will need to bring back mandatory military service to increase troop numbers.
@@niweshlekhak9646 As likely as a snowball in Hell!
@@glynluff2595we do have both, called refuel in air and sea, there incase British marines are needed for any deployment, as if there situation they are needed with various areas boiling up for a war or potential one with Argentina president wanting to take back the Falklands with force if needed which shown with Argentina getting F-16 not newest but threat
Don't think the word genius and Ministry of Defence go together ?
An oxymoron.
No D-Day is coming out of the UK anytime soon.
Realy I like this powerful warships I will like to have it all
So where is the rudder and screw(s)? If they're at the stern, won't they get banged up?
I wonder if they are at the front and being pulled along rather than pushed, or something else like water jets who knows what they can get up to nowadays
@frankmenchaca9993
Sails and oars to please the green lobby. Each can hold 1,000 horses and their fodder for a week long trip and so long as they can keep the bow strings dry and stop the knight's armor from getting rusty we should be good to go.
The fact that we are again planning for mass beach landings is a bit .... fuched.
Where is Drone Development...
So secret no one mentions it...
2 million in Ukraine
Zero in the UK Military
@@roymichaeldeanable That's not true now is it.
Those uk'ers are really intelligent
Want to land 100% capacity on a beach & move as fast as a modern battle fleet needs to
Take a double hull oil tanker. Move the superstructure forward. Power it w four elec motors on pylons. Hollow it out. Rear ramp. Then float in 4 WWII LSTs ea fully combat loaded. Cover hold w accordion hatch covers that stack against superstructure
Bonus - all the kinks worked out of design
This would cost more than a purpose built design, plus oil tanker hulls are not designed to run up onto beaches.
A puller design with some adaptations could be used here. The new portable missile launchers should be dotting them as well with a capable radar.
So what are the downsides? If it was this great, everyone would be using it already.
The Govt tried this when they announced the through deck carriers of the invincible class. They soon found that they were not fully up to the task and only able to operate one type of fixed wing aircraft (Harriers). Then they sold/scrapped them leaving a huge hole in the navy's capabilities. until they built the Queen Elizabeth class aircraft carriers. Even then they were restricted to a single fixed wing type of aircraft and a cross deck is being talked about along with Cats n traps launching gear. IF! they do build these smaller assault ships each one will require an escort to get the troops and equipment to their destination. Where are they going to get these escorts AND the people to man them? Rant over. Carry on.
This is Fredie Jovellano love Britania and i love mama queen!
What is bow when it isn't a bow? Is it a bough or a bow but not the stern, or a crossbow.
I think it's signposting a future trend to dispense with main guns on future warships to make space for teams of highly trained archers able to fire deadly volleys of poisoned arrows at enemy combatants. In that context it probably makes sense to start referring to the pointy end of ships as the "bow" as pronounced in this video.
The reason why many navies opt to larger vessel is due to weapon carrying capacity, evert limited human resource pool and equipments getting larger and larger.
Assuming a vessel’s service life is 40-50 years, many countries will have demographic cliff in recruitment. Tanks post WWII and modern tanks have a huge weight difference.
Most of all, UK has very small active personnel and small size equipment (only 148 tanks as an example). Given small size, would it be better to specialise in other areas than landing crafts…? Where are we going to land our lads to?
One of these with a helicopter and boats provides can be used in anti piracy duties. Container modules for SAMs or SSMs I suppose could be installed. A helicopter and the necessary container modules gives anti submarine use. Light escorting duties. No idea if any of that is true, just musing.
Actually late WW2 tanks were very heavy. A fully loaded King Tiger weighed 75 tons. A current Challenger 2 tank weighs the same. There are limits on how much a tank can weigh and still be a practical weapon. Bigger tanks cost more. Bigger tanks require bigger engines, greater fuel usage, higher maintenance costs. More difficult to recover if damaged in combat. Can bridges take their weight without collapsing? Will they get bogged down on soft or muddy ground. How fast will a very heavy tank move? How do we get them to the combat zone? What size aircraft would be required to fly them to the battlefield?
