# The sexyness level of various naval things.........



## cameron (15 Dec 2007)

Season's Greetings to all!  I don't know if this topic has ever been posted before but in the spirit of Christmas I thought i'd start this pornographic thread ;D.  Which destroyers/frigates you guys think has the sexiest body?  We're not discussing capabilities just pure shallow aesthetics.  Also i've lumped the two classes of ships together because some such as the Spanish F100 and the RN's Batch III Type 22's blur the line between frigate and destroyer in terms of size.  I hope none of the mods find it sexist, it isn't meant to be, just in the spirit of fun.  Here is my totally unscientific subjective list:

1) RN Type 45 'D' Class (red blooded West Indian men like me find it hard to resist a thick body and large rear end.  If Serena were a warship she'd be HMS Daring).

2) F124/De Zeven Provincien Class.

3) F100

4) Halifax class CPF (very sleek profile, even when compared to 'stealthier' designs.  Hmm Rihanna?).

5) RN Type 23

6) RN Type 22 Batch III

7) Arleigh Burke Class

8) Iroquois Class (Getting up there in age but still a head turner, like Vanessa Del Rio).

9) RN Type 42 (Venerable beauty like no.8).

10) South African Navy Valour Class.


----------



## TN2IC (15 Dec 2007)

KNM Fridtjof Nansen










I have been around this one while in port. Very nice. 


I don't know how to re size it. 
Also... why ships? I prefere my trucks.... now those Sterling Dump trucks with the plow... now we"re talking!


----------



## Fishbone Jones (15 Dec 2007)

Nice picture of anchor stowage  ;D


----------



## Michael OLeary (15 Dec 2007)

Sgt  Schultz (SANKT NIKOLAUS) said:
			
		

> KNM Fridtjof Nansen
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Could you try resizing the image?


----------



## TN2IC (15 Dec 2007)

Ebenezer 'the Grinch' Scrooge said:
			
		

> Nice picture of anchor stowage  ;D



Whatever floats your boat! 

Bada bling!  ;D

As for resizing.... I have no clue in that field.


----------



## Michael OLeary (15 Dec 2007)

Sgt  Schultz (SANKT NIKOLAUS) said:
			
		

> As for resizing.... I have no clue in that field.



Try playing with this:  http://www.resize2mail.com/


----------



## geo (15 Dec 2007)

Sgt Schultz....
here is same boat... different view of the Aegis frigate.
Aparently, the Norwegians are having some serious rust issues with the Spanish manufacturer....

Pretty ship though


----------



## aesop081 (15 Dec 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> here is same boat... different view of the Aegis class frigate.



AEGIS is not a class of warship.


----------



## geo (15 Dec 2007)

I know that.... Aegis is a capability ....


----------



## geo (15 Dec 2007)

South African Navy Valour Class Frigate

Very pretty ship indeed.....


----------



## cameron (15 Dec 2007)

Ebenezer 'the Grinch' Scrooge said:
			
		

>



Sorry Scrooge! ;D


----------



## tomahawk6 (15 Dec 2007)

Type 45


----------



## cameron (15 Dec 2007)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Type 45



Yeah baby, she looks good from the front too


----------



## tomahawk6 (15 Dec 2007)

The Zumwalt class DDG 1000 when its built will be a show stopper. ;D


----------



## CougarKing (15 Dec 2007)

T6,

Is it just me or is that a ram bow on the Zumwault's hull design? It kind of reminds me of those USN or RN predreadnoughts or WW1-era dreadnoughts that had a ram bow. So a ram bow reduces its signature and makes it more stealthy than other kinds of bows?


----------



## cameron (15 Dec 2007)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> The Zumwalt class DDG 1000 when its built will be a show stopper. ;D



Hell yeah, only reason I didn't include it is because none have been built yet, but I can't wait to see that design in real life.


----------



## tomahawk6 (15 Dec 2007)

The Navy will have to manage it better than it has the LCS program.


