I Visited The Most Overpowered US Navy Warship

Рет қаралды 1,332,482

Күн бұрын

0:00 The fastest ship in the US Navy
0:57 As ship that has Boeing 777 jet engines!
1:37 A ship with no propellers
2:19 Why do Freedom class ships use water jets?
3:36 A little about USS Marinette
4:02 Why is USS Marinette overpowered?
4:56 Why are Freedom-class ships so fast?
5:50 The major issue with having jet engines on Freedom-class
6:58 The envisioned missions of the Freedom-class
7:57 How vibrations eliminated the anti-submarine package from LCS
8:40 The combining gearbox issue with Freedom-class ships
9:51 What is the Surface Warfare Package? Weapons on USS Marinette
11:13 Water Board Mission Zone (WBMZ) is not a well deck
11:52 The mine countermeasures package on LCS
12:44 Something unusual about the crew of Freedom class
13:58 Why does the Freedom-class have a bad reputation?
14:39 How Freedom class ships has launch vertical missiles without built-in VLC cells (MK 70 Payload Delivery System)
15:50 The Future of the Freedom class Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)
When you take the same engines that are on British aircraft carriers and put them on a ship that is 19 times smaller in displacement, you get the fastest class of ships in the US Navy. But what limited the top speed of this class of ships to 10 knots, is #NotWhatYouThink #NWYT
Music:
Miles - Enzofar
Virginia Highway - Tigerblood Jewel
Annashuwa - DEX 1200
Where the Air Is Thin - Jay Varton
Some Kinda Medication - Pip Mondy
Serious Development - Blackout Memories
Black Bullet - Deskant
Fuzzy Logic - Nihoni
Keep Them for Me Until It's Over - Marten Moses
Get Out - Alec Slayne
Thyone - Ben Elson
Craft - Anthony Earls
There Is No Sequel - Philip Ayers
Footage:
Select images/videos from Getty Images
Shutterstock
Courtesy of Lockheed Martin
US Department of Defense
Note: "The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement."

Пікірлер: 856

@NotWhatYouThink 17 күн бұрын

So ... which camp are you in?

@Tinjinladakh 17 күн бұрын

the people on board watch your videos?

@markusferdinandblampa5349 17 күн бұрын

Try getting on a AWAC!

@rjpajaron 17 күн бұрын

Keeping the ship. Not all fights need a big ship.

@matthewguski5645 17 күн бұрын

Come on man I was on the same pier as you and you didn’t stop and say hi? 🥲

@RappyFX 17 күн бұрын

Seems like the Navy actually sees something in these ships, but it's ultimately up to the congress if they want to fund building more of it. Personally speaking, I think they're pretty cool. Like what the other guy here said, not every fight needs a big ship. And the more of these they build, the cheaper it becomes.

@F-22. 17 күн бұрын

"Whatcha got there?" Me: a jetski with multiple seats

@PhilipFear 15 күн бұрын

With multiple weapons systems is more like it‼️😉‼️

@F-22. 15 күн бұрын

@@PhilipFear yeahhh we can't forget the defense mesures against pirates

@prestonwills78 5 күн бұрын

It's not a jet ski

@SLOWLYdoesit1 16 күн бұрын

I have been on a Royal Navy version of these and the jet engines produce a peculiar vibration but the speed of the ships is astonishing- the fuel bill was equally terrifying.

@jojodelima1953 16 күн бұрын

Its why need to be a G7 nation to operate one, but i understand turbines ran on kerosene, not diesel

@SLOWLYdoesit1 15 күн бұрын

@@jojodelima1953 yes- you are right! 🤣

@vinyltapelover 15 күн бұрын

@SLOWLYdoesit1 @jojodelima1953 I like the input both of you. I too was given thought about the fuel usage, fuel tanks and refueling issues, even with consideration of the mentioning of kerosene as a fuel source.. Wow.

@ronaldmcmurray6274 12 күн бұрын

Which Royal Navy ships are you talking about. I'm ex Royal Navy.

@SLOWLYdoesit1 11 күн бұрын

@@ronaldmcmurray6274 crikey… I have been on a few over the years… I get invited to occasional events. and I am embarrassed to admit I can only remember the one with clarity that was a sub hunter with this type of set up- HMS Westminster. I was invited to a refit launch I think in 2008ish. The vibration from the jet engines as we sped full pelt around the Isle of Wight was great.

@strategistaow3520 17 күн бұрын

Each day we're closer to see his face reveal 😷

@alaskanmusher7098 17 күн бұрын

It'll ruin his KZfaq, just like "Dream" did😆.... people will not want to watch his video

@Finngolian 17 күн бұрын

where even is he from? his accent is unique sounding

@xandraxie3183 17 күн бұрын

@@Finngoliannot America probably

@S.A.M.117 17 күн бұрын

@@Finngolian I think he mentioned in one video that he is Canadian.

@V3ry_Ep1c 17 күн бұрын

@@alaskanmusher7098 not really people watch his videos for the content not the mystery

@skenzyme81 17 күн бұрын

Lucky 13! Marinette was the thirteenth Freedom-class LCS to be commissioned. Maybe we can call the first dozen disasters *prototypes.* 😅

@gabrielho1874 17 күн бұрын

What a LCS and why are the other disasters?

