Comments by "" (@neutronalchemist3241) on "Binkov's Battlegrounds" channel.

  1. Kill them with fire!
    7
  2. No good for ASW. Too expensive for police missions.
    6
  3.  @Callsign_Prophet  Actually that's false. Italian cruisers designed in the '20s were lightly armored, like ALL the cruisers designed in the '20 were. Those designed in the '30s, heavy and light, were actually among the most heavily harmoured of the conflict, and so were the BBs.
    5
  4. A useless project born when the A129 was already in service and more easily upgradable.
    5
  5. They will be built in Wisconsin.
    5
  6.  @vaztion  The US Navy has tons of real destroyers. They don't need nor requested a wannabe one. They needed and requested an ASW frigate, and the F100 is not one.
    4
  7. Then they could have bought the original Fremm. Fincantieri can build how many you want, in Italy, at 600m $ a piece.
    4
  8. Not a single of them operative yet. The first one would have been ready at least three years after the first FREMM derived one, and the uncertainty about costs and teething problems would have ben higher.
    4
  9. Fincantieri is the largest shipbuilder in Europe and the fourth in the world.
    4
  10.  @lemegars127  The final FRENCH name was maybe "FREgate Multi-Mission". Not the Italian one. The Italian name is "FRegata Europea Multi Missione". The FRENCH radar is maybe made by a French firm. The Italian ones are made by Leonardo and Alenia. The FRENCH jammer is maybe made by a French firm. The Italian one is made by Elettronica S.p.a. The FRENCH surveillance system is maybe made by a French firm. The Italian one is made by Galileo. Ecc... ecc...
    4
  11. They will be made in Wisconsin.
    4
  12. It will be able to do 30 kn. How many times in the last 40 years a carrier group went faster?
    4
  13. That's exactly the problem. US doesn't build civilian ships any more, so, if a shipbuilder has to build ships in the US for the US Navy for a big contract, the only way he can hire specialized workers is to steal them to OTHER shipbuilders that are building ships for the US Navy as well. This problem wouldn't exist if, IE, FIncantieri, the 4th shipbuilder in the world, could build those ships in Europe.
    4
  14. Italy is a net contributor to EU budget.
    4
  15. Anything capable to fire a torpedo would send them to the bottom of the ocean.
    4
  16. Design is italian, the shipyard is American.
    3
  17. Because US Navy ASW capability sucks, as demonstrated by countless NATO exercises that saw US supercarriers ending on the wrong side of a torpedo. That's why they urgently need a foreign design for an ASW frigate.
    3
  18. Actually the Italian ones have more and bigger caliber guns.
    3
  19. What exactly some infrastructure made in collaboration with China has to do with weapon design?
    3
  20. Having 20 years of time, yes, they will be able to design a capable frigate. Unfortunately they need it now, so they will build (the ships are going to be built in Wisconsin) a foreign design that's already operative and proven.
    3
  21. If you exclude others from the competition, and let the US industrial complex to do their games ("I'll provide the frigates, you'll provide the aircrafts...") you'll end up having subpar equipment for double the price. See what happened with the Boeing KC-46.
    3
  22. Because if you leave the US Industrial complex to do their games ("I'll provide the ships, youl'' provide the aircrafts...") you'll end up purchasing subpar equipment at double the price.
    3
  23. FREMM name is Italian too "FRegata Europea Multi Missione" and the company that won the bid was Fincantieri, not Naval Group.
    3
  24. If you exclude others from the competition, and let the US industrial complex to do their games ("I'll provide the frigates, you'll provide the aircrafts...") you'll end up having subpar equipment for double the price. See what happened with the Boeing KC-46.
    3
  25. Apart for the fact that Brits had always been told that only them believed in the "special relationship", the competition was strictly for designs already in service, not promised ones, so they had nothing to offer.
    3
  26. So Wisconsin (where those ships will be built) is another country?
    3
  27. The competition was strictly for designs already in service, not promised ones.
    3
  28. It's an Italian design, but the ships will be built in Wisconsin.
    3
  29. The Seawolf? In 2005, worried because in NATO exercise the US carriers were routinely "sunk" by European diesel submarines (in the "Joint Task Force Exercise/Theatre Missile Defence Initiative 1999" the Dutch submarine Walrus "sunk" the Theodore Roosevelt and 8 ships of its escort, included the nuclear submarine Boise) , the US Navy "borrowed" the Swedish submarine Gotland (not even a last generation sub). In the two years it remained in US service, the Gotland not only managed to "sink" the Ronald Reagan, but it had NEVER been detected by any US vessel, in any exercise it participated. ASW capabilities of US Navy suck. That's why now they urgently need a foreign design for an ASW frigate.
