This is what would happen if the USS Zumwalt fought a Russian battlecruiser 

the USS Zumwalt would probably destroy a Russian battlecruiser

The USS Zumwalt could probably destroy the entire Russian Navy and all of the tug boats that keep it moving lmaooo!

Smitty Werbenjaegermanjensen very very well said!😂😂😂

Battleships are shit. A quiet nuclear submarine can sink an entire carrier group, and Russia has some extremely good submarines. If a German diesel electric can sneak past U.S. ASW-Ships and get into position to fire onto an aircraft carrier (which it did during a wargame), a couple of Russian subs are gonna fuck any american boat up.

SpriteZero Xxx good thing the Americans have more subs than Russia.

Agreed

And those that add a ton of unedited footage of a ship to hit 10 minutes. Edit: and get ads for it

Then don't listen to them.

same

Meh doesn't bother me

These ships are undergoing the same kinds of growing pains every new class of ships goes through.

No. Tumblehome designs have been around for a hundred years.....there are reasons you don't use it is warships. There is no way on this design to eliminate the electronic interference between certain systems...you can use one or the other. Other ships in service around the world suffer this problem too. It comes from a cramped design. You can not fix having the VLS system mounted on the sides....where water can get right at them along with any kind of say collision damage. The list can go on but you get the picture. I might point out that the class is CANCELLED. Burke production is being extended as they can at least sail when the weathers bad.

There's got to be something to it to pour that much money in it. The engineers aren't exactly stupid.

Lol true

@@shawn97006 That isn't a factor or they wouldn't have invested so much money

Make sure to have lots of spares n mechanics on board😂

Blue screen of death

As soon as I heard the artificial voice I stopped the video, came to the comments to find this comment and voice my disgust, as well. I DON'T WATCH VIDEOS WITH ARTIFICIAL VOICED NARRATORS. Ever. Never. Not gonna do it.

This one is actually much better than others I've heard, but it isn't great

Randall MacDonald agree

Yep, I agree completely, if they can't be bothered to actually read it, then I can't be bothered to actually watch it.

Is this before, or after Discovery Channel turns the Zumfault into a crab boat?

the fishes will sink the zumwalt

And dont forget, playing with their blue plastic guns too.

Not only do the deploy inflatable boats but they also sail past supporting civilians with a police escort!!

Ikr

"US Defense news" is probably some dot head kid sitting in his mud hut stealing video to put this crap together.

Norm T do you realize an aircraft carrier is the size of a town with a matching population. And as for stores from my knowledge it's simply afres, aka a ship board px

Cant wait for that to happen

Lmfao. Exactly right. Oh man. Thats great.

No joke! With all the electronic shit they have you would think they could spot a 600 ft cargo ship 50-100 miles away? How can you not notice and change course? Nuts! Somebody isnt awake!

@@richardschauf7373 Not a ship, a little container.

Apparently not. Its hull design is supposedly very good in bad weather. I believe the reason that style of hull isn't really used is because if it takes on water it is likely to capsize

They test it in Alaskan seas and it did better that expected, it's just that it's way to expensive

Yeah it probably fashion over functional..

@@sdhtmt It's highly functional with the usual mechanical problems from a new design but with all the lastest outfits or can be outfitted with a verity of weapons. It's just highly expensive sort of like the F-22 they put a cap on that because it exceeded it's budget during design and manafacturing when we have planes already better than anything in the sky and the F-22s are straight overkill. That's what you got with the Zumalt only during it's design and manafacturing it took "doing to much" to new level

Actually opposite.. It's way more stable, that's one of the main aspects of ship building, its a battleship it had to stay afloat.

No, it is not the end. Then the second Russian cruiser has a target lock because they can build ten cruisers for the price of one Zumwalt. This is how the Russians took out German Tiger tanks with T34/85 tanks AND WON THE WAR!

@@georgeeverette3912 yes 10 t34/85 vs tiger

Problem zumwalt has 0 ammo for it and no misslies all it can do is ram and sink plus they only made one and cancelled the rest of them and the one built is now headed to to be scraped for the new warships coming up

SPOILERS!!!

Boys i think you missunderstood 2 things: 1. "Battlecruiser" are not battle cruiser, they're a underclass of a battleship. 2. The zum is huges and slow for a destroyer ,and as history show, slow and big targets are the way to go for battleship. Bonus: The zum dont even have a single missile in the end so....

elcormoran1 that goes for Russias shit too.....

Combat with who? A guy driving a "technical" pick-up truck with a gun in the rear? When was the last time we faced an equally armed navy in combat, 1945?

