This is Germany's new F126 type frigate. It will displace 10,550 tons and will have 16 (sixteen) VLS-cells.Say something nice about it.
How many illegal immigrants can it carry?
>>59575498>Say something nice about it.It's not the LCS. I can tell because it doesn't seem to be covered in rust.
>>59575504Military ships don't carry migrants retards, it's those NGO fucks.
>>59575498Why dont they just build a proper destroyer if they are doing 10k tonnes anyway?
>>59575498How did it get this bad, krautbros?
>>59575504as many as necessary to ensure the prosperity of judea
10k displacement and 16 VLS? Really?
>>59575498>16 VLS Cells>10,550 TonsHow? That's heavier than a Burke or Tico.
>>59575498What’s the difference between a frigatte, a corvette and a destroyer?
>>59575498>T26 8000t displacement>48 VLS CAMM>24 VLS MK41 Should have got a T26
>>59575529>>59575532It will also carry two RAM launchers.I don't know why they didn't fit more VLS cells, but I suspect it has something to do with the space taken up for "ISO mission modules".Also the germs have this fore and aft redundancy thing so that might be a factor. Lots of backup systems, perhaps.
>>59575547> yet-to-be-built Hunter-class frigates, based on the British Type 26 Global Combat Ship, were chosen by the Turnbull government in 2018 to specialise in anti-submarine warfare at a time when China’s submarine fleet is expanding rapidly. But the Hunter-class frigates are relatively lightly armed with only 32 missile cells, compared with 48 on the navy’s existing AWDs and 96 cells on the US Navy’s Arleigh Burke-class destroyers.Really wish we'd just buy 3 Burkes from the U.S and call it a day
>>59575650>Burkes>ASW specialisedSpeak not what ye wot not of.
>>59575697I like the Hunters they'll be great for their role, but theyre a long way away. We need a Navy with firepower, we didnt build enough Hobarts, and calling them "Destroyer" is a strech when you compare to what the zhangs, nips, gook and yanks consider Destroyers.
>>59575498Sexo
>>59575498looks like something AI designedalso shortly after production it will be retrofitted and the 16 VLS cells will be replaced with 2x 7,62mm machine guns
How many VLS will the F127 have?
>>59575504Why do ruzzians hate migrants in other countries lol?
>>59575787No one knows, early renders showed 128+ though.
>>59575787F126 is supposed to be a replacement for the ASW frigate F123. F127 will replace the F124 which is AAW. It will be closer to the Burkes in capability. There are proposals for a 220m ship with 12,000t and AEGIS.
>>59575650Its a ASW Frigate not a Destroyer what did you expect?
>>59575498looks pretty
>>59575886The US's new ASW frigate (Constellation-class) has 32 VLS cells
>>59575913The Australian T26 has 32 VLS cells whats your point?
>>59575514>LCS>rustDumbass
>>59575886Im just sad we didnt build more Hobarts honestly
>>59575541From smallest to largestCorvFrigDestryThere are some typical missions/roles that they each have traditionally played and people will insist they are "rules" but there are just as many exceptions. Also, the size ranking only applies to recent times, if you go back in history all bets are off, even from nation to nation.
>>59576104Ye it gets fucked up in WW2 a Destroyer was max 3000t a Type 45 is almost 9000t
>>59576104Aren't the Finns calling their new ships corvettes even though they're larger than some 90s frigates?These things are growing faster than cars.
>>59575938I'm agreeing with you that ASW frigates don't need a ton of VLS cellsA reply to you is not automatically an attack or disagreeing with what you posted.
>>59575498This thing weighs as much as the Graf Spee
>>59576243Fuck you and your stupid arguments! I'm right and everyone can see it. SEETHE
>>59576243I asked what your point was. You explained it in this post, i wasnt having a go at you stop being so sensitive.
>>59575941>he doesn't knowsadhttps://www.propublica.org/article/how-navy-spent-billions-littoral-combat-ship
>>59576104I would sayCorvette = single purpose, low enduranceFrigate = single purpose, medium enduranceDestroyer = multi purpose, high enduranceAll those ships are also unarmoured in contrast to WW2 light cruisers.
>>59576283Did you read the article? Because I have and much of the links in it (because almost all the info in it is quite old). And you referencing it like it supports your position makes you look like a dumbass.
