新的战列舰和护卫舰并不能解决海军的问题。美国海军肉眼可见的衰退让美国网友们心急如焚，狗头军师们各出主意

@edl653
It is an upxed CG(X) concept from about 20 years ago. I would rather get 2 DDG(X) which would have more VLS (2 x 96) cells, increased survivability, reduced vulnerability at a lower cost for per-2 ships. Those are some of the primary reasons it was rejected 20 years ago. Additionally, the US doesn't have the shipyard capacity to build such a long ship with impacting other ship productions. NASSCO and Hanwha Philly Shipyard do not have the experience building US combat ships and the Philly yard would need lots of investment. On the other hand, the smaller of DDG(x) can be built in several existing yards. Yes, a video about the FF(x) including larger ship production capacity would be good. - The so-called Battleship is Donny Ego project and likely not what NAVSEA or CNO wanted or recommended.

这是大约20年前提出的CG(X)概念的升级版。我更愿意用同样的资源去造两艘DDG(X)，每艘都有更多的VLS发射单元（2×96单元），生存性更强、被击中风险更低，而且两艘加起来的成本还更划算。这些正是它在20年前被否决的主要原因。
另外，美国目前也没有足够的船厂产能来建造这么长的大型舰艇，而不影响其他舰船项目。NASSCO（加利福尼亚圣迭戈造船厂）和韩华费城船厂都缺乏建造美国作战舰艇的经验，费城船厂还需要投入大量资金升级。相比之下，更小一些的DDG(X)可以在多个现有船厂建造。
当然，如果能有一段介绍FF(X)，以及更大型舰艇建造能力的视频也不错。至于所谓的“战列舰”，更像是特朗普的个人面子工程，很可能既不是NAVSEA（美国海军海上系统司令部），也不是海军作战部长真正想要或推荐的方案。

@Sean2002FU
​ @esobed1 ....More TDS on display here!

@esobed1 ……这儿又是满满的 TDS（对特朗普的精神错乱综合症）在表演！

@Sean2002FU
It seems you left out an important issue, the 7in armor belt that these " battleships" call for. It's a fact that a single hit can take most warships out of the fight. One of the driving forces behind this proposal is that the ship can take hits, and still stay in the fight. Does that require a ship of this size? No, and also were looking at a concept right now, who knows what comes after the design phase...I dont think we know enough yet, we will see!

看起来你漏了一个重要问题，就是这些“战列舰”方案里提到的7英寸装甲。事实是，一次命中就可能让大多数军舰失去战斗力。推动这个方案的一个重要原因就是希望这艘船能抗揍，就算被击中还能继续作战。
那这一定非得要这么大一艘船吗？未必。而且现在也只是个概念阶段，谁知道设计之后还会变成什么样……我觉得我们现在掌握的信息还不够，多看看再说吧。

@esobed1
​ @Sean2002FU how does belt armor hold up to a top hit from a hypersonic projectile moving at mach 15? One hit like that would be a mission kill on a Gerald Ford class.
This thing is a waste of resources based on people taking advantage of Trump's psychology and ego.
Best to build multiple smaller( and autonomous) platforms in support of our current and future smaller capital ships.
@Sean2002FU

舷侧装甲面对一枚以15马赫速度俯冲命中的高超音速弹体还能扛得住吗？这种级别的一发命中，基本就能让“福特”级航母直接任务瘫痪。
这玩意儿本质上就是浪费资源，有人只是在利用特朗普的心理和自尊心推动项目。
还不如建造多数量、更小型（而且能自主行动）的平台，去支援我们现有和未来的中型主力舰。

@Sean2002FU
​ @esobed1 ...Your assuming a few things. 1. Chinese weapon systems work as advertised. There are many that believe they don't and China is a paper tiger. Don't believe everything you hear on YouTube. 2. Many US surface combatants are capable of intercepting ballistic missiles, there is no guarantee the missiles will surivive the trip, remember we have the extremely effective THAAD system in theater now, inconjunction with the above stated warships...Your giving China way too much credit, and they have no war fighting experience in the last 40 or 50 years....If you hate Trump just say so, the fact is this is a preliminary concept.
Lastly most surface combatants will be exchanging anti ship missiles designed to take out modern vessels...Aluminum is a problem, and a 7in armored belt will be quite effective aginst those missiles.
Who knows what's going to be the result of this, none of have even really a good clue, so the whole thing is mute.
Your TDS is showing!