@user-io9ie5cs8j 17 күн бұрын

@@gabrielho1874 Litoral Combat Ship. They're for close to shore warfare. There were Alot of issues with them originally. It seems they've cleared most of them up. There's videos on this channel about the problems they had.

@brodyhernandez4913 17 күн бұрын

Lucky 13 is the USS Wichita LCS 13 the most accomplished ship of its class.

@chaosXP3RT 16 күн бұрын

They weren't disasters

@kevinakling 15 күн бұрын

They were. The Navy went woke. The LCS program was the result. I know this because I spent some time working with LCS in the PMO.. Good news, getting back to merit fixes everything.

@oumuarice 17 күн бұрын

Of course, it has received a lot of criticism. The problem is that even for the missions previously handled by the OHP in the existing U.S. Navy, there are already cheaper and more capable ships available. The concept originally desired by the U.S. Navy and Congress was to replace the Navy’s second-tier combat ships and coastal support vessels with a large number of affordable, multi-purpose littoral combat ships, but this vessel does not fit that concept at all. The cost is another issue-just building two of these can be as expensive as an Arleigh Burke-class destroyer. Who would like such a thing? In many ways, this project is very similar to the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program being carried out concurrently. The JSF aimed to reduce costs through tri-service integration but instead saw costs skyrocket due to that very integration. Similarly, the attempt to combine different classes of ships-frigates, coastal patrol ships, and minesweepers-into one to replace them ended up failing to adequately fulfill any of their individual missions. Costs increased, many of the ambitious new technologies failed or were abandoned, and delays became rampant. At least the JSF, as the only fifth-generation fighter in the Western world aside from the F-22, managed to continue development and improvements despite the challenges. On the other hand, the LCS has already seen one of its three major missions, anti-submarine warfare, transferred to the next generation of ships entirely. Moreover, there's frequent discussion about replacing the Avenger class with another class of ships for the crucial mine countermeasure mission instead of using the LCS. Given the significant investment in MCM MM development and the fact that abandoning the mine countermeasure mission would render the LCS a costly failure, there is a determined effort to continue this mission at the very least.

@ShneekeyTheLost 17 күн бұрын

Part of it was the LRLAP system that was supposed to be the crown jewel of the ships, which turned out to be an albatross. The concept is sound, something long enough ranged to do the job of a missile, but a deep enough magazine and inexpensive enough to be able to be deployed consistently without having to go back and reload. Unfortunately, while the original plan the rounds were quite inexpensive compared to missiles, when the purchase order got the hatchet job, they were no longer able to leverage economics of scale, and the per round costs skyrocketed to being even more expensive than a missile. Ultimately, the problem was too many new ideas that didn't work in practice the way they expected. The modular system that was supposed to be one of the main selling points was an utter disaster. The LRLAP system might have worked if they'd built enough of them to make the price per shell cheap enough, but was doomed to failure once budget cuts came in. Basically, everything that the class of ship was supposed to do, it couldn't, because each system was a new one that hadn't been rigorously tested, and turned out to have... 'teething problems'. Hopefully, the experience we paid dearly with these systems will be used going forward, as an example of what not to do and also what needs to be improved to make these technological improvements more mature. Kind of like the old program that tried to double the accuracy of the rifle and ended up with the ACOG.

@TheBooban 17 күн бұрын

I don’t see why LCS can’t be used as intended; coastal support or second tier for anti piracy and the like. In combat, it can be used as a drone control ship. And about being expensive, that’s the Navy’s mismanagement problem not due to this ship. Anything they do costs too much. Look at the Constellation which was supposed to be “off the shelf”. They completely changed it and now it costs too much as well. The JSF is also not expensive. If each service was to develop their own plane, you bet it would have cost 3x of the JSF as well! The Navy should have gone with the UK type 26, specifically designed as the best anti sub frigate in the world.

@ShneekeyTheLost 17 күн бұрын

@@TheBooban The LCS might work as a coast guard cutter, they'd be great at SAR and anti-drugrunner patrols, at least. However, the Coast Guard already has cutters for that role which work well. So they simply aren't needed. It'd also work very well in anti-piracy patrols, say in the Red Sea. Being fast and maneuverable, while being able to launch drones for further reconnaissance assets, would serve them well in that role. However, given their primary weapon system is officially abandoned, and their price tag is absurd, it really isn't cost effective to build more for that role.

@TheBooban 17 күн бұрын

@@ShneekeyTheLost you can’t say it’s not cost effective because we already see what they did with its cost effective replacement: Constellation class! As soon as they get their grubby hands on a new class that is their biggest chance to corrupt it. Yes, it is outright corruption. Congress needs to slap the Navy in the face and force them to buy it exactly the same as the Italians have it.

@joshuawood1436 17 күн бұрын

Aside from the f22? It is the first 5th generation fighter and th emost common, the US also has the f35, so it isn't "the only othe rthan". The f22m and F35 are more frequent, and came before the one you're descrivbing, so it is the "only other" if anything. Never mind that Raussia,a nd China both have 5th generation fighters of their own...