>>59576288First off, your single/multi purpose is flat out wrong. But what do you mean by low/med/high endurance specifically?
>>59575528Obsessed
do you think they'd be able to fit more VLS in those custom modules if the need arose?
>>59575541Historically, it's complicated.In modern times, you call the ship whatever you want in order to get politicians that have no clue to greenlight your ship class, to get around existing treaties, or to placate whatever kind of public uproar is going on right now.
>more displacement than a burke>only 16 vls cellsjesus that's anemic, i know the amount of VLS per ship isn't EVERYthing but that's a really small amount for a ship that's supposed to be able to deal with large amounts of air targets.
>>59575516because the german government wont allow it
>>59575498>10.000 tons>16 vlswhy the fuck people let germans design anything that should be 5-6000t for 10.000 tons i want 80-100 vls
>>59575498>It will displace 10,550 tons and will have 16 (sixteen) VLS-cells.>10,550 tons >16 VLS-cellsis there anything with a worse tonnage to VLS cell ratio tho? the new Finn boat that's less than half the displacement has the same amount
>>59575498As a german, I wish it would have cruise missiles equipped with thermonuclear warheads.
>>59576558I'd really like to know what all the tonnage went into.Is there a huge room to have at-sea Oktoberfest?
>>59576558For some reason I have a little bit of a boner for these. They seem like something that has been thoroughly thought out. Small, fast, nimble tough little things manufactured with Finnish autism for anything warfare. Capable of punching way above their own weight class.They seem like that (since they are designed for conditions of Finnish coastline and Baltic sea in particular) they don't need to make such compromises as more generic purpose "can be used anywhere in the world" frigates would probably need to make. And they still call it a corvette, when it might as well be called a frigate. Like they were trying to lure you into a false sense of "oh it's just a small corvette". It is small-ish when compared to a lot of other ships, but... I don't know, i get the feeling we should not underestimate these.
>>59576558Germany's current frigate, the F125, has 7,200t and 0 (ZERO) VLS cells.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baden-W%C3%BCrttemberg-class_frigate
>>59576558Yes, but only if you look at weird shit like the Japanese Hyūga-class helicopter destroyers which have 16 VLS cells and are around 19,000 tons displacement when loaded up with helicopters.Back in the '90s the Japanese also had the Asuka-class which had 8 VLS cells and a full load displacement of just under 6,300 tons. Though this class was specifically built to be a testbed for naval technology before integration on larger ship designs. So i'm not sure it really counts here.
>>59576240The line between corvettes and frigates is extremely blurry nowadays. The main difference is blue-water capability. Frigates are intended to be blue-water-capable from the get-go, whereas corvettes are more restricted to green-water operations.
>>59575498>thick bones
>>59575743How many can you realistically afford?What about ASW capability?If antiship capability is what you want, AUKUS SSNs were absolutely the right choice
The hyper pacifism of the German public is pretty sad. You shouldn't be afraid of having a strong military. It seems like German society is totally traumatized by ww1 and 2, which is understandable I guess.
>>59577191I mean why would anyone want a poorly armed gigantic hunk of shit (+ a skeleton crew no doubt) to patrol just the north sea? its already swarmed with ships and planes with on land runways a 5 minute flight away in any direction
SLCM capability matters too, many nations have the short length VLS-cells for AAW, but not the strike-length VLS-cells for cruise missiles, ABMs, and ASATs.
>>59577237forgot the baltic sea exists but still its comically large and probably won't have enough crew to wrangle it
>>59575541>>59576104>>59576288Traditionally, a "frigate" is a medium warship smaller than a battleship; this includes cruisers which used to be a mission description, not a type classification (Bismarck was sent out cruising, but that doesn't make it a cruiser, now does it?)Similarly in the early 20th century "destroyer", which is really an abbreviation of "torpedo boat destroyer" (a destroyer of torpedo boats), was a mission description that became a type classificationPost-WW2, the Royal Navy decided that it would call anti-air ships "destroyers" and anti-submarine ships "frigates"; the Admiralty was allergic to the word "corvette" as it is typically associated with the French NavyThe anglophone countries followed suit, though not without some initial resistance; the US Navy tried to resurrect the "frigate" 2nd-place ranking described above; when it rebuilt its late-WW2 cruisers as missile cruisers they wre initially named missile "frigates"Unfortunately this fell afoul of the European navies who decided that their largest warships would be named "cruisers", their smaller warships would be named "frigates", and their smallest would be "corvettes"; to further complicate the picture, the French first named their smallest warships "escorters", then "avisos", which is translated in English as "corvette" or "sloop"NATO follows the Royal Navy system; this is why French "frigates" have D pennants (picrel, Forbin D620); however, their D'estienne D'orves class "escorters" / "avisos" / "corvettes" have F pennants for Frigate!! and their D'entrecasteaux class OPV "multi-mission ships" have the A pennant!!>>59576322>what do you mean by low/med/high enduranceCorvettes can have as low as 2 weeks' endurance; frigates and destroyers can have as high as 2 months>>59577157Corvettes can theoretically be ocean-going; it's just that they're typically limited to coastal patrols due to limited endurancefor some smaller vessels, sea state limitations is also a thing
>>59577370>file.pngWhat's the purpose of two big guns?