    3
  30. Any possibility of the F100 had been doomed by the sinking of the Helge Ingstad and the Norvegian report that partly blamed the design. The US Navy prides itself on a history of highly capable damage control efforts, and the ability to “save the ship” even after suffering significant damages. The fact that, after a rather slow sinking in shallow waters, there was practically no salvageable part of the ship, would have made any potential buyer to think otherwise.
    3
  31.  @timboyle3114  No cruiser is designed to withstand the gunshots of a battleship at point blank. The fourth withstood an aerial bombing that would have sunk several battleships.
    2
  32. Italy build F35s. In Italy there is one of the three assembly plants.
    2
  33. They will be built in Wisconsin.
    2
  34. Then they could have bought the original Fremm. Fincantieri can build how many you want, in Italy, at 600m $ a piece.
    2
  35. There is something like a Finnish navy?
    2
  36.  @jannevellamo  So the Finnish navy are islands?
    2
  37. The bid was for models already in service. No untested design could be considered. Also the Type 26 costs almost twice per ship.
    2
  38.  @Leon1Aust  And how many Type 26 are in service?
    2
  39.  @dv2045  The US Navy needs PRIMARILY a good ASW frigate, since in NATO exercises, for allied diesel-electric subs, it had become a joke to arrive at launch distance from US supercarriers. US Navy borrowed a Swedish sub (not even last generation) to do it's own tests, and guess how many times it had been intercepted before arriving at launch distance from the target carrier? ZERO.
    2
  40.  @patrickhenry1249  it's an often advertised charateristic. Unfortunately it doesn't take into account the shorter range of the 57mm Bofors. So it fires a little more explosive per minute, yes, but it has to engage the targets closer to the ship, and so has less time to fire before it's too late. Also, RL tests demonstrated 75-76mm is the smallest viable caliber to sink a ship (while 127-130mm is the largest viable for AA work, that's why most of the navies in the world use one of those two calibers, to have a dual-purpose gun). Also, there are extended range guided ammos for 76mm and 127mm, that practically turn those guns into a further missile launcher. The problem with 127mm guns is that, while the 57mm and 76mm guns can be simply bolted over the deck, or (to have more ammos) have a magazine that occupies a level under the gun, the 127mm gun occupies TWO LEVELS under it. That means that, a ship that use a 127mm gun (like the Italian PPA for example) has to be designed around it, and has less space for other things.
    2
  41.  @derricklanders1205  The vulnerability of US carrier groups to modern diesel submarines (that routinely "sunk" US carriers in NATO exercises) had been noticed firstly by the US Navy itself, that for that reason borrowed the Swedish submarine Gotland (not even a last generation sub) between 2005 and 2007. In those two years the Gotland not only managed to "sink" the USS Ronald Reagan, but had never been detected in any exercise it participated.
    2
  42. The design is Italian. The ships will be built at Marinette Marine shipyard, in Wisconsin
    2
  43. No, Arleigh Burke are destroyers, those are frigates. Lighter and more specialised for anti-sub.
    2
  44. Much of the early problems had been fixed. Simply LCS had been conceived in the '90s for police work. The thing other navies do with corvettes. Only a little more heavily armed. A war with China was not contemplated. Result. Too expensive to be corvettes, and almost useless as warships. That's why the program is being redimensioned.
    2
  45. Because the first US Type-26 frigate would be ready at least 3 years after the first FREMM-based one and, being still an uncompleted project, there will be bigger uncertainties over the costs.
    2
  46. The Norvegian frigate was based on the Alvaro de Bazan-class.
    2
  47. LCS had been conceived in the '90s for police work. The thing other navies do with corvettes. Only a little more heavily armed. A war with China was not contemplated. Result. Too expensive to be corvettes, and almost useless as warships. The real solution to the problem would have been the Italian PPA. Displacement doesn't really cost. Modules do (missiles, sensors etc.), both for building and maintenance. So you can select and build a frigate-dimensioned single hull, and install modules for light or heavy work depending on what you need.
    2
  48.  @dickmelsonlupot7697  The Mangusta can also use Hellfire missiles, while the Tiger can't, since the Hellfire is dangerous if launched from the internal pylons, and the external ones of the Tiger can't support that weight.
    2
  49. Three already ordered and 12 planned.
    2
  50.  @worldover4307  The design is Italian. The ships will be built in Wisconsin, in a shipyard (Marinette Marine) already owned by Fincantieri.
    2