The French Navy Stands Up to China

[antonius123]

First of all, as I said. type 901 and type 904 are both not replenishment ship, 904 is general store, which by the way, lacking the crane, would not be class as even underway ship. 901 is a Combat Support Ship.

And if you count all this (Tug, Ice Breaker, troopship and everything), then British does not just have 9 auxiliary vessel like you said Because.

RFA :

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Fleet_Auxiliary

Tide Class Replenishment (1 ship)
Wave Class Replenishment (2 ships)
Fort Victoria Class Replenishment (1 ship)
Fort Rosalie Class Replenishment (2 ships)
Bay Class Dock Landing Ship (3 Ships)
Aviation Training Ship (RFA Argus) (1 ship)
Point Class Sealift (4 ships)
Royal Research Ship (4 Ships)
Tanker (MV Maersk Rapier) (1 ship)

RFA total - 19 ship

Royal Navy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_Royal_Navy_ships

Ice Breaker (HMS Protector)
Ocean Survey (HMS Scott)
Survey Launch (HMS Magpie)
Echo Class Multipurpose Survey (2 ship)

Royal Navy Total : 5

Serco Marine Service

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ships_of_Serco_Marine_Services

Worldwide support ship (1)

• SD Victoria Based at Portsmouth

Multi-purpose ship (1)

• SD Northern River

Anchor handling tug (1)

• Kingdom of Fife

Heavy lift ship (1)

• Cameron

Moor-class diving support vessels (2)

• SD Moorfowl Based at Kyle of Lochalsh
• SD Moorhen Based at Kyle of Lochalsh

Multicat 2510-class recovery vessels (2)

• SD Navigator Based at Portsmouth
• SD Raasay Based at Kyle of Lochalsh

Multicat 2613-class utility boat (1)

• SD Angeline Based at Faslane

Recovery vessels (2)

• SD Inspector Based at Portsmouth
• SD Engineer Based at Devonport

Coastal oilers (4)

• SD Teesdale Based at Portsmouth
• SD Oilman Based at Faslane
• SD Waterpress Based at Faslane
• SD Oceanspray Based at Portsmouth

Damen ART 80-32 tug (1)

• SD Tempest Based at Portsmouth, designated tug for Queen Elizabeth Class Aircraft Carriers

Impulse-class tugs (2)

• SD Impulse Based at Faslane
• SD Impetus Based at Faslane

ASD 2509-class tugs (2)

• SD Independent Based at Portsmouth
• SD Indulgent Based at Portsmouth

ATD 2909-class tugs (4)

• SD Reliable Based at Faslane
• SD Bountiful Based at Portsmouth
• SD Resourceful Based at Faslane
• SD Dependable Based at Faslane

Twin Unit Tractor Tugs (5)

• SD Adept Based at Devonport
• SD Careful Based at Devonport
• SD Faithful Based at Devonport
• SD Forceful Based at Devonport
• SD Powerful Based at Devonport

STAN 2608-class tugs (3)

• SD Hercules Based at Devonport
• SD Jupiter Based at Faslane
• SD Mars Based at Devonport

ASD 2009-class tugs (4)

• SD Christina Based at Portsmouth
• SD Deborah Based at Devonport
• SD Eileen Based at Devonport
• SD Suzanne Based at Portsmouth

Felicity-class water tractors (4)

• SD Florence Based at Devonport
• SD Frances Based at Devonport
• SD Genevieve Based at Portsmouth
• SD Helen Based at Portsmouth

Pushy Cat 1204-class tugs (2)

• SD Catherine Based at Portsmouth
• SD Emily Based at Devonport

STAN 1405-class tug (1)

• SD Tilly Based at Devonport

Trials vessels (2)

• SD Warden Based at Kyle of Lochalsh
• SD Kyle of Lochalsh Based at Kyle of Lochalsh

Storm-class tenders (2)

• SD Bovisand Based at Devonport
• SD Cawsand Based at Devonport

Newhaven-class tenders (3)

• SD Newhaven Based at Devonport
• SD Nutbourne Based at Portsmouth
• SD Netley Based at Portsmouth

Padstow-class tender (1)

• SD Padstow Based at Devonport

Oban-class tenders (3)

• SD Oban Based at Devonport
• SD Oronsay Based at Faslane
• SD Omagh Based at Faslane

Personnel ferries (2)

• SD Norton Based at Portsmouth
• SD Eva Based at Faslane

Fleet tenders (3)