>>59577446>I'm lazy to rename filesTwo *medium* guns; the French and Italians use the 76mm Oto Melara system as their CIWS
>>59575498> 16 cellsThat can hole up to 64 SAM. More than sufficient for the mission. And it has separate strike missile tubes.> It has "mission modules"Das LCS. Although one of the packages is jail cells for "detention", just in case....
>>59577370>Corvettes can theoretically be ocean-going; it's just that they're typically limited to coastal patrols due to limited endurance Yes, that's what I meant to say. A (very) rough rule of thumb tends to be that, if a ship has an endurance under 4000 nm at cruise speed, it's a corvette, if above, it's a frigate. For instance, the Doha class has an endurance of 3500 nm at cruise speed, and is classified as a corvette, despite displacing 3250 tons.
>>59576558>.50cal MGsThis always annoys me, I'm sure it'd for a good reason but it seems like going up to at least 20mm would give you so many more options as far as munitions. A 50 is good for, what? Shooting dinghies with a bomb on board?
>>59575498I will defend anything German EXCEPT for their surface fleet.It just doesn't make sense.
>>59577555"If you fulton a nig"...
>>59575808>dude let's own the third world by becoming the third world lol
>>59576825Why don't other flat-top boats use VLS cells?
>>59577927The 57mm on the front fulfills the capability you're thinking of. The smaller 12.7mm is much better for very close range targets since the gun has better traversal and more ammunition that doesn't have to be used sparingly
>>59575498Well it looks pretty cool at least
>>59576574Who are you trying to nuke Hans
>>59578247I imagine their length would take up a massive amount of space in the hangar deck not to mention being an area you need to keep clear of potential aircraft landing/takeoff which is obviously at a premium on a ship of that type.Considering Japan didn't put VLS-cells on the newer helicopter destroyers they built I think is telling.
>>59575541Corvette - fleet/littoral security, patrols, limited ASW, very limited enduranceFrigate - bluewater operations, ASW focusedDestroyer - bluewater operations, backbone of the fleet, high level air defense and shore bombardment with missilesCruiser - Destroyer but bigger
>>59578528>Frigate - bluewater operations, ASW focusedNot always, several modern navies are loving AAW frigates.
>>5957837412,7mm is just at the scale that is "easily humanely understood". Big gun go dakka. Point at baddie you see over there. Baddie turns into red mist. Plenty of ammo to make dakka do the dakka. Nothing more sophisticated involved.No bullshit ballistics or anything needs to be considered. It is, I think, the very upper limit that still feels "up close and Personal". Cathartic. It's not looking at a dsiplay and pushing buttons. It just goes Dakka.
>>59575498It probably won’t ever exist
>>59578811If they're on schedule construction has begun, steel cutting and such, the keel laying should be next year, commissioning in 2028/9.
>>59576526In the last 2 years the dumb takes about Germany have risen exponentially.
>>59575504No need, since they're all living rent free in your head.
>>59577370>then "avisos", which is translated in English as "corvette" or "sloop"No>can have as low as>can have as high asSo you have nothing beyond a rule of thumb that has just as many exceptions as applications...which was exactly the point originally raised:>and people will insist they are "rules" but there are just as many exceptions.
>>59575498America should have made these instead of the LCS.
