just wondering, why can S. Korea a country with the population of CA. design and produce excellent naval designs much faster than the USN ? It is taking us years and years just to DESIGN a new cruiser and still nothing built AND we need a Italian design for a new Frigate ? Perhaps its time to order our USN ships from our allies because we have lost these skills apparently, what the H... is wrong with us ?
The CVX is a cool design to look at but not sure how South Korea can sustain it logistically. This ship might require some global voyages that consumes a lot of resources. Having a wide variety of sustainable energy sources like solar panels, wind turbines, or hydrogen fuel cell engines (fuel by processed sea water) is ideal for longer voyages. Investing in modular storage spaces and solutions with onboard production facilities such as a vegetable garden or a metal 3D printers for immediate access to spare parts. With so many potential problems associated with the CVX design, developing smart solutions when isolated at sea will save the ROK's Navy a lot of time, money, and resources. They might as well integrate some merchant ship features into the CVX design such as dry bulk cargo bays for "expedited protected shipping" to fulfill priority diplomatic missions or needed immediate cash.
As someone who’s been following the KDDX program since it was first unveiled to the public. I’m very disappointed with the new direction the design has taken…
I think the top brass of ROKN are conservative bunch, and they don't like going too futuristic, which will definitely look cool to military enthusiasts, but might be risky in real life use. Which also makes sense.
Flexible means you have power either for propulsion OR sensors??? How stupid is this? I'd like to see this guy in battle operations when need full propulsion and sensor at maximum range! When engineers don't go to war and have headhakes designing ships. Better CVX 3 CATOBAR version. Is this ship in coperation with Italy and UK?
Nothing against Korea or anyone...but just a offftopic fun observation - India is the world's 3rd largest Naval shipbuilder that commissions/launches new warships every other month. -In November 2021 and Dec 2022, India commissioned 2 Vishakapatnam Class Destroyers. - In 2022, India launched 3 Nilgiri Class Frigates at Sea - In September 2022 India commissioned the 45,000 tons Carrier INS Vikrant - Last week 2 Indian Carrier Battle Groups exercised at sea in formation - There are numerous BrahMos missile tests from Indian warships. - India earlier this year tested an Anti ballistic missile AAD from INS Anvesh, a 15000 tons Naval instrumental tracking ship. -Yesterday India launched a Corvette and a Survey vessel on the same day. But pretty much Nothing is covered by "Naval News". Oh well, enjoy your 10k Views per video.
sn't there a trade fair for weapons like this in IN? Well, it was in 2019 that JP began to be held on a large scale. Please don't worry too much. It is a superpower that will become No. 1 or No. 2 in the world in the near future. As the world's largest "democracy", as a representative of the "Global South" and as the "Chair of the G20", will have a stronger voice in international politics. Let us continue to work together with the US and the AU for “peace and stability” in the Indo-Pacific. INではこのような武器の見本市はないでしょうか？ さて、JPが大規模に開催され始めたのは2019年からです。 あまり心配しないでください。 近い将来、世界で１位か２位になるであろう大国です。 世界最大の「民主主義」として、「グローバル・サウス」の代表として、そして「G20議長国」として、国際政治においてより強い発言力を持つことになる。 インド太平洋地域の「平和と安定」に向けて、引き続き米国、AUと協力していきましょう。
@@n1k2-ja46 yes, every year. Its called Defence Expo. And offcourse you are right. But journalists like Naval News should be smart enough to take some stories from India as well as this will sky rocket their viewership due to the huge Indian population. So win win for both.