• SD Melton Based at Kyle of Lochalsh
• SD Menai Based at Falmouth
• SD Meon Based at Falmouth

STAN 1505-class tenders (3)

• SD Clyde Racer Based at Faslane
• SD Solent Racer Based at Portsmouth
• SD Tamar Racer Based at Devonport

STAN 1905-class tenders (3)

• SD Clyde Spirit Based at Faslane
• SD Solent Spirit Based at Portsmouth
• SD Tamar Spirit Based at Devonport

Serco Marine Service (62 Ships)

Total combine would be 86 ships just between Royal Navy, Royal Fleet Auxiliary and Serco Marine Service. There are unknown number of Merchant Navy ship operating in RN capacity. + all the UK Overseas bases around the world, while its common knowledge Chinese Navy is YET to break the first island chain.

LOL at you try to count ALL the ship in PLAN and just count selected supply ship with the Royal Navy, EITHER YOU ARE TOO MAMBA TO UNDERSTAND THE MEANING OF REPLENSIHMENT AS SUGGESTED, OR YOU LIED OUTRIGHT.

Either way, I rest my case, liar

LOL

LOL. When will you be a little bit smarter?

First, can't you do math? since when 86 is > 232? . 86 Britts aux vessel are only about 1/3 of 232 China Aux

Second, most of Serco vessel are small boat with tonnage less than 500 tons, like this:

Third, Britts only has 6 big replenishment ship, while China has 18! though with smaller tonnage but with quantity 3x bigger! so China still win in this matter.

86 with most small boats are far behind 232 larger vessel, so you are making another nonsense and rubbish BS. Please come back to me when you are a little bit smarter

 

[gambit]

I dont care Gary meant underway replenishment or not...

The word 'underway' is important. Why? Because fleets under pressure want to minimize idle time, so if a ship can be resupplied while making waves, do it.

What this means is that a supply ship that is capable of underway replenishment is a different class of vessels than other ships, even if it is converted. You were so desperate to be right that you ended up being wrong because you did not read your source. A ship that requires 15 months of structural retrofitting to serve the military is no longer useful to non-military purposes.

You are wrong. But then...What was your 'aviation studies' again...???

 

[antonius123]

@Davos

Can you tell me the reason why you give negative rating on my post below?

LOLs. You still show same low quality, poor in reading comprehension and intelligence

Keyword: "did", "had" and it was written in 2013

So yes now china should be capable to circle the earth.

When will you be a little bit smarter?
Otherwise you will fail with your current research

This is to reply jhungary in his following post:

@gambit

He have a tendencies NOT TO READ HIS OWN source.

If you read the whole page of his quote

https://www.wired.com/2013/01/china-new-oiler/

NOT ONCE did the page mentioned China can circle the globe because of these small ship beside the title. In fact, the article is actually talked about how Chinese did not have enough of these AORs to resupply the fleet they had and forcing their own Carrier in home water....

LOL

I am really busy as of now to go do a lot of research and argue with this mambo. If you want, keep at it lol

In the meantime you never warn or give negative rating to jhungary and gambit, though they do personal insult and were still actively using words like stupid, idiot, or mamba?

 

[Piotr]

@Davos

Can you tell me the reason why you give negative rating on my post below?

He gave you negative rating for debunking jhungary and proving that jhungary is a fraud.

 

[jhungary]

LOL. When will you be a little bit smarter?

First, can't you do math? since when 86 is > 232? . 86 Britts aux vessel are only about 1/3 of 232 China Aux

Second, most of Serco vessel are small boat with tonnage less than 500 tons, like this:

So your tug boat in PLAN service, which you counted, are large ship, bigger than 500 tons?

Third, Britts only has 6 big replenishment ship, while China has 18! though with smaller tonnage but with quantity 3x bigger! so China still win in this matter.

86 with most small boats are far behind 232 larger vessel, so you are making another nonsense and rubbish BS. Please come back to me when you are a little bit smarter

You still don't understand the premises? It's not about who have more ship or not

You claim Chinese have 18 + 232 supply ship. But then you claim the UK only have 6 + 9

That is obliviously A LIE because you counted EVERY TINY SHIP in service with the PLAN and only say 6 + 9 auxiliary ship when I have proven they have 58+ in RN + RFA + Serco ALONE

That's number 1.

