Royal Navy

  • 428 Respostas
  • 102167 Visualizações
*

Lusitano89

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 9236
  • Recebeu: 301 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 209 vez(es)
  • +15/-5
Re: Royal Navy
« Responder #375 em: Fevereiro 21, 2018, 12:08:53 pm »
 

*

Vitor Santos

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 3313
  • Recebeu: 244 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 191 vez(es)
  • +71/-33
Re: Royal Navy
« Responder #376 em: Março 07, 2018, 08:37:36 pm »
 

*

mafets

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 4644
  • Recebeu: 754 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 532 vez(es)
  • +31/-13
Re: Royal Navy
« Responder #377 em: Março 08, 2018, 09:37:43 am »
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/hms-cattistock-clears-mines-around-norwegian-capital-oslo/?no_cache=1

Citar
HMS Cattistock found more than ten mines and torpedoes from the Second World War during a search for unexploded wartime bombs as part of a NATO task group.

According to a press release:

“Norway was occupied by the Nazis between April 1940 and the war’s end, with the RAF making repeated attempts to disrupt shipping between Oslo and Germany – an operation codenamed ‘gardening vegetables’, with Oslofjord itself also given the cover name ‘onions’.

Twin-engine Hampden bombers, or four-engine Lancasters and Halifaxes dropped between one and two dozen mines at a time, just one or two seconds apart from a mere 600ft over the fjord. Around 1,500 British ‘A’ mines were sown in the fjord and its many inlets – some triggered by a ship’s magnetic field, others by the noise vessels made as they passed overhead.”

Leading Diver Karl Atkin said:

“The environmental conditions were incredibly challenging – water temperatures down to freezing, often causing the formation of ice, and air temperatures consistently well below freezing. So diving operations were unusually demanding. We often went down to 60 metres in zero visibility and had to identify the mines by touch.

The deep dives bring a heavy decompression penalty too – we had to conduct ‘stops’ at various depths on the way up. When we do, we’re motionless in the water column and get very cold very quickly! The cold also forced the ship to abandon the last two miles of hunting due to thick sea-ice closing the bay.”



Saudações

"Nunca, no campo dos conflitos humanos, tantos deveram tanto a tão poucos." W.Churchil

http://mimilitary.blogspot.pt/
 

*

tenente

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 2187
  • Recebeu: 819 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 259 vez(es)
  • +58/-5
Re: Royal Navy
« Responder #378 em: Março 13, 2018, 06:03:27 pm »
Fifth River-class OPV officially named


Photo: BAE Systems

Trent, the third of five River-class offshore patrol vessels (OPV) being built for the Royal Navy, has been named.

The naming ceremony took place in Govan, Glasgow on March 13, BAE Systems Maritime informed.

Trent is now set to take to the water for the first time and make the short journey across the Clyde from Govan to Scotstoun where she will be fitted out for sea trials.

‘This is another landmark moment for the River Class OPV Programme and an important day that honours the traditions of the RoyalNavy” Iain Stevenson, BAE Systems Naval Ships managing director, commented.

Trent is expected to take part in counter-terrorism, combating piracy, halting smuggling and defending UK waters. The River-class OPV is the sixth Royal Navy vessel to bear the name.

The five ships in the class are called Forth, Medway, Trent, Tamar and Spey. They are being built at BAE Systems’ Clyde shipyards as part of a £348 million contract.

HMS Forth, the first of five vessels from the batch, joined the navy in January this year. Medway, the second of class, was named in October 2017.

https://navaltoday.com/2018/03/13/fifth-river-class-opv-officially-named/




https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/new-offshore-patrol-vessel-hms-trent-named-glasgow/


Pelos custos apresentados para os cinco River, 78,5 milhões de euros por Navio, e, diga-se de passagem que em quase tudo são navios semelhantes aos nossos NPO's, por exemplo sem hangar e com 30mm como armamento principal, conseguíamos construir os dez NPO's/NCO's inicialmente previstos, e ainda sobravam uns milhões, £ 348 M = € 392,5 M ! ;) ;)
 
Abraços
« Última modificação: Março 13, 2018, 06:18:29 pm por tenente »
 

*

NVF

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 1960
  • Recebeu: 526 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 1382 vez(es)
  • +27/-0
Re: Royal Navy
« Responder #379 em: Março 13, 2018, 06:30:36 pm »
Há que ter em conta a diferença salarial entre Portugal e o RU e, mais importante, que este programa não passa de um subsídio à BAE para manter os seus estaleiros ocupados — não me admirava que parte significativa desse dinheiro tenha servido para manter técnicos qualificados em casa até a construção dos Type 26 ter entrando em velocidade de cruzeiro.
 