@ChevyRob313 17 күн бұрын

That engine box goes both ways I’m sure not only keeps it from exploding into the ship but keeps ship explosions from messing with the propulsion of the vessel

@NotWhatYouThink 17 күн бұрын

Good point.

@floydholder597 16 күн бұрын

I kind of figured it was also designed to provide additional armored protection from incoming hostile ordnance..... But what do I know from nothing?

@dmacarthur5356 15 күн бұрын

I'm sure it also acts as a sound barrier and thermal barrier too. 2 full aircraft turbine engines spun up would be painfully loud for the crew.

@rogerramjet6134 14 күн бұрын

Tracers work both ways!

@wysoft 13 күн бұрын

I don't know about the LCS ships but on the older Ticos the turbines were containerized for several reasons... an entire turbine assy could be quickly pulled and replaced by an overhauled unit, the container doubles as sound insulation since these turbines are loud as shit, and the container itself is a semi sealed unit that can be easily flooded with CO2 in the event of an engine fire.

@brodyhernandez4913 17 күн бұрын

Didn’t think I would see myself in this video but that was a nice surprise.

@vanderwallstronghold8905 16 күн бұрын

Timestamp?

@Memevze 2 күн бұрын

@vanderwallstronghold8905 0:51 its him! 😮

@brodyhernandez4913 2 күн бұрын

@@Memevze13:56 I was the only guy in camo. That was taken probably early 2020.

@brodyhernandez4913 2 күн бұрын

@@Memevzeno that was not me!

@Memevze 2 күн бұрын

@brodyhernandez4913 oh i was hoping i had special powers

@wormyboot 14 күн бұрын

I like seeing all the little details like clipping the chairs to the floor in the ward room. That was neat and simple and clever.

@NotWhatYouThink 14 күн бұрын

I know right! We thought that was pretty neat too!

@philsalvatore3902 10 сағат бұрын

I wish our ammo ship had that feature when we hit a typhoon in the Philippine Sea. Our wardroom was a disaster!

@wormyboot 10 сағат бұрын

@@philsalvatore3902 I think logistics is super cool. I absolutely appreciate the value of an ammunition ship but I don't think I could serve on one. What chrome plated balls you must have.

@thegr8winston 17 күн бұрын

I been watching the retired LCSs arrive in Philadelphia over the last week, cool timing!

@MooreFishing-ky3wq 9 күн бұрын

I noticed that too driving by . Seems like a waste of money . They should find what they’re good at and use them . Maybe use turbo diesel engines for better fuel economy .

@Chuck8541 4 күн бұрын

@@MooreFishing-ky3wqYeah, like surely the coast guard, or something is them?

@cle_roknn3742 4 күн бұрын

They are not suitable for much of anything. Too expensive to ooerate for most allied navies to utilize, not reliable or strong enough hulls for the Coast Guard, only one operational mission package was ever deployed and it was mediocre at best according to the reports. Their combining gears had fatal flaws thet required redesigns. The navy wants to get rid of rhem, congress wants the jobs and kickbacks from the contractors so they will build more to simply be mothballed. The OHP class should have served as a basis for the new ship, not a clean slate design thet ended up being two different hull types built by two different shipyards which overcomplicated the entire project. But that's what happens when you throw a bunch of politicians into the ship design process....

@Chuck8541 4 күн бұрын

@@cle_roknn3742 Ahh, ok. Fair enough, you make a good point.

@waynegood9233 10 күн бұрын

Thanks I was in the Navy and we had a race from Baja to Long Beach California with 3 other destroyers in 1968

@MrMotopsyco69 17 күн бұрын

Well done. I think this is one of your best videos if not the best outright. Clean comprehensive and clever.

@user-fs3iy7em2t 15 күн бұрын

This channel keeps getting better & better

@user-iv2iy1nw9f 17 күн бұрын

Thank you for the videos!

@WSallai 10 күн бұрын

What do I think the US Navy should do with the Freedom Class LCS ships: I think that these ships are a perfect fit for the US Coast Guard. They can perform interdiction, anti-piracy, oceanographic research, and Search & Rescue operations while also being able to fit into US Navy roles when called upon. The “Red Light District” and huge flight deck provide lots of capabilities to carry out those functions. The fact that they have smaller crews also fits into the Coast Guard’s needs.

@EstorilEm 8 күн бұрын

That’s a good point - but they’re VERY maintenance intensive and expensive to operate, which generally goes against USCG doctrine (and certainly their budget.)

@dgthe3 4 күн бұрын

@@EstorilEm How much more expensive are they than the large Legend Class cutters?

@EstorilEm 3 күн бұрын

@@dgthe3 They are indeed much closer than I thought, but the NSC is still a good bit larger with more capability. It's difficult to quantify, but it seems like the LCS would still have significantly increased maintenance costs over the NSC. Not a bad idea though, especially if they're already retiring them (as in, they're already bought and paid for!)

