It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

Russian aircraft carrier towed in Mediterranian

page: 3
15
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 06:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: FredT
a reply to: FuggleHop

Well we have 10 super carriers (Nimitz and soon the Ford Class) and the remaining 9 are much smaller (Wasp and America class) and are STOVL versus CATOBAR which is really needed for true strike potential.

What it really highlights is the difficulties surrounding true forward deployed blue water naval operations at which the USN excels at.....


Oooh STOVL versus CATOBAR! You must be a sailor!




posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 06:39 PM
link   
a reply to: JedemDasSeine

Source, location?

3 boats are the typical setup for harbour ballets with big vessels, I've seen that quite a lot. Why would you do that in open waters? Towing bears risks, 2 more towlines are two more risks I'd avoid in open sea. Also, utility vessels from the russian fleet might be the best choice at hand, given their big hull and engines.


“Over the limited capacities of the mooring infrastructure in Tartus two warships will enter directly the port and will be moored there, the third warship will be anchored in the harbour,” the source said.

www.globalresearch.ca...

Not the container terminal, is it? Do they have any tugboats at all? I didn't see any, but correct me if I'm wrong.



(post by Velatropa24 removed for a manners violation)

posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 06:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: Velatropa24

originally posted by: hounddoghowlie
a reply to: JedemDasSeine


.but hey, don't let the truth get in the way of a good story,


especially if you can spin it so you don't look bad.







sorry not a fake article,
. just google it and you'll see articles from all over the world.
and you might want to check yourself when calling someone a kid, you have no idea who you are talking to. and if you would have looked at the date on your link it says Published time: 16 Nov, 2015 12:18. that was last year not 3 Nov 2016.
stop being ignorant.
edit on 3-11-2016 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-11-2016 by hounddoghowlie because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 06:56 PM
link   
a reply to: Nickn3

No, we have 10 full deck carriers, of which, right now two are deployed, four are in post maintenance or post workup maintenance, and four are in maintenance or about to go into maintenance.

We have two LHAs, with one under construction and 8 LHDs. Both are capable of carrying AV-8Bs or F-35s.


(post by Velatropa24 removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 07:17 PM
link   
So far, only the US propaganda site published it. The video location and time is unclear, but looks like Russian buildings in the background. And filmed from a helicopter - most likely Russian as the enemy military would not be allowed to fly that close.

This belongs in the hoax bin. Deny ignorance.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 07:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Velatropa24

Why wouldn't an aircraft be allowed to fly that close? There is no state of war, and if they're in international waters then they're free to fly as close as they want, as long as they don't pose a safety issue.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 07:54 PM
link   
The Kitty Hawk had to be towed back from Japan to the US.....

It happens, even to US carriers.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 09:24 PM
link   

originally posted by: Velatropa24
And filmed from a helicopter - most likely Russian as the enemy military would not be allowed to fly that close.

This belongs in the hoax bin. Deny ignorance.


Umm perhaps you forget the footage of Russian planes buzzing a USN destroyer in April, Thats pretty close



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 09:43 PM
link   
From Ukraine Today Towed



Id be waaaaay more concerned by the Pyotr Velikiy which is shown ahead of the carrier. In 2004 a Russian admiral said that its reactor could explode at any minute

edit on 11/3/16 by FredT because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 11:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: pirhanna
Thats embarrassing. Hahah. Putin is doing a facepalm about now.

Seriously though, can the dems (and some neocons) stop already with the new red scare? Every confrontation between us and Russia in the last decade has been perpetrated by either parts of our own government or Germany's.


As I've said in other threads, it's highly ironic and humorous to see conservatives having their own red-scare propaganda used against them, after conservatives having pulled this literally from like 1950 until 2015...

As a liberal, and leftist, I can't tell you the amount of times I've heard conservatives pull the "commie" or "socialist" bull regarding some moderate liberal policy, from following international law and the UN Charter to wanting health care for all, or even just environmental regulations..

I'm against the current use of such by the Clinton camp, but you guys really should take this as an opportunity to reflect a bit.



posted on Nov, 3 2016 @ 11:27 PM
link   
a reply to: JIMC5499

would be a shame if one of those missiles from yemen were to sink it.......



posted on Nov, 4 2016 @ 04:38 AM
link   

originally posted by: jrod
The Kitty Hawk had to be towed back from Japan to the US.....

It happens, even to US carriers.


True but in Russia's case an ocean tug accompanies / is included in the battle fleet because of how unreliable their engines are (the russian carrier).



posted on Nov, 4 2016 @ 06:43 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: jrod
The Kitty Hawk had to be towed back from Japan to the US.....

It happens, even to US carriers.


True but in Russia's case an ocean tug accompanies / is included in the battle fleet because of how unreliable their engines are (the russian carrier).


Is that a bad move to have tug boat With you?

I think it is a very good move. Because if one of the ships in the fleet does break Down or have a problem. You wouldnt have to wait for a tug boat to Reach Your location. And the other ships can still do their job.

I think its brilant.



posted on Nov, 4 2016 @ 07:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: JedemDasSeine

Mmm...I wonder what would you guys think in case of this photo:

Any experts?


It's a photoshop. The original photo only shows the one tug at the bottom of the picture. The other two are just rotated copies.




posted on Nov, 4 2016 @ 08:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: FuggleHop
a reply to: princeofpeace

Hahaha! Those wacky Russians! They only have one aircraft carrier and it's being towed! ROFL! The USA is so superior to them! We've got like THIRTY aircraft carriers! And they don't have to be towed! LOL!



The US navy operates 19 'aircraft carriers' but considers only ten of them to be actual aircraft carriers.



posted on Nov, 4 2016 @ 08:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: jrod
The Kitty Hawk had to be towed back from Japan to the US.....

It happens, even to US carriers.


True but in Russia's case an ocean tug accompanies / is included in the battle fleet because of how unreliable their engines are (the russian carrier).



Want to know the true irony those engines are built in Ukraine. And that is one of the reason they have a problem getting part for them. This lack of parts supplies leads to maintenance issues where a part ha to be made or stolen from another ship.



posted on Nov, 4 2016 @ 09:21 AM
link   
a reply to: EvillerBob
Thanks, cap)). You didn't get the irony.

BTW, I wonder whether at least one single person in the thread understands the issue under discussion)).
edit on 2016 by JedemDasSeine because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 4 2016 @ 05:33 PM
link   
Poland’s claim that Egypt sold Mistral warships to Russia for €1 outrages France.

That will shake some heads.



new topics

top topics



 
15
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join