Diesel vs Nuclear Aircraft Carriers

  • Am Vor 4 Monate

    Not What You ThinkNot What You Think

    Dauer: 13:54

    In this video, we compare diesel powered aircraft carriers vs. nuclear powered. We focus primarily on HMS Queen Elizabeth vs. USS Gerald R. Ford.
    Note that in this video, we present our personal ideas and opinions from our research on the topic. We do not claim to be experts on the topic, but we did put over 100 hours into making this video.
    Note that: - "The appearance of U.S. Department of Defense (DoD) visual information does not imply or constitute DoD endorsement."
    Special thanks to US Navy and Royal Navy for maintaining public domain archives of military footage.
    REFERENCES:
    www.savetheroyalnavy.org/the-reasons-hms-queen-elizabeth-is-not-nuclear-powered/
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_marine_propulsion
    www.world-nuclear.org/information-library/non-power-nuclear-applications/transport/nuclear-powered-ships.aspx
    holbert.faculty.asu.edu/eee460/jaa/index.html
    chinapower.csis.org/aircraft-carrier/
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Queen_Elizabeth_(R08)
    www.royalnavy.mod.uk/news-and-latest-activity/news/2017/august/18/170818-logistics-team-rises-to-the-qe-refuelling-challenge

prateek yadav
prateek yadav

its actually ironic how a country which always stands up to avoid nuclear attacks from other countries uses most nuclear for their own purpose

Vor 4 Stunden
Wiesiek Wloch
Wiesiek Wloch

Nuklear aircraft carrier is the Best

Vor 4 Stunden
The_Lost
The_Lost

So we need nuclear aircrafts! Thats the solution.

Vor Tag
Saikiran Rao
Saikiran Rao

But Nimitz class looks way cool and sexy than Elizabeth class

Vor Tag
Creabsley
Creabsley

Stop saying diesel. It’s not diesel.

Vor Tag
Ian Brown
Ian Brown

The QE Carriers can be retrofitted with Cat & Trap and a Nuclear propulsion should that still be a requirement in it's 15 year refit. An Aircraft Carrier can only go as fast as it's escorts. No Carrier travels without it's escorts, it can only go as fast as it's escorts. The UK pumps out Nuclear subs every year. There's already plans for a further two QE mkII Carriers, plus the UK is building four Wasp size Carriers for littoral operations, these will also have the ability to fly a few F35B's (where the hell they're going to get them from is a greater mystery).

Vor Tag
Michael Sciberras
Michael Sciberras

It’s like the last greenhouse gases people burn them more than military burns

Vor Tag
Michael Sciberras
Michael Sciberras

I would never wanna be on one of these nightmares

Vor Tag
Michael Sciberras
Michael Sciberras

In real war, the nuclear would go boom if hit

Vor Tag
Squid :V
Squid :V

How about destroyer class use nuclear power? Im sure no home for me if human do that.

Vor 2 Tage
One Bridge
One Bridge

The newer reactors for the Ford will allow for new generation Laser defense when they mature.

Vor 2 Tage
Minnie
Minnie

I always thought nuclear ships would be more dangerous in war time situations like what would happen if they were struck with anti ship missiles

Vor 2 Tage
Steven Gibson
Steven Gibson

Apparently the only facility in Britain to build nuclear powered vessels is in Barrow in Furness in Northern England. That's where we are building our nuclear submarine fleet at the moment. I might be wrong but I don't think it has the facilities to build aircraft carriers. We should just buy straight from the yanks if we needed one that bad.

Vor 2 Tage
Dan G
Dan G

Nuclear 👍

Vor 3 Tage
uditt lamba
uditt lamba

Brilliant channel!

Vor 3 Tage
Oozora Kyou
Oozora Kyou

imagine if nuclear powered container / cargo ship exist.. my parcel will arrived much faster i guess

Vor 3 Tage
TheeBarricade
TheeBarricade

When those who don't serve in the Navy make videos. This is about 17% accurate.

Vor 3 Tage
Pacaj Albert
Pacaj Albert

Moja lietadlova loď nemala žiadnu lietadlovu dráhu opačne oproti logike vojny Generála

Vor 3 Tage
The Occasional Video
The Occasional Video

Could aircraft carriers be built on a multihull platform?

Vor 3 Tage
Rodney Bardin
Rodney Bardin

Smoke from fuel can be detected my aircraft or land base. It's much cleaner. Does not hurt the decks, or planes or steel or paint as much as desile fuel. Can move much larger ships faster. Cleaner air for the crew to breath.