@esobed1……你这里假设了几件事。
第一，你默认中国的武器系统真的像宣传的那样好用。很多人其实觉得并不是这样，认为中国只是“Z老虎”。别什么 YouTube 上听到的都信。
第二，很多美军水面舰艇都有拦截弹道导弹的能力，导弹能不能飞到目标都不好说。别忘了，我们现在在战区还有非常有效的 THAAD 系统，再加上前面说的那些军舰……你把中国看得太强了，而且他们过去四五十年基本没有真正的作战经验。
如果你只是讨厌特朗普，那就直说吧。说到底，这也只是个初步构想而已。
最后，大多数水面舰艇真正交手时，互相打的都是反舰导弹，都是奔着摧毁现代军舰去的。铝材确实是个问题，而7英寸的装甲带对付这些导弹会相当有效。
说实话，最后结果会怎样，谁都不知道，我们其实也没什么靠谱的判断，所以这事儿争来争去意义也不大。
你这“反川综合征”（TDS）都藏不住了。

@sdoo-ou2ni
I feel sorry for you man you didn't ask for this I wish it wasn't a video that you would have to make

我替你感到难过，兄弟，这事儿不是你自找的。真希望这不是你非得做的一个视频。

@Dori-Ma
You forgot the 252 cells in the 21 still active Los Angeles-Class Submarines. :P

你忘了那21艘还在服役的洛杉矶级潜艇上的252个发射单元了。 :P

@dontsupportrats4089
I think what we are looking at, is funding to increase the entire capacity of Navy ship building. The Navy knows that the design phase will still be happening when Trump is gone. Sec. of Navy just sold Trump a line of ships named after him. This will turn into the DDG(X) program by then. But they got funding NOW instead of it keep being pushed farther down the line.

我觉得这波主要是在掏钱把海军造船的整体产能拉起来。海军心里很清楚，等这些舰艇还在设计阶段的时候，特朗普早就不在位了。海军部长不过是给特朗普画了个大饼，说要用他的名字命名几艘船。到时候项目自然就会演变成 DDG(X) 计划。关键是，他们现在就把钱拿到了，而不是继续一拖再拖。

@esobed1
​ @dontsupportrats4089 I hope you are right. It is still a shame that this has to be done this way to get the structure we need... Biden, Harris, Bushes, Obama, Clinton's... and most definitely REAGAN would not need this level of insane coddle to get this done! I just wish more on the Right would wake up ( stop being anti-woke) and stop making the OBVIOUS election mistakes like the one we are dealing with now.

@dontsupportrats4089 我希望你是对的。只是很可惜，非得用这种方式才能弄出我们需要的体制……拜登、哈里斯、布什家族、奥巴马、克林顿们……当然还有里根，**绝对**不需要这么疯狂的被人哄着才能把事办成！
我真希望右翼里能有更多人清醒点（别再一味反“觉醒”了），别再犯那种**显而易见**的选举错误，就像我们现在正在面对的这个一样。

@dontsupportrats4089
@esobed1 It's quite odd to name the first ship of the class .. not the class of the ship.
If it truly is a "Trump class" ship it should be named the Donald J. Trump. The first ship isn't named that in the render example. This is a clue that the class of ship name isn't "permanent". (though if a Republican wins in 28 it might be made permanent, depending on Trumps residual power).
@esobed1

把级名不是按首舰来命名，这点挺奇怪的。
如果真叫“特朗普级”，那首舰就该直接叫“唐纳德·J·特朗普”号。但效果图里j

@Sean2002FU
​ @dontsupportrats4089 ...You see the game! funny how many people miss the chess move! Bravo sir!

@dontsupportrats4089……你看懂这盘棋了！有意思的是这么多人都漏看了这一步妙招！干得漂亮，兄弟！

@ranwest2213
What are your thoughts on BMD concept of the San Antonio class as an option for the Arsenal ships discussed?

你怎么看圣安东尼奥级两栖船坞运输舰采用 BMD（弹道导弹防御）概念，作为所讨论的那些“军火库舰”方案的一种选择？

@esobed1
​ @ranwest2213 That seems like a good quick solution. Usage of a hull that is already produced is key. I had to take a quick look when you mentioned it... wasn't familiar. Will look more into it. Thanks much!

@ranwest2213 这看起来是个不错的快速解决方案。关键是能用已经在生产的舰体。你一提我就去简单查了下……之前不太熟。之后会再深入了解一下。非常感谢！

@rmdlgarcia
In a situation where we have air superiority, and we want to take out small targets, we still have to send million dollar rockets to take them out or an aircraft. The battleship has the capability of carrying thousands of rounds which would all be low-cost. Battleships, carrying high capacity of inexpensive rounds, will solve the cost per target problem the Navy currently has. A Trump class battleship parked off the coast of Yemen would’ve been perfect.