@thomasromanelli2561 17 күн бұрын

I appreciate the effort, but your video title is dangerously close to clickbait (if it isn't already based on your definition of "overpowered"). The LCS class ("little crappy ship", or for the Freedom class in particular, the "little crappier ship") is a case study in the dysfunctional acquisition system currently practiced by the US Navy, exceeded perhaps by only the disaster that was the Zumwalt class destroyer. The LCS concept was identified during a series of conflict scenarios that posited a foreign power attempting to close the Strait of Hormuz, a hypothetical event at the time that exposed the USN's capital ships (the ones capable of mine clearing, ASW and interdiction of enemy surface vessels) to multi-domain attacks from littoral and shoreline missile batteries. The USN thought a small, fast ship displacing 2500-3000 tons could accomplish all of those missions using a number of modules that would optimize the hulls for mine clearing, ASW and surface warfare duties. The small size and relatively inexpensive cost designated the LCS ship as an expendable asset. Unfortunately, incessant design requirement changes meant that the modularity component was grossly under-developed (ASW and mine clearing modules were never completed), would require the vessel to leave the AO for module installations and the exchanges themselves took far more time in protected ports than originally projected. Compounding these erroneous assumptions was the decision to reduce the number of hulls ordered- fewer hulls would save money since the modules could make every ship an ASW, mine clearing or surface warfare platform. If all of the modules were actually functional, then part of this statement would be true- but because each hull could only do one mission at at time the main benefits of modularity were essentially defeated because there simply were not enough hulls to carry them. Ironically, the USN ultimately committed each hull to a specific mission profile with a focus on surface warfare packages- a very anti-modular approach which was the foundation of the entire concept. The surface warfare "lethality" is still grossly under-powered, but this is being addressed with the addition of the NSM and bolt-on, containerized VLS cells. The ships won't look pretty, but they will certainly be more lethal although their survivability remains low. Had the USN navy committed to hull specialization at an early stage, then at least there would have been some commonality between ships and subsequent reductions in maintenance costs and some aspects of training. The USN still needs a new small hull form mine clearing and ASW platform- the current ones date back to the Korean War and have wooden hulls. How useful they will be remains to be seen, but perhaps the most practical lasting lesson for the USN is an examination of its procurement and design process to avoid multi-billion dollar mistakes. Beyond the money, the USN lost a generation of time in a flawed concept, which could have been spent training new crews in a more evolved combat doctrine to remain ahead of potential adversaries. No amount of money will ever compensate for that loss of time- and China and the PLAN have used this opportunity to invest heavily in their domestic shipyard capacity and have now fielded the world's largest navy by hull numbers (and will in a the next decade achieve supremacy in actually tonnage). BTW, we're still waiting to commission three of the Freedom-class vessels- long after the USN begged Congress to defund the program.

@user-rn3rn6nl3h 18 сағат бұрын

Almost like they are failing on purpose.....

@philsalvatore3902 10 сағат бұрын

Yet the hulls and machinery used in both LCS classes are based on successful commercial designs. Why can civilian sailors operate ships like this and the US Navy cannot? The Independence class is based on a 19 year old high speed ferry, the MV Benchichigua Express operated by Fred Olson Line around the Canary Islands. It carries over a thousand passengers and 300 vehicles every day in any kind of weather in the Atlantic Ocean. Fred Olson Lines is satisfied with the ship's reliability they ordered two more from Austal. Commercial ships live much harder lives than naval vessels that are in port more than they are at sea. Commercial ships have to earn their keep. Fred Olson gets great service from their ships. The Freedom Class is based on a successful passenger ship design that currently holds the Blue Ribband for crossing the Atlantic. In 1992 she crossed the Atlantic in 58 hours 34 minutes. That is just over two days and ten hours! She has been in commercial service 1992 and her owners are happy with her, yet the US Navy can't make the same basic hull work for them.

@bobsmith5714 23 минут бұрын

The title refers to the Literal horsepower of the ship... Freedom LCCS: 2x 48000HP turbines plus 2x 9100HP Diesels for 114k HP for 3500 tonnes displacement. 32 HP/tonne VS Arleigh Birke: 4x 26250HP turbines for 105k HP for 9700 tonnes displacement. 10.8 HP/tonne

@tomrock6431 17 күн бұрын

EXCELLENT VIDEO! VERY COOL!

@chrisdjernaes9658 15 күн бұрын

Well done … thanks for sharing.

@charlesmadisonrhea 17 күн бұрын

Great video as always! That misile six-pack box sure looked tall and tippy on deck. Guess they won’t be crash-stopping with it up and working

@dgthe3 4 күн бұрын

They have tethers for the chairs. You think they won't secure the box of missiles?

@t23001 17 күн бұрын

NWYT, Great documentary! Very informative!

@dennisdownes9319 Сағат бұрын

Excellent video! Great details-pros/cons. You know, the Oliver Hazard Perry Class FFG-7 also had many problems and didn't get such great life out of that class! DD

@user-di4kv9yk3g 3 күн бұрын

definitely an interesting ship design - in the UK we have been using jet engines for propulsion for some time, and its good to see that advance being used to power the water jets which are in their own right very versatile, glad you showed the HCS Francisco which so far has a good track record and is possibly quite cost effective being a faster boat which means more services can be run etc

@clowning69 13 күн бұрын

great video! thanks for the card, it feels weird being the only one knowing what the next video is going to be. can't wait!

