Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2746
    Points : 2744
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Thu Jul 06, 2017 1:47 am

    By the same token, if the RF needs conventional and/or nuclear a/c carriers (which they confirmed in the affirmative), then they'll be built. And since they already have nuclear icebreakers but not a/c carriers, they'll now need them even more than the former.


    Last edited by Tsavo Lion on Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:18 am; edited 1 time in total
    eehnie
    eehnie

    Posts : 2476
    Points : 2487
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  eehnie on Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:10 am

    Militarov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    eehnie wrote:...................
    and you think with this knowledge you can talk about fantasy projects (note that we see just the same in the sea since decades)

    Care to back up that BS with some data?

    Just politely asking before rest of the naval crowd here tears you a new one... Razz  

    Data about what? about how the Project 23000 is not a fantasy project is a real project perfectly doable and about how there are current aircraft carriers in the sea that are like the Project 23000?

    Perfectly doable? Sure. Question is... for whom?

    Yes, there are like 11-12 of them floating at this moment, question is, how many are built by Russia?

    Which are the technologically not doable components for Russia?

    Where are exactly the technological limits that the US reached in 1975 that Russia can only dream with in a "fantasy project", according with the "proved expert" (clear intoxicator) Papadragon?
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2746
    Points : 2744
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:43 am

    Government says new monster icebreaker will become reality
    ..the “Lider” will be 205 meter long and have a deadweight of at least 55,000 tons. It will have a nuclear powered engine based on two new-model RITM-400 with an effect of at least 110 MW. https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/arctic-industry-and-energy/2016/12/government-says-new-monster-icebreaker-will-become-reality
    For comparison, the reactors on the Nimitz class CVNs have 104MW output https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A4W_reactor
    So, Russia will have the reactors for her new nuclear a/c carriers.
    eehnie
    eehnie

    Posts : 2476
    Points : 2487
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  eehnie on Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:51 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:Government says new monster icebreaker will become reality
    ..the “Lider” will be 205 meter long and have a deadweight of at least 55,000 tons. It will have a nuclear powered engine based on two new-model RITM-400 with an effect of at least 110 MW. https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/arctic-industry-and-energy/2016/12/government-says-new-monster-icebreaker-will-become-reality
    For comparison, the reactors on the Nimitz class CVNs have 104MW output https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A4W_reactor
    So, Russia will have the reactors for her new nuclear a/c carriers.

    Making the answer more difficult for the "proved expert" (clear intoxicator) Militarov.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Guest on Thu Jul 06, 2017 12:09 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:None, but there is a 1st time for everything! How many nuclear icebreakers did USA built? Technically, the Lenin was the 1st nuclear powered aircraft carrying ship!
    http://l7.alamy.com/zooms/00954359004a4796be77d84aca63d711/mi-2-helicopter-lands-on-lenin-nuclear-powered-icebreaker-b9cn5h.jpg
    All subsequent icebreakers been carrying helicopters, as well as 4 CGNs with 3 each in a hangar below deck. http://n7.alamy.com/zooms/5caae96227df411d864870c003cc2113/a-helicopter-aboard-the-nuclear-powered-icebreaker-arktika-b9dd8w.jpg
    http://media.gettyimages.com/photos/helicopter-on-board-russian-nuclearpowered-icebreaker-50-years-of-picture-id148507970?s=170667a
    http://c8.alamy.com/comp/B9DD8E/a-helicopter-on-the-helipad-aboard-the-nuclear-powered-icebreaker-B9DD8E.jpg http://www.bing.com/cr?IG=6637F7CDF2EF49A9A0BF0FF339ECB88F&CID=1A0C77B1BBA061FD38767D07BAA66096&rd=1&h=oYuGjdJ4lbUr0o4XiehFAsC2QcYmtljEWlHxUoCo_JE&v=1&r=http%3a%2f%2fl450v.alamy.com%2f450v%2fa2mahd%2frussia-arctic-circle-franz-josef-land-helicopter-on-the-deck-of-nuclear-a2mahd.jpg&p=DevEx,5068.1
    http://jeffhead.com/modelbuilds/RUS-CGN099.htm
    http://www.shipspotting.com/photos/middle/4/6/3/1180364.jpg
    http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/kirov/images/1144_3.jpg

    And how much naval traffic does USA have "above" Alaska and Canada? To my knowledge basically none. Them building nuclear powered icebreaker would be quite unusual thing.