在我们已经掌握制空权、只是要打击一些小目标的情况下，现在却还是得发射价值上百万美元的导弹，或者直接出动飞机。这成本实在太高了。
而战列舰不一样，它能装载成千上万发炮弹，而且这些弹药都很便宜。
这种能大量携带低成本弹药的战列舰，正好可以解决海军现在“打一个目标太贵”的问题。
如果有一艘“特朗普级”战列舰停在也门近海，那简直再合适不过了。

@kimmogensen4888
It sounds cool and if warships was free it would definitely be fun to build them, but in my opinion the age of aircraft carriers is far from over and when you can build super carriers and nobody else can, what the navy needs is ships that can defend the super carriers, nothing ever built by any country has even close to the scary firepower of a super carrier, but they need a lot of protection to be able to deliver that punch effectively, defend the super carriers and not even China has a good chance of competing with the US navy, you don’t need to bankrupt yourself to to stay on top, just be careful about over extending yourself it’s one of the ways the USSR collapsed, better to keep a stable defense budget and economy, and China will not be likely to compete with the US navy, I have seen no evidence that they are actually close to the level of Technology that the US and friendly Asian countries has combined, Japan might not have a impressive land force but they have a nice Air Force and their navy is very strong, and South Korea has a very nice mix of capabilities, Taiwan has had some under funded years compared to their security situation but like especially every country close to Russia in Europe they have changed their mind and seems to invest a lot of resources in their military, my take is the US just has to be careful with spending more money then they can afford, keep a stable military budget it’s the most efficient way, and defend those super carriers they are still in my opinion the most powerful weapon system ever created if they can operate mostly efficient they can deliver more firepower then any other ship it’s not even close, they are still the most powerful ship ever created and at least for now no other country can compete with them. China should not be underestimate, but they still is not capable of building a super carrier and I have seen no evidence they can build a 5 generation fighter jet engine

听起来确实很酷，如果军舰是免费的，造着玩肯定很爽。但在我看来，航母时代远远没有结束。只要你能造超级航母、别人造不出来，那海军真正需要的就是能保护这些超级航母的舰艇。世界上还没有任何国家造出过火力能接近超级航母的东西，但航母要想把这种打击力发挥出来，就必须有大量护航。
只要把超级航母保护好，连中国也很难和美军海军竞争。没必要为了保持优势把自己搞破产，关键是别过度扩张——苏联就是这么垮的。保持稳定的国防预算和经济才是正道。中国短期内不太可能在海军上追上美国，我也没看到什么证据表明他们的技术水平接近美军加上盟友（尤其是亚洲盟友）的整体水平。
比如日本，陆军可能不显眼，但空军很强，海军也很厉害；韩国的军力结构也很均衡。台湾（地区）这些年相对安全形势来说投入不足，不过和欧洲那些靠近俄罗斯的国家一样，最近明显开始加大军费了。
我的看法是，美国只要别花超过自己承受能力的钱，维持稳定的军费水平，就是最有效率的做法，同时把超级航母防护好。在我看来，超级航母依然是人类造过的最强武器系统，只要能高效运作，它们能投送的火力远超任何其他舰艇，根本不是一个量级。至少现在，还没有哪个国家能和它们竞争。
当然，中国不能低估，但他们目前还没能力建造真正的超级航母，我也没看到证据表明他们已经能造出成熟的第五代战机发动机。

@raw7279
Containerized payloads on a ship can be changed out very quickly.

船上的集装箱式载荷可以很快更换。

@canadiankewldude
Could the X-Bat's be added to this new ship designed?

能把 X-Bat （注，自主无人机）也加到这款新舰艇的设计上吗？

@esobed1
Stop being so Trump/Maga friendly.
F47, Trump Class, FFX built on a coast guard frigate... all of these decisions are a n indirect effort to weaken our combat effectiveness. Along with kicking out non-white, non-male flag level officers.
Everything being done just makes it easier for Russia to invade along their western border and China to take Taiwan uncontested.
There is no rationale to these force design decision other than the easily pliable ego of Trump, the potential bribery being done by potential contractors, the blind racist ignorance of the Maga base who voted for this insanity AND the Russian influence that encourages the white supremacy geared Conservative movement towards degrading the rules based international order.
Not being transparent about this is resulting in our collective detriment!

别再对特朗普/MAGA这么友好了。
F47、“特朗普级”、基于海岸警卫队护卫舰的FFX……这些决定全都是在变相削弱我们的作战能力。再加上把非白人、非男性的将级军官清理出去。
这一切只会让俄罗斯更容易从西部发动入侵，也让中国更轻松、不受阻碍地拿下台湾（地区）。
这些兵力设计决策根本没有任何合理性可言，只是迎合特朗普那种轻易被操纵的自尊心、潜在承包商可能存在的贿赂行为、投票支持这种疯狂的MAGA基本盘的盲目种族主义无知，以及俄罗斯影响力——它不断把以白人至上为导向的保守派运动推向削弱基于规则的国际秩序。
对这些事情不保持透明，只会让我们所有人一起吃亏。

@ronclark9724
@esobed1 Well, what did Sleepy Joe do to fix the US Navy shipbuilding ills? Oh, Joe slept... Joe did NOtHING... Weather Donald will fix the US Navy shipbuilding ills may or may not work, at least Donald is AWAKE...