*

tenente

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 2187
  • Recebeu: 819 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 259 vez(es)
  • +58/-5
Re: Royal Navy
« Responder #380 em: Março 13, 2018, 07:27:03 pm »
Há que ter em conta a diferença salarial entre Portugal e o RU e, mais importante, que este programa não passa de um subsídio à BAE para manter os seus estaleiros ocupados — não me admirava que parte significativa desse dinheiro tenha servido para manter técnicos qualificados em casa até a construção dos Type 26 ter entrando em velocidade de cruzeiro.

Foi isso mesmo que aconteceu, desse modo mantiveram os melhores especialistas ocupados sem o receio de irem para outras paragens, digo estaleiros, construir na concorrência, mas, isso tem custos que a médio/longo prazo trazem benefícios enormes neste caso para a construção naval Britânica, apesar de eu preferir mais a construção naval Alemã, Dinamarquesa e até Holandesa á Britânica, vá-se lá saber porquê .........  ;)

Abraços
 

*

LM

  • Perito
  • **
  • 516
  • Recebeu: 34 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 333 vez(es)
  • +4/-0
Re: Royal Navy
« Responder #381 em: Março 14, 2018, 11:21:11 am »

Pelos custos apresentados para os cinco River, 78,5 milhões de euros por Navio, e, diga-se de passagem que em quase tudo são navios semelhantes aos nossos NPO's, por exemplo sem hangar e com 30mm como armamento principal, conseguíamos construir os dez NPO's/NCO's inicialmente previstos, e ainda sobravam uns milhões, £ 348 M = € 392,5 M ! ;) ;)

Este custo é para o "batch 2", correcto? Tinha ideia que eram (apesar do armamento principal) algo diferentes nos "detalhes" dos nossos NPO e que esses "detalhes" justificavam a diferença de custo (alterações da versão original => https://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2016/06/thoughts-batch-2-river-class/)... estou errado?
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum videtur
 

*

NVF

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 1960
  • Recebeu: 526 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 1382 vez(es)
  • +27/-0
Re: Royal Navy
« Responder #382 em: Março 14, 2018, 12:29:47 pm »
Há que ter em conta a diferença salarial entre Portugal e o RU e, mais importante, que este programa não passa de um subsídio à BAE para manter os seus estaleiros ocupados — não me admirava que parte significativa desse dinheiro tenha servido para manter técnicos qualificados em casa até a construção dos Type 26 ter entrando em velocidade de cruzeiro.

Foi isso mesmo que aconteceu, desse modo mantiveram os melhores especialistas ocupados sem o receio de irem para outras paragens, digo estaleiros, construir na concorrência, mas, isso tem custos que a médio/longo prazo trazem benefícios enormes neste caso para a construção naval Britânica, apesar de eu preferir mais a construção naval Alemã, Dinamarquesa e até Holandesa á Britânica, vá-se lá saber porquê .........  ;)

Abraços

Os alemães, agora também não lhes tocava :) Navios que adornam, custos exorbitantes, submarinos parados. Há algo de podre no reino da Prússia.
 

*

mafets

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 4644
  • Recebeu: 754 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 532 vez(es)
  • +31/-13
Re: Royal Navy
« Responder #383 em: Março 22, 2018, 10:15:05 am »
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/three-river-class-offshore-patrol-vessels-may-be-retained-should-they-be-needed-to-control-uk-waters/?no_cache=1

Citar
Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Defence, Guto Bebb has revealed that £12.7M had been allocated from the EU Exit Preparedness Fund to preserve the three Batch 1 River class ships, should they be needed to control and enforce UK waters and fisheries following the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union.