----------



## SweetNavyJustice (15 Dec 2007)

What can I say other than I'm a sucker for the classics.  

The Russian Kirov class (now called something else....I've been away from the Navy too long...)

Don't know if I'm disqualifying myself since it's a cruiser instead of a destroyer or frigate.....

To me the Kirov represents what a naval warship is supposed to be.  Big, packed full of violence, the mere sight of which on the open ocean will ring in a bad day.  

Only problem is that the Russian Navy is too poor to float the boat..


----------



## tomahawk6 (15 Dec 2007)

I agree something about a battle cruiser inspires respect.


----------



## geo (15 Dec 2007)

Heh... Cruisers & a bad day... I can relate to that.

Something like an infantryman in his trench in West Germany, waiting for the massed guns of the Soviet artillery to rain down on his positions... to be followed by the massed tanks streaming towards the coast.


----------



## cameron (15 Dec 2007)

Even though it's not part of the category that this thread is about I have to agree, the Kirov class battlecruisers are among the most beautifully designed warships in the history of naval architecture.  I remember the first time I saw a picture of one.  When I was in Secondary School one of my classmates would always have the latest issue of Jane's Fighting Ships which he always generously lent me.  In one of them I saw a picture of the Kirov class battlecruiser Frunze (I hope I remember the spelling right).

In a word I was awestruck.


----------



## Spencer100 (15 Dec 2007)

The Kirov was one of the reasons the Reagan Admin reattivated the BB's in the eights as a response.  I think one of Tom Clancy books even had a "battle" scene between the two.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (15 Dec 2007)

Although this is not for the sexiest _warship_ its for the sexiest *frigate and destroyer* class.....


----------



## Sub_Guy (15 Dec 2007)

This here is a decent Frigate.   RSS Formidable


----------



## Spencer100 (15 Dec 2007)

Always a favourite of mine........like the beautiful B&W movie starlets of the 30's and 40's







The Tribal class of WWII.  Arguably the most famous of any Canadian ships, (We can talk about the Flowers another time)

Mod: to add class of ship


----------



## CougarKing (15 Dec 2007)

What's a battlecruiser doing in a destroyer/frigate thread? ;D Next thing we know it we'll be putting those old _King George V_ class battleships from the WW2 era Royal Navy on this thread as well...hehe.

Would someone mind answering my question about the ram bow? Or is this thread just for eye candy?


----------



## JBoyd (15 Dec 2007)

Personally I'm attracted to more of the tin can variety







And a sexier view of the Ault







Edit: To fix links


----------



## CrazyCanuck (16 Dec 2007)

I think (correct me if I'm wrong) during the Crimean War there was a battle and more ships were sunk by ramming than by gunfire, so therefore ship designers thought that ram was a viable weapon. Of course this did not prove true during the first world war however it does increase the speed of a ship and possible its stability(?) which would make sense as that DDWhatever thing has rather low gunwales.


----------



## CrazyCanuck (16 Dec 2007)

Visby Class Corvette, (not a frigate but still the best looking ship out there)

[edit] I wonder if she comes in CADPAT


----------



## aesop081 (16 Dec 2007)

I've seen alot of different frigates and destroyers at sea but i still think that our very own Halifax class looks pretty good. They sure make for some great photos

(Picture by yours truely)


----------



## JBoyd (16 Dec 2007)

Well speaking of the Halifax class here is a nice view of the HMCS Toronto


----------



## CougarKing (16 Dec 2007)

Another battlecruiser from another era that inspires respect- HMS _Renown_. This BC's war record from both World Wars rivals that of the battleship HMS _Warspite_. This is a picture of her in WW2, after the massive refit/overhaul which gave her a superstructure much like that of the newer _King George V_ class battleships of the time.


