Check it out, got it from someone in WAB. :diablo: :dev2:
Its just simple with over 450 billion dollars budget it simply outnumbers everything in and out.
However in a all out war it simply makes other navies look puny through numbers but it might not be the case through diplomatic influence. :diablo:
check pages from 90 to 110 too..
By: broncho - 26th October 2006 at 03:21
same difference as far as any practical use is concerned.
By: sferrin - 26th October 2006 at 03:17
[QUOTE=Raygun]
Don’t have a fleet like the USN’s? No problem, do it the PRC way – Photoshop it into existence! 😀
it’s a CG not photoshop!.
Guarantee you Photoshop touched it somewhere.
By: Raygun - 26th October 2006 at 02:41
[QUOTE=YourFather]Don’t have a fleet like the USN’s? No problem, do it the PRC way – Photoshop it into existence! 😀
it’s a CG not photoshop!.
By: Bager1968 - 26th October 2006 at 02:20
Bronco, I clearly see 2 catapults on the bow, one on the angle, and (in the first picture) steam rising from the catapult tracks of the angle and port bow catapults.
Of course, you can do a lot with photoshop.
By: joey - 25th October 2006 at 07:57
lol OMG LMAO.
i believe Varyag wont come to service ever instead they will build from scratch.
and i believe building a to fight USN in blue water rather than building nimitz class size making small carriers with extreme potent small a/c and fielding awacs with a must have aegis class destroyers r needed.
aegis/virginia ssn takes most of the cake.
seems like i post most controversial topics 😉 .
By: Francois5 - 25th October 2006 at 06:37
Definitively the structures of the Varyag (I hope you chinese will correct the spelling at Viagra when it comes in service!).
With CATOBAR, I give the chinese 30 years to master the design.
If in 30 years they keep flying the -33s… I am scared!
By: broncho - 25th October 2006 at 06:28
The photoshop seems to show flankers flying without a ramp or catapult? It doesn’t look like varyag anyway.
By: YourFather - 25th October 2006 at 06:25
This is for chinese kids to think about:
Don’t have a fleet like the USN’s? No problem, do it the PRC way – Photoshop it into existence! 😀
By: Francois5 - 25th October 2006 at 05:22
This is for chinese kids to think about:
In comparison, the DoN Battle Force alone operates a fleet of fighting warships with an aggregate displacement of 2.85 million tons. At the height of its naval dominance, the England strove to achieve at least a “two-navy standard.” That is, British naval planners aimed to maintain a navy that was as large as the combined fleets of the closest two naval powers.
In terms of aggregate warship tonnage, then, the United States enjoys a “17-navy standard.” Indeed, at 94 percent of the total aggregate ROW tonnage, the US war fleet displaces nearly as much as all other warships in the world’s navies, combined.
By: sferrin - 25th October 2006 at 04:24
Go read about the upcoming trainwreck in ship procurement and it’ll take the wind out of your sails.
Sign In
October 23, 2006 at 4:55 pm