Cumprimentos
"Nunca, no campo dos conflitos humanos, tantos deveram tanto a tão poucos." W.Churchil

http://mimilitary.blogspot.pt/
 

*

Cabeça de Martelo

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 14269
  • Recebeu: 717 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 718 vez(es)
  • +53/-33
Re: Royal Navy
« Responder #384 em: Março 23, 2018, 06:07:20 pm »
Final cure for Type 45 destroyer propulsion problems announced

In a modest ceremony held on board HMS Diamond in Portsmouth today, BAE Systems, BMT Defence Services and Cammell Laird signed a contract with the MoD to deliver the Type 45 Power Improvement Project (PIP). Significant propulsion problems have hampered the operation of the six destroyers since their construction and it is encouraging that a permanent cure has now been agreed upon.

The RN has paid a high price for pioneering Integrated Electric Propulsion (IEP) in a major warship. The principles are sound but the selection by government, against the advice of the builder BAE Systems, of an unproven Gas Turbine design has left a painful legacy. Problems with the intercooler-recuperator fitted to the Type 45’s WR-21 gas turbine engines have caused complete propulsion failures. (We covered the complex story of these issues in detail in one of our most widely read articles back in 2016.)

Some media coverage has given the impression that all the Type 45s have been permanently stuck in port for years, but this is far from the truth. Sailing with some workarounds and operating restrictions, developed under the Equipment Improvement Plan (EIP), has allowed them to successfully deploy, including to the warm waters of the Arabian Gulf.

It would be too difficult to replace the Gas Turbines so instead, the PIP plan is that the two existing diesel-generator sets will be replaced by 3 more powerful sets. The Type 45 will then change its standard operating procedure to cruise on its diesels and only use the GTs for higher speeds.

£280M of funding for the PIP was set aside in the 2015 SDSR. The competition for the contract was split into two parts, comprising procurement, design and integration of the solution, and the physical installation and replacement of equipment onboard the Type 45 vessels. The alliance of BAES, BMT and CL won both parts of the contract, with work set to begin immediately.



The existing diesel generators could be replaced using access paths designed into the ship without cutting the hull open. Seen here in 2015, a replacement Wärtsilä 12V200 diesel generator set is prepared to be lowered into place aboard HMS Diamond. (Photo: BAE Systems)

The cutting open of the hulls to remove the old generator sets and inserting the new plant will be done at Cammell Laird’s shipyard in Birkenhead sustaining more than 100 jobs. CL have large dry docks and years of ship repair and conversion experience appropriate to this kind of work. BAE Systems already has the maintenance contract for the Type 45s in Portsmouth and has the technical experience needed to and support them re-entering the fleet after the conversion.

At this time there is no definite indication which ship will be first to be taken in hand for the PIP in 2019. HMS Daring is currently laid up as a “harbour training ship” in Portsmouth and is a likely candidate. HMS Dauntless has already begun a major refit, HMS Defender has just completed refit and the other 3 ships are active. The first conversion should be completed in 2021, 12 years after the first Type 45, HMS Daring was commissioned in 2009.

As the original shipbuilder, BAE Systems was always in pole position to win this contract. The announcement will be a blow to Babcock who had bid, needing continuity of work for Rosyth and Devonport. It is interesting to note a deepening alliance between Camell Laird and BAE Systems who are also competing for the Type 31e project.

http://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/final-cure-for-type-45-destroyer-propulsion-problems-announced/
7. Todos os animais são iguais mas alguns são mais iguais que os outros.

 

*

Lusitano89

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 9236
  • Recebeu: 301 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 209 vez(es)
  • +15/-5
Re: Royal Navy
« Responder #385 em: Março 28, 2018, 12:03:03 pm »


« Última modificação: Março 28, 2018, 08:21:22 pm por Lusitano89 »
 

*

tenente

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 2187
  • Recebeu: 819 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 259 vez(es)
  • +58/-5
Re: Royal Navy
« Responder #386 em: Março 30, 2018, 03:16:31 pm »
 The third of four new support tankers to be delivered to the UK has arrived in Cornwall for customisation and trials before entering service with the Royal Fleet Auxiliary and being deployed on operations with the Royal Navy.

 The arrival of RFA Tidesurge comes just weeks after her sister ship, RFA Tidespring, met up at sea with aircraft carrier HMS Queen Elizabeth for the first time.



 The 39,000-tonne tankers can carry up to 19,000 cubic metres of fuel and 1,400 cubic metres of fresh water in support of Royal Navy operations all over the world.

 The detailed customisation work to prepare RFA Tidesurge and her sister ships for operations is being undertaken at the A&P shipyard in Falmouth, sustaining around 300 jobs.