----------



## warspite (16 Dec 2007)

Off Topic:
Well since it seems non frigates are fair game i have to offer one sugestion 
As for frigates I have always liked the halifax class for looks


----------



## cameron (16 Dec 2007)

OK I GIVE UP, I GIVE UP ;D  If the mods have no problem with it you guys can mention a cruiser, battlecruiser or battleship that you think has a sexy figure.  But please no aircraft carriers or submarines, that would make it ridiculous.  Seriously though, my reason for specifying destroyers/frigates is because they are the largest main surface combatants in most first rate navies today (I was planning to start a thread in the future on all main surface combatants, both past and present). 

Fewer navies are using cruisers, interestingly though, the new Type 45 can probably be seen as a light cruiser in terms of its size and capabilities, just like the Type 82 prototype of the '80's.  I'd be interested to hear if you navy types (who know more about these things than I do) agree. 

P.S. I have to agree with CDN Aviator and warspite, the Halifax Class is one of the best looking warships out there.


----------



## tomahawk6 (16 Dec 2007)

How about submarines ? I think the Antey class is sexie just wouldnt want to serve in one. ;D


----------



## JBoyd (16 Dec 2007)

cameron said:
			
		

> But please no aircraft carriers or submarines, that would make it ridiculous


----------



## aesop081 (16 Dec 2007)

The clean lines of a Los Angeles Class SSN running the surface. This is the USS Hellena

(another pic by yours tuely)


----------



## CrazyCanuck (16 Dec 2007)

For subs I'd have to say our Victoria's have a certain appeal to them, but these new German ones can sure turn heads:


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (16 Dec 2007)

The Arleigh Burkes are the size of WW1 battleships so in terms of capability designations such as cruiser are falling by the wayside. Designations these days seem to be leaning towards what role the warship assumes.


----------



## cameron (16 Dec 2007)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> The Arleigh Burkes are the size of WW1 battleships so in terms of capability designations such as cruiser are falling by the wayside. Designations these days seem to be leaning towards what role the warship assumes.



True, i've noticed that present day designations are often more based on the ship's role than its size.  Oh and guys as for the sub photos, very funny.


----------



## CougarKing (16 Dec 2007)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> The Arleigh Burkes are the size of WW1 battleships so in terms of capability designations such as cruiser are falling by the wayside. Designations these days seem to be leaning towards what role the warship assumes.



Ex Dragoon,

Well those _Arleigh Burkes _ are also closer in size or tonnage to WW2 era USN heavy cruisers built during the Washington Treaty years, such as the USN _Portland_ and _Northampton_ class heavy cruisers.

Speaking of WW1 Battleships...COUGH...Ram Bows...my unanswered question from earlier in the thread...COUGH, COUGH COUGH!
 :


----------



## CrazyCanuck (16 Dec 2007)

Ram Bows:





> I think (correct me if I'm wrong) during the Crimean War there was a battle and more ships were sunk by ramming than by gunfire, so therefore ship designers thought that ram was a viable weapon. Of course this did not prove true during the first world war however it does increase the speed of a ship and possible its stability(?) which would make sense as that DDWhatever thing has rather low gunwales.


----------



## CougarKing (16 Dec 2007)

Thanks for the response, Boater.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (16 Dec 2007)

CougarDaddy said:
			
		

> Ex Dragoon,
> 
> Well those _Arleigh Burkes _ are also closer in size or tonnage to WW2 era USN Heavy cruisers built during the Washington Treaty years, such as the USN _Portland_ and _Northampton_ class heavy cruisers.
> 
> ...



CD just illustrating how much designations have changed over the years....


----------



## TN2IC (16 Dec 2007)

Boater said:
			
		

> For subs I'd have to say our Victoria's have a certain appeal to them, but these new German ones can sure turn heads:





Yeah.. they look amazing up on dry dock!  ;D


----------



## CougarKing (16 Dec 2007)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> CD just illustrating how much designations have changed over the years....



Ex-Dragoon,

Your point is well taken. One example that demonstrates your point are the USN's now-decomissioned _Leahy_ class guided-missile cruisers, which used to be classified as destroyers, surprisingly.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leahy_class_cruiser

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Navy_1975_ship_reclassification

So yes, as you well know, the destroyers and frigates of today are a far cry from and much more heavily armed than their predecessors dating back to World War One and so forth.