Another thing is, if you count ALL the assortment of ship (like Barrack Ship or Buoy Tender and etc) UK Naval Service (which is RN + RFA + Serco) does not operate those in their rank, they are from the Merchant Marine. Such as MV Queen Elizabeth II was used to transport British troop to Falkland from Mainland during 1982, and MV Atlantic Conveyor is used to transport Helicopter for British Army to Falkland. Both of which ship is from Merchant Navy not from UK Naval Services.

If so, if you have to put EVERY LITTLE SHIP in service with PLAN to count their war effort, then YOU WILL ALSO NEED TO PUT the 1400+ ship in service with Merchant Navy of the UK. Which mean they would have 86 + 1400+ ships.

That mean either you don't know what is replenishment, or you don't know what are you talking about AT ALL.

That number 2

The third point is, UK had 6 Replenishment ship China have 11 (not 18), but UK have 8 Overseas bases in all 5 different ocean, which shorten the supply routes a lot, which mean they only need 6 and still can travel the world. If British ship want to travel to Australia during wartime. They don't go from England to Australia, they go from England - Gibraltar/Ascension - Falkland - Australia, mean you only need supply to last in each journey.

China DO NOT have any base outside their own water. Which mean whenever Chinese Navy need to travel you need to last the whole range, 11 replenishment ship to serve 103 surface fleet would be enough for maybe 2 days of operation, then your replenishment ship would need port call, but where can they port?

On the other hand, if China want to sail to North Sea, you will need to have enough supply to last THE WHOLE TRIP. ​

IT'S COMMON KNOWLEDGE CHIENSE NAVY IS YET TO BREAK OUT FROM FIRST ISLAND CHAIN. And you are talking about global deployment? LOL

And you are a real smitee lol

The word 'underway' is important. Why? Because fleets under pressure want to minimize idle time, so if a ship can be resupplied while making waves, do it.

What this means is that a supply ship that is capable of underway replenishment is a different class of vessels than other ships, even if it is converted. You were so desperate to be right that you ended up being wrong because you did not read your source. A ship that requires 15 months of structural retrofitting to serve the military is no longer useful to non-military purposes.

You are wrong. But then...What was your 'aviation studies' again...???

lol, look at he outright LIES to the public and try to salvage.

he counted tug boat when he "claim" PLAN have 232 axillary ship, but when I counted the tug used by serco, he said it is too small LOL. well, maybe PLAN tug are as big as a Destroyer? I don't know...LOL

Really magnificent display of intelligence if you ask me.

Then he don't even know the different between a store ship and a replenishment ship.

LOL....

 

[antonius123]

So your tug boat in PLAN service, which you counted, are large ship, bigger than 500 tons?

Tug boat no, but there are much heavier vessel in china auxiliary than britts auxiliary.

You still don't understand the premises? It's not about who have more ship or not

You claim Chinese have 18 + 232 supply ship. But then you claim the UK only have 6 + 9

That is obliviously A LIE because you counted EVERY TINY SHIP in service with the PLAN and only say 6 + 9 auxiliary ship when I have proven they have 58+ in RN + RFA + Serco ALONE

That's number 1.

No. You still dont understand the point! this is not about I know/dont know exactly how many britts have which is supposed to be your burden as you are the one who claim britts have more, but this is about whether china can circle earth or not that you claim "cannot"!

And I have proved that with more replenishment ship and auxiliary ship than Britts has, China navy should be more able to circle the earth than Britts navi.

Another thing is, if you count ALL the assortment of ship (like Barrack Ship or Buoy Tender and etc) UK Naval Service (which is RN + RFA + Serco) does not operate those in their rank, they are from the Merchant Marine. Such as MV Queen Elizabeth II was used to transport British troop to Falkland from Mainland during 1982, and MV Atlantic Conveyor is used to transport Helicopter for British Army to Falkland. Both of which ship is from Merchant Navy not from UK Naval Services.

China 232 auxiliary ships are not from merchan marine.

If so, if you have to put EVERY LITTLE SHIP in service with PLAN to count their war effort, then YOU WILL ALSO NEED TO PUT the 1400+ ship in service with Merchant Navy of the UK. Which mean they would have 86 + 1400+ ships.

LOL. Dont you read that Chinese 232 is not including those from merchant?! I have shown you evidence.

If you said Britts has 1400 merchant ships, do you think China has less? LOL. Be a little bit smarter

That mean either you don't know what is replenishment, or you don't know what are you talking about AT ALL.