 Minister for Defence Procurement Guto Bebb said: “The arrival of RFA Tidesurge in Cornwall marks another key milestone in the Tide Class programme. Tidesurge will soon join her sister ships in providing the integral support which powers our warships and helps our Royal Navy maintain a truly global presence.”

While in Falmouth RFA Tidesurge will be fitted with UK specific armour, self-defence weaponry and communications systems, with the total UK work content, including A&P, in the Tide Class programme worth around £150 million and sustaining further jobs at 27 UK-based companies.

 The customisation work is expected to take around four months after which RFA Tidesurge will begin final sea trials before entering service in Autumn this year.

 Meanwhile, RFA Tidespring, which was preparing to conduct a Replenishment at Sea (RAS) refuelling when it met with HMS Queen Elizabeth in February, is currently acting as the training tanker for the Navy’s Flag Officer Sea Training (FOST) and will take part in exercise Joint Warrior in the Spring. RFA Tiderace, which is currently docked at A&P Falmouth, is undergoing preparations for her capability trials which are expected to commence in early April.

 Sir Simon Bollom, Chief of Materiel (Ships) at Defence Equipment and Support, the MOD’s procurement organisation, said: “I’m proud to say that the delivery of the tanker programme will provide vital support for the Royal Navy, providing it with fuel and fresh water, while also being able to undertake a wide range of maritime operations, including humanitarian relief.”

The fourth of the Tide Class vessels - RFA Tideforce - is expected to be delivered later this year.

 A&P Group has held the contract to support and maintain RFA ships at home and abroad since 2008. Under the Cluster Support Programme, A&P Group provides maintenance support to groups of MOD vessels, which include RFA Argus and the RFA Bay Class vessels Mounts Bay, Cardigan Bay and Lyme Bay.

http://www.thefifthcolumn.xyz/Forum/viewthread.php?tid=70&page=8

Abraços
« Última modificação: Março 30, 2018, 03:19:20 pm por tenente »
 

*

tenente

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 2187
  • Recebeu: 819 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 259 vez(es)
  • +58/-5
Re: Royal Navy
« Responder #387 em: Abril 13, 2018, 03:07:12 pm »
HMS Forth enters service


Photo: BAE Systems

HMS Forth, the first of Royal Navy’s five new Batch-2 River-class offshore patrol vessels, entered service in a ceremony held at her Her Majesty’s Naval Base Portsmouth, on April 13.

At the ceremony, the ship’s Lady Sponsor, Rachel Johnstone-Burt, was joined by UK government and defense officials, as well as the families of the ship’s company.

Forth is the first of five vessels in her class, designed and built by BAE Systems. The ship arrived at its Portsmouth homeport on February 26, 2018, after being launched at BAE Systems’ Glasgow construction site in August 2016.

The remaining four ships are expected to arrive in Portsmouth by 2020. The Batch 2 OPVs are four knots faster than their predecessors at 24 knots, have an increased range of 5,500 nautical miles. They are equipped with a 30mm automatic cannon as their main armament instead of a 20mm gun, two Miniguns and four machine-guns.

Each ship has an extended flight deck to operate up to Merlin size helicopters and accommodation for up to 50 embarked Royal Marines for boarding and supporting operations ashore if required and each carries two Pacific 24 sea boats.

The new OPVs will be supported at Portsmouth Naval Base by BAE Systems under the terms of the Maritime Services Delivery Framework (MSDF) contract. It was awarded to the company in 2014 to manage Portsmouth Naval base and to support the Royal Navy’s Portsmouth-based surface fleet.

The next major milestone for HMS Forth will be to undertake her first naval deployment, which is anticipated to take place later this year.

https://navaltoday.com/2018/04/13/hms-forth-enters-service/

Abraços
« Última modificação: Abril 13, 2018, 03:09:14 pm por tenente »
 

*

tenente

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 2187
  • Recebeu: 819 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 259 vez(es)
  • +58/-5
Re: Royal Navy
« Responder #388 em: Abril 17, 2018, 07:36:22 am »
Royal Navy ‘keen’ to keep batch one River class ships

By George Allison -   April 17, 2018



Rear Admiral Chris Gardner, assistant chief of naval staff, said that the Royal Navy is “keen” to keep the ships.