Flexibility - One of these alone would have been enough to have secured the Falklands in 1982, given the leap in technology since and not many future adversaries would be as difficult as the threat posed by Argentina then !
@@sichere I think you are mistaken. They look very small to me and only capable of carrying a helicopter or two.
@ reluctantheist5224
It is much better for LHC or destroyer for each purpose.
The top speed is ca 20nm. Hardly enough for pirate patrol…. FYI the small boats pirates use has top speed of 25-30nm.
What an interesting way to pronounce bow - "bo" versus "boow"....
Is this to drop off all the illegal immigrants? Great idea
This is what the US Navy needs to build for the Marines. It's what they are looking for.
The Marines require blue water ships that are capable of disembarking an MEF ( Marine Expeditionary Force ) and that can support aviation units. See: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marine_air-ground_task_force
I'm sure America will find a way to spend a lot of money and not get one built.
A good concept but they have to be able to traverse oceans and the troops be fit enough to hit a beachhead, landing craft by their very nature are flat bottomed which makes for a very uncomfortable sea passage
Once-great Britain still has shipyards??
@@SirWhiteRabbit-gr5so we do…just. The US is in the same boat. Both used to have lots of major warships yards. Now down to diseased eaten bones for both. Compared to the 80s, both struggle to do maintenance and build much. Lots of go slow in builds.
Typical short sightedness from politicians. Infrastructure takes decades to build. But a year and stoke of a pen to destroy.
Shipyards classical had slipways down which you launched a vessel, and the vessel was built on the slipway. Modern vessels are constructed in sections under cover, so not affected by weather or time of day, and transported to a dry dock where they are then assembled into a fully functioning vessel. The old shipyards are redundant and there is no need for slipways anymore, what is now needed is a number of large construction sheds, a couple of large dry docks, and the cranes and transporters to move the parts around. And yes the British and Americans have these modern shipyards, and the ancillary equipment, even if it is bought in from Germany. The vital infrastructure is already built, that’s the dry docks, all the rest can be quickly constructed, and it wasn’t lack of foresight by politicians or industry. It was instead the rapid change in construction methods in the last few years, that saw the decline of traditional shipyards.
They will find out AFTER they commit the budget for construction. Then they can pocket the budget cash without repercussions.🤣
Plenty of useful facilities in Scotland
@@sichere After the nationalism carry on. Vote "buying" around the carriers. I would want any new yards to be in England and Wales.
Robo voice is terrible.
Except the RM is now all about dispersed raiding in very small groups so I’d argue you aren’t talking about putting large numbers of vehicles ashore anymore
Your video would be a lot better if you hired an actor for your voice work. Along with a monotone voice there are many words pronounced wrong.
I assume the content creator types in text that he/she wants the AI to narrate. At least for the "bow" (bow and arrow) / "bough" (bough of a tree) issue heard all through this video the creator could presumably have deliberately misspelt "bow" as "bough" to force the correct pronunciation there. It's pretty lazy to not have at least done that (assuming it would work).
She is lome Lublin class ship.
Use them to take illegal immigrants back to France.
Use the to take Refom voters to the US.
@@Andre-pe9mm You'll have to build enough to take millions then pal, and I wouldn't say that too loudly in Yorkshire either...
Learn from Ukraine ADAPT, ADAPT, ADAPT! Smaller ships spread risk of single ASM's stopping a mission, option's for multiple smaller assaults and if they keep the price down (Yes IF) international sales (Which will drop per unit price)
Why are we building offensive weapons
Because some people have become highly offensive. In a world without weapons, the guy with a pointy stick is king.
Read The Art of War. It answers your question.
18 months to to construct ones of these things. We used to build all up gun destroyers in a year. This thing is a landing craft. limited weapons and electronics compared to a modern frigate or destroyer. So WTH will it take 18 months.