@NotWhatYouThink 13 күн бұрын

Hey! Glad to hear you got the card in time! It may not be the next video, but the one after!

@clowning69 13 күн бұрын

@@NotWhatYouThink no matter the video, i'll still enjoy it!

@chrisrohde7696 16 күн бұрын

omg i saw you omg, you are not an ai voice! omg you are actually making these videos! you are real! dude i love your work and your team, im sure you have a team. these are some of my favorite content online. Reminds me of "hows it's made" and dirty jobs" mixed. Thank so so much and please dont stop!

@thedootguy4444 17 күн бұрын

So cool you get tours, keep at it!

@tolson57 10 күн бұрын

Outstanding work sir! Retired Navy Chief. Very few creators get the details right when it comes to military topics, but you nailed it!

@T.Media1199 5 күн бұрын

What an incredible insight into the most overpowered US Navy warship! This video provided such an exciting and informative tour, showcasing the cutting-edge technology and immense capabilities of our naval forces. The dedication and skill of the crew are truly inspiring. Thanks for sharing this fascinating glimpse into the future of naval warfare!

@garymiller5937 17 күн бұрын

Thanks for the cool 😎 video. 😊😊😊😊❤❤❤❤

@landonleathers5936 6 күн бұрын

I go past there a few times a month and it's always thrilling to drive across the bridge and see these awesome ships being built right here in Wisconsin go Bucky and go Navy

@ChloeKruegerSenpai 16 күн бұрын

Independence class: Why am I still here? Just to suffer?

@EstorilEm 8 күн бұрын

It’s got the looks lol.

@skenzyme81 17 күн бұрын

LCS was a disaster. Good thing the Constellation frigate program is on schedule and under budget. 😑

@robertcullison8782 17 күн бұрын

You are joking right? Three years behind schedule, and over budget.

@skenzyme81 17 күн бұрын

@@robertcullison8782 Very much joking. Constellation is making LCS look like a success story. The frigate DESIGN isn't even done and they're already cutting steel!

@matthewgibbs6886 17 күн бұрын

rofl good 1

@robertcullison8782 17 күн бұрын

That what I thought.

@asdf42042 17 күн бұрын

why was it a disaster?

@andrewcrawley4429 15 күн бұрын

One thing you didn’t point out was that that ship uses amazing amounts of fuel when those turbines are used. They can’t run them for extended periods of time due mostly to their fuel consumption. Turbines are huge H.P. producers and light weight, but they use staggering amounts of fuel.

@lasselahti4056 3 күн бұрын

Hmm. That tennis ball trick seems pretty convinient to laminated floor also :D No scratches anymore! And now tenniselbow!

@mikeizzano172 Күн бұрын

Being a Naval aviation veteran , I’m familiar with jet engines in aircraft and how they operate ,but I gotta know how you get high volumes of air to those big engines inside a box below deck…..that alone would create noise you could hear from miles away….quite a feat !

@Shipspotting_Vietnam 15 күн бұрын

Nice video!!

@GWNorth-db8vn 17 күн бұрын

Not to brag, but Canada had a twin-jet powered hydrofoil frigate in the sixties that did 63 kt. It couldn't do much else, but it sure went fast.

@WalrusWinking 17 күн бұрын

You don't know what the LCS's top speed is. It's much higher than officially stated. Like we don't know how deep our submarines dive.

@kadelefox8946 17 күн бұрын

Kinda like the Uss Tucumcari and the Pegasus class hydrofoil in 1970s to the ealy 90s which was an american hydrofoil warship that was pretty quick albeit its only about 48 knots

@GWNorth-db8vn 17 күн бұрын

@@WalrusWinking - According to Tom Clancy, American subs can officially all dive to two hundred feet. That's how deep the first one went, and that's all they'll say about that. I wouldn't count on the LCS going much faster than they've said, though. The hull is fairly wide for its length, and that limits the top speed of a displacement hull.

@WalrusWinking 16 күн бұрын

@@GWNorth-db8vn "two hundred feet" lmao I hope you're joking because that's nothing we have way more knowledge even PUBLICLY that they go over 1300.

@GWNorth-db8vn 16 күн бұрын

@@WalrusWinking - That's the official answer when asked and has been since the 1920's. It's actually usually "deeper than two hundred feet" to be precise. They occasionally mention a deeper depth and stories do get out.

@TheToucanDragon 17 күн бұрын

Cool that you revisited these ships. I think it's good to see where they've come from former critisim.

@billhanna2148 17 күн бұрын

But its a bit late and EXPENSIVE thanks to Navy, Congressional and shipbuilder incompetence, collusion and greed respectively.

@Jermydewasbeer 17 күн бұрын

yes new video😍😍😍😍😍

@DrunkenShellback 17 күн бұрын

This video was super thorough and well explained.

@badgerpa9 Күн бұрын

Marinette is a nice city, the surrounding areas are really nice and you can rent a sled in winter.

@markrowland1366 17 күн бұрын

I see the crew have both a red light didtrict and a Sauna, or did you mean Sonar. It looks like fun for the crew. Thirtyfive years back, the fast, wave piercing, twin hull, Blue Riband wining, magic water jet driven, amazing, craft, moored on the Brisbane river, Queensland, opposite my house, on a sales tour. Upon returning to its home in Tasmania it had done extremely well with buyers fighting to get them.