@esobed1 嗯，那“瞌睡乔”到底为了解决美国海军造舰的问题做了什么？哦，乔在睡觉……乔什么都没干！至于特朗普能不能解决美国海军造舰的问题，也许有用也许没用，但至少特朗普是醒着的……

@YeaDatDrill
⁠ @esobed1
Even Americans are hating on America! Remember your Stance when your city is burning because you’re helping the enemy tear apart your Country from the inside! Trump is the only one trying to bring back production factories back to USA and build our Military constantly to compete with China! Even building semi conductor warehouses for micro chips so we don’t only rely on Taiwan forever!
@esobed1

连美国人都在骂美国了！等你们的城市烧起来的时候，记住你现在的立场——你们是在帮敌人从内部把国家撕碎！特朗普是唯一一个想把制造业拉回美国、持续建设军队、用来和中国竞争的人！他甚至还在建半导体工厂生产芯片，好让我们不用永远依赖台湾（地区）！

@khan_k
Building a ship around a weapon system that doesn't exist yet? Definitely haven't tried that before...

围绕一种还没存在的武器系统来造舰？这套路以前绝对没试过呢……

@bobkohl6779
Tried it with Zumwalts and LCSs, and Ford carriers. To many problems to be realistic. Navy to to enthralled with untested buck rogers crap

之前在朱姆沃尔特级、濒海战斗舰，还有福特级航母上都试过了，问题太多，根本不现实。海军对那些没经过验证的“巴克·罗杰斯式”花里胡哨的东西太着迷了。

@johnhess351
that is sarcasm right?

你是在讽刺，对吧？

@heftyind
They exist though, lMao. Thr US has invested tens of billions into drone research and development over the past decade and a half. They just havent been widely declassified for obvious reasons.

它们确实存在啊，笑死。过去十五年里，美国在无人机的研发上砸了几十亿美元。只是出于显而易见的原因，这些项目还没广泛解密、公开而已。

@bdiff9340
What are you talking about, all these system have been in research and design for decades

你在说什么呢，这些系统都已经研究和设计了几十年了。

@rgloria40
That right....we need to ramp the VLS launch cells; it just a steel box....

没错……我们确实需要把垂直发射系统（VLS）的发射单元数量提上去，说白了那就是个钢盒子而已。

@HouseholdDog
Actually most missile systems in the 60s were built this way. It's what futurists do.
Having said this, the battleship isn't going to happen.

其实60年代的大多数导弹系统就是这么造的，这就是未来派常干的事。
话虽如此，战列舰这东西是不可能回归的。

@chrisbaker162
Sure they have, the A-10 Thunderbolt. Seemed to work out ok.

当然有啊，A-10“雷霆”攻击机。当年看起来用得还挺不错的。

@calglider13
Oh YES IT HAS. And it did not end well! In short, I like the idea...BUT! Now "IF" the VLS cells could be reloaded at sea. That might help. But I agree. Lasers, rail guns, YOU NEED A Nuclear reactor to power them!

哦，对，**已经这么干过了，而且结局并不好！**
简单说，我是挺喜欢这个想法的……但是！
如果现在那些垂发（VLS）单元能在海上补装弹药，那可能确实会有点帮助。
不过我也同意——激光、轨道炮这些东西，你必须得有核反应堆才能撑得起它们的能耗

@Ranger1PresentsVirtualRealms
@calglider13 Agreed. I'm not entirely sure that the announced power plants may indeed be a red herring.

@calglider13 同意。我也不太确定已经公布的动力系统是不是在故意放烟雾弹。

@ronclark9724
@Ranger1PresentsVirtualRealms Thus a battleship size warship, to squeeze in a aircraft carrier power plant to fire those two HELIOS lasers on this BBG... Those lasers won't power themselves...
@Ranger1PresentsVirtualRealms

所以这是要在一艘战列舰级别的军舰里，硬塞进一套航母级的动力系统，就为了给这艘BBG上的那两门HELIOS激光供能……那些激光可不会自己发电啊。

@tatonoot1950
​ @ronclark9724 it was stated it was meant to be powered by gas turbine and diesel engines, but that may not be feasible

@ronclark9724 有人说过它原本打算用燃气轮机加柴油机来驱动，但现在看来可能并不现实。

@korana6308
@Ranger1PresentsVirtualRealms It's not "may be" a red herring. It is the only explanation. Either that or they are stpd. Though messed up numbers on the official presentation point to that.