Speaking to The News here, Rear Adm Gardner said:

“At the moment no decision has been taken about what their future could be. I’m keeping the ships in a state of operational readiness which means that as the future becomes a bit clearer post-Brexit, and as our requirements are more broadly understood, we will be able to make decisions about whether or not we will seek to retain and operate them as additional units in the Royal Navy or find some other solution.”

Recently, Parliamentary Under-Secretary for Defence, Guto Bebb has revealed that £12.7M had been allocated from the EU Exit Preparedness Fund to preserve the three Batch 1 River class ships, should they be needed to control and enforce UK waters and fisheries following the United Kingdom’s withdrawal from the European Union.

Peter Dowd Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury asked:

“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, with reference to the Written Statement of 13 March 2018, Spring Statement, HCWS 540, if he will publish a list of where the £12.7 million allocated to his Department to realise the opportunities from EU exit will be spent.”

Guto Bebb, Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence, responded:

“The Ministry of Defence has now been allocated £12.7 million in 2018-19 for essential EU exit preparations. This will fund preserving three Off-Shore Patrol Vessels, should they be needed to control and enforce UK waters and fisheries. It also includes some EU Exit preparedness funding for UK defence bases in Europe. As with all HMT Reserve funding, finalised allocations will be confirmed at Supplementary Estimates 2018-19 in early 2019.”

Earlier in the year, Bebb revealed the running cost of the Batch 1 vessels in response to a written question:

“The cost of operating a River Class Offshore Patrol Batch 2 Vessel will be determined by the specific operational programmes of the ships when they enter service. We have used the cost of the current in service Batch 1 Offshore Patrol Vessels as the basis of our planning which is £6.5 million per year.”

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/royal-navy-keen-to-keep-batch-one-river-class-ships/

Abraços
 

*

tenente

  • Investigador
  • *****
  • 2187
  • Recebeu: 819 vez(es)
  • Enviou: 259 vez(es)
  • +58/-5
Re: Royal Navy
« Responder #389 em: Abril 19, 2018, 07:03:37 pm »
Union warns UK shipbuilding jobs at risk if support ship contract goes overseas




The Ministry of Defence is to put the order for Royal Fleet Auxiliary support ships out to international tender at the end of this month, diminishing hopes that they will be built in the UK.

Keeping the work in the UK could create or secure 6,700 jobs, including 1,800 shipyard jobs, and support a further 4,700 in the supply chain, say union GMB.

Ross Murdoch, the GMB’s national officer for shipbuilding, claimed:

“It would be a gross betrayal of the spirit of the ‘red, white and blue Brexit’ that Theresa May promised if this crucial contract is awarded outside of the UK and jobs here are lost as a result. We have a highly skilled shipbuilding workforce in the UK that is more than capable of making these ships at a fair market price.”

Current government policy is that Royal Navy warships are built in the UK but orders for Royal Fleet Auxiliary ships can go overseas as they’re not ‘complex warships’. According to the ‘National Shipbuilding Strategy’ document, there are three tenets regarding UK shipbuilding policy that impact on the build location of contracts:
1.For reasons of national security, all Royal Navy warships (destroyers, frigates and aircraft carriers) will continue to have a UK-owned design, and, will be built and integrated in the UK. Warship build will be via competition between UK shipyards. But international partners will be encouraged to work with UK shipyards and other providers to produce the best possible commercial solution.

2.All other naval ships should be subject to open competition (provided that there are no compelling national security reasons to constrain a particular procurement to national providers). Integration of sensitive UK-specific systems will be done in the UK, where possible after competition between UK providers.

3.Defence will take account of wider factors (including the impact on UK prosperity) when making these procurement decisions.

Support vessels like the solid support ships are eligible to be constructed outside the UK as only ‘complex warship’ construction (such as destroyers and frigates as outlined above) must stay within UK borders.

Babcock International, which announced 400 job losses at Rosyth was reportedly among a number of firms from the UK and abroad to attend an industry day in relation to the deal.

An article in The Herald recently claimed that shipbuilding on the Clyde has “been dealt a blow” as new support vessels aren’t going to be built there. The problem? The were never going to be, BAE aren’t even bidding for them. The headline seems to set the tone for the rest of the article with a glaring error, “Clyde yards suffer new blow as Royal Navy orders set to go abroad”, they’re not Royal Navy, they’re for the RFA.