That number 2

LOL. It is you who dont know what is replenishment, since you brag 1400 Britts merchant ship in the equation

The third point is, UK had 6 Replenishment ship China have 11 (not 18), but UK have 8 Overseas bases in all 5 different ocean, which shorten the supply routes a lot, which mean they only need 6 and still can travel the world. If British ship want to travel to Australia during wartime. They don't go from England to Australia, they go from England - Gibraltar/Ascension - Falkland - Australia, mean you only need supply to last in each journey.

Wrong!

I have brough evidence china has 18 replenishment ship!, can you bust it?

Stop behaving ignorantly!

And you have no data yet to support your claim that Britts have 8!

China DO NOT have any base outside their own water. Which mean whenever Chinese Navy need to travel you need to last the whole range, 11 replenishment ship to serve 103 surface fleet would be enough for maybe 2 days of operation, then your replenishment ship would need port call, but where can they port?

On the other hand, if China want to sail to North Sea, you will need to have enough supply to last THE WHOLE TRIP. ​

IT'S COMMON KNOWLEDGE CHIENSE NAVY IS YET TO BREAK OUT FROM FIRST ISLAND CHAIN. And you are talking about global deployment? LOL

And you are a real smitee lol

Yes, China can circle the earth.
https://www.wired.com/2013/01/china-new-oiler/

I have shown you this many times. You fail to grasp.
Your reading comprehension problem and intelligent deficiency is your own problem.

lol, look at he outright LIES to the public and try to salvage.

he counted tug boat when he "claim" PLAN have 232 axillary ship, but when I counted the tug used by serco, he said it is too small LOL. well, maybe PLAN tug are as big as a Destroyer? I don't know...LOL

Really magnificent display of intelligence if you ask me.

Then he don't even know the different between a store ship and a replenishment ship.

LOL....

LOLs. You still show same quality: poor in reading comprehension

Even chinese tugboat still larger than serco, and if you remove tugboats from both china and britts, then you can see that china aux vessel is larger than serco.

While:
This Yantai class chinese aux ship outclass all the vessel in SERCO / Britts auxiliary ships.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_072-class_landing_ship#Yantai_class

This chinese tugboat outclass serco's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_830_tug

The word 'underway' is important. Why? Because fleets under pressure want to minimize idle time, so if a ship can be resupplied while making waves, do it.

What this means is that a supply ship that is capable of underway replenishment is a different class of vessels than other ships, even if it is converted. You were so desperate to be right that you ended up being wrong because you did not read your source. A ship that requires 15 months of structural retrofitting to serve the military is no longer useful to non-military purposes.

LOL. When did I say "underway" is not important? I was not debating about underway.

LOLs. You still show poor in reading comprehension.

You are wrong. But then...What was your 'aviation studies' again...???

For sure I am not fraudster like both of you (Gambit & Jhungary), who claim as a Air Force officer, pilot etc when debating about militer, and claim about semiconductor engineer when debating about electronics, and claim a financial background when debating about stock, PhD candidate etc, what a shame

 

[jhungary]

Tug boat no, but there are much heavier vessel in china auxiliary than britts auxiliary.

High Intelligence Homo-Sapient

UK Auxiliary vessel include EVERY UK registered vessel under UK DOT registar

So, is MV Queen Elizabeth II are a small ship?

No. You still dont understand the point! this is not about I know/dont know exactly how many britts have which is supposed to be your burden as you are the one who claim britts have more, but this is about whether china can circle earth or not that you claim "cannot"!

And I have proved that with more replenishment ship and auxiliary ship than Britts has, China navy should be more able to circle the earth than Britts navi.

If we are talking about war condition, China Cannot.

Most naval expert agree China is yet to break out from First Island Chain, ask your Chinese brother if you are unsure. 11 replenishment ship without oversea bases will NOT get a 103 ship navy ANYWHERE

Everybody can circle the earth if it is not in wartime condition, and no, you have not supply ANY evidence saying China can circle the earth, the article you quote did not said so,

China 232 auxiliary ships are not from merchan marine.

LOL. Dont you read that Chinese 232 is not including those from merchant?! I have shown you evidence.

China DOES NOT HAVE A MERCHANT MARINE.

And Merchant Marine is NOT the same as Commercial Fleet.

If you said Britts has 1400 merchant ships, do you think China has less? LOL. Be a little bit smarter

Do you even know what is a Merchant Navy? And how did it different from Commercial Fleet?

Merchant Navy is dual use of Commercial Ship with retasking into Military Purpose. eg You can convert an ocean liner to a troop ship with minimal reconfiguration. UK naval service DOES NOT OPERATE Troop ship, that does not mean UK does not have troop transport capacity.