    And yes i am very well aware of Lenin and subsequent projects.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Guest on Thu Jul 06, 2017 12:12 pm

    Tsavo Lion wrote:Wrong! From 2015: http://www.maritime-executive.com/features/mission-impossible-a-new-us-icebreaker
    ..a major study found the U.S. needs six new icebreakers — three heavy and three medium — to carry out the Coast Guard's increased missions. ..the Navy says explicitly in their strategic planning documents that they depend on the Coast Guard to access icy waters. The Navy has no icebreakers of their own..
    http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2015/06/01/411199853/as-the-arctic-opens-up-the-u-s-is-down-to-a-single-icebreaker
    http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/2006-01-02-icebreakers_x.htm https://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/02/us/politics/obama-to-call-for-more-icebreakers-in-arctic-as-us-seeks-foothold.html
    The most efficient heavy icebreaker is a nuclear 1!

    Heavy icebreaker does not equal nuclear, why would it. With their wast fleet of oilers and auxilary ships and fairly small frost affected sealines compared to Russia diesel powered breakers are more than adequate.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Guest on Thu Jul 06, 2017 12:21 pm

    eehnie wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    eehnie wrote:...................
    and you think with this knowledge you can talk about fantasy projects (note that we see just the same in the sea since decades)

    Care to back up that BS with some data?

    Just politely asking before rest of the naval crowd here tears you a new one... Razz  

    Data about what? about how the Project 23000 is not a fantasy project is a real project perfectly doable and about how there are current aircraft carriers in the sea that are like the Project 23000?

    Perfectly doable? Sure. Question is... for whom?

    Yes, there are like 11-12 of them floating at this moment, question is, how many are built by Russia?

    Which are the technologically not doable components for Russia?

    Where are exactly the technological limits that the US reached in 1975 that Russia can only dream with in a "fantasy project", according with the "proved expert" (clear intoxicator) Papadragon?

    At this moment list for technologicaly not doable components is long like Chinese voting list.

    To start with there is no adequate shipyard available, actually there is very little available at this moment for such major project. In decade... maybe, now... dont make me start. Its not lego, it doesnt work the way most of you imagine it either, "oh ye see, we have built nuclear icebreaker, lets enlarge it 5 times, and strap some airstrip to it, and whoala, mighty Shtorm is there".

    I am even skeptical about production of marine grade steel of such quantity and quality in Russia at this moment, judging by problems recent submarine projects had due to steelworks underperfoming and overpicing their products. Lets not go any further into million and 1 challenges of such project.
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 3771
    Points : 3751
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  miketheterrible on Thu Jul 06, 2017 2:56 pm

    Excuse me, which submarines? Borei seems to be fine, same with all the Kilo class subs. So you are saying their subs are spotty quality now?

    Use references so you don't look like an assholes.
    eehnie
    eehnie

    Posts : 2476
    Points : 2487
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  eehnie on Thu Jul 06, 2017 7:06 pm

    Militarov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    PapaDragon wrote:
    eehnie wrote:...................
    and you think with this knowledge you can talk about fantasy projects (note that we see just the same in the sea since decades)

    Care to back up that BS with some data?

    Just politely asking before rest of the naval crowd here tears you a new one... Razz  

    Data about what? about how the Project 23000 is not a fantasy project is a real project perfectly doable and about how there are current aircraft carriers in the sea that are like the Project 23000?

    Perfectly doable? Sure. Question is... for whom?

    Yes, there are like 11-12 of them floating at this moment, question is, how many are built by Russia?

    Which are the technologically not doable components for Russia?

    Where are exactly the technological limits that the US reached in 1975 that Russia can only dream with in a "fantasy project", according with the "proved expert" (clear intoxicator) Papadragon?