Vor 4 Tage
Bob Bob
Bob Bob

In the case of all out war, having nuclear powered carriers is not good because of the amount of radiation that would be exposed if it was sunk/blown up

Vor 4 Tage
georges raimondeau
georges raimondeau

How to hide the inability of the UK to design and build a nuclear reactor for either aircraft carriers or submarines.

Vor 5 Tage
Paul Perry
Paul Perry

When talking about fuel usage in volume/weight, a consideration not taken into account, is the total size and weight of the powerplant and fuel source combined. Fuel tanks can be any size/shape around the ship, whereas the nuclear plant has to be installed as a primary concern and other equipment must make space for it to be so.

Vor 5 Tage
THZ
THZ

Thank you. That was a great video. :)

Vor 5 Tage
Ninad Sheth
Ninad Sheth

Excellent video those five knots could make the difference 5 notes could make the difference with hypersonic missiles around.

Vor 5 Tage
david blick
david blick

Trump won the election too.

Vor 5 Tage
Shubham Gupta
Shubham Gupta

Me watching this video before buying a aircraft carrier.

Vor 6 Tage
Dan Shelburne
Dan Shelburne

Seems the big problem with a nuclear carrier is getting rid of them, legally.

Vor 6 Tage
Putra Jr
Putra Jr

I always wonder all this nuclear power vessels and submarines, if they sink doesn’t it pollute the oceans?

Vor 6 Tage
Mason Parker
Mason Parker

water is an incredibly good radiation sheild. to put this in perspective for you in the Chernobyl reactor you could swim at the top of the cooling pool despite their being a whole ass reactor below you bc the radiation just didn't spread. and adding an aircraft carrier worth of radiation to the ocean wouldn't be all that big of a deal anyway bc 1 its not as much as you think 2 the ocean is big like really big and 3 their is already plenty of radioactive elements in the ocean that have been their for thousands of years it would be a drop in a bucket

Vor 5 Tage
Jerome Lockhart
Jerome Lockhart

The nuclear reactors on the USS Ford generates 300MW of power each, not 125MW.

Vor 6 Tage
D Loui
D Loui

for war machines, down time is a very important factor , it's a deal breaker ................

Vor 6 Tage
Mason Parker
Mason Parker

unless you have so many that even with half your fleet down you still are so incredibly dominant no country on the planet can even remotely challenge you on the sea for example the USA

Vor 5 Tage
Carl Jilks
Carl Jilks

First off HMS Queen Elizabeth is not diesel powered she is diesel electric. Secondly aircrafts???? Did the person who posted this ever learn English at school? 5/10 for effort

Vor 7 Tage
AJD Channel Tv
AJD Channel Tv

Hello guys……

Vor 7 Tage
SOUL
SOUL

Ford👍️

Vor 7 Tage
McRocket
McRocket

Great video...thank you very much for making it. As for aircraft carriers in the future? Their days are numbered, imo. Not only are they vulnerable to transonic missiles - which will eventually be built (probably by China) in large numbers and can overwhelm a carrier strike groups defensive assets and take out the carrier. But the cost for the ordinance large carriers can deliver is terrible, actually. A Ford class with aircraft costs about $20 billion. Now add the cost of all the accompanying ships in the Carrier strike group probably adds another $8 billion or so. Plus the cost to train and pay over 6,000 sailors for all these ships. You are probably talking about $30 billion. For about 75 aircraft deployed. That is pathetic. One, Ohio class SSGN (cruise missile submarine) costs about $3 billion each and can carry 154 Tomahawk cruise missiles (at about $1.5 million per missile or about $230 million for all 154). It needs no escort ships and is relatively undetectable with a complement of only 155. You sail one about 500 miles off the coast of China/Russia and launch a massive wave of destruction...with no danger of losing a pilot. Plus, the boats can launch their missiles and then submerge to again remain undetected...for a while, anyway. Large, aircraft carriers are soon to be white elephants that are insanely expensive for the 'power' they project. Much smaller, amphibious assault ships still make sense. But large, aircraft carriers? Waste of money.

Vor 8 Tage
Frank Hardy
Frank Hardy

My god what information, many thanks to this channel

Vor 8 Tage
NS L.
NS L.

I have noticed that Diesel always loses in horsepower competition, whether on the railway tracks or even at sea. And to make matters worse, diesel engines always BURP and FART too much !

Vor 8 Tage
Ethan Kim
Ethan Kim

So if this ship sinks radioactive waste will be released??

