Top 5 Navys In The World - Page 5

rickusn · 03-21-2005, 19:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

Rick, you highlight the sentence you want to CAP or italicize, then right click, hit 'copy', then hit the I or B button on the control panel.

It automatically does the whole sentence. just like this.

Thanks. Still time consuming but not as confusing as having to go through the process I wsa experimenting with I think. LOL

**TopHatter** · 03-21-2005, 20:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

Rick, you highlight the sentence you want to CAP or italicize, then right click, hit 'copy', then hit the I or B button on the control panel.

It automatically does the whole sentence. just like this.

Actually, I don't think you even have to hit copy, just highlight the word or sentence or what have you and hit B or I or U

rickusn · 03-21-2005, 20:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TopHatter

Actually, I don't think you even have to hit copy, just highlight the word or sentence or what have you and hit B or I or U

Getting easier. LOL

**TopHatter** · 03-21-2005, 21:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickusn

Getting easier. LOL

We are your friends, we aim to please, trust me on that

rickusn · 03-22-2005, 04:36 AM

Thanks.

How about something like this:

Well I quess you cant copy/paste frpm preview anyway because all the fonts disappear LOL What little does show here I redid. But Im out of time. Shoot.

WORLD NAVIES

A quick look at the Major units of most navies of the world.

Ive attempted to list only small frigates that are of relatively modern and useful combat value displacing approx 1000-2000fl.
Ive not noted numerous patrol vessels similar to USCG Cutters.
In addition sections for Amphibious ships(displacement over 1000fl) were incorporated.
As were sections for Mine Warfare ships and Underway Replenishment ships.
Listed the Tiers and the nations in them at the top.
Ship Listings for each navy follow below.
See separate post for Guided Missle units under a displacement of 1000fl.

The Navies in each Tier are ranked in no particular order:

Tier 1
USN
Tier 2
France
UK
Russia
Tier 3
Japan
India
China
Tier 4
Italy
Spain
Brazil
Tier 5A
The Netherlands
Germany
Austrailia
Canada
S. Korea
Tier 5B
Taiwan
Turkey
Greece
Tier 6A
Sweden
Norway
Denmark
S.Africa
Singapore
Saudi Arabia
Venezuela
Tier 6B
Chile
Pakistan
Peru
Indonesia
Argentina
Egypt
Portugal
Thailand
Tier 6C
Iran
Malaysia
Israel
Colombia
Poland
Algeria
Tier 7
New Zealand
Belgium
Bahrain
UAE
Romania
Ukraine
Mexico
Libya
Ecuador
Bangladesh
Morocco
Bulgaria
Oman
Serbia

{Tier 1}

<USN>

CARRIERS
2 CV JFK may retire 2006. Kitty Hawk 2008.
1 CVN Enterprise Class
9+1+1 Nimitz Class class

CRUISERS
0+? CGX
22 CG-47 Class Aegis MK-41 VLS SM-2 ( being modernized) 9,600fl

Destroyers
48+14 DDG-51 Class AEGIS MK41 -VLS SM-2 8900-9200fl(Japan has similar ships)
0+7 DDX

FRIGATES
0+60 LCS
30 FF OHP Class (This is the OHP class found in a # of other navies)(USN ships no longer have SM-1/Harpoon missle launchers. There combat value is quite low)

**TopHatter** · 03-22-2005, 21:41 PM

How do you get to Carnegie Hall?

Anyway, so far so good.
I especially like the bottom half format

CARRIERS
2 CV JFK may retire 2006. Kitty Hawk 2008.
1 CVN Enterprise Class
9+1+1 Nimitz Class class

Even just simple caps for a subheading make things easier.

rickusn · 03-22-2005, 21:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TopHatter

How do you get to Carnegie Hall?

Anyway, so far so good.
I especially like the bottom half format

CARRIERS
2 CV JFK may retire 2006. Kitty Hawk 2008.
1 CVN Enterprise Class
9+1+1 Nimitz Class class

Even just simple caps for a subheading make things easier.

Well yes for small posts. But when you do 50 some navies it isnt trust me I did it sorta that way at first. And had to put in spacing just to not drive myself crazy. LOL

But I wish you would have seen the way I had it formatted in the preview.

I especially like how the italicised part worked.

And then still freaking typos. I just noticed. Ive got to do this when Im fresh.

Id like to run the Tier section across the page but I know it would turn out like crap.