    At this moment list for technologicaly not doable components is long like Chinese voting list.

    To start with there is no adequate shipyard available, actually there is very little available at this moment for such major project. In decade... maybe, now... dont make me start. Its not lego, it doesnt work the way most of you imagine it either, "oh ye see, we have built nuclear icebreaker, lets enlarge it 5 times, and strap some airstrip to it, and whoala, mighty Shtorm is there".

    I am even skeptical about production of marine grade steel of such quantity and quality in Russia at this moment, judging by problems recent submarine projects had due to steelworks underperfoming and overpicing their products. Lets not go any further into million and 1 challenges of such project.

    Pure intoxication.

    Nothing said that means a real technological limit that Russia can not reach in the following years.

    To build a ship of 100000 tons is nothing technologically outstanding. Countries like South Korea, Japan, France or Finland have been building ships over 200000 tons. It means these countries (and others) have shipyards big enough to build aircraft carriers of this size. The intoxicators are saying that Russia can not have a shipyard like those that are real today in countries like Finland? Just a weird joke. A shipyard for a ship of 100000 tons means nothing technologically outstanding today.

    And to order ships over 100000 tons is also nothing outstanding. Private companies have been doing it, private companies that are a lot weaker economically than Russia, private companies that manage not a superior technological level than Russia.

    The intoxicators are talking about lack of technological capabilities of Russia, a country that has been leading by decades the technologies that allow to build spacial stations. Absurd.


    Last edited by eehnie on Thu Jul 06, 2017 10:08 pm; edited 1 time in total
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2746
    Points : 2744
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Thu Jul 06, 2017 7:19 pm

    ..we need to construct some number of ice breakers, harden our ships to operate in the High North and overall be prepared to face the extreme increase that we’re seeing on the part of Russia across the Arctic Sea. http://now.tufts.edu/articles/why-oceans-matter
    In the long run, heavy conventional icebreakers, if used extensively in both Arctic & Antarctic (where the next big war may erupt to divide it), will cost more to operate than the nuclear powered 1s, since they'll need to be refueled & carry all that fuel instead of aviation fuel for helos &/other cargo/supplies. http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/news/science/russia-to-induct-largest-n-icebreaker-in-2019/articleshow/57276085.cms
    BTW, 4y ago India also planned to acquire icebreaker for polar exploration: http://zeenews.india.com/news/eco-news/india-to-acquire-icebreaker-for-polar-exploration_852366.html http://www.nunatsiaqonline.ca/stories/article/65674india_eyes_icebreaker_to_use_in_arctic/
    The new Russian super icebreaker will be 205m long; the Nimitz CVN is 332.8m, or by 127.8m longer, so it's not 4-5 times difference.  https://thebarentsobserver.com/en/arctic-industry-and-energy/2016/12/government-says-new-monster-icebreaker-will-become-reality https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nimitz-class_aircraft_carrier
    As I wrote before, to save time & $, the 1st 2-3 Russian carriers may be conventional, under 95,000T.
    Northern Fleet divers resume surveying of WWII Arctic convoy transporter http://tass.com/economy/953309
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Guest on Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:00 am

    miketheterrible wrote:Excuse me, which submarines? Borei seems to be fine, same with all the Kilo class subs. So you are saying their subs are spotty quality now?

    Use references so you don't look like an assholes.

    No, i am talking about steel. I linked a year ago or so article about issues regarding marine grade steel production in Russia. As steelworks refuse to produce fairly small amounts Russian shipyards require for the price state is offering to pay as they claim such production is not profitable for them in any way (logical, no).

    Also some batches of that steel werent of adequate quality, that being one of reasons why Russia obtained fairly significant amounts of marine grade steel from South Korea though years. I am not really informed on which projects used which steel batches, for that you would need to know someone in shipyards and i have no connections or sources in shipyards except Admiralty.