@Ranger1PresentsVirtualRealms 这根本不是“可能”是个障眼法，而是唯一的解释。要不然就是他们太蠢了。而且官方展示里那些乱七八糟的数据也挺能说明问题的。

@liddz434
@calglider13 when sarcasm goes straight over your head….

@calglider13 当讽刺直接从你头顶飞过去的时候……

@gusgone4527
@calglider13 He was being sarcastic. I the rest of the anglosphere it's called taking the piss. Look it up.
@calglider13 I believe the CCP plaN are learning that you have recharge issues with EM catapults so yes, nuclear powered if you want to play the energy game.

@calglider13 他是在讽刺。在其他英语国家里，这就叫“调侃/挖苦人”。自己去查查吧。
@calglider13 我认为中G海军plaN正在认识到电磁弹射在能量补充上有问题，所以没错，如果你想玩这种高耗能的体系，那就得用核动力。

@Bob-d1p4i
@calglider13 The Zumwalt class was designed to do all that and it doesn't have a nuclear reactor.

祖姆沃尔特级本来就是按这些目标设计的，而且它还不是核动力的。

@bdiff9340
@Bob-d1p4i There are two Zumwalt, and they are a littoral combat ship, and the Zumwalts armament is nowhere near the Trumps-class.

有两艘朱姆沃尔特级，它们算是近海作战舰艇，而且朱姆沃尔特的武器配置根本没法跟“特朗普级”相比。

@perryallan3524
@calglider13 You don't need a nuclear reactor to power lasers adnd rail guns. You need separate combustion turbine-generators
@calglider13

给激光和轨道炮供电不需要核反应堆，用独立的燃气涡轮发电机就行了。

@joshmader6855
@calglider13 I’d buy the railguns off the Japanese. We only need two they are way further ahead than us. Plus it will share an ammo type with an ally and bring the cost per shot fired down. That way you don’t repeat the zumwalts. If they go bust on theirs add more VLC’s. As for reloading build ships based on a commercial vessel that you can pack as many VLC’s as possible on the deck. Piloted by the ghost ship AI. Then it kinda becomes how much ammo do you need and the automated ships can just pilot themself’s from the front to the rear to be reloaded. Pair them with the ai subs for protection. So the battleship or really any manned surface vessel with the sensor package and the ability to command the ghostships. You can kinda mix and match manned and unmanned vessels depending on what you’re doing. It would be kinda cool if the ai turns the outer unmanned VLC boats/air defense batteries when you turn the command ship. You could even build a low cost ai carrier based on a tanker that has four shield ai xbat launch pads with an elevator system to launch one after another and move the next up like rounds out of a magazine. Make it as simple and low cost as possible so you can use them in the most contest areas and all you would need to command it and the ai VLC boats is the new frigate if they just install the sensors.
@calglider13

我会直接买日本的电磁炮，我们只需要两门，他们的进度比我们快太多了。而且还能和盟友共用一种弹药，单发成本也能降下来，这样就不会再重演朱姆沃尔特级那种翻车。
要是他们自己的项目黄了，那就多装点VLC（垂发）。至于装填和补给，可以用商船船型来造船，甲板上尽可能塞满VLC，由“幽灵船”AI来驾驶。这样问题就变成你需要多少弹药了，这些自动化舰船可以自己从前线跑到后方去补给。
再搭配一些AI潜艇做防护。真正有人值守的战舰，或者任何有人水面舰，只要负责传感器和指挥这些幽灵船就行。根据任务需要，可以把有人舰和无人舰自由组合。
如果指挥舰转向，AI还能同步调整外围那些无人VLC平台或防空电池，那就更酷了。甚至还能用油轮船体搞个低成本AI航母，装四个带护盾的AI XBAT发射平台，用升降系统一个一个放飞，像弹夹一样轮流上。
核心思想就是尽量简单、尽量便宜，这样才能丢到最激烈的海域去用。而指挥它和那些AI VLC船的，只需要新型护卫舰上装好传感器就够了。

@wanleaf
they will probably cut their 2nd weapons to just a rail gun for littoral bombardment and "show of force"

他们可能会把二号武器直接砍成只剩一门轨道炮，用来近海轰击和“展示武力”。

@wedgeantilles8575
@calglider13 You imply that to use all these systems would require a lot of energy. A surge in energy, compared to the normal duty energylevel. Correct? Then how on earth do you think a nuclear reactor would be a good solution for this? Nuclear energy is great to provide STEADY power levels. It is horrible at producing fluctuating energy levels.

你这话的意思是，使用这些系统会需要大量能量，而且是比平时运行功率高很多的那种“瞬时猛增”，对吧？那你到底是怎么觉得核反应堆适合干这个的？核能确实很适合提供*稳定*的电力，但在应对这种大幅度、频繁波动的能量需求方面，表现其实很糟糕。

@ronclark9724
@wedgeantilles8575 Spot on... One thing is for certain though, a Burke destroyer has to black out the rest of the ship to fire the one HELIOS laser... And even after doing that, the HELIOS laser wants more power...