That's kind of the point, isn't it? Systems like this deter other Navy's from attempting anything. However, that does not mean I support the system. I think its way over priced, the rail-gun system that was one of it's flagship weapon systems proved not to be cost effective, and the ship's seaworthiness is questionable. I think the Navy would have done better by purchasing more cruisers and updating its air fleets.

elcormoran1 /

elcormoran1 .and

Carriers are not meant for facing Russia or China, they are meant for supporting America's endless "nation building" and "regime change" wars which support the Industrial Military Complex and insure its existence. People really need to pay attention to current events.

abc64pan , Actually you seem very uninformed on Naval Warefare, let me help you out, here are the basics. Naval Warefare can be divided into three essential missions. First is Sea Control, this historically has been perfomed by Capitol ships such as Battleships or thier more recent replacements, Aircraft Carriers but also can be performed by a variety of smaller surface combatants such as Cruisers or Destroyers, the idea is to establish sea dominance over a particular area extending both above and below the surface, typically perfomed by a task group acting synergetically . The Second Mission is Sea Denial, this has been primarily performed by Submarines but also sea mines and ground based bombers and even fast attack boats have performed this role. Finally support, this can be perfomed by just about any ship but has been most successful when performed by Carriers. Aircraft Carriers due to their size and flexibility generally can perform the Sea Control and Support much better then any other type of weapon system, which is why all Naviee want them. Now you know something about the subject matter, frankly I don't understand why some people usually Pacifist Liberals feel the need to comment on things they obviously have no knowledge of, I don't know anything about the Russian Ballet so I refain from offering my opinion on it but lack of facts just doesn't seem to stop you people, odd.

It's a early ship of its class, it's not gonna be a good one.

like the arleigh burk, tyconderoga, f-15, abrams, cobra, etc...?

Philip basler, you'll have to be specific, each weapon system you named have entirely different roles and that includes the Arleigh Burke class which is intended primarily for Area Air Defence. The Zumwalt was originally intended as a post Cold War era ground support ship. Due to the protracted time this ship was in development the Navy decided to test numerous new technologies on it and many seem to work great. However usually when a ship undergoes extensive redesighn, costs escalate. This is why I expect to see many new techonogies the Zumwalt makes use of in other future ships. Whether or not this was the best move by the Navy, only time will tell.

Dr Bendover yea they said that in Vietnam we don't need bullet's we have missiles

GPS means nothing unless you know where your looking.

global hawk through X Band Satellite Communication to a ship.

do you take your boyfriend's missile up your tailpipe Doc ?

SpursSpursSpurs Audere est Facere the type 45 destroyer is a British one, isn't it.

I agree, the shape goes against most hydrodynamic principles, just like the stealth fighter went against airodynamic principles, it looks like it would try to dive under huge waves encountered at sea, instead of riding over them... If this didn't try to sink it, it would definitely stop its forward progress cold... This looks to be a fairweather boat...

They only made one the rest are cancelled now and its being towed to a scrap yard to be taken apert for it material for the new ship thats coming out

Chuck Kelly phalanx

Vin496 well sayed👏👌✌️

I might be wrong but I think TASMs are already used extensively by subs for anti-ship warefare.

This ship is for attacking points of interest on land . It's not exactly a battleship . I mean it is but it's not for fighting other ships . It takes out our enemies important land targets .

@@stevenhembree6891 They advertised it as more than that, and paid for more than that

the us is now producing a new high tech cruise missile called the JASSM-XR and has a range of 1,000 miles

that was my thinking... what would happen if a very high wave takes on her starboard?

?

Ask California's resident clown Jerry Brown about billion dollar boondoggles.

Lol what’s a boondoggle

Iowa class battleSHIPS

Sounds like some other Russian ship I know only it needs 2 tugs to keep er going Cough cough Russian cough cough carrier cough

solid snake I was about to bring up the Russian aircraft carrier as well 😂

No Russian warship will ever do that as they need tugs to tow them everywhere.

These aren't frigates, you are thinking of the littoral combat ships which have have matured into decent ships. This is a very large stealth destroyer.

the kirov is designed to taken on ships its heavy armored 827ft in length during the cold War the Iowas class battleships were actually sent out with their own battle groups with 4 arleigh burkes and 2 Ticonderoga missiles hunt them down

Hm, didn't know, though the guy in the video said that it's heavily equiped with surface to air armaments 1:31, but it did have anti ship missles.

+J. Wilson How so? Elaborate beyond these simplistic claims.

A U.S. Air Force official tells Popular Mechanics that, "the Air Force plans to upgrade all aircraft in question to Software Block 3F."