----------



## ironduke57 (16 Dec 2007)

Is there a sexier warship then the mighty BISMARCK? No. 8) Okay YAMATO doesn´t looked bad neither.

Regards,
ironduke57


----------



## CougarKing (16 Dec 2007)

ironduke57 said:
			
		

> Is there a sexier warship then the mighty BISMARCK? No. 8) Okay YAMATO doesn´t looked bad neither.
> 
> Regards,
> ironduke57



'em's fighting words!!!  ;D Of course there is a SEXIER ship than the _Bismarck_, her sister ship the _Tirpitz_!   :rofl:

You are right, the _Yamato_'s huge size made her sexy too. Hehehe...but aren't we REALLY getting off topic?  ;D


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (16 Dec 2007)

One nations destroyers is another nations cruisers....don't be too wrapped up on the terms used....


----------



## aesop081 (16 Dec 2007)

CougarDaddy said:
			
		

> but aren't we REALLY getting off topic?  ;D



I'll fix that  ;D


----------



## TN2IC (16 Dec 2007)

The sexyness level of various naval things.........  eh?

I would like to say some of the girls on the MCVD's on Bravo Jetty...


----------



## zipperhead_cop (16 Dec 2007)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> How about submarines ? I think the Antey class is sexie just wouldnt want to serve in one. ;D



Someone is into big girls   :dontpanic:


----------



## tomahawk6 (16 Dec 2007)

Yeah something about subs as big as cruisers that are appealing. ;D


----------



## aesop081 (17 Dec 2007)

tomahawk6 said:
			
		

> Yeah something about subs as big as cruisers that are appealing. ;D



Speaking of Russians and cruisers.......


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (17 Dec 2007)

I always thought the Kara's and Kresta's were very nice looking cruisers as well.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (17 Dec 2007)

Apparently the pre TRUMP 280s were voted the sexiest warships by Playboy when they first were commissioned due to their bunny ears. The old timers still talk about it lol


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (17 Dec 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> Sgt Schultz....
> here is same boat... different view of the Aegis frigate.
> Aparently, the Norwegians are having some serious rust issues with the Spanish manufacturer....
> 
> Pretty ship though



ah hem,,,it's not a boat.....it's a ship!!!!!!!!!! :rage:


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (17 Dec 2007)

ironduke57 said:
			
		

> Is there a sexier warship then the mighty BISMARCK? No. 8) Okay YAMATO doesn´t looked bad neither.
> 
> Regards,
> ironduke57



Yeah but what have you done for us lately?? ;D


----------



## cameron (17 Dec 2007)

Well since we've broadened the thread, how about that doe-eyed female marine in the tv series 'Jag'. ;D


----------



## Danjanou (17 Dec 2007)

cameron said:
			
		

> Well since we've broadened the thread, how about that doe-eyed female marine in the tv series 'Jag'. ;D




Your wish is the mods command.  8)


----------



## Danjanou (17 Dec 2007)

In all seriousness the French Navy had some great designs in the immediate pre WW2 era. Most never saw action after 1940 unfortunately.

The unique design of the Richelieu Class of BB ( 2 completed) resulted in a nice looking ship. My favourite picture shows here in her new Pacific Fleet camo paint job. NAother beautiful classic ship is also in this shot HMS Cumberland, a County Class Heavy Cruiser. (Cumberland was part of the squadron  that hunted down the Graf Spee.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (17 Dec 2007)

I always thought this was rather nice too.


----------



## PMedMoe (17 Dec 2007)

I prefer this sailor.