Commercial Fleet in England is different than in Merchant Navy, it was a complete Civilian Vessel, you cannot use them in combat situation

China did NOT have a Merchant Navy, all support ship to serve PLAN are PLAN ship.

And no, China may have BUILD more ship than Britain, that does not mean they have more ship in Chinese Commercial Fleet than British. in fact according to this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_merchant_navy_capacity_by_country#The_table

British and its overseas territories) have more Gross Weight Tonnage and Dead Weight Tonnage over China

British have 59.4 millions GRT and 72.6 DWT
China have 38.8 millions GRT 62.2 millions DWT

LOL. It is you who dont know what is replenishment, since you brag 1400 Britts merchant ship in the equation

Dude, I used that to demonstrate that YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS REPLENISHMENT.

Wrong!

I have brough evidence china has 18 replenishment ship!, can you bust it?

Stop behaving ignorantly!

And you have no data yet to support your claim that Britts have 8!

You brought nothing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_904_general_stores_issue_ship

Built by Qiuxin (求新) Shipyard of Jiangnan Shipyard in Shanghai, Type 904 (and its successor Type 904A) are frequently but erroneously referred by many as underway replenishment ships. However, this is incorrect because these ships are designed as general stores issue ships, and they lack the gentries and transfer stations, and thus are not capable of performing any underway replenishment duties. Type 904 and Type 904A are equipped with four davits each housing a small boat, with two on each side, and these boats are the primary means of transfer supplies. Type 904 and Type 904A are intended to supply garrisons on offshore islands without any port facilities. Helicopter can be carried, but it platform only, without any hangars, and helicopter is the secondary mean of transferring supplies. Specification:[1]

Yes, China can circle the earth.
https://www.wired.com/2013/01/china-new-oiler/

I have shown you this many times. You fail to grasp.
Your reading comprehension problem and intelligent deficiency is your own problem.

Show me where in this article it said China can circle the earth?

The closest is this

Without underway replenishment, most naval vessels can travel only a few thousand miles; with fuel top-offs, they can circle the globe.

I never specifically mentioned Chinese have this capacity. But it mentioned this

just five tankers in total to support a combat fleet numbering no fewer than 75 major warships, including frigates, destroyers, amphibious assault ships and the lone carrier. The U.S., by contrast, possesses more than 30 underway replenishment ships – all of them larger than China's oilers – to support around 130 large surface warships.

Again, tell me where and when exactly the article said China can circle the globe now, I will admit I am wrong, if not, suck it

LOLs. You still show same low quality, poor in reading comprehension and intelligence

Even chinese tugboat still larger than serco, and if you remove tugboats from both china and britts, then you can see that china aux vessel is larger than serco.

While:
This Yantai class chinese aux ship outclass all the vessel in SERCO / Britts auxiliary ships.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_072-class_landing_ship#Yantai_class

This chinese tugboat outclass serco's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_830_tug

Such an ignorant.

Comeback to me if you are a little bit smarter

Now, who's displaying its "AWESOME" intelligence?

Were 072 landing ship bigger than Bay Class?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay-class_landing_ship
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_072-class_landing_ship#Yantai_class

And Tug is not about size, it's about traction (where you can tow ship) the fact that China need big tug to provide good traction mean the tug technology is quite bad in China, while type 830 weight 3000 tons to tow the heaviest ship PLAN had, which is CV-16, the Serco uses a tug that weigh 295 tons to tow HMS Queen Elizabeth II, which is full 20,000 ton bigger than CV-16.

This is nothing to take pride about,

What are smitee LOL

 

[antonius123]

High Intelligence Homo-Sapient

UK Auxiliary vessel include EVERY UK registered vessel under UK DOT registar

So, is MV Queen Elizabeth II are a small ship?

LOLs. You are idiot if you include restaurant ship to navy aux ships [emoji38]

If we are talking about war condition, China Cannot.

Most naval expert agree China is yet to break out from First Island Chain, ask your Chinese brother if you are unsure. 11 replenishment ship without oversea bases will NOT get a 103 ship navy ANYWHERE

Everybody can circle the earth if it is not in wartime condition, and no, you have not supply ANY evidence saying China can circle the earth, the article you quote did not said so,

OF course can, with 18 can.

China DOES NOT HAVE A MERCHANT MARINE.

And Merchant Marine is NOT the same as Commercial Fleet.

