Which country has the sexiest warships and why is it Sweden?
I've seen the rest of the world's warships.
They're hideous garbage.
I guess the rest of the world doesn't take it's inspiration from the male penis.
always reminds me of these
>>61989491
yuck
>>61989491
We have some small sexy ships in the pipeline
>>61989578
>male penis
As opposed to the other kinds of penis.
>>61989491
The stealth destroyer concept and resultant aesthetic started with the Ticonderoga-class missile destroyers.
Or at least that's what I know.
>>61989631
Zumwalt class looks even more like a pyramid
>>61989762
The Visby Class corvettes are largely built on the experiences from the Smyge stealth research platform (in turn pretty much a speedboat).
>>61989578
>the rest of the world doesn't take it's inspiration from the male penis
>>61989491
What is the most autistic way to ask a question and why is it like this?
>tfw landlocked
>tfw no navy
JUST
>>61990203
But will that thing ever be built?
>>61989491
100 megaton torpedo is reality
>>61989491
Soon.
>>61990372
OP said has
also, that's ugly as fuck lmao
>>61990372
I like your helicopter destroyers
>>61990342
Yes but only 3 sides of it will be of a warship, 4th will be a museum of african art and tolerance.
>>61990594
Kek. I appreciate the joke but Hans posted a Russian Navy destroyer concept. My post was a reference to how Russians unveil these ambitious concepts every few years but nothing ever happens - see also the eternal new Russian aircraft carriers.
There's no appetite in Germany to build ships like that btw. Their biggest destroyers are weaker than most frigates
how about these
>>61989578
>his penis looks like a stealth naval vessel
let's all laugh at the freak
Sexiest drone coming through.
>>61990832
I believe the technical term is "based"
>>61990720
my mistake
>>61990832
We built a prototype, but the changing politics (focus on protecting mercantile ships rather than raw naval power) meant she was wrecked in the end.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Finnish_hovercraft_Tuuli
>>61989491
The classic
Probably the best part about my trip to NYC desu
>>61990978
>23 KB, 275x184
Ants.
Pure Class.
>Britain have only <300 tanks
>>61991075
even we have like 200 MBTs lmao
>>61991046
Always nice when they preserve old warships. Best one here.
>>61989491
lol
>>61991075
britain was blessed by G-D to be a huge ass island west of europe though
>>61989491
To bad they fucked up with the ship then
>>61991145
Based. It pisses me off how the UK sold its navy for scrap at bargain bin price.
>>61991075
Why do we need lots of tanks? Remind me of the size of the British Army during the 19th century.
If you want to make fun of us, you should be pointing out our lack of warships. A big army is a waste of money, a big navy and air force is money well-spent.
>>61991135
Starter for 10: which country shares a large land border with Russia?
Britain or Finland?
>>61990720
>Their biggest destroyers are weaker than most frigates
No, they are about equal or greater than most frigates in yuro navies. Reminder the French don't use the term 'destroyer', so their fightier classes are defined as frigates, same as the Dutch.
>>61991075
God forbid, an island nation, not having legions of tanks.
>>61991145
Fuck that is sexy
>>61991275
Britain has over 300 battle tanks anyway, with hundreds of other armoured vehicles too.
>>61991306
>No, they are about equal or greater than most frigates in yuro navies.
You sure? This is Germany's largest warship, called a frigate but a destroyer-equivalent in the British sense.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F125-class_frigate
Look at the armament.
France, Italy and others have much smaller ships which are much more powerful than that.
>>61991145
fat and sexy arse.
>>61989491
Modern warships are shit XVI to XIX warships were the true master-race.
Our warships are the coolest
>>61991531
Spain knows. Let's sing some sea shanties.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOfC1PEKt1U
>>61991417
It really isn't our DD equivalent, our DDs exist for a particular role (AAW) at almost the exclusion of everything else.
F125 class has a role in sustained operations for humanitarian support, a lot of that tonnage is for self-sustainment stuff. How do I put this... it has a warship hull, but its main role isn't combat. The closest thing the Germans have to other yuro DDs is Sachsen-class, which is a 'combat first' ship.
>>61991599
>this bad boy alone annihilated british fleets twice
>>61991698
You're right, the destroyer-equivalent is the Sachsen Class. That was my mistake.
But I do think the Saschsen comes across as a lightweight when compared to the Franco-Italian Horizon class and especially Daring class
I wonder why Germans don't put Tomahawks on their ships
>>61991959
They don't need to. They know we'll back them.