J. Wilson you don’t know how it will fight, so I suggest keeping your mouth shut until we use it.

Can you supply any links? Same with you Spooky where the navy has said this because i've watched lightning II's development and last i heard it's being tested still but from what i hear as of the Red Flag Wargames where it racked up a 20:1 kill ratio only losing 1 plane it's doing quite well. As well as being able to function as a secondary command and control asset based on the fact it's onboard computers where creating real time work simulations of the battle flow and was able work against them. Last i read there was also and article going along the lines of something like. Wargames are too easy for the Lightning II's. So i'm just curious about what information you both are looking. I didnt much like this plane either but so far the results that 1 trillion dollar plus funded seems to be working out. Oh yeah and lets not forget F-15s, F-16s BVR shot limit is 30 miles these shoot BVR 160 mile with their advance computers and avionics. They were so valuable in Red Flag based on their computers compiling data that legacy craft like F-16s, F-15s and F-22s request some of them stay on to do just that and only that after they ran out of munitions. Hardly sounds like junk. But have to wait to see more. I'm still on the fence. Especially now that the DOD is ordering 2,456 of them

Artem Ryapolov your in a fantasy world, hopefully you have nothing to do with procurement

Jim Clarke that's exactly what I thought. The ironclads.

Jim Clarke Yes ! A monitor !

Looks a lot like one of those old flatirons, the ones before the electric models, I mean

@bob bobo monitor was a good fighting ship, It just wasn't sea worthy. Had they not left the ballistic shells on the dock. They could have sunk the maramack. Had they known how to use sloped armor. They would have been immune to Confederate guns. In return if Maramack knew they could up the powder change of they're guns they could have sank the monitor.

Ironclad

?

I'm curious how you know rayo kill is Jewish? Also, he must have never served aboard a warship. If he did he would know that all shipboard controls have backups and local controls, plus damage control and non power requiring voice communications throughout the ship.

There is no radar in the world that can detect a Zumwalt until its to late. The Zumi would have launched it anti-ship attack long before any Russian or Chinese ship knew they had even been detected. The only kind of shots that Russian or Chinese ships will get off against a Zumwalt are "bearing only solution" shots. Basically they'll shoot their anti-ship missiles in the direction they see the Zumwalt's missiles coming from, if they have enough time after detecting the incoming missile strike. If the Zumwalt is firing stealthy missiles, they will not be detected until the final few seconds of flight and they would not have a chance to fire any anti-ship missiles back at the Zumi. If the inbounds are non-stealthy anti-ship missiles, they'll detect them as they come over the horizon approx 12nm and that will give the ship 1 minute to program and fire as many anti-ship missiles back at the Zumi as they can, I would estimate between 6 and 12 missiles would be successfully fired and that isn't close to as many as are needed to overwhelm the Zumwalt's defensive systems, but there is such a thing as a lucky shot too. If a missile were to leak through and actually hit a Zumi, of course it would kill many sailors and cause much damage, but the ship would likely survive. No navy does damage control better than the US navy.

"If a missile were to leak through and actually hit a Zumi, of course it would kill many sailors and cause much damage, but the ship would likely survive" good sir have you ever seen a P-700 Granit? (AKA SS-N-19 "Shipwreck") a single hit from those and it's game over for the zumwalt. the P-700 is so large it looks like a fighter jet with 750kg warhead compared to the harpoon's 200kg. the russian battlecruiser has 20+ of those missiles and it only needs one to decimate the zumi. A 1v1 end up zumi loosing. A strike group and coordinated attack must be employed to counter the russian Kirov-class battlecuiser

sTinger Can't hit what you can't see. The Russians will be hit before they even know there is a missile.

good luck, you'll need it

It's doubtful the Russian battleship would ever detect a Zumwalt, so its doubtful the Russian would ever get a shot off that had any chance of hitting a Zumi. You can't hit what you can't see. This video said one thing that is true in every kind of modern combat; the side that sees the other side first and gets off the first shot usually wins

eddie money the amount of stupidity you just said is off the charts

swigity swooty Any when you think about it, all the countries that have these brand new ship designs brag about them such as the Germans and Japanese hyping up their new ships (bismark and yamato), yet they have a knack for being one of the largest targets in the water and no matter how much they tried to hide these prized ships, the enemy persistently hunted them down. If this ship was ever in combat, it would be one of the first targets and I would guarantee you that it wouldnt be hard to find with Russias technological advances the are coming up with.

eddie money If you listened to the video, the Russian radar, although powerful, is a neon sign to ships especially designed to stealth classifications. Having worked on radar systems anything (Including both ships) can be detected. Having fought in Vietnam it's usually young stupid kids who've never fought who brag about "this can defeat that." How brilliantly stupid anyone is who wants to see the next war.