Do you even know what is a Merchant Navy? And how did it different from Commercial Fleet?

Merchant Navy is dual use of Commercial Ship with retasking into Military Purpose. eg You can convert an ocean liner to a troop ship with minimal reconfiguration. UK naval service DOES NOT OPERATE Troop ship, that does not mean UK does not have troop transport capacity.

Commercial Fleet in England is different than in Merchant Navy, it was a complete Civilian Vessel, you cannot use them in combat situation

China did NOT have a Merchant Navy, all support ship to serve PLAN are PLAN ship.

And no, China may have BUILD more ship than Britain, that does not mean they have more ship in Chinese Commercial Fleet than British. in fact according to this

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_merchant_navy_capacity_by_country#The_table

British and its overseas territories) have more Gross Weight Tonnage and Dead Weight Tonnage over China

British have 59.4 millions GRT and 72.6 DWT
China have 38.8 millions GRT 62.2 millions DWT

Your evidence show the opposite.

You said China doesnt have Marine Navy, but the list show China has.
You said Britts have more tonnage, but the list show the opposite: china has more:

China have 38.8 millions GRT 62.2 millions DWT
British have 30 millions GRT and 40.7 DWT [emoji38]​

And these are not including Hongkong merchan navy with 78.5 GRT 130.3 DWT where if combined will dwarf Britts [emoji38]

You need to have head check dude [emoji23]

Dude, I used that to demonstrate that YOU DO NOT KNOW WHAT IS REPLENISHMENT.

LOL. It is you [emoji38]

You brought nothing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_904_general_stores_issue_ship

I brough so many evidence that busted your BS.

Chinese 18 Replenishment ship (Evidence) :

Fleet replenishment has been an expanding element in PLAN auxiliaries. The PLAN view the need of replenishment ships as vital for blue water fleet operations:

• Type 901 fast combat support ship (NATO designation) - 1 in active service, 1 on sea trial
• Type 903 replenishment ship (NATO designation Fuchi-class) - 8 in active service.
• Type 904 general stores issue ship (NATO designation Dayun-class) - 6 in active service.
• Type 908 replenishment ship (NATO designation Fusu-class) - 1 in active service.
• Type 905 replenishment ship (NATO designation Fuqing-class) - 2 in active service.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/People's_Liberation_Army_Navy_Surface_Force#Fleet_replenishment​

That is evidence of china 18 rep ship that bust your claimed 11 ship, stop lying [emoji23]

Show me where in this article it said China can circle the earth?

The closest is this



I never specifically mentioned Chinese have this capacity. But it mentioned this



Again, tell me where and when exactly the article said China can circle the globe now, I will admit I am wrong, if not, suck it

It is obvious from the whole reading. Your poor reading comprehension problem is your own problem. [emoji23]

Now, who's displaying its "AWESOME" intelligence?

Were 072 landing ship bigger than Bay Class?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bay-class_landing_ship
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_072-class_landing_ship#Yantai_class

And Tug is not about size, it's about traction (where you can tow ship) the fact that China need big tug to provide good traction mean the tug technology is quite bad in China, while type 830 weight 3000 tons to tow the heaviest ship PLAN had, which is CV-16, the Serco uses a tug that weigh 295 tons to tow HMS Queen Elizabeth II, which is full 20,000 ton bigger than CV-16.

This is nothing to take pride about,

What are smitee LOL

Yes, type 071 landing ship is bigger than Bay Class

Bay class is 16k tonnage, while type 071 is 25k tons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_071_amphibious_transport_dock

LOL. Tonnage is one of important parameter of vessel, including Tug.

Tha fact says china navy and auxiliary ships and merchant navy dwarf britts, which is contrary to your military knowledge [emoji23] [emoji38]

 

[jhungary]

LOLs. You are idiot if you include restaurant ship to navy aux ships

didn't @Davos teaches you a lesson on hot to use personal insult?

And Laugh at you for saying Queens Elizabeth 2 is a restaurant ship. Maybe you were too poor to have a trip on it, mommy did not pay you enough money to go anywhere uh?? Poor you LOL

OF course can, with 18 can.

How, because you said so?

LOLs. Your evidence show the opposite.

You said China doesnt have Marine Navy, but the list show China has.
You said Britts have more tonnage, but the list show the opposite: china has more:

China have 38.8 millions GRT 62.2 millions DWT
British have 30 millions GRT and 40.7 DWT ​

And these are not including Hongkong merchan navy with 78.5 GRT 130.3 DWT where if combined will dwarf Britts

You need to have head check dude

Mr McMuffin obviously did not read the website in full, but who am I kidding, you never do.