KR always cares about his appearance and is very good at covering it up. In terms of domestic politics, international politics, and even more so national defense policy, we are producing very nice ships like this, but I can't help but wonder how many ships can be properly operated. KDDX, HCX-23, FFX Batch III, KDX III Batch II, CVX Have you calculated the "cost" for deploying this much? Can we expect economic development to cover the defense budget? Are you going to cut the Army and "throw" assets into the Navy and Air Force? ← If this happens, CN, RU, KP's arbitrariness, KR's politicians. Do military personnel (especially naval staff) really think about "national defense"? In the current economic situation, it will easily exceed 4% of GDP. It's too "childish" to "pursue" "safety and security" in this way at the "sacrifice" of people's lives, and I feel sorry for them. Well, it can't be helped even if people in the field say this or that, so please "do your best" at best, manufacture a "cool-looking ship" and "export" it "overseas" to enrich the domestic economy. It's completely irrelevant, but I don't know what to do about the "Hyundai/Kia" car lawsuit in the US. The future of that “semiconductor” will be determined by whether it attaches to the US or CN. No one will help us because it is a self-inflicted "crisis" caused by the immaturity of KR's diplomatic and economic policies up to now. Since it is a “developed country” recognized by the United Nations, please “solve” it on your own. Phiten! KRは外見ををいつも気にしていて取り繕うのはとにかく得意です。国内政治でも、国際政治でも、ましてや国防政策もこのように外見上非常に素晴らしい艦艇を製造しておりますが、まともに運用できる艦艇がどれくらいなのか気になって仕方ありません。 KDDX、HCX-23、FFX バッチ III、KDX III バッチ II、CVXこれだけ配備するのに”コスト”計算は出来ているのかな？国防予算を賄えるだけの経済発展は見込めるの？陸軍を削減して海軍、空軍に資産を”投入”するの？←こんな事したらCN、RU、KPの思うつぼ、KRの政治家。軍関係者（特に海軍参謀）ホントに”国の国防”を考えているのかな？ 現状のままの経済状況だと対GDP比4％を余裕で超える。国民の暮らしを"犠牲”にして”安心・安全”をこの方法で”追求”するにはあまりに”稚拙”すぎて気の毒にさえ思えてしまう。まあ外野の人間があれこれ言ってもどうしようもないのでせいぜい”頑張って” ”カッコイイ外見の艦艇”を製造して”海外”にジャンジャン”輸出”して国内経済を潤してください。 全然関係ないけどUSでの”現代・起亜”の自動車訴訟どうするのかね、全世界で車売れなくなったら益々”半導体”と”軍需産業”に期待がかかるよ。その”半導体”もUSに付くかCNに付くかで将来が決まるしUSに付いたらCNの経済制裁が”発動”、CNに付いたらそもそも生産できなくなるしね。 今までのKR外交及び経済政策が未熟の為に引き起こした、自ら招いた”危機”だから誰も助けてくれないよ。国連も認めた”先進国”だから自力で”解決”してください。ファイテン！
The additional destroyer program is not an issue in the current defense budget - this is a conclusion that has already been reached after many professional discussions. The issue is aircraft carriers. The debate over the need for aircraft carriers is intense. The Navy is pushing ahead over the objections of the Army and Air Force. And what is wrong with South Korea increasing its military power? In classical liberal terms, the basic role of the state is to protect its citizens and maintain law and order. There are no capabilities that take precedence over national defense. Right up there, the lunatic Kim dynasty is threatening us with nuclear weapons. Do you expect us to lay down our weapons in the face of an active shooter?
항상 전시국가인 한국이 군사력에 gdp 4퍼센트를 쓰는게 이상한건가? 너희 일본이야말로 전시국가도 아닌 전범국 주제에 전쟁가능국가로 변모할 계략이나 짜고있지않아? 그럼 누가 여기서 “childish" 하다는걸까? 우리는 북한이라는 적을 막아야해서 군사비를 올리는거고 너희들은 한국이 군사비용에 대한지출을 올리니 괜히 찔려서 동시에 전범국주제에 법을 개정하고 전쟁가능국가로 탈바꿈하고있지않는가? 한국을 그저 따라하면서 유치한플레이를 하는 일본은 자기자신의 모습을 되돌아보고싶지않나?
@@thevulcan2011 Not quite, more likley that on many weapon systems they will fill a niche that US has abandoned in recent years, the KA-50 for example fills a role that the was never fully replaced when the us stoped producing the f-5 and abandoned the F-20, a lighweight attack fighter. The KA-50 is also seen as good platform because it is developed from a trainer aircraft the was intended to ready pilot for the f-16 which also shares some commonality with the F-35, this means pilots who train on the trainer model of the K-50 can transition quickly to the armed varrient and up the ladder to the F-16 and eventually the f-35, the KA-21 will also figure into that chain as well espically since the f-16 airframe cannot be upgraded much further. Basically there may be some competition on certain platforms, but also cooperation and coordination.
@@Americaisgreat12 the US is loosing ground, despite their immense budget! the problem that former military are joining naval manufacturer serves only the purpose of lobbying! we saw it with the Zumwald, complete failure but they still invested money until they were forced to admit that it is not capable to do their tasks
The carrier concept 3 is interesting, if you wish to use offensive aircraft the mother ship needs (has to be) as far away from enemy as possible. The british carriers went cheap with no catapult & Stol F35 aircraft, this has put the carriers that much closer to the enemy due to the lower fuel or armaments carried, frankly a stupid situation. For one who served on the Falklands War flag ship carrier the lessons seem to have been forgot.
