@@Muarijun en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canberra-class_landing_helicopter_dock _Unlike the Spanish vessel, the Australian ships are built to meet Lloyd's Naval Rules_ Try again
@@Muarijun navalinstitute.com.au/hmas-canberra-dwarfs-structures-on-suva-wharf/ _Canberra has the same physical dimensions as Juan Carlos I, but differs in the design of the island superstructure and the internal layout, in order to meet Australian conditions and requirements. Unlike the Spanish vessel, the Australian ships are built to meet Lloyd’s Naval Rules._
@@georgepantazis141 Yes, but of for yes is spanish, because it made the same company of spain, (Navantia) But Navantia opened the other company in Australy
Si. Son buques de la clase Juan Carlos I. El casco fue construido en España y la superestructura en Australia por una union de empresas españolas y australianas para adaptarla a las necesidades concretas de Australia. Hay otro navio gemelo construido para Turquia.
It is the same boat with different onboard systems adapted to the needs of the Australian Navy. In Spain we are delighted with the trust that the Australian Navy has placed in Navantia, and we hope that the collaboration with the Australian government and companies will last for many years.
@@Muarijun navalinstitute.com.au/hmas-canberra-dwarfs-structures-on-suva-wharf/ Canberra has the same physical dimensions as Juan Carlos I, but differs in the design of the island superstructure and the internal layout, in order to meet Australian conditions and requirements. Unlike the Spanish vessel, the Australian ships are built to meet Lloyd’s Naval Rules.
Nope. Spanish ship is designed as a light aircraft carrier with docking capability. Australian ships are built to be dedicated amphibious assault ships. They might look the same from outside. But their internal layout and the way they operate are completely different.
@@dbyers3897 Medical facilities is not exactly what I'm talking about. The French ship as I watched the video on it, has the potential to have a larger than usual medical facility, almost like a Hospital ship.
There is not enough info on the Type 075 to rank it, As we know, China doesn't really give any specifics on what it can carry or what systems it has and what performance those systems have are all unknown Info, therefore it's much harder to rank the Type075
Because Canberra is a dedicated amphibious assault ship. Unlike Juan Carlos 1 which is built to be a light aircraft carrier with docking capability. Juan Carlos can't handle amphibious operations to the same level as Canberra.
yes and no. the Spanish has been modded for STOVL and ammunition storage, the Australian government refuses to provide the LHD any missile defence and also mod out for a very small cost [Aus $500 million] the changes the Spanish JC has made. Again pissing off China is the reason. Appeasement, PM Scott Morrison is a sop.
@@williambroadstreet3353 Like you said, yes and no. Missiles are carried by the escorts, putting them on Canberras just adds more weight and cost. The Canberras are also not supposed to carry aircraft. They are amphibious ships. If we have them carry fixed-wing aircraft, then they can't carry as many vehicles.
French Mistral class from what i read and watched (From US source) should be up there i think. France has one of the largest sea area to protect among all countries (Mediterranean, Atlantic, Pacific, Indian ocean to name the large oceans).
Enteros no, muchos sistemas no son de Navantia son diseño australiano, es el mismo buque pero con muchos sistemas a requerimiento de la armada australiana Basicamente son una version australiana del JC1º, aqui se fabrico el casco y buen parte del interior, pero la la superestructura y el resto de sistemas se montaron alli
Well, that ship haven't commissioned yet. If you really want to bloat the list with out of service ships, then the 3rd place should go to the Tarawa-class. Last of the class decommissioned in 215, but two of the class is still in reserve. I have a hunch that those two ship could enter active service sooner then the Trieste (which is not a class at all, just a single ship). BTW, the converted Essex-es (Boxer-class) could be outrank every non-american ships in the list too. Even the much smaller (less then half displacement compared to the current american landing carriers) Iwo Jima-class were able to complement more marines then any non-american ship in the list (and the escort carrier conversion Thetis Bay had a marine complement of 1300, that is more then double of the Trieste's normal complement). So if you want the Trieste in the list, then the places 1-5 (or even to 6th) belongs to current and past american ships.
@@pietrodicanio9404 Which american ships don't have them? All of the currently commissioned landing carriers have F-35Bs, and the two in reserve can handle them too. The Italians only got 2 so far, and those were never touched the surface of the Trieste. So the Trieste is the one which don't have them. Merlin? For what end the US Navy should use them. There is the SH/MH-60 family. What is the AW 126? Even AgustaWestland doesn't know about its existence. If you mean AW-129, then so what? USMC have the AH-1Z. And what about troop transport in the Trieste? Does she have CH-53 or MV-22? Trieste will be a good and capable ship. When she enters active service. For the time being she in not an operational ship, which means she has absolutely no real capabilities.
...It's normal...Why tell worldwide that there are ultimate italian engineered ships?Naaah better to hide everything, 'cause latinos cannot produce something competitive ...
@@Justineexy They don't look the same if you can read numbers. JS Hyūga is hull number 81 which is clearly visible here while ROKS Dokdo is hull number 6111 which can be seen on both sides of the superstructure. Also, Dokdo mounts a large air search radar between the two funnels which is absent on Hyūga.
As former Gator Navy (LPD-8 and LPD-10), not only did my ships NEVER carry MBTs but no ship in my battle group carried MBTs. Having either LCUs or LCACs in the Well deck would mean almost no room for anything else and the LCAC can only carry one MBT at a time. LHAs can carry two LCACs but that only means that only two MBTs could be deployed and they would have to make a return trip to get anymore. MBTs were either flown in or carried by special carriers and offloaded pier side.
@@dundonrl Didn't say it wasn't possible. I was stating, from a tactile and logistical standpoint, you would need every, Amphib in the Navy to get barely two tank platoons to any particular location. Those same ships could offload scores of AAVs and LAVs with the same equipment giving the marines they are carrying mobility and semi protection.