I said Britain + Overseas Britain Territories combine have more tonnage than China.

Did you read this line in the webpage?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_merchant_navy_capacity_by_country

For example, although the United Kingdom's merchant navy totals 30.0 million GRT and 40.7 million DWT in shipping, actual UK merchant navy interests worldwide consists of 59.4 million GRT and 75.2 million DWT in shipping.[2] This largely includes the merchant navies of British Overseas Territories and UK merchant navy interests in former colonies.

You are quoting just Britain, Cayman Island and Bermuda were both British Territories, hence ship registered in both territories are British Ship, because both territories belong to the British Empire. And that is before the British Flag of Convinence ship come to the picture.

LOL @ Mr McMuffin.

LOL. It is you

Lol, it's Mr McMuffin

I brough so many evidence that busted your BS, where you are such a liar and ignorant

​

That is evidence of china 18 rep ship that bust your claimed 11 ship, stop lying

lol, it said OUTRIGHT it was NOT a underway replenishment ship, in black and white, and you still try to lie your way out lol?

Really? Mr McMuffin?

It is obvious from the whole reading. Your poor reading comprehension problem is your own problem.

It is obvious you HAVE NOT READ THE WHOLE article.

The article is actually saying China LACKING THE CAPACITY to travel overseas with the current deployment

it said here

With the existing AOR fleet tapped out, the new carrier Liaoning would have forced Beijing to make a hard choice: keep the flattop in home waters or cut either the counter-piracy patrols or the long-range training cruises.

lol funny looking at Mr McMuffin lying thru his arse...

Not ONCE did the article hinting at Chinese capacity to travel the world, at least in 3 occasion the article question whether or not China have enough replenishment ship to sustain operation.

Again, if you can find in the article, anywhere saying China have the capacity to circle the globe, I admit I am wrong and I will even give you my title, if you can't then suck it lol.

Yes, type 071 landing ship is bigger than Bay Class

Bay class is 16k tonnage, while type 071 is 25k tons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Type_071_amphibious_transport_dock

LOL. Tonnage is one of important parameter of vessel, including Tug. Fix your head first please LOL

LMAO Why not said "Liaoning is bigger than Bay Class" while you are at it?

You said Type 072, then now you claim 071 is bigger? 071 wasn't even the same class of ship than Bay class. And 071 is an Amphibious Transport Dock (LPD), 071 wasn't even a support ship. Bay Class is LANDING SUPPORT SHIP. If you want to compare Type 071, you should use it against HMS Ocean or USS San Antonio

Dude, are you sane in the membrane?

LOL

 

[oprih]

@Davos

Can you tell me the reason why you give negative rating on my post below?

​

This is to reply jhungary in his following post:

​

In the meantime you never warn or give negative rating to jhungary and gambit, though they do personal insult and were still actively using words like stupid, idiot, or mamba?

@Davos is a piece of shit just like his mates jhungary and gambit. I bet the poor guy wanted to kill himself already while hopelessly watching as China develops at a rapid pace while his two bros are getting destroyed in this thread simultaneously.

Rated negative by a retard aka @Davos. This retard must be really mad.

 

[Piotr]

@Davos is a piece of shit just like his mates jhungary and gambit. I bet the poor guy wanted to kill himself already while hopelessly watching as China develops at a rapid pace while his two bros are getting destroyed in this thread simultaneously.

@oprih please don't drag you down to @jhungary 's level. You're better than this.

 

[antonius123]

didn't @Davos teaches you a lesson on hot to use personal insult?

And Laugh at you for saying Queens Elizabeth 2 is a restaurant ship. Maybe you were too poor to have a trip on it, mommy did not pay you enough money to go anywhere uh?? Poor you LOL

With "if"!

LOLs. Calling your mom again to help you? And you dont feel you are insulting other?

To be frankly I dont respect him due to his bias, for me he is only your fanatic supporter; he seems panic every time you get cornered, like a mom who is panic seeing her child was bullied. I suspect both of you share something or have certain relationship

How, because you said so?

Because the fact said so. Evidence given and you are too delusional to see fact.

Mr McMuffin obviously did not read the website in full, but who am I kidding, you never do.

I said Britain + Overseas Britain Territories combine have more tonnage than China.

Did you read this line in the webpage?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_merchant_navy_capacity_by_country

Did britts need those territories to support her during malvinas? and britts navy still can sail to malvinas 15000 km away.