>>59576240Singapore is building 6 corvettes of 5,000-10,000t displacement based on the Iver Huitfeld. They are formally designated as corvettes as they are replacing a previous corvette class of 500t
>>59579694It's just as pointless as LCS
>>59578907and it's just a coincidence that so have energy prices and nuclear plant closures, arbeit im die kalt Macht frei
>>59579839This is the exact brainlet seethe I was talking about lmaoWeird prepackaged taking points without relevance and barely connected to reality.Are you a bot? What does the colour purple sound like, anon?
>>59578528A Frigate is a poor man's Destroyer.
>>59580248A destroyer is a poor man's Battleship
>>59580248Ehh, if you're the US it kinda makes sense to have both frigates and destroyers, especially when burkes are running ~$2.35B a pop right now and the constellation class boats are looking to run $1B to $1.25B each.
>>59576283Evidently you are the one who doesn't know.Now reply to me in a manner not related to the conversation like a retard.
>>59575515How many NGO migrant rafts will it sink?
>>59577180My fantasy is just buying 3 burkes from Anerica. Getting the RAN closer go 16-18 ships is important. Lowest firepower in 30 years just when ever other nation is gaining more doesnt bode well
>>59579824Yes, but it appears to be functioning as designed and I'll even bet it has the weapons system it was designed for.
>>595804790.A war 70 years ago and some alleged atrocities means that all western nations must be forced to take in infinite shitskins.
>>59580578The EU must use the Australian model.Send everyone back, no exceptions.
>>59575498Knowing Germany, the real question to be asked here is how many decades will this program take to complete and how many billions will it go over budget.
>>59575498isn't that the helicopter that every is returning?
>>59580570it isn't built yet and it appears to be functioningit is likewise designed around planned modules hopefully none of those get cancelled. really does seem like the LCS program but bigger. and it cannot fail because they'll actually need it if they want to have a navy in 2040
>>59580758>send everyone backKek your leaders will be "tough" on the illegal migrants, than make all the legal routes of entry even easier. Next thing you know you still have 500k to a million foreigners entering your cunt while you still dont have enough houses, hospitals, schools for those already here. That is the Australian way
>>59580031>wahhh you can't just critize obvious stupidity stop STOP STOPpurple sounds like my balls in your throat faggot
>>59576825Asuka is still in service. But yeah, it's a dedicated experimental ship not combatant.
>>5957755564 ESSM =/= 64 SM6s>>59579491>NoYes>So you have nothing beyond a rule of thumb that has just as many exceptions as applicationsWrongI wrote in detail about who makes which rules and why, to provide more specificity beyond a vague rule of thumb. I pointed out one major exception - the French navy - but listed multiple adherents to the rule, to demonstrate that there are far fewer exceptions than you imagine.>>59579733>They are formally designated as corvettes as they are replacing a previous corvette class of 500tNonsense
>>59575498I hate Germans so much
>>59576240Yes, 4300t displacement and 16x Mk.41 VLS cells so far on the Pohjanmaa-class. The justification for calling them Corvettes is that despite their displacement, they're not really designed to be blue water-capable. Their mass comes from them also being minelayers and ice breakers, and someone on /k/ said that ice breaker hulls are very unstable in the high seas.
>>59575541A destroyer takes on torpedo boats and the other two ships do all the other work.
>>59575514>ships at sea get rusty????????was this supposed to be an own?
>>59575516>>59576526>>59578907warships in general are getting bigger and heavier, its the same reasoning behind why the american ddgx program is projected to be over 13k tonnes and the ffgx program is clocking in at almost 8kwarship classes arent actually real and theres no firm definition so its mostly how it relates to other current ships and the F126 is going to be much closer to the constellation class or whatever than the DDG(X)
>>59575650Burkes require too much manpower. The surface fleet can barely be crewed as is, and retention/recruitment is a struggle.
>>59582365>someone on /k/ said that ice breaker hulls are very unstable in the high seas.The heaviest duty icebreakers have their hulls shaped so that if the ice's too thick to shatter by just crashing into it, they can climb on it to some degree and break it under their weight.This does put some demands on the bow and keel's shape and strength, along with the ship's propulsion system. The kind of smooth, sloping shape that does this the best isn't really ideal for seaworthiness.
All new ships with the angular superstructures are souless.
>>59578416he's a kraut, hopefully his own damned self.
>>59582292No
>>59582292>ESSM isn't a SAM now because I say so.Whatever.
