Naval History Forums

Not to mention the gens 'd armes who studied the art of war from the time they were seven years old andI believe the spanish had the burgundian companies.

What if the KM completed their H-44 study in '39 instead of '44 and what if american intel got their hands on a copy of that study? But they thought it was an actual design and built their own?

Kyler wrote:
"Knock it off with those negative waves."

I beg your pardon?

Bgile wrote:Weren't there three Tigers in Kelly's Heroes?

Yes but the were the small Tigers in the universe

One problem with surface units is that they work on a flat surface, they are some sort of bi dimensional vessel. The sub, on other hand, is three dimensional, using depth as part of it´s variables. Indeed, don't get me wrong I like subs (I have fond memories of reading 'The Hunt for Red October' as...

Expensive and irrelevant? I hardly think carriers and amphibious assault ships are irrelevant, and what about ASW? Submarines have their place but they're not going to make every other ship obsolete and they can't really beat what flies they have virtually no AA and no troop carrying ability and th...

Gentlemen, There IS a replacement for the battleship from some time now. It´s indeed an American creation: the SSN and the SSBN. Those are the modern dreadnoughts. They can beat whatever floats (or flies) and run deep and silent. The new subs are the superior naval weapons now. No need of expensive...

Something like the Kirov class battlecruiser perhaps? Although I don't think that's going to happen (any time soon anyway) the navy is satisfied with it's ships, we've got a lot of cruisers, destroyer, subs and frigates. And aircraft carriers have decent weapons systems and they do IIRC have an armo...

Very cool!