    I hope you see where i am coming from as carrier is far more demanding project in this manner, especially in terms of quantity of steel.
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2746
    Points : 2744
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:04 am

    Is it more demanding than steel for icebreakers? If so, China could supply it for le$$ than SK!
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Guest on Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:07 am

    eehnie wrote:

    Pure intoxication.

    Nothing said that means a real technological limit that Russia can not reach in the following years.

    To build a ship of 100000 tons is nothing technologically outstanding. Countries like South Korea, Japan, France or Finland have been building ships over 200000 tons. It means these countries (and others) have shipyards big enough to build aircraft carriers of this size. The intoxicators are saying that Russia can not have a shipyard like those that are real today in countries like Finland? Just a weird joke. A shipyard for a ship of 100000 tons means nothing technologically outstanding today.

    And to order ships over 100000 tons is also nothing outstanding. Private companies have been doing it, private companies that are a lot weaker economically than Russia, private companies that manage not a superior technological level than Russia.

    The intoxicators are talking about lack of technological capabilities of Russia, a country that has been leading by decades the technologies that allow to build spacial stations. Absurd.

    So, tell us, which is the shipyard currently available in Russia that can build a 100000t carrier. Enlight us, because i do not know one, nor does anyone here i assure you. But you obv do, so we can inform Kremlin too Very Happy

    Yes.. private companies that are...biggest shipyards in the world. Its like you say that Russia can build better car than Mercedes-Maybach S600 Pullman, because Russia has more money than Mercedes... mindblowing logic Suspect

    Space station and carrier, are not... you know... same cup.
    miketheterrible
    miketheterrible

    Posts : 3771
    Points : 3751
    Join date : 2016-11-06

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  miketheterrible on Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:07 am

    Once zvezda shipyard is operational, it can do up to 130,000 tons.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Guest on Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:10 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:Is it more demanding than steel for icebreakers? If so, China could supply it for le$$ than SK!

    Icebreakers use normal marine grade steel for structural integrity and hull to my knowledge, special HSS steels are used for surfaces that are in contact with ice, and are far thicker to provide for years of service where steel actually gets partially worn away.

    I might be wrong here, but i personally dont have big time trust in Chinese steelworks. Tho i did hear from first hand that Chinese cold forged tank gun quality is beyond outstanding.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Guest on Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:11 am

    miketheterrible wrote:Once zvezda shipyard is operational, it can do up to 130,000 tons.

    I do not question that.
    Rodion_Romanovic
    Rodion_Romanovic

    Posts : 477
    Points : 477
    Join date : 2015-12-30

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Rodion_Romanovic on Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:17 am

    Militarov wrote:
    miketheterrible wrote:Once zvezda shipyard is operational, it can do up to 130,000 tons.

    I do not question that.
    Than what is your point?
    Anyway, Zvezda will be operational at latest in 2019.

    Currently, the shipyards able to cope with a ship of that size are Zaliv (in Kerch, Crimea) and most probably Sevmash (where they refitted the carrier for the indians).
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2746
    Points : 2744
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:18 am

    Exactly- just a few months ago Sevmash offered to build Storm to India. http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/naval/navy/2016/07/11/russia-india-nuclear-aircraft-carrier-storm/86937106/ http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2016/08/coming-soon-russian-built-super.html
    They must be very confidant that they can do it w/o losing face like they did with delays delivering the Ex-Gorshkov!
    PapaDragon
    PapaDragon

    Posts : 8235
    Points : 8319
    Join date : 2015-04-26
    Location : Fort Evil, Serbia

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  PapaDragon on Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:32 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:Exactly- just a few months ago Sevmash offered to build Storm to India. http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/naval/navy/2016/07/11/russia-india-nuclear-aircraft-carrier-storm/86937106/ http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2016/08/coming-soon-russian-built-super.html
    They must be very confidant that they can do it w/o losing face like they did with delays delivering the Ex-Gorshkov!

    Once check clears the bank they couldn't care less about losing face.


    Fact remains that for the price of one supercarrier you can buy entire new Pacific Fleet.

    Not upgrade it. Not supplement it. Buy whole thing brand new from scratch, both surface and sub segment with pair of new helicopter carriers on top.