>>59575498It has a variable pitch prop. Some interesting optimization compromises in that prop shape - a lot of things to consider.
>>59583869>all SAMs are created equalretard
>>59575498>It will displace 10,550 tons Sounds like perfectly reasonable size for a frigate.>and will have 16 (sixteen) VLS-cells.Whad da fugg? Even Finland manages to have room for 16 VLS cells on 4,300 ton corvette, it will be built with 8 cell mk41, but there is room for another 8 cells if future upgrades demand such thing.
>>59583178Retention/recruitment will keep struggling if Australian governments refuse to fund the navy and keep peddling "life extensions" on ships that shouldve been replaced years ago. Besides that could stand down 2 ANZACs to help
>>59584451Can you name some more 4k vessels with 16 cells?
>>59575515Irish Navy has done "humanitarian missions" in the med, ferrying Africans to Europe
Nobody itt explained WHY it's so big and only has so few VLS-cells. The simple answer is that it wasn't designed to have as many. The more complex answer is that its intended mission profile doesn't allow more space for more launchers.
>>59584479NTA but Singapore's Formidable-class frigates (arguably corvettes) based on the French Lafayette corvette design>>59584544I took a stab at it upthread, but only speculatively; feel free to share if you have specifics
>>59584553>SingaporeSensing a pattern here. Anything else?
>>59577370>Post-WW2, the Royal Navy decided that it would call anti-air ships "destroyers" and anti-submarine ships "frigates"; the Admiralty was allergic to the word "corvette" as it is typically associated with the French NavyIt is WWII era classification for a discount destroyed that might have 4 boilers instead of 6 and bit less weapons mounts, regardless what kind of weapon: dual purpose gun, torpedo tubes, AA-guns. Frigates tended to be somewhat mission oriented, most were anti-submarine and some were anti-aircraft. Americans called the same thing destroyer escort. Destroyer was always multi-role ship. >The anglophone countries followed suit, though not without some initial resistance; the US Navy tried to resurrect the "frigate" 2nd-place ranking described above; when it rebuilt its late-WW2 cruisers as missile cruisers they wre initially named missile "frigates"WWII cruisers remained cruisers until those were retired, US Navy built proper cruisers until 1961. Original post WWII frigates were destroyer leaders, bit larger than usual destroyers with improved command facilities. HQ ships for destroyer squadrons and escort part of carrier groups. When US Navy decided to comply with rest of the NATO with what frigate is, their frigates became either light cruisers or destroyers, mostly depending on tonnage. Former destroyer escorts were re-classified as frigates. Ticonderoga-class cruiser was developed as air defense destroyer, but politics impacted it. Most WWII-era cruisers were retired in 60's and early 70's. Some heavily upgraded ones lasted until late 70's, remained in naval reserve until mid to late 80's. Soviets kept cranking out WWII-style gun armed cruisers well into 50's. Those were still in service in 70's and that created cruiser gap. So Ticonderoga-class was re-classified as cruisers. US Navy had proposals for building more proper cruisers that weren't stretched destroyers well into late 80's, but nothing survived the budget considerations.
>>59584591Russian frigates and corvettesThere are others with more VLS cells, but they are generally the smaller type; to be fair to the F126, I'd only count <4000 ton frigates mounting VLS cells similar to the Mk41 in sizeThere are many <4kton ships that CAN mount that many cells but choose not to>Sensing a patternYes; generally defensive, green-water ships that don't expect to go far out to sea for long
>>59584667>Yes; generally defensive, green-water ships that don't expect to go far out to sea for longAlso the largest ships of that Navy
>>59584672Typically, navies which see the need to fit <4kton frigates with that heavy armament don't have much larger surface combatants.Also, note my point about many navies simply choosing not to have that kind of loadout. RAN Anzacs, for example, have provision for 16 Mk41 cells but only fit 8 at this point, and they are not the largest surface combatants of that navy.
>>59584704>we agree but I feel the need to argue with you anywaysIts just so tiresome
why do modern ships look so weird?is it stealth tech or what's the reason for the blocky but relatively straight form?