I just dont understand why things cant [ost the way you type it in tabular format its frustrating. LOL

Ill work on it again soon

killer · 03-31-2005, 01:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

Yep, looked it all up again last night.

For a program that is now delivering hulls, there is remarkably little online wrt the Horizons.

I couldn't even find a pic of one.

Regardless, based on my recently refreshed memory, Italy gets the boot off the list.

2) Russia
3) UK
4) Spain
5) India

Sorry, still no French.

this list is OK. but I will prefer to put like this.

1 USA
2 Russia
3 india
4 UK.
5 Toss between spain and france.

Putting UK after India is because inspite of having good ships, they operate mostly in europe and atlantic. without US support they will not stand a chance.

same with spain and france. USA and Russia can operate inepenently around the world. then comes India which can operate independently from gulf to far east

AutopilotOFF · 04-03-2005, 20:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

Rick,

Not a navy guy here but the new Canadian CDS is sounding like the death knell for the navy's task group concepts. The IROQUOIS/TRIBAL Class is going to be mothballed when they're done their life service. The rest of the navy is seemingly being turned into supportting the army. In essence, the new CDS is turning the CF into a USMC type force.

The question that comes to mind is would the limited funds that are now being slated (in 3-4 years) be enough for the HALIFAX Class to still form task groups to support American CVBGs? Can CF/MC still remain viable as a naval force?

Just want to get an idea what the navy guys are thinking on this.

Well honestly,

I think that we will update the frigates in some capacity, and with the new helicopters, they will continue to do well. I honestly don't see a problem with navy "supporting" the army. It seems like most Ops in the near future will not require direct naval action anways.

So my opinion:

Upgrade the frigates-
Order some capable support ships-

The frigates can be useful for patrolling our coasts as well as deploying internationally. Support ships will inable our army to go places faster and with better support.

wishful thinking-

new air defence ships (unlikely)

submarines function normally (unlikely)

**Officer of Engineers** · 04-03-2005, 21:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AutopilotOFF

I think that we will update the frigates in some capacity, and with the new helicopters, they will continue to do well.

The MHP is the only upgrade right now. I know the MC is planning for a midlife upgrade but as of yet, they have not announced their plans nor allocate any funds.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AutopilotOFF

I honestly don't see a problem with navy "supporting" the army. It seems like most Ops in the near future will not require direct naval action anways.

As much as I like to see the boat people squirm, they have flown the flag more often than the other two branches. For both Afghanistan and Iraq, Canadian naval taskgroups formed the flank protection for American CVBGs.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AutopilotOFF

new air defence ships (unlikely)

Why would you need AD ships when protecting a CVBG?

Quote:

Originally Posted by AutopilotOFF

submarines function normally (unlikely)

I have complete faith in the people who crew the VICTORIAs to make them work. If we could "sink" American carriers with the OBERONs, they could function with the VICTORIAs up to and including what-not-to-do.

AutopilotOFF · 04-03-2005, 21:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Officer of Engineers

Why would you need AD ships when protecting a CVBG?

I have complete faith in the people who crew the VICTORIAs to make them work. If we could "sink" American carriers with the OBERONs, they could function with the VICTORIAs up to and including what-not-to-do.

It would be nice to have an AD/command ship for when we deploy on our own. The Iroquois have been flagships for fleets and groups as well. Would we not lose this capability if no ships replaced the iroquois?

As for your second part, I would tend to agree. Any ideas how long it will be until all of the subs are actually able to go on patrol?

**Officer of Engineers** · 04-03-2005, 21:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AutopilotOFF

It would be nice to have an AD/command ship for when we deploy on our own. The Iroquois have been flagships for fleets and groups as well. Would we not lose this capability if no ships replaced the iroquois?

The IROQUOIS were bastardized into a Command Ship, not its original intent. HMCS PROTECTEUR would be a better bastardization, having the room and the power to do all those wonderful computers.

Quote:

Originally Posted by AutopilotOFF

As for your second part, I would tend to agree. Any ideas how long it will be until all of the subs are actually able to go on patrol?

Even without the fire, it was going to be 10 years before the VICTORIAs would achieve operational status. Currently, they're figuring out how to operate the subs safely. Next on the agenda is they would figure out how to use them effectively.

HMS-Dreadnought · 07-04-2005, 21:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by killer

this list is OK. but I will prefer to put like this.