Vor 8 Tage
David Ching
David Ching

👍🏼👏🏼👏🏼

Vor 8 Tage
Elite7555
Elite7555

When talking about nuclear waste, I think few people really understand how tiny the amount really is. Yes, it is a problem, but a very dense one.

Vor 8 Tage
Simon Clarke
Simon Clarke

Excellent review. I think the simple answer would be size and range.

Vor 8 Tage
dylan c
dylan c

Could you imagine if countries spent all this money on helping humanity not preparing to hurt them

Vor 8 Tage
red panda
red panda

Could you imagine if any military did not spend all this money then we’d all probably be German, Chinese, or Russian? Maybe even Japanese but idm being anime 🤷‍♂️. Also also that kind of thinking removes the factor that good will is not necessarily equally rewarded with good deeds. Countries can be good and spend all their budget on humanitarian needs. All it takes is one country which spent majority of its budget in Military to have bad intentions and you and your ‘good willed’ people are dead or enslaved. :)

Vor 7 Tage
mignonthon
mignonthon

In a full scale war my primary target would be fuel supplier.

Vor 9 Tage
Joe Steen
Joe Steen

Good information but you’re comparing Lions to lambs.

Vor 9 Tage
David Franklin
David Franklin

Not! Nuclear powered vessels break even in less than 5 years based on fuel costs alone. Especially at the fuel consumption rates to maintain the higher speeds of a warship. Slower speed merchant and cargo ships with less power required william break even in less than 3 years. A 12,000 TEU container ship 40-60MW drives will break even in 2.5 years and save over $1.4 billion in fuel cost over a 20 year service life if nuclear powered. It will also save lots of CO2 emissions also.

Vor 9 Tage
donkmeister
donkmeister

The CdG was a white elephant - in theory it sounded great for France, a nuclear aircraft carrier, the prestige oooh. But, the reactor has too low power output for the size of ship, the prop is a stupid design (and they didn't order enough spares), and being a smaller carrier it doesn't have the duration benefits of a hulking great 100k tonne nuclear carrier.

Vor 9 Tage
YoungSandwich
YoungSandwich

Lmfao nuclear is easily the best only had to refuel once every 25 years

Vor 9 Tage
Mason Parker
Mason Parker

@YoungSandwich doesnt matter still requires years of down time something conventional carriers dont require

Vor 5 Tage
Mason Parker
Mason Parker

@YoungSandwich its still pretty bad

Vor 5 Tage
YoungSandwich
YoungSandwich

@Mason Parker it's more than to just refuel its that and what I just said

Vor 5 Tage
YoungSandwich
YoungSandwich

@Mason Parker that's to do refits and repairs and overhauls so again that's not bad still

Vor 5 Tage
Mason Parker
Mason Parker

except when they do need to refuel it takes years

Vor 5 Tage
Jackson B. McKee
Jackson B. McKee

Y'all talking about war like you know wtf would happen. 😂 Smh

Vor 10 Tage
Dipankar Nath
Dipankar Nath

I recently learnt the US Navy is the world's 2nd largest airforce in layman terms.I mean wtf uncle Sam.insanely powerful these yankees

Vor 10 Tage
Unknown User
Unknown User

better not wasting oil for war or prestige.

Vor 10 Tage
Elijah
Elijah

What about the size and weight proportioned to fuel efficiency?

Vor 10 Tage
Siddharth Dogra
Siddharth Dogra

Earlier i was very confused which one should i buy but now it's clear...thanks bro

Vor 11 Tage
Vanquished
Vanquished

USS Truman's early retirement wouldn't have saved a penny. That's why it was overruled

Vor 11 Tage
Desert Fresh
Desert Fresh

Looks like the starboard side of the carrier, to me.

Vor 11 Tage
ladwarcoffee
ladwarcoffee

Another point of nuclear power carriers is they can out run torpedo while diesel can not. Nuclear can go way faster then just 5 knots faster then diesel.

Vor 12 Tage
Carlos_A_M
Carlos_A_M

In my opinion yes, it depends, but nuclear be better if done right if the tech works out, say something like thor con´s msr, a reactor like that not only refuels itself actively, but can operate at way higher temperatures, using thorium at 100% means also even less fuel, so lets say we get that in an aircraft carrier assuming we manage to make it as small as claimed, we dont need pressure vessel so less cost, more fuel is used so less waste, the waste heat can go straight to a water desalination station or to the steam generators to generate a monstrous amount of steam, if somehow the ship is exploded or the reactor starts to overheat a freeze plug melts and the reaction instantly stops, meaning it is literally impossible to melt down.