@johannjohann6523 15 күн бұрын

Thank you for your service everyone on the Marinette.

@generalcalamity 14 күн бұрын

One of these would make an awesome SUPER super yacht... It's designed perfectly for being a toy hauler and to do expedition journeys whilst still having the speed capability. Plus the US navy has trained all the staff you would ever need since they all do multiple jobs on the ship... Get a luxury overhaul of the interior and modify for world touring and you have the ultimate ship...

@gisnu 14 күн бұрын

The box at 1:21 is mainly due to sound, due the the high pitch of a jet engine.

@NotWhatYouThink 14 күн бұрын

That’s an interesting point. I’m sure it makes things a lot more quiet. But if that was the main reason for the box, why make it explosion-proof?

@quontox9247 16 күн бұрын

With its speed, it could respond really quick to anti piracy missions and free up destroyer escorts. Apart from that, it seems too costly and under equipped to do much more. Maybe in the future, it can use its huge turbines to power laser weapons for fleet defence against swarms of drones or missiles.

@timtrewyn453 17 күн бұрын

There was a USS Bainbridge nuclear destroyer followed by a Virginia class of nuclear cruisers. I would think a nuclear sub chaser could get somewhere quickly and then go into very quiet mode like a nuke sub can. My understanding is that navy reactors are pretty reliable, maybe reliable enough to have an auxiliary engine that can move the ship at 5 knots if for some reason the reactor had to go down. So having one reactor would keep costs down, costs seeming to be the problem with nuclear surface ships. I wonder if the LCS could do the Prosperity Guardian job in the Red Sea.

@richardmeo2503 9 күн бұрын

With some bugs worked out they could still see service protecting our shores, Red Sea, and advance base areas in coastal zones. Anti-sub copters could be used for sub work.

@bafon 6 күн бұрын

12:11 that would be a VDS Variable Depth Sonar, besides changes in sensors and frequenzy it pretty much has stayed the same for the past 50-60 years or so i believe?

@AirJoe 3 күн бұрын

I went aboard the USS Cooperstown in the same class. It just seems like it doesn't have enough weaponry aboard and feels kind of empty for a warship. I think they should give them to the coast guard to deal with smugglers and stuff. They would be perfect for that.

@onionhead5780 9 күн бұрын

Water board mission zone? 😳 Not what I thought it was before description was given. 😅

@jrwhite7916 9 күн бұрын

As a retired Gas Turbine Tech from the NAVY, I was shocked to hear the HP rating on the Rolls Royce Turbines. The GE LM2500's are about 21,000 each. The 2500's are what I worked on along with the Allison 501-K17 turbines to run the generators. Frigates, Tico's and Spruance class were my ships back in the day.

@josephpiskac2781 15 күн бұрын

Better yhan than the previous video on these ships.

@kpadalldotablet1009 4 күн бұрын

I hate to break it to you, but as far back as 1976, the Spruance class destroyers had reversible props that could perform a "crashback" in the length of the ship at full published speed, or about 32 knots. However, the Spruance class were capable of over 60 knots.

@d.cypher2920 15 күн бұрын

I ❤️‍🔥 your videos... Not what you think is an AWESOME channel!!! ❤ from USA. 😎🇺🇸🙏

@TheRealMagni 20 сағат бұрын

The iso mounting may counter the vibration but that is not why most light equipment was iso mounted. it was a shock class requirement. if the ship took a hit things have to be able to flex or risk failure.

@Rylee_DJ 17 күн бұрын

To be able to do that is so awesome

@andyjennings15 15 күн бұрын

As always it was exactly what I thought.

@johna.zoidberg3049 17 күн бұрын

Correction : The most fastest ship we *ALLOWED* to see in US Navy. 🤫

@Malitubee 14 күн бұрын

Exactly! Wouldn’t be Suprised if they had something that could do double. We’ll never know unless we go to war

@dgthe3 4 күн бұрын

@@Malitubee Physics gets in the way of fantasy. For any given hull shape, it takes exponentially more power go go faster. Even if you could put the powerplant of a Ford class carrier into an LCS, you wouldn't double its speed. You could get an extra, maybe 10kn from it. 15 tops. So to double the speed you'd need something vastly smaller & still powered by at least 2 nuclear reactors. Or it'd need to be a catamaran or otherwise have an insane length-to-beam ratio. And while such vessels are not impossible to build, they would be impossible to fund. Because they'd serve no purpose. Even the LCS has little needd to go over 40 kn. If you need to go much faster, aircraft exist.

@jerrygirdner2753 11 күн бұрын

I think these ships would be great for the Coast Guard down around Southern Florida. They could use them to chase drug smuggling boats. Semper Fi from an old Marine

@pedrosanchez-uk4wm Күн бұрын

40. Nudos es excelente, pero e visto súper yates qué superan esa velocidad, para la guardía Costanera seria ideal. Pienso que el costo de mantenimiento debe ser brutal.