>>61991985
Then whey don't need their army at all
>>61991959
Expensive.
We are the only ones who use them outside the US
>>61990084
Ah, the Zuwalt. Looks like a sophomore 3d design project.
>>61992023
Ask Japan.
>>61991275
>A big army is a waste of money, a big navy and air force is money well-spent.
if your on an island yes
>>61991804
DELETE THIS
DELEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>>61991862
Not a problem, it takes a good amount of autism to learn the asinine differences between warships.
They do, but there's pretty much parity between the yuro AAW ships (excluding ours, because (legit) reasons). All of them share the same or national project radars.
>>61991959
Expensive and none of the VLS tubes would fit Tomahawks.
(got pic in Russian for your convenience)
>>61992027
>Expensive
Not for Krauts I think
They spend billions on rapefugees, so they can find some monies to fix their ships
>We are the only ones who use them outside the US
Yes, well, Frenchies have analogues of these systems so Germans can develop their own too
>>61992160
The fr*g always has an analogue to everyone else's stuff. They can only into national projects.
>>61991275
Astute-class a qt.
>>61989729
>thailand
Russians is not great lads.
Soviets with Typhoons was.
>>61992146
>if your on an island yes
That was my point...
>Not for Krauts I think
Expensive for anyone. Only worth buying good cruise missiles if you actually plan to use your navy aggressively. German government doesn't use its navy much.
>>61992300
"Shark" is Russian name of it.
>>61992302
Meant to reply to Ivan >>61992160
>>61992280
The exhaust funnel and rear radar arrangement always upsets me.
>>61989716
Looks like shit. One 30mm gun?
>>61992455
It is an OPV, what do you expect?
>>61992455
Are you suggesting the RN needs bigger guns than this to tackle pirates and smugglers?
>>61992526
What do you need a warship for then? Just slap a gun on some cheap fast ship.
>>61992802
A "cheap fast" ship wouldn't have the endurance and flexibility for the global policing role that the Royal Navy requires for its OPVs. They need to travel long distances, carry sophisticated helicopters, drones and so on.
The range is over 5000 nautical miles which is over 9260 km
>>61992802
Also they share the same internal infrastructure and comms. as the larger warships so that information they gather can be easily passed to the rest of the fleet
>>61992063
>>61990084
what the HELL usa?
>>61993185
WE
>>61993185
copycats
shouldve signed TTIP mang
>>61992802
Why does Finland have armoured vehicles, when you could just use horseback archers :D:D:D:D:D::D
>>61993218
WUZ
>>61990256
What way?
>>61992023
US assistance always comes with a big price to pay. That is the downside to not spending on defence.
>>61991075
>tfw the reason my country has 2000 gen 3 tonks is because we were designed to be the meatshield of the potential Chinese wave tactics
we never wanted this
>>62003102
You should reunify with the North and invade Japan, desu
GOAT aesthetics coming through
>that two-tone
How to make a amphibious warfare ship sexy 101
>>61989578
>See ship
>Think of Penis
Eeeeeeeeeeeee......
>that sleekness, while being one of the most capable air-defense destroyers out there
>tfw when Canada has just one destroyer that breaks all the time
France can we get some of those FREMM destroyers please?
>>62007810
>HMCS Athabaskan, 1 June 1969
jesus
>>62008741
Trudeau will fix it! Canadian Surface Combatant stronk!
>>62009439
>Construction is slated to begin in the early 2020s and take 20-25 years to complete.[4][18] The first ships to be built will replace the Iroquois-class capabilities; the roles of area defence and command and control. General purpose variants will be constructed later in the project.
Long arse time.
>>62009696
It's because we're building the Harry DeWolf Class patrol boats right now.
The years since the Cold War has killed Canadian shipbuilding. Now that everyone realized our ships are falling apart we have to basically start over again.
>>62007810
Why don't you buy our superior Type 48?
>>62011232
You were considering joining our Type 26 project, but your ship builder unions stopped it.
baka
>>62011322
Type 45 aren't in production anymore.
>>62011322
Too expensive. Plus the FREMM is already a multinational project.
>>62011561
FREMM or the German F-11X class series would be decent buys, although the Danish might be something to look at, with their designed for colder, northern waters.
>>62007063
>tfw your country will never be invaded by sea
>>61989491
>a fucking cone
>>62012561
Coming from Czechia, a country that enjoyed being invaded so much they didn't even resist Hitler.
>>62013125
>fuck cheekes
>>62012561
Have you even seen a boat in real life?