太对了……有一点是肯定的：伯克级驱逐舰为了发射那一门HELIOS激光，得把整艘舰其他地方的用电都断掉。而且就算这样，HELIOS 还是嫌电不够用。

@SeedyTurf9487
More like guided missile cruisers that are branded "battleships"

更像是被贴上“战列舰”标签的导弹巡洋舰。

@tvgerbil1984
This is the admirals' cunning plan to make Trump fund their Ticonderoga replacement. Just don't call them cruisers. Call them Trump class battleships.

这是海军上将们的妙计，想忽悠特朗普给他们拨款搞提康德罗加级的替代舰。就是别叫它们巡洋舰，直接叫“特朗普级战列舰”。

@BrandonMeyer1641
@tvgerbil1984 yeah I see this new “battleship” as a direct replacement for the Ticonderoga. It’s got the vls capacity that is similar. Really it’s a question of hegseth puts his money where his mouth is and drops the rail gun and other unnecessary stuff if things aren’t looking up.
The frigate on the other hand is something I think that is a good move. It won’t fall into the same pitfalls as the constellation as it’s already designed to US standards. It’s just not even remotely as capable. But if they can figure out how to produce it en masse and then figure out how to add vls after the fact it can easily go down as one of the most successful us navy ship programs next to the Burke.
I can’t be mad at them for trying. This is certainly better than whatever the hell the status quo was. Bringing in Hanwha to Philly was also a good move.
@tvgerbil1984

是啊，在我看来这款新的“战列舰”就是直接拿来顶替提康德罗加的，VLS数量也差不多。说到底就看赫格塞斯会不会真金白银支持了，要是形势不乐观，就该把电磁炮这些没必要的花活砍掉。
至于护卫舰，我反而觉得这是一步好棋。它不会像“星座”级那样掉坑里，毕竟设计一开始就是按照美国标准来的，只是性能上确实没那么强。但要是他们能解决大规模生产的问题，再想办法后期加装VLS，那它完全有可能成为和伯克级并列的、美海军最成功的舰艇项目之一。
我也没法怪他们去尝试，这总比之前那一摊“维持现状”的烂局强多了。把韩华拉进费城船厂这步棋，下得也不错。

@winstonchurchill5892
​ @BrandonMeyer1641 for the first part, anything besides a complete re-design is in order, nothing works, its a bad combination. Why have a railgun when your missiles out range everything? Why have so many VLS systems (less than 2 burkes) while also having lasers? Why on gods green earth is a ticondoroga replacement 37,000 tons! That's to big, and the exact same flaw the zumwalts had, shoving a cruiser sized hull onto a destroyers role.
For the seccond FF(x) program it should also have a fundamental re-design. You can't really just add VLS systems onto a ship if there isn't a pre-built missile system like on the early ticondoroga classes. That makes this vessel neer useless in its sole mission, a escort. Say what you want about the failed constellation class, but the base design works, the FF(x) really doesn't, yes we need hulls in the water but we need good hulls, not a worse legends class cutter.

@BrandonMeyer1641 先说第一部分，除了彻底重新设计，别的都没用，整个方案就是个糟糕的拼盘。导弹射程都比一切都远了，还要电磁炮干嘛？VLS单元数量又不多（还不到两艘伯克级），却又塞进激光武器，这是怎么想的？更离谱的是，提康德罗加的“替代舰”居然有3.7万吨！这太大了，和朱姆沃尔特级犯的是一模一样的错误——用巡洋舰级的船体去干驱逐舰的活。
再说FF(x)项目，也一样需要从根本上重来。如果没有像早期提康德罗加那样预先整合好的导弹系统，你不可能事后随便往船上加VLS。这直接让这条船在它唯一的任务——护航——上几乎没什么用。随你怎么吐槽失败的“星座级”，但它的基础设计是说得通的；FF(x)真的不行。是的，我们需要更多船下水，但我们需要的是好船体，不是一艘更差的“传奇级”巡逻舰。

@jab100lochaber
@BrandonMeyer1641 'drops the rail gun and other.....' good approach, but the hull and systems should have the power and other margins in case things do work out, or if its a 'fit for but not with' approach
@BrandonMeyer1641

“把电磁炮之类的先放一边……”这个思路不错，但船体和系统本身还是得预留好电力和其他余量。万一哪天技术真能搞定，或者采取那种“为安装做好准备，但暂时不装”的设计思路，也不至于受限。

@royyoung5996
@BrandonMeyer1641 they're going to have to find a way to put more fire power on that frigate though

@BrandonMeyer1641 不过他们还是得想办法给那艘护卫舰装上更强的火力才行。

@gamingrex2930
@BrandonMeyer1641 there are bolted on 45 degree tilted VLS packages for the Freedom class, I don’t see why they can’t slap more of that on empty deck space.