@jejc1001 10 күн бұрын

That's badass

@bryan192 16 күн бұрын

engineering question here: any hypothesis on they could have created a variable gear box to couple the engines? from what I know, the rpm of a turbine and diesel engine is not fixed, and I don't think is possible to regulate it. hence the only way to couple them is a variable gearbox.

@iDennis95 14 күн бұрын

It kind of reminds me of the first boat powered by a steam turbine, it went so fast with a prop that they discovered about cavitation. It went fast though, almost on plane if I remember correctly

@2coryman 2 күн бұрын

Beautiful ship

@EstorilEm 8 күн бұрын

The HSC Francisco ferry is a catamaran, VASTLY more hydrodynamically efficient than a traditional v hull. …that’s probably why the other LCS (Independence class) is a trimaran with 20,000 less horsepower yet is only 3kts slower lol. Of course it makes the design much more expensive and complicated, plus limits the amount of large areas onboard - but I always thought the Independence was one of the coolest looking navy ships out there. The same company that makes the Freedom class also builds super ferries by the way, and makes the worlds fastest diesel ferry, tested to an insane 56 knots (almost 65 MPH!) …so yeah, they definitely know what they’re doing!

@zlm001 15 күн бұрын

Thanks

@1chish Күн бұрын

You can rest assured that those MT30 GTs will not be breaking down let alone 'exploding'. They are used by many naval ships around the world.

@alexgranda05 17 күн бұрын

I'm studying Naval engineering and I can tell that most battle ships are equiped with jet turbines for engines, I'm from Spain so I can put the example of the Spanish Navy ships, in the F-80 frigatte class they use 2 gas turbines and for the newest and one of the most advanced frigatte class in the world, the F-100 class, they are equiped with 2 conventional pistón engine producing 12000 HP that doesn't use much fuel and 2 jet turbine engines producing 46000 HP for high speed sailing

@user-ok1qy6yc7j 2 күн бұрын

IMPRESSIVED ❤...

@gordonwallace3584 12 күн бұрын

AEC USN RET, 21 YRS-9 MO-18 DAYS LOVED IT THEN, LOVE IT STILL MY NAVY!⚓

@moyzahmed4666 15 күн бұрын

What's the difference between water jet and a propellor? Both push water?

@usnchief1339 15 күн бұрын

The Navy has the best of all services. I would definitely do it all over again. Go Navy!

@BalakeHart-nh4xh 13 күн бұрын

Same brother, but too old now.. 😆 🤣

@EstorilEm 8 күн бұрын

I seriously regret not doing it. My retired navy friend got me onboard CVN-73 / GW a while back when she was in Norfolk. My mind was completely blown, such an awesome experience I’ll never forget.

@miket2120 3 күн бұрын

The Arieigh Burke uses a GE turbine engine running a prop, so that makes the ship a turboprop! The Marinette uses a RR turbine engine to shoot out a jet of water, so that makes her a full jet, with thrust reversers too!

@insanereindeer4081 7 күн бұрын

I had no idea RR installed these in ships. I've been to all their facilities in the US and I'm not sure where these would be made.

@MichaelEdlin542 17 күн бұрын

Hold on, so for it to have any VLS capability it has to fully sacrifice it's entire flight deck, until it can dock?

@ulrickceprika3134 4 күн бұрын

Wow j'adore 👍

@narref04 10 күн бұрын

Well Made.

@HighGuard121 17 күн бұрын

I visited this same ship at Staten Island during fleet week, we weren't allowed to take pictures of the inside though

@NotWhatYouThink 17 күн бұрын

That’s actually where we visited the ship too. We have a big platform, so they were kind to give us a tour.

@trakpardaloriginal2333 2 күн бұрын

Amigo, por acaso você ao Invés de dizer que o jato de água "seria direcionado para traz" para causar a parada de emergência, você não quis dizer não foi: "direciona o jato água para vante"? Pos direcionando o jato de água para vante, assim como nos jet ski, essa manobra permite a que estes dêm narcha à ré, ou parada.

@happilyham6769 15 күн бұрын

Question: Are these the largest water-jet boats?

@DMSparky 4 күн бұрын

I am surprised the jet turbines cause a lot of vibration. I would have assumed it was the opposite. Is it because they weren’t designed as turbo shaft engines? I don’t know much about turbines though.

@phil_nebula676 16 күн бұрын

Considering the delayed by three years of the FFG-62 Program, I think it would be a mistake to decomissioned them early, it would be best to upgunned them with 8-cells Mk. 41 VLS for ESSM, or VL-ASROC along with NSM for either Anti-ship/Land attack missiles, should be keep in-service until sufficent number of FFG-62 are comissioned! Which could be transferred to allies through Excess Defense Article (EDA), like Greece, Taiwan, and the Philippines.

@dreadzepplin1278 15 күн бұрын

I wonder what the current price of scrap aluminum is right now ?

@peanuts2105 Күн бұрын

So great to see the long standing British and American partnership with Rolls Royce and their modified Trent 800 gas turbine

@mistypig 17 күн бұрын

This week is fleet week in Portland (Or)

@rikertvonfulton16 3 күн бұрын

Maybe turn them into drone swarm ships. Drone carriers .Both airborne and seaborne kamikaze drones.