Unless they have the best air defense systems , like Russia . It's one thing to launch your missiles , but it's another thing to get them there , and Russian air defense systems are far ahead of anything the US has . Same applies to your wonderful stealth aircraft . Their missiles still need to penetrate the Russian air defense systems .. . .

Dave 80 i honestly think the iowa if fitted with modern machinery could sink anything

Nah

I will take the ship since the health care sucks

Jack Fenton Ain’t that the truth!!

Hyperbole

The government can’t balance their spending (like the rest of us have to do) but you’re ok with them being in charge of our health?

Add to the fact that the zumwalt doesn't have any shells and that the anti ship variant tomahawk missiles were decommissioned for being unreliable. Also USS Zumwalt is still detectable it just appears to be a small boat. Also also I'm pretty sure it's design is prone to capsizing if it takes on water, say if it gets hit by a missile. Put those together and you have a glorified yacht with no way to attacking versus an outdated but still effective warship. I'm pretty sure that even the USS Constitution would beat USS Zumwalt in a battle

@Kill of duty Doom punch she's actually quite large, a true cruiser hull compared to the Burkes. What confused me about the Zumwalts is that the Navy was on the cusp of developing a funky functional rail gun and laser defense systems that could have been deployed on the Zumwalts had their construction been delayed for another decade.

@@Bigweave74 I was referring to it's size on radar since I assume an engagement would probably happen beyond the horizon For why the navy rushed the zumwalt is because they desperately wanted to replace the ever increasingly outdated Burke class destroyers. The problem is that they fell into the classic blunder of this is new so it must be better. I can't say that I agree with you on your last point. Right now the railguns are about as useful as the special guns currently on the zumwalts. Quite frankly I'm unsure whether railguns will end up being practical in the future or if it will be like the zumwalt's guns and be a massive waste of time and money. Only time will tell, and rushing it is exactly what lead to the zumwalts.

eh? why? All 4 Kirov classes are still in service and some are going through mid life refits now.. if you googled Pyotr Velikiy you may have found the WW2 Battleship of the same name

@@discountthor9302 that was a joke dude be serious.

at the same time in Noway, NAMMO have just developed a 155mm scramjet artillery shell for ...artillery use, that can be modified for ship use, with a range of 100+km

@Tim Krigers everybody profits off war?

The ship is now cancalled and is going to be scarped for there new ship thats coming out thats more practical

Tim Krigers a 16 inch shell is about 50% less expensive than that think about that for a sec

TheMilosgrozni 2 you know electromagnetic wave reflection right?

@@tysonautry5984 and you know what SIZE DIFFERENCE IS right ? SU-57 UNSTEALTHY !!!....because it has 40 cm IRST in front of the cockpit F-22 0.000000000000001 RCS even from sides ...DESPITE 3 METERS + HIGH STABILIZERS. i know stuff...and among stuff i know to recognize bullshit. zumwalt is an overpriced piece of junk. it has NOTHING NEW when compared to burke. it's armed with crappy tomahawk ( tech from 70s ) and as anti ship it still ( 2019 ) uses harpoon ( with 120 km range and a warhead that is a fart when compared to russian and soviet warheads ). compaire that to russian ( soviet made ships ) like kirov class that are getting 3m22 hipersonic scramjet powered anti ship missile with speed of mach-8+ ,warhed of 1000kg of explosive and range of roughly 1000km. even some of the smallest ships in russian navy ( like admiral gorshkov 5000 ton frigates ) could get this missile in near future and potentially become carrier killers. you murikans keep on buying same old tech from 70s and paying more and more just for the new pacage with no real new tech added...AND YOU'RE FUCKING PROUD OF THAT !

@@themilosgrozni237 > *_"and you know what SIZE DIFFERENCE IS right ? SU-57 UNSTEALTHY !!!....because it has 40 cm IRST in front of the cockpit F-22 0.000000000000001 RCS even from sides ...DESPITE 3 METERS + HIGH STABILIZERS"_* Not even remotely close to the being the case. > *_"zumwalt is an overpriced piece of junk. it has NOTHING NEW when compared to burke. "_* New AESA, more power generation, integrated facilities to operate unmanned helicopters, et cetera. > *_"with 120 km range and a warhead that is a fart when compared to russian and soviet warhead"_* Not really the case with the warhead. Especially compared to its analog, the _Kh-35 (AS-20_ ). 221kg. in the _Harpooin_ vs 145kg. of the latter. > *_"like kirov class that are getting 3m22 hipersonic scramjet powered anti ship missile with speed of mach-8+ ,warhed of 1000kg of explosive and range of roughly 1000km."_* That's the plan for _Nahkimov_ and _Pyotr Veliky._ Though there is still doubt the former will enter service on its current time table, and little said on the downtime of the latter. The size of the warhead is unknown, but given the smaller airframe, it's certainly to be smaller than _P-700,_ which has a 750kg. warhead, and similar or less than _P-800_ which has 300kg. warhead. A lot of its destructive power will likely come in the form of its speed and weight.