1 USA
2 Russia
3 india
4 UK.
5 Toss between spain and france.

Putting UK after India is because inspite of having good ships, they operate mostly in europe and atlantic. without US support they will not stand a chance.

same with spain and france. USA and Russia can operate inepenently around the world. then comes India which can operate independently from gulf to far east

I'm sry,.. but INDIA?? b4 UK ? LOL

And as far as the Royal Navy being toast with out US support,..

Against who?... The Sith?

inorder for india to be placed above another navy, her navy should beable to defeate the other in a battle/war? or be better in some way or another. Would you not agree?

So your saying india could defeat the RN? or is better?

miglover5 · 07-17-2005, 14:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M21Sniper

Because Spain can actually protect the carrier it does have, and the AV-8B II is a pretty good multi-role fighter(AV-8B II is AMRAAM capable).

France can't protect theirs, the damned thing never works right, and they have a penchant for surrender anyway.

I cannot in good consciense put france at no.5.

Sorry

I think that the new carrier fighters for the Charles de Gaulle from the french navy, the rafale M, are a lot better than the av-8B II.

So I think that the french navy is better than the spanisch navy

Anon · 07-17-2005, 17:09 PM

Spanish navy has better fleet AAW protection.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Israel works on Iran N-strike	Ray	Political Discussions	30	01-14-2007 15:54 PM
how long will america lead the world?	astralis	Political Discussions	89	08-10-2006 17:12 PM
Ahmadinejad Writes Letter to Bush	Bulgaroctonus	Current Affairs	2	05-09-2006 22:14 PM
A View from the Eye of the Storm	tim52	Current Affairs	3	02-14-2006 00:03 AM
F-16 FALCON vs. MIG-29 FULCRUM	Tronic	Military Aviation	182	08-10-2005 21:30 PM

03-22-2005, 04:36 AM	#65 (permalink)
rickusn *Military Professional* Join Date: 08-09-03 Posts: 1,317	Thanks. How about something like this: Well I quess you cant copy/paste frpm preview anyway because all the fonts disappear LOL What little does show here I redid. But Im out of time. Shoot. WORLD NAVIES A quick look at the Major units of most navies of the world. Ive attempted to list only small frigates that are of relatively modern and useful combat value displacing approx 1000-2000fl. Ive not noted numerous patrol vessels similar to USCG Cutters. In addition sections for Amphibious ships(displacement over 1000fl) were incorporated. As were sections for Mine Warfare ships and Underway Replenishment ships. Listed the Tiers and the nations in them at the top. Ship Listings for each navy follow below. See separate post for Guided Missle units under a displacement of 1000fl. The Navies in each Tier are ranked in no particular order: Tier 1 USN Tier 2 France UK Russia Tier 3 Japan India China Tier 4 Italy Spain Brazil Tier 5A The Netherlands Germany Austrailia Canada S. Korea Tier 5B Taiwan Turkey Greece Tier 6A Sweden Norway Denmark S.Africa Singapore Saudi Arabia Venezuela Tier 6B Chile Pakistan Peru Indonesia Argentina Egypt Portugal Thailand Tier 6C Iran Malaysia Israel Colombia Poland Algeria Tier 7 New Zealand Belgium Bahrain UAE Romania Ukraine Mexico Libya Ecuador Bangladesh Morocco Bulgaria Oman Serbia {Tier 1} <USN> CARRIERS 2 CV JFK may retire 2006. Kitty Hawk 2008. 1 CVN Enterprise Class 9+1+1 Nimitz Class class CRUISERS 0+? CGX 22 CG-47 Class Aegis MK-41 VLS SM-2 ( being modernized) 9,600fl Destroyers 48+14 DDG-51 Class AEGIS MK41 -VLS SM-2 8900-9200fl(Japan has similar ships) 0+7 DDX FRIGATES 0+60 LCS 30 FF OHP Class (This is the OHP class found in a # of other navies)(USN ships no longer have SM-1/Harpoon missle launchers. There combat value is quite low)

03-22-2005, 21:41 PM	#66 (permalink)
TopHatter Administrator Join Date: 09-03-03 Location: Fort Myers FL Posts: 9,509 Country:	How do you get to Carnegie Hall? Anyway, so far so good. I especially like the bottom half format CARRIERS 2 CV JFK may retire 2006. Kitty Hawk 2008. 1 CVN Enterprise Class 9+1+1 Nimitz Class class Even just simple caps for a subheading make things easier.

07-17-2005, 17:09 PM	#75 (permalink)
Anon New Member Join Date: 08-03-03 Posts: 1	Spanish navy has better fleet AAW protection.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)