>>59584544The project started as K131 which was a supplement to the current corvette class K130, but optimized for low-intensity conflicts and maritime security in foreign waters. Then it grew into the MKS 180 (multi purpose combatant) when it was clear that a corvette hull was too small. The design was "multi purpose" in the same way the F125 is. Mission modules should provide the ship's capabilities. Then it was decided that the ship would need two types of modules: "Custody" for imprisonment of pirates etc. and an ASW module to replace the aging F123 frigates. The F123 already has only 16 VLS cells and this ship is an F123 plus additional space for longterm peacekeeping missions. It's supposed to be able to operate continously for 2 years far away from home with exchangeable crews that stay on board for 4 months each.
>>59582365>someone on /k/ said that ice breaker hulls are very unstable in the high seas.No. Previous Hämeenmaa-class minelayer that Pohjanmaa-class corvette will replace, along with Rauma-class missile boats, were built with very shallow waters operations in mind, with flat bottom instead of roughly v-shaped hull bottom. Previous Pohjanmaa, a minelayer, built late 70's, was very much ocean going vessel as its other role was being school ship for naval academy. Hämeenmaa-class is very much capable of crossing oceans and aren't unsafe for that, but if you run into a storm, it's not going to be pleasant ride and there might be vomit all over the place.There is nothing that makes icebreakers inherently not that ocean worthy.
>>59584553It's multiple reasons really. The first being that it started as a corvette in the beginning. That's why some still call it K131. When it was clear that the mission profile exceeded the capabilities of a corvette they turned it into a "multi-role combat ship" and because the navy gotta navy they finally called it a frigate.Traditionally the german navy had more ASW-focused frigates and some really old destroyers. When the destroyers got retired, they replaced them with a more AA focused frigate, the Sachsen-Klasse. Those ships have 32 VLS cells and are regulary part of US carrier strike groups as AA assets. But on the other hand the main mission for the ASW ships in the last 30-40 years was enforcing UN and EU embargos or anti-piracy mandates often a long way from home and in very different climate zones. Remember these ships were build with the north and baltic sea in mind and are supposed to operate right out of their home ports.The use of them for long missions in the subtropics increased the wear and was very difficult for the crews. That's why tge decision was made to build ships that are better designed to operate for a longer time in all climate zones. They not only have to be able to support 80 navy infantry along with the normal crew of 114 but they also need space for detainees. But there is also the "multi role" to consider. They have dedicated space and infrastructure to carry "mission modules" and the staff that is operating them. The ships also still beed the ASW capabilities of their predecessors so that needs even more space. They initially wanted to build 8 of them, then there where plans for 6 and now they ordered 4. This means that there is an even bigger need for longer maintenance intervals because there aren't enough spare ships. So redundancy of many systems is very important.TL/DR: It has so few VLS cells because as a multi role combat ship the mission profile has other priorities.
>>59584763I know all of this, see my reply above
>>59584503>Irish navyAs expected from the angloid version of the jew
>>59584626>It is WWII era classificationThe origins of this classification has its roots in a 1950 Admiralty order according to D.K. Brown.>Frigates tended to be somewhat mission oriented, most were anti-submarine and some were anti-aircraft>Destroyer was always multi-role shipIn 1950, yes; but by the time CVA-01 was cancelled the Admiralty dropped this definition>WWII cruisers remained cruisers until those were retired>Original post WWII frigates were destroyer leadersMy mistake; I forgot the Leahys and Belknaps were new-build not conversions>Ticonderoga-class cruiser>cruiser gapI don't subscribe to that interpretation.To me, the Ticos were in the same boat as the Leahys and Belknaps; nominally cruiser-sized destroyer-leaders that logically were redesignated cruisers. Ticos replaced Virginias in the same role; if the latter were regarded as cruisers there's no reason why Ticos shouldn't be.Spruances were derided in the early days for their cruiser-size dimensions, remember.
>>59584733Were we having an argument?
>>59584339> W-why doesn't it have lasers and railguns too!We'd explain the concept of "design to the mission", but really why bother?
>>59584845>it has SIXTY FOUR (64) SAMs okay>don't look into whether those are 64 Stingers, 64 ESSMs or 64 SM-3s>something something MISSION OKAYEven applying your overly-broad definition of "SAM", you're still wrong, as it would carry 106 "SAMs" then.