    So which makes more sense?
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Guest on Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:33 am

    Rodion_Romanovic wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    miketheterrible wrote:Once zvezda shipyard is operational, it can do up to 130,000 tons.

    I do not question that.
    Than what is your point?
    Anyway, Zvezda will be operational at latest in 2019.

    Currently, the shipyards able to cope with a ship of that size are  Zaliv (in Kerch, Crimea) and most probably Sevmash (where they refitted the carrier for the indians).

    Yea... same as Ivan Gren was to be operational in 2009. right Smile? We have saying here, first jump, then say "hop".

    Are you for an example aware that certain shipyard in Croatia offered to build a carrier to India and Russia few years back, doesnt really mean they can do it. Whole Croatia put together couldnt just weld the hull in a decade.

    Kerch would require massive investments to do so, investments that would reach the cost of a carrier.
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Guest on Fri Jul 07, 2017 12:34 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:Exactly- just a few months ago Sevmash offered to build Storm to India. http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/naval/navy/2016/07/11/russia-india-nuclear-aircraft-carrier-storm/86937106/ http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2016/08/coming-soon-russian-built-super.html
    They must be very confidant that they can do it w/o losing face like they did with delays delivering the Ex-Gorshkov!

    Yea... and if Indians signed such crazy contract they would get carrier in 2055. Laughing
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 2746
    Points : 2744
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Tsavo Lion on Fri Jul 07, 2017 1:10 am

    No, much earlier- it's easier to build a new 1 than modify a TAKR! BTW, can the steel from 2 Kiev class TAKRs now in PRC be recycled?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiev-class_aircraft_carrier#Ships
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Guest on Fri Jul 07, 2017 1:25 am

    Tsavo Lion wrote:No, much earlier- it's easier to build a new 1 than modify a TAKR! BTW, can the steel from 2 Kiev class TAKRs now in PRC be recycled?
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kiev-class_aircraft_carrier#Ships

    Its easier to build a super carrier than to convert one already existing hull half the size? That i am afraid is not and cant be true. Let alone those two are of two totally different categories. Russia simply lost the know-how for carrires and countless other things, i am not sure how you people do not understand that. I mean.. not like Soviet Union really ever mastered anything about carriers but hey... they tried best they could.

    Steel can be recycled and used for something else, i would not reuse that steel for capital ship again tho. It could be recycled in Russia too probably, would take a while, but why not.

    AlfaT8
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1806
    Points : 1801
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  AlfaT8 on Fri Jul 07, 2017 1:28 am

    Militarov wrote:
    Tsavo Lion wrote:Exactly- just a few months ago Sevmash offered to build Storm to India. http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/naval/navy/2016/07/11/russia-india-nuclear-aircraft-carrier-storm/86937106/ http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2016/08/coming-soon-russian-built-super.html
    They must be very confidant that they can do it w/o losing face like they did with delays delivering the Ex-Gorshkov!

    Yea... and if Indians signed such crazy contract they would get carrier in 2055. Laughing

    That's to pessimistic, i say 2040, if they sign before 2025.


    Last edited by AlfaT8 on Fri Jul 07, 2017 1:29 am; edited 1 time in total
    avatar
    Guest
    Guest

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Guest on Fri Jul 07, 2017 1:29 am

    AlfaT8 wrote:
    Militarov wrote:
    Tsavo Lion wrote:Exactly- just a few months ago Sevmash offered to build Storm to India. http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/naval/navy/2016/07/11/russia-india-nuclear-aircraft-carrier-storm/86937106/ http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2016/08/coming-soon-russian-built-super.html
    They must be very confidant that they can do it w/o losing face like they did with delays delivering the Ex-Gorshkov!

    Yea... and if Indians signed such crazy contract they would get carrier in 2055. Laughing

    That's to pessimistic, i say 2040.

    I was sort of joking, but you get my point.

    Sponsored content

    Russian Navy: Status & News #3 - Page 20 Empty Re: Russian Navy: Status & News #3

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Sep 17, 2019 7:33 pm