@BrandonMeyer1641 自由级上已经有那种螺栓固定、45 度倾斜的 VLS 模块了，我不明白为啥不能在空甲板上再多装点这种东西。

@ronclark9724
@tvgerbil1984 The US Navy is getting smarter...

@tvgerbil1984 美国海军变得更聪明了……

@sethwilliams4103
@ronclark9724 they've always done stuff like this

@ronclark9724 他们一直都这么干的。

@starebound
@tvgerbil1984 people really caught up in the semantics.

@tvgerbil1984 大家真的太纠结于措辞和字眼了。

@rodneydecormier1504
@tvgerbil1984 tRUmp class
Hubris at its finest.

@tvgerbil1984 川普那一帮人
把“自大狂”演绎到了极致。

@darktengu77
@rodneydecormier1504 Well it is RU in that they are basically mid-21st century Kirov Class successors.
@rodneydecormier1504

嗯，很“俄式”，基本算是21世纪中期的“基洛夫级”继任者。

@rodneydecormier1504
@darktengu77 they will not be completed. Congress will cancel next yr when Dems win the House.

@darktengu77 它们根本造不完。等民主党明年赢下众议院，国会就会把这些项目砍掉。

@darktengu77
@rodneydecormier1504 It's not just Trump who wants this, it's the Navy who need to replace 28 aging Ticonderoga class cruisers. The program name will be changed on Jan 21, 2029.

@rodneydecormier1504 不只是特朗普这么想，海军也确实需要替换那28艘老化的提康德罗加级巡洋舰。这个项目的名字会在2029年1月21日更改。

@theproceedings4050
It's 3 times as large as a the Ticos...

它的体量是 Tico（提康德罗加级）的三倍大……

@DelAoc
@theproceedings4050 Don't get too hung up with the long wishlist of size and weapons for the Trump class at this stage. The Navy put as many gadgets into the preliminary specs as possible and made the ship as big as possible in order to persuade Trump that these battleships with his name would be the most powerful in the world. All these were just to make him help in getting the crucial congressional funding. In the long process of designing the ships, many items in the wishlist would be quietly adjusted to meet what the Navy really wants, as Ticonderoga replacement.
@theproceedings4050

现阶段别太纠结“特朗普级”战舰那一大串尺寸和武器的愿望清单。海军在初步规格里尽可能把各种高科技全塞进去，把船做得越大越好，就是为了说服特朗普：这种冠着他名字的战舰会是世界上最强的。
这些操作主要是为了让他帮忙搞定国会里至关重要的经费。等到后面漫长的设计过程中，清单里的很多项目都会悄悄被调整，变成真正符合海军需求的方案，归根结底就是拿来替换提康德罗加级的。

@ronclark9724
@theproceedings4050 Twice as large as the Zumwalts...

@theproceedings4050 比朱姆沃尔特级大一倍……

@Spidrm0nky
@theproceedings4050 isn’t this almost identical to the Cruisers they were looking at in the 80’s to replace the Tico’s?
I don’t get the issue as long as these are more of a replacement for the Cruisers than an actual Battleship.

@theproceedings4050 这不跟80年代他们打算用来替代提康德罗加级巡洋舰（Tico）的那些方案几乎一模一样吗？
只要这些定位更像是巡洋舰的接班人，而不是真正意义上的“战列舰”，我就不太明白问题出在哪。

@supercooljoeeman7268
Maybe more of a battlecruiser

或许更像是战列巡洋舰吧。

@darktengu77
@supercooljoeeman7268 Almost exactly a US Kirov class battlecruiser but optimised for land strike rather than facing off against a Carrier Battlegroup

@supercooljoeeman7268 几乎就是一艘美版的基洛夫级战列巡洋舰，只不过是为对陆打击优化的，而不是拿来正面硬刚航母战斗群的。

@WWeronko
You missed the Los Angles Submarines Flight II and Flight III/688i, that are outfitted with 12 dedicated vertical launching system tubes per submarine. 23 Los Angeles-class submarines are currently in active commission or 276 cells.

你漏掉了洛杉矶级潜艇的 Flight II 和 Flight III（也就是 688i 型），这些潜艇每艘都配备了 12 个专用的VLS发射管。目前仍在服役的洛杉矶级潜艇共有 23 艘，总计 276 个发射单元。

@alphonsotate2982
Yes subs are the best you can not shoot at something you can not see on the surface of the water or know where it is

是的，潜艇才是最厉害的，你没法攻击水面上看不见、也不知道具体在哪儿的目标。

@mwallace021
The constant scope creep, funding interruptions, and development pivots are costing billions. They need to layout a strategy and commit to it.