The article even says “unions had hoped the vessels would be constructed in yards across the UK and leave the specialist yards on the Clyde to built complex warships“, support vessels are not complex warships by any definition and the unions appear well aware of the fact that the Clyde is at capacity with the Type 26 Frigate build and had no intention of bidding for this work. The 40,000 tonne support vessels wouldn’t even physically fit on the slip alongside the Type 26 Frigate builds.

The unions are advocating that the build stay in the UK, not that it be done on the Clyde and this is something we agree with.

Jude Brimble, GMB National Secretary, said:

“The Royal Fleet Auxiliary contracts are the key to unlocking the country’s massive shipbuilding potential. But Ministers refusal to put the UK’s interests first will mean that instead of a massive programme of shared economic and employment re-distribution, our firms will be competing against each other for slivers of complex warship work. It beggars belief that the Government wants to give this golden opportunity away to foreign competitors when working class communities up and down the country are crying out for decent work.”

The article which also appeared in The Evening Times also points out that unions are demanding the vessels are built in the UK, as seeking an international tender “undermines the national interest” however none of them are advocating for the 40,000 tonne support vessels be built on the Clyde which is expected to be at capacity until into the 2030’s, long after the date the vessels will be required.

We spoke to a contact at the BAE yard in Govan, who told us that the article was a bit surprising as no one at BAE expected the vessels would be built on the Clyde:

“Calling this a blow is a very strange choice of words. It [the article] came as a surprise frankly, I don’t think anyone here considers this any sort of blow especially as we were never going to be building them and BAE have no intention of bidding for them. They’ll be going to South Korea like the tankers as I don’t think any UK yard is considering a bid for them, we certainly aren’t.”

An MoD spokesperson said:

“There will be an international competition to build the ‘Fleet Solid Support’ supply ships, which UK companies will be able to enter, with a separate UK-only competition for customisation work and trials. This approach ensures the best value for money for taxpayers.”

The Strategic Defence and Security Review 2015 confirmed that three new large Military Afloat Reach and Sustainability (MARS) Solid Support Ships would be acquired for the Royal Fleet Auxiliary, to replace the single-hulled RFA Fort Victoria, which entered service in 1994, and RFA Fort Rosalie and RFA Fort Austin (both dating from the late 1970s). The Solid Support Ship is designed to carry a wide range of stores to support other ships with ammunition, food and explosives to replenish naval ships at sea.

They will have extensive aviation facilities, with 2 flight decks, one at the stern and one spot on top of the hanger. They will have the ability to to replenish at sea via 6 replenishment stations, three on each side as well as using helicopters for vertical replenishment.

The ships are expected to enter service in the mid 2020s.

https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/union-warns-uk-shipbuilding-jobs-at-risk-if-support-ship-contract-goes-overseas/

....E dizia eu no thread do NPO2000 para a futura corveta, ainda há quem defenda as industrias de construção Naval nacionais, nem de propósito !!!!!

Abraços
« Última modificação: Abril 19, 2018, 07:12:52 pm por tenente »
 

 

[Navy] SEAL Falls on Grenade to Save Comrades

Iniciado por PanteraQuadro Conflitos do Presente

Respostas: 0
Visualizações: 2325
Última mensagem Outubro 30, 2006, 01:12:30 pm
por Pantera
Red Star over Blue Seas - a Soviet Navy AAR

Iniciado por Vicente de LisboaQuadro Internet-Jogos-Simulações

Respostas: 16
Visualizações: 7702
Última mensagem Setembro 08, 2009, 11:57:00 pm
por Vicente de Lisboa
FFG-14 no Naval Vessel Registration (NVR-US Navy)

Iniciado por P44Quadro Armadas/Sistemas de Armas

Respostas: 0
Visualizações: 1162
Última mensagem Setembro 09, 2004, 01:56:12 pm
por P44
Imperial Japanese Navy Page

Iniciado por P44Quadro Internet-Jogos-Simulações

Respostas: 0
Visualizações: 1031
Última mensagem Outubro 28, 2004, 11:53:02 am
por P44
Marinha Grega (Hellenic Navy)

Iniciado por P44Quadro Armadas/Sistemas de Armas

Respostas: 24
Visualizações: 11117
Última mensagem Abril 20, 2018, 10:10:48 am
por P44