@@peterson7082 1) " Not even remotely close to the being the case. " ...i'm still waiting for you to elaborate on this 2)" New AESA, more power generation, integrated facilities to operate unmanned helicopters, et cetera." pretty much a) all stuff that could have been relatively easy added to burke class destroyers b) stuff that doesn't ( or at least shouldn't ) make ship 5 times more expensive. c) stuff that other war ships ( built by other countries ) also have...but they don't cost 4 billion dollars x ship. AESAs on ships are standard piece of equipment...it's 2020 ( almost ) ,you can't claim that electronic radar is a "super hi tech feature " 3) KH-35 is analog to harpoon OLY IN A CERTAIN WAY ( they are both antiship missiles that use conventional tech ) but they are not analog in the role they perform. harpoon is main antiship missile of US ,while KH-35 is russian antiship missile to be used in swarms against smaller war ships . KH-35 IS NOT ( by any stratch of immagination ) russias top of the line antiship weapon and it's not intended for attack against big and heavely armed ships. if russian ships come in combat against big american warship they will likely use 3m54 or brahmos......therefore not a real analog to harpoon. 4) zirkon is designed to be launched from 3s14 launchers ...so ALL PLATFORMS THAT USE 3S14 will be abile to fire zirkon. i can not name a russian ship that doesn't use 3s14 launchers.....even the smallest ships in russian navy like buran class corvettes and improved kilo class diesel electric subs are using them

@@themilosgrozni237 > *_"1) " Not even remotely close to the being the case. " ...i'm still waiting for you to elaborate on this "_* I am. It was a heading. > *_"a) all stuff that could have been relatively easy added to burke class destroyers b) stuff that doesn't ( or at least shouldn't ) make ship 5 times more expensive. c) stuff that other war ships ( built by other countries ) also have...but they don't cost 4 billion dollars x ship."_* The _AN/SPY-3_ is a multi-function radar. The _AN/SPY-6_ is a volume-search and targeting radar. While like many radar's it can fulfill the role of target illumination, it's not its primary role. The latter is intended for the upcoming FlightIIA/ III _Arleigh Burkes._ > *_"AESAs on ships are standard piece of equipment...it's 2020 ( almost ) ,you can't claim that electronic radar is a "super hi tech feature "_* I never said that. You said they offered nothing innovative. From PESA, yes that is very innovative. Only 2 navies have destroyers with AESA multi-function radars before it, and only 3 with AESA as a primary radar in target aquisition/ illumination. So on destroyers, no it is not common. > *_"KH-35 is analog to harpoon OLY IN A CERTAIN WAY ( they are both antiship missiles that use conventional tech ... if russian ships come in combat against big american warship they will likely use 3m54 or brahmos......therefore not a real analog to harpoon."_* Yes it is. In performance and intended roles, they are analogous. Just because _Harpoon_ is the only dedicated AShM on U.S. destroyers and cruisers doesn't change that. Russia doesn't operate BrahMos either. > *_"zirkon is designed to be launched from 3s14 launchers ...so ALL PLATFORMS THAT USE 3S14 will be abile to fire zirkon. i can not name a russian ship that doesn't use 3s14 launchers.....even the smallest ships in russian navy like buran class corvettes and improved kilo class diesel electric subs are using them "_* All of their destroyers, currently all cruisers, and half of their corvettes do not bear the 3S14 vertical launching system. The "Improved Kilo" pattern of the Project 877 Diesel subs do not have 3S14, they have a vertical launching system specifically dedicated to Kalibr however. "Yasen" Project 885M nuclear attack subs are designed for a universal VLS (not 3S14), but it is unclear if Zircon is compatible.

brit boy it's not that stealthy if we know about it

That's like me and you, you have a .500 magnum revolver. I have my .38 Spcl. revolver. But I'm quieter and can get the jump on you. Your big gun is useless if I attack first because chances are, I'll hit my target.

Pretty much whoever is spotted first and engages has the upper hand

Yup. Ther is still a "if this works" question.