The QE class were originally designed to be Catobar if I’m not mistaken, but the constantly tight British military budget forced them to scale it back to a ski jump design, which is a real shame. At least they have carriers, but it’s very disappointing to see what they could have had when looking at the ships they got.
@@ichheiseralfichheiseralf5466 There was no reason not to build as 'fitted for but not with'. Steel is cheap; the systems, not so much. The South Korean military industries are leaving everyone else embarrassed; but none more so than Britain. How fallen are the once-mighty!
Most of the uniforms celebrated my birthday through 11.01.1985 how inclusive of all it has subsidies the breath and the days of the uniformed. 🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉🎉
Seeing as how South Korea is starting to break in to the European defense market through Poland, I wonder how open South Korea would be to partnering up with a European country on designing some of their naval ships. Imagine Germany or Italy with the KDDX or KDX III; maybe France might even combine the Pang carrier with the CVX if the stars align. Maybe, perhaps not.
i think Italians approach is similar to the Korean or even the Japanese, carry planes but amphibious assault troops and vehicle too! And Korea needs a strong naval force, their are in a strategic not optimal position, all big cities near the Chinese boarder and not forget the crazy rocket man in north korea!
Nice designs, but all this exposed equipment isn’t going to reduce the radar signature. Like the USA, it seems that Korea is lacking and left 20 + years behind the others in terms of low visibility and stealth. All the while the French, who basically invented stealth surface ships, are well above anybody else.
@san1804If you compare Arleigh Burke and 055, you can see that the layout of the radar and bridge, ciws and funnel are very similar. Although the 055 has its own design (bow's stealth design), it is an undeniable fact that it followed Arleigh Burke's design philosophy as a whole. So it's ridiculous that KDDX, which looks like an Arleigh Burke's hull with an integrated mast, copied 055. In the future, when China deploys the J-35 and Korea comes through with the KF-21 batch2, you seem likely to claim that Korea copied the J-35 from the KF-21. In fact, the Chinese J-35 was just a copy of the US F-35.
@san1804 I also know that when Korea's KDXIII batch 2 was carried out, the Chinese media published an article that Korea's Aegis destroyer copied 055. It's very funny, the KDXIII batch1 ship, which had the same design as the KDXIII batch2, was traveling around the ocean seven years earlier than 055.
@san1804 I'm sorry for you, but integrated masts have been used in many countries, including Europe, even before China started using them. China's 055 is an Arleigh Burke with an integrated mast and stealth design added. Take a look at destroyers from other countries. Except for Aegis ships from Korea and Japan and 055 from China, all of them look completely different from Arleigh Burke. 055's bridge and radar layout are at the level of copying and pasting Arleigh Burke. And I have recognized that Korea's recent destroyers are similar to the Arleigh Burke, and have admitted this differently from you.
@@ililililil8508 Japanese and chinese have an inferiority complex about Koreans! Sometimes they cheat like people from other countries, or they are Korean, and they manipulate and lie about being Korean, so be careful!Meanwhile, their women like Korean men and come to meet them! It's so much fun to see a Chinese who steals all Korean things talk about stealing!
I'm not advocating for the production of aircraft carriers, but the model is certainly attractive. A fleet of small unmanned ships seems more realistic.
Japan is still a more capable naval force. And I am Korean. We are closing the gap fast though. It won't happen soon as unlike Japan which is an achepelago nation which can do without investing a lot on land forces, we do share border with NK so our priority has always been on land forces first so we do not have the luxury of Japan who can invest heavily on navy and airforce.
It's been a long time since China has had a naval force that is much stronger than the navies of South Korea and Japan combined. China clearly has the strongest navy in Asia, and the second strongest navy in Asia would go to Japan.
@@senapoko6833 what the hell are you on? South Korea is a peninsula with a very unfavorable and hard to defend shoreline geography, with a North Korean and Russian threat to the north and a Chinese adversary to the east. All three of which field very sizeable navies mind you. Perhaps an aircraft carrier is not essential for their defense but the ability to project power is always a great deterrent regardless.
@@Insert-Retarded-Reply-Here South Korea is connected by land, and there are many places where the sea is sandwiched between the continent and South Korea, so it is possible to take off fighter planes from South Korea, where the sea is calm, and for maritime defense, if there is an Aegis ship with a quiet sea. It's romantic, and aircraft carriers are cool, but if you take off fighters from the land, you'll have enough range in terms of cruising range.
@@asn4556 If the KDX-III, which was commissioned in 2008, is equipped with a new radar and reduced in size, it becomes the KDDX in this video. I don't think 055 and KDDX look alike, but both are beautiful ships.
