China’s Type 055 vs US Navy Burke Flight III: Which Is Actually the Best Destroyer?

中国 055 型驱逐舰对阵美国海军伯克 III 型驱逐舰：谁才是真正最强驱逐舰？

We compare the Chinese PLA Navy's Type 055 destroyer (NATO: Renhai class) against the American Arleigh Burke Flight III destroyer, the most advanced frontline surface combatant in the US Navy.

对比中国人民解放军海军 055 型驱逐舰（北约代号：刃海级）与美国阿利・伯克级 Flight III 型驱逐舰 —— 美国海军现役最先进一线水面作战舰艇。

以下是各国网友的评论：

tzone40
Stay 1500 km away from type 055

和055型驱逐舰至少拉开1500公里的距离

 

kMeng
You're right, but maybe not enough.

你说的没错，但光1500公里恐怕还是不安全。

 

krzysztofoleksij
You can’t hit what you can’t see. Type 55 wouldn’t be able to detect a Burke until it came in within 40 kilometers because of the curvature of the earth. Same goes for the Burke

看不到对方就没法发起打击。受地球曲面影响，伯克舰不抵近到40公里以内，055根本发现不了它；伯克舰探测055也是同理。

tdldprim
@krzysztofoleksij you know it's connected to all kind of observation/awareness support infrastructures don't you? Satellites, drones, hell even high altitudes airships are to take into account in china's arsenal now..

你别忘了中方有一整套全域侦察感知配套体系。卫星、无人机，现在连高空飞艇都纳入了他们的作战装备。

krzysztofoleksij
@t @tdldprim Depends on the location and circumstances , considering the scale of US naval forces and amount of aircraft carriers and refueling tankers - Chinese air assets might not be available. 500 American air tankers ensures US fighter jets completely dominate the sky given its not close to China. China doesn’t have this luxury with its small amount of tanker aircraft and two crappy diesel aircraft carriers. As for satellites - once again those might not be available. If it’s strictly one on one both ships will become visible to one another at around 40 kilometers - which renders Chinese super long range missiles pretty unnecessary. …, If the fight takes place close to China and it’s aerial assets than type 055 is a better ship , if it’s out in open waters far from China type 055 would likely be a sitting duck.

这得看交战地点和战场环境。美军航母、空中加油机规模庞大，远离中国近海时，中方空中支援很难抵达。美军拥有500架空中加油机，足以让己方战机牢牢掌控制空权。中国加油机数量稀少，还只有两艘性能一般的常规动力航母，根本没有同等支援能力。至于卫星，战时也未必能稳定使用。单纯两舰单挑的话，双方要抵近到40公里左右才能互相发现，中方那些超远程导弹就发挥不了作用。如果战场靠近中国本土，能得到己方空中力量支援，055会更占优势；可要是在远离中国的远洋，055基本就是活靶子。

 

dv2766
The Flight III is the end of the line for The Burke class, while the 055 is just getting started.

伯克III型已经是伯克级的终极改进款，升级潜力基本耗尽，而055系列才刚刚起步。

 

tarstreak170
Lots of American bots here are in denial about their decaying US navy.

评论区好多美方水军，不肯承认美国海军实力正在衰退。

 

loktom4068
The Epstien's clients cheerleaders are seen on the comments.

评论里能看到不少为资本势力摇旗呐喊的人。

 

bestestusername
My god the little angry chinese bots are worse , it feels like i stood on an ants nest and their all pissed

我的天，这边激动的中方水军更夸张，跟踩了蚂蚁窝似的，一窝蜂上来发火。

CönTieu-z7n
@bestestusername sorry but usa can't even build a navy ship

不好意思，美国现在连军舰都造不利索了

 

littlehorseyhorsey
It's obvious, Type 055.

答案很明显，更强的是055型驱逐舰。

 

yuliu8875
The US navy needs to fix its toilets first. It is strongly suggested that the toilets on US navy vessels should be just like the Chinese ones: squat type instead of sitting type.

美国海军先修修船上的马桶吧。强烈建议美军军舰换成中国这种蹲厕，别用坐便。

 

 

XkMeng
Squatting has many advantages: 1. It's scientifically the most suitable original posture for excretion. 2. No one can occupy the toilet for too long. 3. It's actually more hygienic as it doesn't involve skin contact. 4. It's less likely to cause blockages!

蹲厕好处不少：1. 从人体科学来讲，排便姿势更贴合生理；2. 没人会长时间霸占卫生间；3. 皮肤不直接接触洁具，更卫生；4. 不容易堵塞。

 

horridohobbies
Cruiser = Heavy Destroyer. That's what the Type 055 is.