You are quoting just Britain, Cayman Island and Bermuda were both British Territories, hence ship registered in both territories are British Ship, because both territories belong to the British Empire. And that is before the British Flag of Convinence ship come to the picture.

LOL @ Mr McMuffin.

LOL. You drag cayman island and bermuda while britts did not invite nor need them when they fight in malvinas, and still bermuda and cayman are peanuts and the additions from them are far from enough to equate China+ HongKong.

Lol, it's Mr McMuffin

Hahaha admit it mr. delusional Lol

lol, it said OUTRIGHT it was NOT a underway replenishment ship, in black and white, and you still try to lie your way out lol?

Really? Mr McMuffin?

In what way they are not underway?

It is obvious you HAVE NOT READ THE WHOLE article.

The article is actually saying China LACKING THE CAPACITY to travel overseas with the current deployment

it said here

You have reading comprehension problem. I've told you it was then, and we are talking now, as simple as that which you failed to understand due to your own problem.

I suggest that you read sentences carefully.

I repeat again:

LOLs. You still show same low quality, poor in reading comprehension and intelligence

Keyword: "did", "had" and it was written in 2013

So yes now china should be capable to circle the earth.

When will you be a little bit smarter?
Otherwise you will fail with your current research

lol funny looking at Mr McMuffin lying thru his arse...

Not ONCE did the article hinting at Chinese capacity to travel the world, at least in 3 occasion the article question whether or not China have enough replenishment ship to sustain operation.

Again, if you can find in the article, anywhere saying China have the capacity to circle the globe, I admit I am wrong and I will even give you my title, if you can't then suck it lol.

It was then, not now. The article said "had", "did", and it was written in 2013, means in 2013 and before china has no capability to circle earth, but the article clearly say they are developing that capability in fast manner - the part that you ignore. And now 5 year after that you can see she has 18 replenishment ships which enable China to circle earth.

LOLs. You still show same low quality, poor in reading comprehension and intelligence

Keyword: "did", "had" and it was written in 2013

So yes now china should be capable to circle the earth.

When will you be a little bit smarter?
Otherwise you will fail with your current research

LMAO Why not said "Liaoning is bigger than Bay Class" while you are at it?

You said Type 072, then now you claim 071 is bigger? 071 wasn't even the same class of ship than Bay class. And 071 is an Amphibious Transport Dock (LPD), 071 wasn't even a support ship. Bay Class is LANDING SUPPORT SHIP. If you want to compare Type 071, you should use it against HMS Ocean or USS San Antonio

Dude, are you sane in the membrane?

LOL

LST means less powerful LPD, dont you know that?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amphibious_transport_dock

What make you think during war China navy will never bring her LPD when Britts bring her LSD?

In fact China has 4 LPD + 32 LST + 31 LSM while Britts only has 2 smaller LPD and 4 LSD, though Britt's LSD is much heavier than Chinese LST, combination of Chinese LPD + LST + LSM will dwarf them easily!

And as I've told you above: the combined China navy + aux + merchant dwarf the combined Britt's navy + aux + merchant, in term of number of ships - tonnage - fire power, regardless on how you would segregate or classify their ships!

I've told you, you would be trapped in your own silly game, as you are demonstrating nonsense more and more

 

[Tiqiu]

@antonius123 Just use the ignore list as I did. You have already smashed them. My past experience here made me feel that these so called "professionals" are so unprofessional, yet they are being taken good care of by other professionals or alike here. Sometimes I thought it was an Indian forum

 

[antonius123]

@antonius123 Just use the ignore list as I did. You have already smashed them. My past experience here made me feel that these so called "professionals" are so unprofessional, yet they are being taken good care of by other professionals or alike here. Sometimes I thought it was an Indian forum

Well indeed , some fraudster could hide their "unprofessionality" with their "professional status" obtained from cooperation among them by giving positive rating to each others BS. But this thread could be a compacted monument and historical evidence of how they make ridiculous claims then get busted.

Also another positive side is: watching their joke and how they get busted could be entertaining too

 

[Davos]

G'day mate

@waz @Slav Defence @The Eagle

I think this thread have been dragging on long enough @antonius123 was repeatedly insulting fellow member and no action was taken. Not to mention the off topic content

I have reported all associated post on this thread and please do close this thread to prevent further esculation

Thank you

Davos

@jhungary @gambit

Please refrain from replying to @antonius123 in the future