@@bomomorses I don't know much about the type 075 capability, but it weighs 40000 tonnes, literally the size of the French Charles de Gaulle nuclear aircraft carrier or India's Vikramaditya carrier. I feel that alone warrants a spot on the list
@@solomonokoli212 Again I’m still leaning more towards what I said and you have a good point, although the Type 075 does weigh 40000 tons, it really is just a mirrored and less capable image of the Wasp. The size and most of its capabilities should earn it a spot on the list, you are right
@@bomomorses Damn, now that you mentioned the Wasp, I actually see the resemblance, lol. Type 075 does look like a shiny imitation. Yeah, you're right, it's definitely not as good as the Wasp class.
TCG Anadolu is turkish made amphibious assault ship 232 meter long carriying hospital helicopters vtol fighter jet and carries mbt up to 50 and with many armored vehicles and carries armored amphibious assault vehicle ZAHA only two countries have this tech turkey and usa and also carries many USV unmanned sea vehicles. TCG Anadolu with these specs deserves 3rd place on that list And it has got a ramp to be able to fly aircrafts
@@ignacioburkhardt789 Yes. They're classed as helicopter assault ships, but they also have the capability to carry and support fixed wing aircraft such as the Harrier and F35.
Not even close. They can carry VSTOL aircraft, but they are nowhere close to aircraft carriers. Flight deck is too short, no catapult and do not have the elevators or the storage to do sustained combat operations if they were specially modified to carry ONLY VSTOL aircraft.
Atlantico is a Ex-Royal Navy ship so how did it come up higher on the list than are current amphibious ship Except from it is basically a helicopter carrier
So... the Netherlands no longer exists? Rotterdam class and Karel Doorman class. The first one is a specific built LPD. It carries 130 crew and can carry up to 604 extra crew, like marines, airmen and other types of armed forces. It's 166 meters long and has a water displacement of 12,750 metric tons. It's top speed is 21 kts. It's armed with 10 M2HB .50 caliber machine guns and 2 Goalkeeper CIWS systems. It can carry up to 6 NH-90's, Chinooks or Cougars and has can carry up to 5 landing craft. It has a dock at the back which it can load troops and material through, it can even carry tanks and vehicles like that. The ship itself also has some stealth technologies. It furthermore also carries it's own command center, making it capable of leading missions on its own. Looking at all this, it outperforms most of the ships on the list.
Wow a good channel. Speak about the Mistral. This channel at the first picture: show the Tonnerre. Genius. What a good work. Please, make researchs before making those videos. I finish this video, please stop watch this channel. They speak about the Mistral but not about the Tonnerre when the Tonnerre is better than the Mistral. So they litterraly forgot one of the best amphibious boat in the world. Wow good. How many others did they forgot ? I'm curious.
The American class has 2 models, the first made without well deck, one more will be made this way, the rest of this class will have well decks. The Navy/Marines want a small fast light carrier, with this more F35b can fly off with larger fuel more space for work crews. Pretty good idea.
Seems like everyone can wake up here and write down his personal top ten.... Than show to everyone on RU-vid..... Please continue with more sci fi.....
The Camberra Class and Juan Carlos Class are the same ship only different for these ships are the electronic systems build from Australian army and little different in the defense systems. The rest building are the same because in the Spanish navy proyecting buying in first time the F-35B from this ship. The reallity is the operated flying ground are Harrier 2 SeaHawks and Sea King from navy. From Spanish army Chinook, Nh90 and Tiger HAP.
Even people in the royal navy say that's a terrible idea. Amphibious operations are done close to hostile shores. A carrier should never be in that place. It should be far out at sea.
America and Wasp class are externally the same dimensions. Also the Wasp class (and I'm sure the America class) is capable of almost 8 knots faster than what you're saying!
There is no such thing as an AAS. It's called a LPD, LHD, LHA. ( Landing platform dock ) San Antonia, Type 071, Albion ( Landing Helicopter Dock ) Wasp, Trieste, Mistral, Type 075, Ex-Ocean ( Landing Helicopter Assault ) America
The America class is no way near the size of the Midway class even in its WW-2 straight deck configuration of 900' in length!! Which would of been a more useful length for the America class!!
Saw my USS Essex (LHD2). Very first thing I noticed was the rust. All the other ships were fairly clean and my tub was like "Paint? nah it's just gonna rust again." I have some BM2 friends who would shit a brick if they saw that. In fact. Time to share this. LOL
@@enricomandragona163 when did this happen? our crew painted the side every time we were in home port. there was even a floating barge with scaffolding just for it.
No, a helicopter carrier is a carrier that operates helicopters. Amphibious assault ships operate helicopters, but also have a well deck to launch amphibious assault boats and equipment. U.S.S. America is a helicopter carrier, but the rest of the America class will be Amphibious assault ships. America was designed without a well deck as an experiment to test the old Sea control ship concept that dated from the 1970s. It was done as with the F-35B, they finally had a supersonic V/Stol aircraft such a ship would require.
The aussie ship is the same as the spanish ship, for us aussies its a waste of time. Its has no defence and is a slab sided target for anti ship missles.....when its not picking up refugees and dropping food and water to pacific islands
You need to look up what amphibious assault is. If it was carrying fast jets, it won't be an amphibious assault ship. If it had more weapons, it would take more crew, more sensors, more power to operate those weapons. So they need bigger engines. So where is the amphibious element going to be?
After american ship have forget 2 important class, 2 giapanese and Italian Trieste Is + big of Francoise ship, dodko, spanish, Australian, english, Chinese, brazilian and sant Antonio class are much little. PS, giapanese and Italiani are F35 carriera.