巡洋舰就是重型驱逐舰，055本质就是这个定位。

 

interpl6089
It's either a Cruiser or a Destroyer. Besides, both classes of ships usually work different missions. Cruisers are the main hitting power of the fleet, which the 055 does, and in 055's case, it's also a specific air defense platform. It is a cruiser.

它要么归为巡洋舰，要么驱逐舰。而且这两类舰艇执行的任务定位完全不同。巡洋舰是舰队核心打击力量，055刚好承担这个角色，同时还是专职防空平台，所以它算巡洋舰。

 

dannyzero692
The Arleigh Burke-class is a late Cold War design and is more or less reached its modernization limit, but the boondoggle with the Zumwalt-class means that the replacement never got as far as the US Navy wanted to go. The DDG(X) program isn't exactly inspiring either with the pace it's going.

阿利·伯克级是冷战末期设计，升级空间基本见底。朱姆沃尔特级项目耗资巨大却收效甚微，导致美军下一代替换舰艇计划严重滞后。如今DDG(X)项目推进速度缓慢，前景不容乐观。

The Burke's derivatives in the JMSDF and ROKNs are more capable individually though, especially the Sejong the Great-class.

日本、韩国基于伯克技术研发的舰艇单舰性能更强，尤其是韩国的世宗大王级。

 

ziongite
Japan's Maya etc aren't Burke derivatives, as far as the hull and everything, it's a very different ship, however it is built around the Aegis system and the American SPY radars primarily the role is air defence with a heavy shift toward ballistic missile defence, this is why the Japanese and Korean and heck even the Australian destroyers made by Navantia of Spain all to some degree share a similar appearance, it is about sharing the same type of radars and combat systems.

日本摩耶级这类舰艇并非伯克级衍生型号，舰体整体设计差别极大。只是它们搭载了宙斯盾系统和美制SPY雷达，核心任务以防空为主，同时侧重弹道导弹防御。日韩驱逐舰，甚至西班牙纳万蒂亚造船厂为澳大利亚建造的驱逐舰，外形看着相近，根源就是采用了同款雷达与作战系统。

 

scottzagger
The JMSDF Burke variants aren’t more capable but the USN seems to be eyeing the Koreans for the Flight IV Burke.

日本的伯克系舰艇性能并没有更强，不过美国海军似乎打算参考韩国舰艇设计打造伯克IV型。

 

BruceSarbi
Let's call a spade a spade. Aegis missile shield can't do shit to Iranian missiles like the Fateh and Seijil just to name a couple.

实话实说，宙斯盾反导系统对付伊朗征服者、泥石这类导弹根本没什么办法。

 

mauricelarson7263
It doesn't matter which boat is better, The Sharks will be well fed

两款舰艇孰强孰弱不重要，真打起来遭殃的还是普通民众。

 

interpl6089
In light of this, a complex breakdown of the Gorshkov or the modernized Udaloy class (Marshal Shaposhnikov) would be interesting. Russia still has at least some role in the Pacific.

说到这，要是能详细解析俄海军戈尔什科夫级、升级后的无畏级（沙波什尼科夫元帅号）会很有意思。俄罗斯在太平洋海域依旧具备一定影响力。

 

gelinrefira
Haha this kind of videos are probably the ones that has the highest engagement for your channel. Good show though.

哈哈，这类舰艇对比视频一般是你频道互动量最高的，这期内容做得不错。

 

KittyCat-nv9nd
Stupid Question. Only the US wants to rule the Pacific. China only wants to defend her territorial water and EEZ

这问题本身就没意义。只有美国想掌控太平洋，中国只是守护本国领海与专属经济区。

 

HackedToaster
The US navy is undoubtedly still ruling the world's oceans, but it's rotting away

不可否认，美国海军依旧掌控全球海洋，但整体实力正在持续走下坡路。

 

jasonsiu6368
Quality x Quantity and location wills power, not about a single equipment type

战力强弱取决于装备质量、数量以及作战地域，不能单靠一款舰艇下定论。

 

Zabi_Red
A real war would have too many variables. But straight ship on ship combat, ALWAYS bet on type 055.

真实战争变数太多，但如果单纯两舰正面单挑，055绝对胜算更大。

 

kaihaoliu7869
Not comparable. 055 is newer and larger while Burke is old and outdated...they are not in the same class

两者根本没有可比性。055更新、吨位更大，伯克级设计老旧落后，完全不在一个水准。

 

mikayaarcelim
outdated? looks whos talking, even the old arleigh burk class are more advance than the newest non combat tested chineses destroyer,.larger? its mean easy target?

落后？可别这么说。就算老旧的伯克级，技术都比中国这款从没经过实战检验的新式驱逐舰先进。吨位大？那不就等于更容易被锁定的活靶子吗？

 

Grishaschannel
The Pacific belongs to everyone. No country should be able to own or control it

太平洋属于所有国家，没有任何一方能独占、管控这片海域。

 

alganhar1
The Type 55... It is relatively new, and has plenty of room and tonnage for upgrades. The Burke's do not have that, they are right at the end of their upgrade life. There is not enough room in their hull, and not enough topside weight free to upgrade them any further.