Vor 12 Tage
MyNameIsMyName YourName
MyNameIsMyName YourName

This guy is just reading off the wikipedia page.

Vor 12 Tage
jonny777bike
jonny777bike

US needs to continue to invest in making nuclear power safer and less costly. Also how can we recycle the used fuel rods and continue to get power from them as they decay.

Vor 13 Tage
Michael Szczekot
Michael Szczekot

Dismantling a nuclear carrier. Scrap all the metals that aren’t nuclear contaminated use the depleted uranium for making ammunition. Store what can’t be salvaged. In lead lined non biodegradable barrels to

Vor 13 Tage
James Flores
James Flores

Where do its nuclear waste go??

Vor 14 Tage
Water Mirror
Water Mirror

On another note, UK carriers contribute to the rapid depletion of fossil fuels, & the subsequent increase of petroleum prices

Vor 14 Tage
Door-to-Door Hentai Salesman
Door-to-Door Hentai Salesman

The advantage of diesel carriers is you can stop at a nearby gasoline station to refuel.

Vor 15 Tage
Mason Parker
Mason Parker

advantage of nuclear is you dont need to refuel

Vor 5 Tage
Nikunj raj
Nikunj raj

I think India have to built only two or three nuclear powered aircraft carriers with a displacement of 100,000 tonnes of displacement because only one aircraft carrier with displacement of 100,000 tonnes can counter two Chinese aircraft carriers and india also have one diesel electric aircraft carrier and one is in sea trials and will be commissioned soon at the last of the year so 5 or 6 aircraft carrier with 2 or 3 nuclear carriers are sufficient and I don't understand that why is America is manufacturing so much nuclear powered carriers with 10 uss Nimitz class carriers and 11 uss Gerald r ford class.

Vor 15 Tage
cardboard truck100
cardboard truck100

My only problem with the nuclear carriers is if they are hit in the reactor

Vor 15 Tage
Logan K
Logan K

America uses nuclear because we are going green.....LOL

Vor 15 Tage
Rich Dobbs
Rich Dobbs

The assessment will depend on what happens when the USA and China go over the edge, and those big flattops start getting dunked. The outcome won't be dependent on propulsion system, but the assessment will be. If China succeeds in sinking a number of nuclear carriers with other weapons, than nuclear propulsion will be judged a bad decision. OTOH, if China is left with no blue water navy with at most one CVN being lost, then nuclear propulsion will be judged essential.

Vor 16 Tage
Colton Wilson
Colton Wilson

If only you could put the Ford class carrier up to a car pump.

Vor 16 Tage
Jaggsta
Jaggsta

11 aircraft carriers and wonder why USA is almost 30trillion in debt.

Vor 16 Tage
Steven Lamoureux
Steven Lamoureux

There are a few areas that are not quite accurate. The build times are skewed because several of your examples were driven by initial development time of the tech, so with the Ford’s follow-on ships they will be able to be constructed in a shorter period of time. Also, in some cases the build time is deliberately spread out national strategic reasons. For example if you need to keep a shipyard and its skill set in place but don’t really need the amount of ships it can produce, then you slow production down. It is FAR, FAR easier to ramp up production speed than it is to start from scratch. Congress discovered this the hard way during WWI when they ordered a large number of cargo ships to be built. Due to steel shortages they were to be made of wood. Unfortunately by this time most shipyards had switched to metal ship construction and had lost the skill needed to properly build those ships. Hundreds of ships were ordered and built, most of them were complete disasters. Luckily the war ended before they were put into action. They are now a marine sanctuary after they were burned to the water line to prevent them from being navigational hazards on the river they were mothballed at. Otherwise I am impressed with the effort you put into making this video clip. Keep up the good work. As for cost, the first in class ship is always much more expensive than follow-on ships because of development cost’s of the technology. Also CVN-79 is still being built. I think I saw the reference material that you used for this which showed that 2 carriers where built, which is not quite correct. I think it was about 80% complete at the beginning of the year.

Vor 17 Tage
Blue Bolt Strike
Blue Bolt Strike

I’m gonna tell you folks this just once: Diesel belongs in trucks. Nuclear reactors belong in the supercarrier. Don’t mix the two.

Vor 17 Tage
Matthew Pappas
Matthew Pappas

One of the things i always thought was that it was just a way to use less crude oil over time.

