Germany spent 700 million dollars on a frigate who dosen't event float properly, what happened to german naval industry...

Germany spent 700 million dollars on a frigate who dosen't event float properly, what happened to german naval industry?
They used to buil some of the best eletric submarines and frigates in the world


navaltoday.com/2017/05/14/german-navys-new-frigates-have-a-listing-problem-report/

Other urls found in this thread:

boatinternational.com/yachts/yacht-design/10-biggest-lurssen-superyachts--26773
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

Times change

>continental navies

the english ones broke in the warm water near egypt
the american 4billion meme one doesnt even work

kraut internet defence force on time as always

meant that more as in every new ship a shit
all the last generation ones seem to go on forever

They had all of their military assets on engineers literally pillaged.

A slight listing to one side happens for all ships.

FGS Baden-Württenberg, is the first ship in the class. Meaning that it will have problems like all first-in-the-class warships as the design and technique of its construction is immature.

It has been returned to the builder to rectify, so there isn't a huge problem.

The listing helps combat capability, noob

Being in alliance with NATO means that it can't defend against it. At least it can against Russia etc.

Germany's always been good at subs and not so good at ships

America doesn't currently use frigates last I checked, which is a shame. Our Perry class boats were cute.

t. Nigel Hood

In Europe only Navantia and the
Damen Group produce good ships. The British ships are also trash not just the Germans. Pretty embarassing stuff

He means our LCS shit that the Navy practically just mothballed and abandoned.

>Navantia

>127mm gun
>40 rpm
Ohhhh baby, I'm diamonds.

>happened to german(y)
Germany is an American proxy state.

50% of the population below 30 years of age is not German. This will happen to you if you trust Amerimutts.
You know the saying: "Serves him right, he trusted Amerimutt."

They have cucked BAE out of the Aussie contracts for a reason pal. Not even a country with your cuckstamp believes your ships are good

God I never think mutt posts could get any dumber but you keep surpassing even my lowest expectations

>No one buys British ships because they are literal garbage
>muh mutt
Whatever faggot. Keep believing that your unoperational carriers are not literal trash while the rest of the world laughs at your shit tier navy

Not him, but that's entirely disingenuous to suggest that just because whatever BAE offered, didn't match the requirements best. Doesn't necessarily mean that everyone else is crap.
So if British ships are crap, then why is the Type 26 the favorite in both Canada's Single Class Surface Combatant Project and Australia's SEA 5000 programs?

hot.

wtf, I love the US navy now
>and Australia's SEA 5000 programs
proofs?

Why does Germany need expensive military stuff at nowadays? For what? For which blitzkrig?

>favorite
Proxyposting mutt spotted.

>Germany
>After WW1
>Actually giving a fuck about the navy

First of all you are probably the only person on the planet who thinks Navantia handled Australia's carrier order even close to competently, never mind well, and second you were the one who brought up British ships out of nowhere, obsessed little creep like all mutts you really are shit on a shoe.

>HAMBURG

F100 class are anti-air focused, when Australia is looking for anti-submarine focused warships.

Now not to say that the F100 can't be modified to suit those needs, but it isn't comparable to a ship like the Type 26 that was designed as a anti-submarine focused warship.

Frankly, nobody has ground to throw mud at each over over warship project management.

If you go back up in the thread I didn't make any accusations of quality to begin with, he did. It's not even like Australia's LHDs are a one-company build anyway.

There are way more things than capability, mainly costs and other smaller things (like lobbying).
There is a ton of commonality with other australian surface ships. Their carriers, aaw destroyers and their new class of oilers were all design by navantia. The aaw destroyers will be very closely related, as you said, as Navantias sea5000 proposal is a variant of the F100. There are also other parts that not only favourabily affect the spanish design, but the italian fremm as well. And this is their choice of turbines for their programs. Both, the spanish and italian designs use an australian made turbine found in almost every large ship of the australian navy, meanwhile bae decided to go with a Rolls Royce model.

I know.
And you're not wrong, Navantia has a very strong case for being chosen.

problems are there to be fixed

we build SUPERYACHTS instead of destroyers now. for alle the sheklebergs of this world

boatinternational.com/yachts/yacht-design/10-biggest-lurssen-superyachts--26773

>doesn't even have a helipad
Weak

BAE and NavyGroup´(DCNS) build the best Ships in Europe.

Worldwide it's the Koreans who build the best.

>Worldwide it's the Koreans who build the best.
How much money do you get from Kim to be posting such bullshit?

>hurr shill

Yeah, MAERSK choosing a Korean Shipyard to build their biggest ship doesn't mean nothing.

He's right in the sense that SK has probably the best international reputation for shipbuilding, not specifically warships though.

>he doesn't know