They are not obsolete yet, they are still capable ships, but they are on that slippery road to obsolescence. The Type 55 will increase in capability over the next twenty years, the Burke's CANT.... And there is no replacement in sight for the Burke's with DDX having been cancelled....

That is the REAL comparison that should be being made. The Chinese are building the Type 55's, they have plenty of space and scope for future upgrades, and they can build more of them and them faster than the US can build Burkes....

Add to that the Frigate woes the US is having, and the USN is going to be in trouble in ten - twenty years... No capable frigate, the Burkes rapidly approaching obsolescence, and no replacements in sight....

055服役时间短，舰体吨位富余，后续升级改造空间充足。伯克级完全相反，改进潜力已经触顶。舰内空间、上层承重余量全部耗尽，很难再做大幅升级。

伯克级眼下还没到淘汰地步，作战能力尚可，但迟早会逐步落伍。未来二十年055能通过升级持续提升战力，伯克级却做不到。而且DDG(X)项目推进受阻，伯克级至今没有合适替代型号。

这才是最关键的对比点。中国持续批量建造055，改造潜力巨大，造舰速度、产能都超过美国伯克级。

再加上美国新一代护卫舰项目进展不顺，未来十到二十年美国海军会陷入困境：没有可靠的新型护卫舰，伯克级快速老化，替代舰艇遥遥无期。

 

herrmettbrotchen2665
So far I have never heard anyone make a convincing distinction between cruisers and destroyers in the modern sense. Nobody respects the distinction anyways.

至今没人能给出有说服力的现代巡洋舰、驱逐舰划分标准，现在各国也基本不再严格区分两者。

 

tigersilberhannes9153
A Destroyer is an escortship, protecting a fleet, flottilla or capital ship, it also acts as a force multiplier for said asset, adding to its capability and or allowing it to operate in regions it could not alone.

A Cruiser does everything (mostly represent your interest) far away from your home for long periods of time.

The Ticonderoga class thus is a destroyer, escorting aircraft carriers and an Arleigh Burk class is a cruiser, operating alone for whatever function is needs then and there.

驱逐舰定位是护航舰艇，负责护卫舰队、编队或主力舰，辅助提升编队整体战力，保障主力舰进入单独无法活动的海域。

巡洋舰侧重远洋长期独立部署，执行各类任务，维护本国海外利益。

这么看的话，提康德罗加级本质是护航驱逐舰，专职护卫航母；伯克级反倒更像巡洋舰，可单独远洋执行各类任务。

 

ajmaeenmahtab8456
Type 55 all the way, that's why US is going for battleships BBG(X).

我坚定站055这边，也正因如此美国才打算研发BBG(X)大型导弹舰。

 

interpl6089
The BBG(X) wont exst for another 20 years. I'm pretty sure we'll see Russia with a Lider class battlecruiser sooner than the Trump class will put to sea.

BBG(X)至少二十年之内造不出来。俄罗斯领袖级战列巡洋舰下水，都会比这款所谓特朗普级舰艇更早。

 

 

davidz7858
The Pacific Ocean will be divided at Hawaii: China will patrol the area west of Hawaii, while the United States will control the area east of Hawaii.

太平洋可以以夏威夷为界划分势力范围：夏威夷以西由中国巡航管控，以东归美国掌控。

 

leemarkley8496
The US is clearly incapable of design and building new destroyers to replace the Burke class.

This is sad for the US. I would have hoped for better. All US taxpayers hope for better.

美国明显没能力设计、建造新型驱逐舰替换伯克级。

这点实在让人唏嘘，我原本期待美国能拿出更好方案，所有美国纳税人应该也这么想。

 

jaybee9269
Perfectly capable. The surface combatant follies do look inexplicable, though.

美国完全有研发能力，只是水面舰艇项目接连踩坑，实在让人费解。

 

david1234lee
China and USA must get along : it is the age of compromise based on military capabilities !

中美两国必须和平共处，当下时代，双方要基于自身军事实力相互让步、达成平衡。

 

canadianbakin1304
so the u.s. might have a better all round destroyer but if they cant produce their losses at a rate that china can it doesnt matter, the sherman tank didnt out shoot the tiger I, II it out produced them china built 3 subs last year the u.s. only made none

就算美国驱逐舰综合性能略占上风，可造舰产能跟不上损耗速度，一切都是空谈。二战谢尔曼坦克单挑打不过虎式、虎王，但胜在量产规模。去年中国下水3艘潜艇，美国一艘都没造出来。