@lhommeaudacieux 15 күн бұрын

Didn't they suffer from massive corrosion problems which would render most of the hulls unusable within 10 years of launching? Has that been addressed?

@aCycloneSteve 9 күн бұрын

I heard the Army has developed a container nuclear power system. They could use the power to synthetically create JP-5 & other liquid fuels. It would be amusing to have a warship that also refuels other warships.

@HayesHaugen 12 күн бұрын

Maybe USCG could use a handful of these for SAR?

@TheWidebody747 3 күн бұрын

How long between re-fueling stops?

@s3p4kner 17 күн бұрын

In theory the LCS is supposed to carry mission modules allowing the same ship to perform multiple tasks, but in reality the USN has not designed or implemented this feature yet. The 1st Mine Countermeasure Module was only delivered to the USN in Apr 2024 and will be another year before it's implemented across LCS - by which time the entire fleet will be decommissioned? The ASW role is pretty well cancelled because the waterjets make too much noise to hear the submarine. It's not war capable because while the hull is steel, the structure is Aluminium which burns especially when hit by a missile. Plenty of vids on youtube of Alu ships hit e.g The Falklands conflict or by the Houthis, if you're curious. The crew dislikes them because they're maintenance heavy and often the tech is restricted so only an engineer for the contractor is allowed to fix it, which means being moored up in port a lot. The navy hates them yet are making the same mistakes with the new Constellation class Frigate which is already years behind schedule, the blueprints are not complete, there's no test facility nor any plan to test the propulsion system which is a hybrid system never before implemented in the USN, and no 3D modelling of the layout either but the USN blames the shipyard for not building on time. Check out channel: Sub Brief by a former USN officer for more on Constellation.

@GSteel-rh9iu 13 күн бұрын

Hull cracking still a thing? So can't go fast in heavy seas?

@JohnSmith-lw2bm 7 күн бұрын

Jack of all trades, master of none.

@AussieCreeker 7 күн бұрын

Those C-Rams are no joke

@WTH1812 17 күн бұрын

Still wondering why the Navy canceled the hydrofoil patrol ships of the 1980's.

@kaourintintamine1383 16 күн бұрын

Because foils are not optimal in high seas and really bad in bad weather conditions

@WTH1812 16 күн бұрын

@@kaourintintamine1383 ... Well , having been in the US Naval Reserve during the Hydrofoil Heydays, and known a few hydrofoil officers and crew, I got good insights to the difference between hydrofoils and Littoral Combat Ships being recalled and decommissioned. Fast Attack Boat lHydrofoils, like Littoral ships, were designed for the shallow waters near shorelines and into large rivers. This is exactly what is in the Red Sea, Persian Sea, Malaysia, Indonesia, Japan's Southern Islands, TAIWAN, The PHILIPPINES, South China Sea islands, Australia, New Zealand, Hawaii, Alaska, US West Coast, Gulf of Mexico, US East Coast, Coast Guard US large rivers and bays, and drug smuggling interdiction. > Notice a common theme here? Being more nimble with shallow drafts and smaller crews the hydrofoils can carry Sting SAMs, anti-tank weapons useful against ships, .50 cal, 20 mm, and 40 mm guns for self defense and local shore attack. Hydrofoils can carry and deploy air drones, sea drones, hydrophone monitors, buoy markers, weather and sea state instruments, SEAL teams, mine sweeping, ..., They are excellent choices for disaster relief squads transporting food, water, supplies -- would have been perfect Hurricane Katrina and in Puerto Rico -- solar power units, refrigerators, and more essentials that otherwise would lumber in days after the disaster hit. None of this is suitable for LCS which cost more to build, crew, fuel, maintain, deploy and replace than hydrofoils, which are less prone to damage while deployed.

@usnchief1339 15 күн бұрын

The ships also were not configured the same. It was difficult and expensive to get parts for them, when they would breakdown. I have been on one and it was sooooo cool inside.

@The_Geezus 15 күн бұрын

Eh, with how Boeing turned out they would be totally shit Today. They were built where the 737 is currently, used to be a proud thing about the area, now we all know nothing that comes out of the big building on the southern shore of Lake Washington can be trusted.

@WTH1812 15 күн бұрын

@@The_Geezus ... With a guarantee for a large number of boats it would be easier to secure manufacturers interests. Would need to avoid the standard military procurement process: Promise the moon, Budget for a blimp, Change specs, Put out for bids, Add a new technology, Introduce modular design, Require untested systems/parts, Cut production run, Add committee approval, Add tank treads, turret, Remove foils,, rudder, Set service ceiling to 10K, Add rail gun, lasers, catapult, Cut budget, Return to committee, Promise the moon, ...,

@enkephalin07 9 күн бұрын

Has anyone discussed transferring retired LCS to the coast guard? I don't see why it would be a bad idea.

@richardkroll2269 14 күн бұрын

I have heard that the crew on both classes of LCS ships can't work on the equipment but only the contractors who built it can. The weapons systems seem to be all for protecting the ship. So if it doesn't go out looking for trouble, it won't have to defend itself. So why was it built? Oh, to make some contractor (MIC) rich who took the Admiral that recommended it be built on to the Board of Directors. Too many of the Littoral class ships seem tied up in San Diego harbor.