Vor 17 Tage
Family Relaxation
Family Relaxation

Nice video, as good t mine... check my music channel

Vor 17 Tage
Hendreh1
Hendreh1

DIESEL

Vor 18 Tage
BOZO TIGER
BOZO TIGER

I disagree with you about on thing. Aircraft carriers are most feared tactical wepon launching platform but it depends who you r fighting against. For example against a mid level power they are super powerful but against a potent great power they will be sitting ducks🤣

Vor 18 Tage
John Trottier
John Trottier

You totally missed the major argument between the carrier types. A nuclear power carrier, with it's higher speed and catapults can launch it's aircraft with full fuel and bomb loads. A ski jump carrier cannot. The total weapons and fuel loads are greatly reduced (half??) from what the same plane can be launched with on a full sized carrier with catapults. The reduction in combat power is much greater than it appears.

Vor 19 Tage
EmperorLionflame
EmperorLionflame

Correction, ski-jump carriers can launch their aircraft at about 20-30% less load, you may be thinking of flat tops like the Wasp class Amphibious assault ships or the America class, which have no ski jump, which may further limit the capacity. The Royal navy however may fly with a full load, The reality is, the QE class will be the deadliest carrier at sea for the foreseeable future. When you bring into the fact that the UK's F-35's are being equipped with Meteor and SPEAR 3 there is no carrier air wing to match it. Even the Ford will need upgrades just to fly F-35's, and will likely have only a couple of air wings. None of this even begins to counter the fact that the Ford is absurdly expensive.

Vor 18 Tage
ISB Agent
ISB Agent

Next from Tesla: a fully electric aircraft carrier that can go from 0-60 knots in 4.8 seconds

Vor 19 Tage
Selman Karadayı
Selman Karadayı

I'd rather prefer diesel. Yeah its much more loud but its abundant, can find every other port. Diesel motor has much more torque.

Vor 19 Tage
ModernVince
ModernVince

What did he say? “Let that sink in for a second... with a 2?” 3:19

Vor 19 Tage
THANOS Mad Titan
THANOS Mad Titan

China needs 4yrs

Vor 20 Tage
Tony T
Tony T

I prefer electricity aircraft carrier.

Vor 20 Tage
Stacy Lockhart
Stacy Lockhart

At least the nuclear can keep moving when the enemy sinks her supply ships and aircraft. And generate power for Directed energy weapons.

Vor 20 Tage
EmperorLionflame
EmperorLionflame

Both carriers can do both of those things, unless you mean when the Diesel carrier is somehow completely empty, if the Disel carrier is empty, chances are her escorts are too, same goes for the nuclear carriers escorts, which are mostly diesel too.

Vor 18 Tage
Cody G
Cody G

They could build the aircraft carriers in 4 years if they didn’t keep retrofitting the electrical systems during construction since it takes so long the original electrical system designs are outdated by the time they’re completed and the govt keeps making them update them as it goes along and of course that takes much longer and cost lots more money

Vor 21 Tag
Mason Parker
Mason Parker

@Cody G but also it is incredibly hard to "balance the budget" as you just cant tax people enough to keep up with current spending but you also cant cut spending a lot bc then you have to get rid of programs people demand and those people control who gets to decide the budget

Vor 4 Tage
Mason Parker
Mason Parker

@Cody G its not really a question of should when they will and do just do it anyways bc money printer go brrrrrrrr

Vor 4 Tage
Cody G
Cody G

@Mason Parker but should they really replace them? Think about this, the US government knows about how much money they will make every year, it shouldn’t be that hard to balance a budget.....yet those geniuses in DC can’t figure it out? Maybe they shouldn’t be retiring ships after 5,6,9, 15 years. Most commercial vessels and planes are 40-50 years old. Our government just loves to spend our money because they know no one will challenge them, just print more, don’t maintain it, replace it. Same with roads, bridges, govt buildings 🤷🏻‍♂️ so much waste

Vor 4 Tage
Mason Parker
Mason Parker

@Cody G in 20 years itll be obsolete and like they already do they will just replace them

Vor 4 Tage
Cody G
Cody G

I would rather them not waste our tax dollars and leave the original designs alone and do a retrofit when they take half of the ship apart to refuel it in 20 years

Vor 5 Tage
Doug Cultra
Doug Cultra

Nuclear power can stay on station longer and steam at full power for longer periods. Fuel powered ships need the travel at optimum fuel efficiency.