----------



## aesop081 (17 Dec 2007)

No..........this is much better


----------



## xena (17 Dec 2007)

I don't think her boots are USMC issue though. ;D


----------



## JBoyd (17 Dec 2007)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> No..........this is much better



Here is a 1028x768 Wallpaper of that shot for you 

http://wallpapers.skins.be/catherine-bell/catherine-bell-1024x768-1124.jpg


----------



## geo (17 Dec 2007)

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> ah hem,,,it's not a boat.....it's a ship!!!!!!!!!! :rage:



Heh... it took long enouigh for a bite


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (18 Dec 2007)

Give me a break! I was lurking outside a bank on a park bench yelling at people as they went in at all hours of the day..."WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO THE GOOD OLD DAYS ?WHEN YOU WENT TO THE BANK AND IT WAS CLOSED?!"  > (Curmudgeons unite!)


----------



## Spencer100 (18 Dec 2007)

To get thing back on track....






Its the white paint that makes this one!!  

The Legend Class National Security Cutters are the largest ships in the Deepwater program, and represent the program's flagship in more ways than one. The 418 foot, 4,300 ton ships will be frigate-sized vessels with a 21 foot draughts.


----------



## cameron (18 Dec 2007)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> No..........this is much better



I'm gonna have to side with CDN Aviator on this one.


----------



## cameron (18 Dec 2007)

About the County Class cruiser in the pic posted by Danjanou.  Ironically it was another County Class that started my love affair with warships.  Somewhere between 1978 and 1979 after the deep water port in St. Kitts was completed a RN County Class destroyer HMS London became the first warship to dock there (it couldn't have been any later than '80 because the ship was decommissioned that year).  

At the time my family lived on a hill right above the port with an excellent view.  Prior to construction of the port visiting naval vessels stayed out in the Basseterre roadsted so this was my first chance to see a large warship up close.  This was way before 911 so I could walk onto the port and stand right next to the ship.  She created quite an impression on a primary school lad (I know i'm dating myself here , with her sleek grey shape bristling with gun turrets and radar antennae.  Just as a point of note her sister ship HMS Glamorgan served in the Falklands War and set a record for firing the longest artillery barrage from a British warship since WWII.


----------



## newfin (18 Dec 2007)

I'm not sure if I would call this "sexy" but it certainly is a beautiful ship.


----------



## Spencer100 (18 Dec 2007)

Broken link for that pic


----------



## zipperhead_cop (24 Dec 2007)

Posted, becuase there just wasn't a decent enough Catherine Bell pic.


----------



## JBoyd (24 Dec 2007)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Posted, becuase there just wasn't a decent enough Catherine Bell pic.



The one that CDN Aviator posted and that I posted a nice wallpaper size of wasn't decent enough?


----------



## zipperhead_cop (24 Dec 2007)

JBoyd said:
			
		

> The one that CDN Aviator posted and that I posted a nice wallpaper size of wasn't decent enough?



They would have been great, if they worked.  
Seriously Skippy, could you be jealous of an off topic pic?  Must be that Left Coast oversensitivity.   :
Thanks for doing the full quote though, and re-posting my pic.   ;D


----------



## JBoyd (24 Dec 2007)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> They would have been great, if they worked.
> Seriously Skippy, could you be jealous of an off topic pic?  Must be that Left Coast oversensitivity.   :
> Thanks for doing the full quote though, and re-posting my pic.   ;D



Hmm, yes my link doesnt seem to work properly, heres a better one 

http://www.aclasscelebs.com/wallpaper/images/girl_catherine_bell001.jpg

however CDN's attachment works for me.... and no problem ;D always a fan of Catherine Bell


----------



## Roy Harding (24 Dec 2007)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Posted, becuase there just wasn't a decent enough Catherine Bell pic.



She's cute - but doesn't look old enough to know what to do with it without extensive instruction.

I hate wasting time on instruction.

Gawd (and my wife) know that "time" is "short enough", so to speak.   


Roy


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (24 Dec 2007)

I think she needs some remedial drill. She's saluting with the wrong hand...and it's a pretty weak salute at that!


----------



## PMedMoe (24 Dec 2007)

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> I think she needs some remedial drill. She's saluting with the wrong hand...and it's a pretty weak salute at that!