If you’re only building a few ships and build them fast you cause boom and bust in the ship building industry and destroy the industrial capacity to build future craft.
And average build time of a WW2 Liberty Ship was 42 days…! ⚓️👌🏼
All hipe and no substance talking already of cuts in spending like our destroyers notice a lot of talk about new frigates to deflect from destroyers being replaced in 2032 a pc that we brought that make TROOPS sick and headaches reducing amount of tanks to 143 from 183 when Poland over 2000 and Germany and France 're arming we are now joke to our allies cannot even stop immigrants crossing channel😅😅
@@spaceskipster4412 True but how many of them sank to U-boats and how many due to manufacturing faults? There are disadvantages to rapid manufacture of a complex mechanism on an industrial scale.
To be fair that's more down to the change in industry, the ever increasing complexity of ships and the lack of an infrastructure dedicated to warship construction.
ww2 era ships could be put out by highly skilled engineers and construction workers in a year because we had a non stop developed shipyard construction business for the best part of 200 years. Everything was well established and standardisation of parts was very useful. You came to design a warship and most if not all of the major parts from the ammunition lockers, to the main guns were all standardised parts made by workers specialising in making that part of the ship. They could take a schematic drawing of the warship and know almost instinctively how to make it from that drawing.
Post ww2 we lost most of our ship building industry and the types of ships we were producing changed dramatically from nuclear submarines to guided missile destroyers so most of the standardisation became non standard now.
Take those ww2 era battleship schematics that were used to produce the original and hand it to modern shipyards with better design equipment, manufacturing processes, just as skilled workforce and it would probably take them more than 3 years to build such a ship again.
Just some of the many great skills lost to history.
The cost in ships is in electronic not steel
Robo voice again. You have to learn to type phonetically
We cannot even keep the RFA vessels at sea,how are we supposed to crew these vessels as recruitment has plummeted to an all time low
Best craft for getting French migrants off the beaches for safer crossing the Channel.... don't forget more money for training the French helpful Gendarmes
Why build this when rubber boats are peak invasion transport
How do you fit AFVs into a rubber raiding craft?
Sorry not playing your game pal.😂
Dust off the old blueprints of the WW2 LST and scale it up...... problem solved.
More expensive drone bait.
Looks like wishful thinking
PISSES ME OFF THE NEAR CONSTANT WRONG PRONUNCIATION OF "BOW". SLOPPY, CARELESS WORK. AI IS CLEARLY NOT FOOLPROOF.
Sadly this isn’t what we need, but the company that builds them was just acquired by an Israeli company. You will see more and more contracts going to Israeli owned/partially owned companies in the UK as the government stealth funds the IDF.
Good ive got no problem with the IDF OR Israel what we dont need is this free palistine bull.
BS Labour has already started cancelling defence orders for Israel. Many on the left have sympathy for Islam, how many grooming gangs were prosecuted when sir Keir was DPP.
Utter crap, that isn't even a halfway believable line of BS 🤣
How is this a Genius UK idea when they copied it directly from the USMC’s Stern Landing Vessels??
Not impressed at all! Mexico has addressed this issue, Mexico has sent a million man force across the border to steal property without ever needing a ship! no ramp required just use the back door!
There are no oceans between Mexico and rheir nearest neighbours, so they dont require ships..
It would be far better and more authoritative if it had a real human voice doing the commentary rather than the AI which makes it seem like a cheap, knock-off 3rd world effort.
Are you planning invade Europe ?
This is Labour all over cutting corners and sending our lads in with out the proper gear proving once again they couldnt give two s&@ts about them.
How did you get that from video
Please explain what the proper gear is..
Sorry mate I'm not playing that game.
Christ, just narrate the videos in person! Listening to this monotone voice misprounouncing 'bow' constantly is doing my head in.
Given they open at the bow not the stern you messed that description up
Nope they don't they reverse on to the beach and discharge cargo via the stern.
SLVs open at the rear