Vor 21 Tag
Wasweiß Ich
Wasweiß Ich

Don't forget the enviormental disaster the destruction of any nuclear carrier/ship would be. much worse than any fuel leak.

Vor 21 Tag
Sheng Liwei
Sheng Liwei

Even USA has to get into debt to run these carriers, I am not so sure so many of them are good in the long run.

Vor 21 Tag
Zhi Han Lee
Zhi Han Lee

13:07 When you remember though that the Ever Given still has ~2x the displacement of a USA aircraft carrier

Vor 21 Tag
THE OTHERGUY
THE OTHERGUY

Don't the nuclear reactors on U.S. aircraft carriers and submarines actually run on weapons grade Uranium that 90% enriched unlike commercial nuclear power plants which only run on 3% enriched Uranium? From what I can understand, a reactor using bomb material has a much higher power density and won't require as much refueling but is much more expensive and has sparked controversy.

Vor 21 Tag
zippo999
zippo999

To sail south and bomb the poor to submission

Vor 22 Tage
Not ReallyMe
Not ReallyMe

4:18 Yeah, good luck with those F35s...

Vor 22 Tage
Laurens Peek
Laurens Peek

YouTube keeps pushing this channel, I keep watching but I'm not subscribing. I wonder if it will stop pushing it as hard as soon as I subscribe.

Vor 22 Tage
Not What You Think
Not What You Think

subscriptions don't matter, it AI suggesting you video based on what other videos you have watched in the past, not necessarily ours.

Vor 22 Tage
Rob Babcock
Rob Babcock

Great analysis!

Vor 22 Tage
Grigory
Grigory

Nuclear power is better because it has heaps of more potential to improve, this means that in about 5 years (as long as nothing goes array with laws and restrictions) there will be no competition between the 2.

Vor 22 Tage
Debra Strougo Frohlich
Debra Strougo Frohlich

is called Taxis

Vor 22 Tage
Henry Potter
Henry Potter

Navy reactors were created to be run by 18 year old kids with minimal training...

Vor 22 Tage
Evil Betty
Evil Betty

Narrators voice sounds like the host from a show called "Naked Archaeologist"

Vor 23 Tage
Oaktown Flyers
Oaktown Flyers

Bottom line is peak oil production was in the 70’s , diesel will grow more expensive as oil is exhausted

Vor 23 Tage
dy zolytan
dy zolytan

WHAT? 3M dollars worth of diesel fuel to navigate around half the globe? There still is a case for sailing.

Vor 23 Tage
Bret
Bret

I’ve served on a nuke carrier with men who served on the Kennedy also. They much much preferred the Nuclear. I can tell you quality of life is far better for sailors in nuke ships. Most of the costs in the Nuke carrier is the regulations, not the power plants or plutonium The US defense industry can’t build anything without making a bunch of defense contractors super rich.

Vor 24 Tage
Maverick
Maverick

Nuclear

Vor 24 Tage
Illumiæ
Illumiæ

Nuclear waste is just nuclear fuel for a different kind of reactor.

Vor 24 Tage

Nächster

All Types of Warships Explained

13:11

All Types of Warships Explained

Not What You Think

Aufrufe 893 000

What Killed Zumwalt Destroyers?

08:41

What Killed Zumwalt Destroyers?

Not What You Think

Aufrufe 1 500 000

Oddly Satisfying & ASMR Video For Bed

0:44

Oddly Satisfying & ASMR Video For Bed

Reaction Lab

Aufrufe 291 578

The Legendary Commando Raid At St. Nazaire | The Greatest Raid Of All Time | Timeline

58:25

World War 2 Navy Comparison - Fleets Evolution 1939-1946

11:35

World War 2 Navy Comparison - Fleets Evolution 1939-1946

World of Warships Official Channel

Aufrufe 1 200 000

WW2 - OverSimplified (Part 1)

13:46

WW2 - OverSimplified (Part 1)

OverSimplified

Aufrufe 53 000 000

Inside America's Most Advanced Nuclear-Powered Aircraft Carrier

10:08

Trippie Redd - Miss The Rage Feat. Playboi Carti

3:57

Giving $300,000 to Students

3:40

Giving $300,000 to Students

Beast Philanthropy

Aufrufe 2 695 596

Mein Mann nahm sich das Leben | WDR Doku

44:19

Kevin Jenewein und Pia-Sophie Remmel covern Minefields von John Legend, Faouzia

3:12

Helga & Marianne - Impftermin für Helga!

3:42

Starship | SN15 | High-Altitude Flight Test

16:05