>>59580758>t Zheng Hue
>>59580758NATO exists to keep Russia OUT, America IN, and Germany DOWN.Migrants are just one strategic component of NATOs hegemony..The migrants are there to dissolve national identity so another Hitler doesn't get democratically elected.But in the unlikely event that one day, for absolutely no reason at all, a Hitler is elected, the migrants will be provoked into firey, but mostly peaceful, protests. If the euro government cracks down on the migrants, America will step in for humanitarian reasons and depose them. This is called a Color Revolution.
>>59584836>To me, the Ticos were in the same boat as the Leahys and Belknaps; nominally cruiser-sized destroyer-leaders that logically were redesignated cruisers. Ticos replaced Virginias in the same role; if the latter were regarded as cruisers there's no reason why Ticos shouldn't be.Tico was developed along with Strike Cruiser, something that was kinda resurrected in 80's when Burkes were on drawing board. US Navy applied the fighter high-low mix concept in its ship designs. Tico was the low, strike cruiser was the high. Then high got axed. Following that politicians, that at the time were to major degree WWII veterans thinking purely in terms that war and gun armed ships, realized that "oh, noes we have less cruisers". Re-classifying Ticonderoga as cruiser was pragmatic solution to that problem.>Spruances were derided in the early days for their cruiser-size dimensions, remember.All ship classes are going up in tonnage because replacement always has to be more capable ship. Except when replacements requirements are based on memes and buzzwords like in Littoral Combat Ship as replacement for frigates. When it comes to Ticonderoga and Spruance, Tico is stretched Spruance.
>>59585241>politicians, that at the time were to major degree WWII veterans thinking purely in terms that war and gun armed ships, realized that "oh, noes we have less cruisers"Sorry, I've never found any reputable source saying that this was the actual case. As you said earlier, the cruiser reclassification was to comply with NATO standardised terminology.>Tico was the low, strike cruiser was the highMainly this was a debate over size and propulsion. Nonetheless, doesn't mean the Tico class was not cruiser-worthy, so to speak.>Tico is stretched SpruanceThey're the same length.
>>59575498>16 (sixteen) VLS-cellsseems kinda light.
>>59585043Another reason why America must be destroyed utterly T.lives in NA, supports Ukraine and is White
>>59575541And for that matter, what about a sloop of war?
>>59584503of course they have. what do you expect from that group of sub-human trash.
>>59585347Well it has 8x NSM for anti-ship capability that don't use VLS cells, it also has 2x RAM launchers for missile CIWS with probably ~20-40 more missiles and can be reloaded (in a few hours). Also ESSMs can be quad packed in VLS cells so those 16 cells can hold 64 ESSMs, which aren't super long range, but are 5-6x longer range than the CIWS missiles. It doesn't have radar for long range BMD or AAW duties anyway so more VLS cells for larger missiles isn't really needed for this ship.
It's basically a 6k ton frigate with another 4k tons of supplies and modularity and overengineering bolted on top. The idea is that you basically just park it on station for 2 years without ever coming back to port, and just swap the crews a bit. It's half way in between a fat frigate and a skinny ESB.
>>59575504Fpbp
>>59586523So it's a glorified Constellation class then, and even at that, the Constellation class carries 16 NSM with with a 32 cell VLS at 7,200 tons. So double the firepower and less displacement than whatever the hell this German boat is supposed to do.
>>59589290Yes but has 2-3x the hangar space and is designed for continuous operating for 2 years straight, whereas I don't think the Constellation-class are designed to do that
>>59575498>16 VLSMakes me feel better about the sorry state of the RN.
>>59576422That thing you think you are? You will never be one
>>59591023Kek
>>59591023>the sorry state of the RN.The RN is in rude health mate, wtf are you talking about? You can't look around it without seeing great steps forward.
>>59593050Yeah, it's the British Army that's languishingThe RN could still clean the clock of any other navy short of the USN and China.
>>59584503>Irish>NavyLmao
>>59593210>Black paint on rear for missile misidentificationNeat
>>59593532>dazzle camo makes a comebackI wishI think it's more to disguise smokestack stains?I don't know
>>59593532>>59593563Those are RAM coatings to prevent self reflected radar energy.
>>59575498Ok, see there anon? I didn't even know Germany had a navy. Is Germany still allowed to make ICBM's or is that verboten since WWII?
>>59595643Doesn't matter. German politicians and citizens gleefully neuter themselves, because weapons = killing = evil.
>>59595666Ironic considering especially the 60s boomers think the same about giving life