You call that a salute?  I thought she was tipping her hat!


----------



## Roy Harding (24 Dec 2007)

PMedMoe said:
			
		

> You call that a salute?  I thought she was tipping her hat!



Well - _something_ was tipping, anyway.


----------



## 284_226 (24 Dec 2007)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> She's cute - but doesn't look old enough to know what to do with it without extensive instruction.
> 
> I hate wasting time on instruction.
> 
> Gawd (and my wife) know that "time" is "short enough", so to speak.



Those photos are only 5 years old, and she's 39 now.  If she needs instruction at this point, there's definitely something wrong  ;D


----------



## Roy Harding (24 Dec 2007)

284_226 said:
			
		

> Those photos are only 5 years old, and she's 39 now.  If she needs instruction at this point, there's definitely something wrong  ;D



39's OK - by then they're starting to get the "hang" of things.

I'll let my appointment secretary know that the lady is good to go on my "B" list  (women don't get REALLY good until they're 45).



Roy


----------



## zipperhead_cop (24 Dec 2007)

Roy Harding said:
			
		

> 39's OK - by then they're starting to get the "hang" of things.



Like "disappointment"?   ;D


----------



## Rayman (24 Dec 2007)

Man...and here I am messing around with women my age like a sucker.... No wonder I know friends who are with Cougars.


----------



## Roy Harding (24 Dec 2007)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Like "disappointment"?   ;D



Speaking from experience?  ;D


----------



## cameron (24 Dec 2007)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Posted, becuase there just wasn't a decent enough Catherine Bell pic.



You just made my Christmas Eve ;D


----------



## cameron (24 Dec 2007)

For those of you who find speed sexy check out these videos.  Even if you've seen them before if you're like me and you like big girls who know how to move it ;D, then you won't tire of watching them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzveUz-WRGQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCj4L160Slg


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (24 Dec 2007)

cameron said:
			
		

> For those of you who find speed sexy check out these videos.  Even if you've seen them before if you're like me and you like big girls who know how to move it ;D, then you won't tire of watching them.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mzveUz-WRGQ
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SCj4L160Slg



Sweet....nice vids.


----------



## cameron (24 Dec 2007)

Here is a really great vid of the Royal Netherlands Navy's De Zeven Provincien Class.  The soundtrack is almost as awesome as the ship.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O87Yl8_gQWA


----------



## Old Sweat (24 Dec 2007)

In reference to the picture of Katherine Bell, "39's OK - by then they're starting to get the "hang" of things."

Geez Roy,

I dunno. It's pretty hard to determine accurate breast measurements from a photo.

Merry Christmas

Brian


----------



## Roy Harding (24 Dec 2007)

Old Sweat said:
			
		

> In reference to the picture of Katherine Bell, "39's OK - by then they're starting to get the "hang" of things."
> 
> Geez Roy,
> 
> ...



I bow to your much more extensive experience!

Merry Christmas, Brian.

Roy


----------



## geo (25 Dec 2007)

Anyways.... Ms Bell's a marine isn't she?


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (25 Dec 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> Anyways.... Ms Bell's a marine isn't she?



Yes but Marines are a branch of the Navy.


----------



## geo (25 Dec 2007)

(not if the marines had any say in the matter)


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (25 Dec 2007)

They don't. They are Naval combat troops in just about every country I can think of that have them. In the US they fall under the Department of the Navy.

http://www.usmc.mil/marinelink/mcn2000.nsf/homepage?readform


----------



## geo (25 Dec 2007)

In hoc.... I know they don't have a say in the matter and they belong to the Navy in that they are a "sub-component" of same said Navy.


----------



## cameron (27 Dec 2007)

More sexy naval action  the last two are of the Canadian Navy (of course i'd save the best for last).