不断加需求、资金老是被打断、研发方向频繁转向，已经烧掉了好几十亿。他们真的需要把战略规划清楚，然后坚定执行下去。

@kylelangdon169
The Navy's plan is to Fuk up as much as possible while spending as much as possible while building zero ships.

海军的计划就是：砸最多的钱，搞最多的烂摊子，最后一艘船都造不出来。

@chadly19
Congress can’t even pass a fucking budget.. the odds of them laying out and agreeing on any coherent military plan is basically zero.

国会连个该死的预算都过不了，指望他们拿出一个清晰一致、还能达成共识的军事计划，基本等于零。

@yeeyeeflannel
Costing the US tax payer billions. Its making Trump's buddies billions so they are going to keep milking it as much as they can.

这要花掉美国纳税人几十亿美元，只是让特朗普的那些哥们儿赚得盆满钵满，所以他们肯定会尽可能一直榨下去。

@BrandonMeyer1641
Hanwha Philly shipyard. That’s the real story.
Alex needs to put his money where his mouth is and not leave such a massive blind spot in his video.
We have a new shipyard. Just like we have new chip fabs.

韩华费城船厂，这才是真正的重点。
Alex得把话说到做到，视频里留下这么大的盲区不合适。
我们已经有了新的船厂，就像我们有了新的芯片工厂一样。

@TheNotoriousENG
@BrandonMeyer1641 Agreed, that shipyard is part of this announcement for sure

@BrandonMeyer1641 同意，那家船厂肯定也是这次公布内容的一部分。

@nomercynodragonforyou9688
Exactly right

说得没错。

@rflameng
When you look at how the careers of Naval flag officers' progress they typically stay in a job for 2 to 3 years and they alternate between fleet and desk jobs. Now, because every one of them wants to make sure he/she has a shot at a Legion of Merit or a Defense Superior Service Medal in this new function, he/she will start by making changes, and a PowerPoint to explain how that change will deliver massive benefits. In other words, he/she upends that what his/her predecessor has done, and basically sacrifices the project 's longterm success for his/her own advancement. Over the lifetime of a typical project, say 3 to 15 years long (yes, I know, in WW2 we managed to develop, build and launch ships in a matter of a year and a half), this happens at least twice but perhaps even 6 or 7 times...

看看海军将领们的职业路线就知道了，他们一般一个岗位干两到三年，然后在一线部队和机关岗位之间轮换。问题是，每个人都希望在新岗位上混个“战功”，比如拿个功绩勋章之类的。所以一上任，第一件事往往就是搞改革，再做个PPT，说明自己的改动能带来多么巨大的收益。
结果就是：他/她基本上会推翻前任做的东西，为了自己的升迁，把项目的长期成功给牺牲掉了。一个典型项目的周期有3到15年（我知道，二战时我们一年半就能设计、建造并下水军舰），在这么长的时间里，这种“推倒重来”的情况至少会发生两次，甚至可能多达六七次。

@HuntingTarg
Let Washington know; I'm sure they'll be happy to keep out of strategic national defense and the PR points associated with announcing new projects.

告诉华盛顿吧；我敢肯定他们巴不得别再掺和什么国家战略防务，也省得为了宣布新项目去刷一波公关存在感。

@josephahner3031
The problem with that is the politicians are just as incapable of sticking to a fucking plan as the Naval officers running the program.

问题在于，政客们跟负责这个项目的海军军官一样，根本没能力老老实实按一个该死的计划走。

@NonsenseAppreciator
@josephahner3031 Congress has consistently given the navy more funding than it's asked for. They might be dumb, corrupt assholes but they do keep giving the Navy funding.

国会一向给海军的钱都比海军自己要的还多。虽然他们可能又蠢又腐败、就是一帮混蛋，但确实一直在掏钱给海军。

@kylelangdon169
@NonsenseAppreciator and the Navy keeps wasting it. for decades.

“@NonsenseAppreciator 而海军几十年来一直在浪费这些资源。”

@BrandonMeyer1641
@NonsenseAppreciator to build crap ships the navy pushes to decommission the second they come out the yard because they crack when under power in rough seas. All the while they can’t get the ships they actually need because they are late as hell, over budget, and being produced too slow.

@NonsenseAppreciator 海军造的都是些垃圾船，刚下水就急着退役，因为在风浪大的海况下一开动就开裂。与此同时，他们真正需要的船却迟迟拿不到，不是严重延期，就是疯狂超预算，还造得特别慢。

@Dasycottus
I would happily bet all my worldly possessions that these never get built.

我愿意拿我全部身家打赌，这些东西根本不可能建出来。