To: sukhoi-30mki
To: sukhoi-30mki
There must be a hell of a lot underwater that can’t be seen. It certainly doesn’t look very long from nose to tailfin. Maybe one hell of a big girth.
3 posted on
07/31/2013 4:29:50 AM PDT by
Gaffer
To: sukhoi-30mki
China’s advance in technology not to be sneered at.
4 posted on
07/31/2013 4:35:30 AM PDT by
luvbach1
(We are finished.)
To: sukhoi-30mki
Looks like a copy of the Kursk.
7 posted on
07/31/2013 4:53:57 AM PDT by
lavaroise
To: sukhoi-30mki
The french submarine "Surcouf" looked more impressive but comes in at only 3,304 tons which is only half of this one. There must bee a lot of the vessel still submerged. Please note -
the Surcouf had a watertight seaplane hangar on it's deck.
The Surcouf at sea.
9 posted on
07/31/2013 4:59:54 AM PDT by
cavador
(Stop the boats,Stop the boats,-we are drowning in boat people!)
To: sukhoi-30mki
Another name for the “worlds largest conventional submarine” would be “target”.
10 posted on
07/31/2013 5:23:05 AM PDT by
norwaypinesavage
(Galileo: In science, the authority of a thousand is not worth the humble reasoning of one individual)
To: sukhoi-30mki
This is the pic from the article,, think you may have posted a pic of a "Golf Class" Cause this is most different sub, note the placement of the "Dive Planes" on the sail
15 posted on
07/31/2013 6:52:02 AM PDT by
Robe
(Rome did not create a great empire by talking, they did it by killing all those who opposed them)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson