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ux3qZ5vMhE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Re-UYkC0r2s

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A8cuB2B2rSo

http://www.youtube.com/watch/?v=QNbqhk4bY-A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VwSwGd62mZc


----------



## cameron (27 Dec 2007)

Oops mistake with the second to last link ;D this is the correct link

http://youtube.com/watch?v=QNbqhk46Y-A


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (27 Dec 2007)

I love the hovercraft video. Just think if we had a few of those we could get you Army boys into some neato places eh?? ;D


----------



## cameron (27 Dec 2007)

Yeah that hovercraft is badass, are the Zubr class hovercrafts Russian made?  Because I think I saw a red star on it.


----------



## Ex-Dragoon (27 Dec 2007)

http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/zubr/

Zubr class hovercraft.


----------



## medaid (27 Dec 2007)

Catherine Bell is my hero  I would serve under her any time if she were a real Marine officer ;D ah... my thing for female lawers...*drool*


----------



## Old Sweat (27 Dec 2007)

Med Tech,

I am sure you could handle being on top of the situation.

Just to add to why Roy recognized why I am called Sweaty.

Cheers,

The Sweatnik


----------



## medaid (28 Dec 2007)

Old Sweat,

    I think I might be beside myself when I'm next to her. The whole sexy TV star thing you know ;D

Cheers,


MedTech


----------



## cameron (28 Dec 2007)

Where Ms. Bell is concerned i'd gladly serve in any position, whether 'under' her or 'on top' of the situation. ;D


----------



## Trooper Hale (28 Dec 2007)

cameron said:
			
		

> Where Ms. Bell is concerned i'd gladly serve in any position, whether 'under' her or 'on top' of the situation. ;D



It'd be a four year contract i'd be happy to fulfil and extend.


----------



## geo (28 Dec 2007)

Heh.... prolly doing a tenner in the Brig!


----------



## cameron (28 Dec 2007)

Ex-Dragoon said:
			
		

> http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/zubr/
> 
> Zubr class hovercraft.



Just got the time to check out the link you posted, thanks Ex-Dragoon.


----------



## geo (30 Dec 2007)

if you're into warships and warbirds, Prisons & Bird brains, ......you'll enjoy these photos.

Just click on the link below,

http://home.comcast.net/~bzee1a/


----------



## cameron (30 Dec 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> if you're into warships and warbirds, Prisons & Bird brains, ......you'll enjoy these photos.
> 
> Just click on the link below,
> 
> http://home.comcast.net/~bzee1a/



DAAMMMN those Blue Angels are some crazy muthaf*&^%s


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (30 Dec 2007)

Very very cool. Man that guy was low off the water. that would have been cool to see.


----------



## aesop081 (30 Dec 2007)

Theres a lenghty thread about that perticular blue Angels show somewhere on this site. No, they did not fly under the bridge.


----------



## CougarKing (1 Jan 2008)

CDN Aviator said:
			
		

> Theres a lenghty thread about that perticular blue Angels show somewhere on this site. No, they did not fly under the bridge.



What about this Blue Angel F-18 from the recent Fleet Week at San Francisco?  ;D







Here's a little more eye candy of HMCS _Algonquin_ from the same event.


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jan 2008)

CougarDaddy said:
			
		

> What about this Blue Angel F-18 from the recent Fleet Week at San Francisco?  ;D


I've seen the video of the show. They do *not* fly under the bridge.


----------



## 284_226 (1 Jan 2008)

CougarDaddy said:
			
		

> What about this Blue Angel F-18 from the recent Fleet Week at San Francisco?  ;D



If you look at the bottom of the webpage in question, the photographer makes this note:



> For the record, the Number 5 did NOT go under the bridge for the sneak pass. He popped over it on the SF side of the span, and dropped down low like a rock! It was an awesome move, and executed quickly.


----------



## CougarKing (1 Jan 2008)

The picture near the top of my post was not from the same webpage you are referring to, but from a different site. So they didn't go under the bridge after all.


----------



## aesop081 (1 Jan 2008)

CougarDaddy said:
			
		

> So they didn't go under the bridge after all.



Now, ist that what i said Twice already ?


----------



## 284_226 (1 Jan 2008)

CougarDaddy said:
			
		

> The picture near the top of my post was not from the same webpage you are referring to, but from a different site. So they didn't go under the bridge after all.



I'm guessing the other site "borrowed" the photos from the BZ site cited above.  They're identical photos.


----------



## cameron (10 Jan 2008)

Couple of great vids.  The first is of a sleek Chinese destroyer, any of you guys know the name of this class and when the first one was commissioned?  the second is some Russian Navy aircraft carrier footage, not too crazy about the music but the footage is awesome.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xc78znFuSgw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9J05XhJ-N_U


----------



## CougarKing (10 Jan 2008)

cameron said:
			
		

> Couple of great vids.  The first is of a sleek Chinese destroyer, any of you guys know the name of this class and when the first one was commissioned?  the second is some Russian Navy aircraft carrier footage, not too crazy about the music but the footage is awesome.
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xc78znFuSgw
> 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9J05XhJ-N_U



The Chinese Destroyer in the video is a Type 052 _Luyang II_ class guided missile destroyer; is it just me or her bridge/superstructure kinds of resembles those USN _Arleigh Burke_ class AEGIS destroyers?

http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/surface/type052c_luyang2.asp


----------



## cameron (10 Jan 2008)

CougarDaddy said:
			
		

> The Chinese Destroyer in the video is a Type 052 _Luyang II_ class guided missile destroyer; is it just me or her bridge/superstructure kinds of resembles those USN _Arleigh Burke_ class AEGIS destroyers?
> 
> http://www.sinodefence.com/navy/surface/type052c_luyang2.asp



Thanks CougarDaddy, well it may be just you and at least one other person because I did see a resemblance too.


----------



## geo (11 Jan 2008)

With all the industrial spying done by China to get it to where it is today.... are you surprised ?


----------



## cameron (11 Jan 2008)

geo said:
			
		

> With all the industrial spying done by China to get it to where it is today.... are you surprised ?



Not the least bit.


----------



## Spencer100 (11 Jan 2008)

Didn't the SPY-1A tech data get into the hands of the Chinese though the Japanese defence force?   I thought I heard something about a laptop and disk with classifiied data getting out.


----------



## CougarKing (11 Jan 2008)

Spencer100 said:
			
		

> Didn't the SPY-1A tech data get into the hands of the Chinese though the Japanese defence force?   I thought I heard something about a laptop and disk with classifiied data getting out.



Spencer,
You must be talking about this other thread I pasted below, right? 

"JMSDF Officer leaks AEGIS Intel"
http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/69218.0.html


----------



## cameron (12 Jan 2008)

Seeing as how there's a discussion on another thread about the CH148-Cyclone helicopter, I think it's appropriate that I mention that it's definitely one of the sexiest (in my opinion the sexiest) maritime helicopter designs.


----------



## medaid (13 Jan 2008)

I nominate Vern, on the basis that she is sexy, and if she ever stepped foot on a Naval vessel she will no doubt be considered to be more sexy then the vessel she rests her behind on. Not to mention she was in Halifax at one point or another. 

She gets me vote.


----------



## CougarKing (13 Jan 2008)

MedTech said:
			
		

> I nominate Vern, on the basis that she is sexy, and if she ever stepped foot on a Naval vessel she will no doubt be considered to be more sexy then the vessel she rests her behind on. Not to mention she was in Halifax at one point or another.
> 
> She gets me vote.



Yup. Medtech has DEFINITELY gone to the COUGAR SIDE, alright !!! MUAHAHAHA! (EVIL LAUGH)  >


----------



## Spencer100 (14 Jan 2008)

CougarDaddy said:
			
		

> Spencer,
> You must be talking about this other thread I pasted below, right?
> 
> "JMSDF Officer leaks AEGIS Intel"
> http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/69218.0.html



Yes that was it.  For what ever it is worth.


----------

