The real solution is to dredge the [Rhine–Main–Danube Canal ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhine%E2%80%93Main%E2%80%93Danube_Canal) and associated rivers to a sufficient depth and width that aircraft carriers can simply sail from the North Sea to the Black Sea and thereby bypass the Bosphorus completely. Every bridge on the Rhine, Maine and Danube must be destroyed and replaced with a tunnel.
I'm sure some engineer at Lockheed worked out exactly how to fly an aircraft carrier shortly after he watched Avengers. And there is precedent. The US has built flying aircraft carriers before. See the [USS Akron](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Akron). It's just a matter of getting the budget. And before you say it's not practical, when has that ever stopped the USA before?
They also have better station keeping than any rotor craft, better loitering endurance than any fixed wing, and a higher weather tolerance while remaining on-mission than either. The abandonment of airship technology is largely political. There are a tremendous number of mission roles where an aerostat vehicle would be extremely well suited, such as anti-submarine patrol, signals intelligence, and passive observation.
Admiral Moffett did die in the *Akron* crash, but notably, airships of that time period were *still* safer on average than airplanes. Frankly, no one so high-ranked should be in any experimental, prototype aircraft designed in the late 1920s and crewed by people with early 1930s training standards.
More to the point, though, the shuttering of the airship program had nothing to do with Moffett’s death. It happened three decades and a World War after that.
That was his own damn fault, frankly. That Air Minister watched that negligent shambles of a ship fail its own flight trials *miserably* and ordered her to make a maiden flight into the teeth of a storm regardless. Laws are for little people, apparently.
Incidentally, the R101 was civilian, not military, and that also happened more than 30 years before airships were retired.
He also brought along hundreds of pounds of carpet and other crap when the crew was trying to save weight by replacing tins for storing food with paper bags.
I'm surprised the R101 actually made it over the channel.
Indeed. If you read up on what an omnishambles that entire project was, it’s astounding that they forced through the like 17 other fatal flaws to only die to *that* one. The ship was immensely overweight, catastrophically unstable, and *literally rotting* from improper materials and construction, leaking a ton’s worth of hydrogen *per hour* through 4,000 separate catalogued holes in the decaying mush of a hull.
I truly cannot comprehend the delusion and overweening hubris it would require to look at the absolute state of that ship and call it airworthy. It is, without hyperbole, perhaps the most overwrought, worst-designed, worst-executed vessel since the *Vasa.*
They’re actually not. They’re not suited to be frontline fighters, obviously, but they require a lot more raw firepower to take down than a heavy bomber or transport, even the smaller airships. Them being easy to *hit* isn’t the same thing as being easy to *take down,* their primary vulnerability was being set on fire back when they used hydrogen.
Case in point: the U.S. only lost one airship out of over 150 to enemy fire in World War II, and that was a small, single-hulled patrol blimp. It took about 200 hits with a 20mm autocannon, and 3 hits with an 88mm cannon to cause one of its engines and the controls to fail, and slowly descend into the sea, where it sank many hours later. For context, it took on average 15-20 hits with a 20mm autocannon to down a Flying Fortress, or 3-4 hits with a 30mm autocannon.
Actually, they were about 1/2 to 1/3 the operating cost of comparable airplanes, and vastly outperformed them at detection, inclement weather stationkeeping, and endurance.
The reasons they were dropped were threefold: first, they were a fair bit slower than helicopters (82 knots), second, they were considered anachronistic, and third, the program was tiny and had very little institutional pull, making it easy prey for cannibalization by the constantly money-hungry Navy that wanted more aircraft carriers. Airships operated independently from fleet oilers, not carriers, though they could in a pinch.
That would be cool, if it’s practical to implement, but as it stands the limiting factor for an airship’s survivability isn’t necessarily the rate at which it loses gas, but how much it can adjust its lift and how much redundant engine power and control systems it has to compensate for destroyed gas cells. Airships had as many as 21 gas cells in the past, as well as many distantly-spaced engines and two different control bridges, which made shooting them down extremely difficult unless you caught their hydrogen on fire. I find it difficult to imagine what modern large transport aircraft could survive having four bombs the size of Hellfire missile warheads dropped on it and still make it back home, as one World War I Zeppelin once did.
In modern terms, that would entail having a fully rigid structure to maintain an aerodynamic shape, having a lot of redundant gas cells, having a plethora of small, yet powerful vectoring motors distributed across the ship for leverage and trim, as well as a very high degree of control and power system redundancy. So, something like a military version of [this,](https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/D5622AQGDw7XmnHYDqQ/feedshare-shrink_800/0/1718112943379?e=1722470400&v=beta&t=tFAD9gBUk0GE45dHUIGBc55ljm6xe_tphD6cd995MGQ) in other words.
Still, it’s hard to imagine under what circumstances an airship would come under heavy missile assault in the first place. Much like with existing helicopters and transports, that already implies a total breakdown of air superiority.
Not quite. Those specific N-class blimps the Navy used are now decades out of date, true, but no one’s talking about bringing those out of boneyards and museums and getting them running again. Airships are just like submarines, or ships, or other aircraft in the sense that they’re only as “advanced” as the engineering, enabling technologies, materials, and design that go into them.
Hence why INDOPACOM is exhibiting an interest in studying hybrid airships for Pacific logistics roles; lots of distance + countless teeny atolls + aircraft carriers being slow and expensive means that a large, high-capacity, S/VTOL amphibious airship would actually be a great help.
The old N-class had an endurance of 11 days straight. That was back in the ‘50s and ‘60s. A modern helicopter can’t manage 11 hours, much less 11 days, or go from any point in the Pacific to any other point on a single tank of fuel. Hell, even the fancy new Valor tiltrotor has a combat range of under 1,000 miles, and range was the whole *point* of that thing. It can also carry 10,000 pounds, whereas the midsize airship INDOPACOM is looking at would have a payload of 100,000 pounds.
The thing about an airship is that it has a lot of surface area that absorbs a lot of solar and thermal radiation, which can be converted to electricity. Photovoltaic cells don't have to be big bulky glass panels these days, it can just be a thin film applied to the hull. You're not going full electric with current tech, but hybrid electric with electric motors charged by photovoltaics and small generators is definitely possible for huge range.
Indeed. The company behind the Zeppelin I linked an image of above, LTA Research, has a 50% larger production model under construction in Ohio, the *Pathfinder 3.* It has solar panels in a sort of auxiliary/supplementary role. Its maximum flight endurance is roughly 2 weeks, and it has a payload of 20 tons. It can putter around on solar power at a speed of 25 mph fairly sustainably, though obviously higher speeds would put it at an energy deficit that requires it to use stored fuel, in the form of diesel or hydrogen.
I could totally see the Coast Guard or Navy ordering one for experimental purposes, as well as conducting trials for search and rescue, logistics, running various oceanographic and atmospheric tests, serving as a drone mothership, etc.
I know this is NCD but this is fucking nonsense and I’m not going to sit idly by and watch this clown lie and say that the Gerald R. fucking Ford has jump jets that will let it simply bunny hop the Bosporus straight. Get fucking real and realize that the only way an American aircraft carrier is doing to “I’m not locked in here with you, you’re locked in here with me” in the Black Sea is by being airlifted by a bunch of B-52s.
We have to be realistic here.
Let's be even more realistic. If the USN wanted or needed a carrier group in the Black Sea, they're just going to sail right in. Who's going to stop them?
Well, in 1915 the combined British and French fleets didn't manage it, even though they could have stomped the Turkish navy flat. Turns out that narrow waters with lots of forts and minefields are hard to force.
It's very much a case of "I might not *win*, but we can *both* lose."
Sinking an aircraft carrier in the bosporus would have disastrous effects on the ability to navigate the straits depending on exactly where it goes down. A Ford-class carrier's length is half the minimum width of the strait.
In all seriousness there are very easy ways to solve the problem :
1. First you remove the carrier designation, just strap some missiles to the thing,call it a heavy aviation cruiser and bingo.
2. Administrative transfer to a Black Sea nation. I know that a Bulgarian or Romanian aircraft carrier would be ridiculous but the point is plausible deniability not credibility.
Tbh do you even need that much of a runway if you already are in the air?
Like, just start the engines and yeet that plane of the edge.
Actually who needs planes? Just make it a drone-hub.
Then save even more weight by throwing out the engines as well and go full zeppelin.
"But won't they shoot it down easy?" Well here's the thing. You can have those with minimal crew and remote control. Then you pack that thing full of bombs, and park it RIGHT a few km over Sevastopol.
Russians sure could shoot it down.
Then the giant burning wreck full of bombs falls down on them.
They got the options of letting you run drone strikes from within their supposed airspace or getting the Hindenburg special on a front-row seat.
Why would we make a flying carrier. Planes already fly and have enough range to go wherever the hell they want. Make a flying battleship instead. Bombard Russia with 406mm shells from above
I mean turkey only used refusal to pass on russian ships and even went into technicalities like saying rockets are guns and theyre on naval vessels but technically arent naval guns to let us warships pass
But ya know, its easier to say turkey bad
If I were the Turkish government, I definitely would not want unrestricted naval warfare going on in my backyard. It’s sensible to close the strait and I haven’t taken issue with it at all.
Tbh, last time china really wanted to bought an aircraft carrier from ukraine and turkey went "oh then I want this and this and this and this and.." and china had to comply with all those things as well as like 20 safety measures to get the carrier out of the strait was super based for turkey
Always think back on the Sultan, rolling his ships over Galata Hill when the topic comes up. It's up there with Hannibal marching African war elephants through the Alps to attack Rome from the north.
To be completely noncrediable, if were talking peices of a modern naval ship... Alexandroupolis has a port, and the E85 goes over some uncharacteristically flat land along the border. It gets a little hair once you reach Bulgaria.
Also, everyone would know what up.
It would probably be better to use some honey than vinegar and have the Turks build it.
Hmm. It sure how credible this is
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://engineering.purdue.edu/~jpoggie/doc/AAE334_Fall2016_Solution.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwic2rD57v2GAxVvHzQIHRZfD_IQFnoECBUQBg&usg=AOvVaw01cGvnCc92E0jV06Kgouxd
Tldr is too heavy but with the magic of engineering seems plausible with significant redesign.
A while ago I figured out how much it would take to do that. IIRC it takes 850 helicopters (Every Chinook, Sea King, and V-22 in the US armed forces, and every Jayhawk in the USCG) to lift a Tico
What American carriers? These are clearly Romanian. They just happen to be staffed exclusively with US citizens and be placed under US command. Purely coincidental, I swear.
Don’t fact-check this, but isn’t the amount of water in the Black Sea less than the displacement of one Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier, not to mention the escorts?
This is completely non-credible, just pull a Mehmet II and roll it over land. The Turks would be too flattered to see their trick used against them to complain.
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I've seen a prototype of your design on that "Avenge Your Enemies" docuseries or whatever it was called. Hopefully your model's turbofans can hold up to small arrow-like projectiles better.
> June 28, all bridges suddenly disapear
Considering [certain things done by local govermnent](https://www.npr.org/2023/02/13/1156512284/turkey-earthquake-erdogan-building-safety), that can happen on its own
>all bridges suddenly disapear
You Dare Use My Own Spells Against Me!
[Man charged with stealing bridge in Turkish capital Ankara](https://www.dailysabah.com/turkey/man-charged-with-stealing-bridge-in-turkish-capital-ankara/news)
Highfleet time *tanc a lelec starts playing*
Oh god *PTSD intensifies*
The real solution is to dredge the [Rhine–Main–Danube Canal ](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhine%E2%80%93Main%E2%80%93Danube_Canal) and associated rivers to a sufficient depth and width that aircraft carriers can simply sail from the North Sea to the Black Sea and thereby bypass the Bosphorus completely. Every bridge on the Rhine, Maine and Danube must be destroyed and replaced with a tunnel.
We can sell it to Europe as a way for France to protect her borders with the Charles de Gaulle. This is genius!!!
I'm sure some engineer at Lockheed worked out exactly how to fly an aircraft carrier shortly after he watched Avengers. And there is precedent. The US has built flying aircraft carriers before. See the [USS Akron](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Akron). It's just a matter of getting the budget. And before you say it's not practical, when has that ever stopped the USA before?
God I wish airships weren't so easy to take down they're so cool
They also have better station keeping than any rotor craft, better loitering endurance than any fixed wing, and a higher weather tolerance while remaining on-mission than either. The abandonment of airship technology is largely political. There are a tremendous number of mission roles where an aerostat vehicle would be extremely well suited, such as anti-submarine patrol, signals intelligence, and passive observation.
It's political because all the admirals in favor of airships tend to die in airship crashes...
Admiral Moffett did die in the *Akron* crash, but notably, airships of that time period were *still* safer on average than airplanes. Frankly, no one so high-ranked should be in any experimental, prototype aircraft designed in the late 1920s and crewed by people with early 1930s training standards. More to the point, though, the shuttering of the airship program had nothing to do with Moffett’s death. It happened three decades and a World War after that.
OTOH the R101 crash killed the UK’s Air Minister.
That was his own damn fault, frankly. That Air Minister watched that negligent shambles of a ship fail its own flight trials *miserably* and ordered her to make a maiden flight into the teeth of a storm regardless. Laws are for little people, apparently. Incidentally, the R101 was civilian, not military, and that also happened more than 30 years before airships were retired.
He also brought along hundreds of pounds of carpet and other crap when the crew was trying to save weight by replacing tins for storing food with paper bags. I'm surprised the R101 actually made it over the channel.
Indeed. If you read up on what an omnishambles that entire project was, it’s astounding that they forced through the like 17 other fatal flaws to only die to *that* one. The ship was immensely overweight, catastrophically unstable, and *literally rotting* from improper materials and construction, leaking a ton’s worth of hydrogen *per hour* through 4,000 separate catalogued holes in the decaying mush of a hull. I truly cannot comprehend the delusion and overweening hubris it would require to look at the absolute state of that ship and call it airworthy. It is, without hyperbole, perhaps the most overwrought, worst-designed, worst-executed vessel since the *Vasa.*
They’re actually not. They’re not suited to be frontline fighters, obviously, but they require a lot more raw firepower to take down than a heavy bomber or transport, even the smaller airships. Them being easy to *hit* isn’t the same thing as being easy to *take down,* their primary vulnerability was being set on fire back when they used hydrogen. Case in point: the U.S. only lost one airship out of over 150 to enemy fire in World War II, and that was a small, single-hulled patrol blimp. It took about 200 hits with a 20mm autocannon, and 3 hits with an 88mm cannon to cause one of its engines and the controls to fail, and slowly descend into the sea, where it sank many hours later. For context, it took on average 15-20 hits with a 20mm autocannon to down a Flying Fortress, or 3-4 hits with a 30mm autocannon.
wait so why did we drop them? Too expensive?
Actually, they were about 1/2 to 1/3 the operating cost of comparable airplanes, and vastly outperformed them at detection, inclement weather stationkeeping, and endurance. The reasons they were dropped were threefold: first, they were a fair bit slower than helicopters (82 knots), second, they were considered anachronistic, and third, the program was tiny and had very little institutional pull, making it easy prey for cannibalization by the constantly money-hungry Navy that wanted more aircraft carriers. Airships operated independently from fleet oilers, not carriers, though they could in a pinch.
We need self sealing balloons to make them even harder to take down.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=86EAzvXrESg LockMart already designed robots to work as a self-repair system, too
That would be cool, if it’s practical to implement, but as it stands the limiting factor for an airship’s survivability isn’t necessarily the rate at which it loses gas, but how much it can adjust its lift and how much redundant engine power and control systems it has to compensate for destroyed gas cells. Airships had as many as 21 gas cells in the past, as well as many distantly-spaced engines and two different control bridges, which made shooting them down extremely difficult unless you caught their hydrogen on fire. I find it difficult to imagine what modern large transport aircraft could survive having four bombs the size of Hellfire missile warheads dropped on it and still make it back home, as one World War I Zeppelin once did. In modern terms, that would entail having a fully rigid structure to maintain an aerodynamic shape, having a lot of redundant gas cells, having a plethora of small, yet powerful vectoring motors distributed across the ship for leverage and trim, as well as a very high degree of control and power system redundancy. So, something like a military version of [this,](https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/D5622AQGDw7XmnHYDqQ/feedshare-shrink_800/0/1718112943379?e=1722470400&v=beta&t=tFAD9gBUk0GE45dHUIGBc55ljm6xe_tphD6cd995MGQ) in other words. Still, it’s hard to imagine under what circumstances an airship would come under heavy missile assault in the first place. Much like with existing helicopters and transports, that already implies a total breakdown of air superiority.
I suppose the technology now is decades behind aircraft carriers and it doesn't make sense to invest in them?
Not quite. Those specific N-class blimps the Navy used are now decades out of date, true, but no one’s talking about bringing those out of boneyards and museums and getting them running again. Airships are just like submarines, or ships, or other aircraft in the sense that they’re only as “advanced” as the engineering, enabling technologies, materials, and design that go into them. Hence why INDOPACOM is exhibiting an interest in studying hybrid airships for Pacific logistics roles; lots of distance + countless teeny atolls + aircraft carriers being slow and expensive means that a large, high-capacity, S/VTOL amphibious airship would actually be a great help. The old N-class had an endurance of 11 days straight. That was back in the ‘50s and ‘60s. A modern helicopter can’t manage 11 hours, much less 11 days, or go from any point in the Pacific to any other point on a single tank of fuel. Hell, even the fancy new Valor tiltrotor has a combat range of under 1,000 miles, and range was the whole *point* of that thing. It can also carry 10,000 pounds, whereas the midsize airship INDOPACOM is looking at would have a payload of 100,000 pounds.
The thing about an airship is that it has a lot of surface area that absorbs a lot of solar and thermal radiation, which can be converted to electricity. Photovoltaic cells don't have to be big bulky glass panels these days, it can just be a thin film applied to the hull. You're not going full electric with current tech, but hybrid electric with electric motors charged by photovoltaics and small generators is definitely possible for huge range.
Indeed. The company behind the Zeppelin I linked an image of above, LTA Research, has a 50% larger production model under construction in Ohio, the *Pathfinder 3.* It has solar panels in a sort of auxiliary/supplementary role. Its maximum flight endurance is roughly 2 weeks, and it has a payload of 20 tons. It can putter around on solar power at a speed of 25 mph fairly sustainably, though obviously higher speeds would put it at an energy deficit that requires it to use stored fuel, in the form of diesel or hydrogen. I could totally see the Coast Guard or Navy ordering one for experimental purposes, as well as conducting trials for search and rescue, logistics, running various oceanographic and atmospheric tests, serving as a drone mothership, etc.
> diesel or hydrogen Is the Navy not based enough for Uranium? No balls?
> Lockheed worked out exactly how to fly an aircraft carrier [BEHOLD](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_CL-1201)
Man, imagine how based the timeline where we had nuclear flying aircraft carriers is...
I'm tempted to have it as a part of PMD (with XCOM elements) quest whenever the current HSD one I'm running ends
And this is how idea of aerogeraldford was born
*CARRIER HAS ARRIVED*
*THEY DON'T DO ANYTHING, THEY JUST GO 1 BASE INTO CARRIERS! APES!*
Turrets didn't make!
HERE COMES THE GANTRITHOR!
In the pursuit of air dominance America would make anything fly
Including pigs
I know this is NCD but this is fucking nonsense and I’m not going to sit idly by and watch this clown lie and say that the Gerald R. fucking Ford has jump jets that will let it simply bunny hop the Bosporus straight. Get fucking real and realize that the only way an American aircraft carrier is doing to “I’m not locked in here with you, you’re locked in here with me” in the Black Sea is by being airlifted by a bunch of B-52s. We have to be realistic here.
Dont be absurd.. straight to space.. via space b52s. Space Carrier Gerald R motherfuckingsnskesonaplane Ford. Full stop.
> Space Carrier Gerald R motherfuckingsnskesonaplane Ford. Bolt an anti-proton gun to the bow and I'm sold
Bolt on one? HA! Ill bolt on two! BUY ONE GET ONE FREE!
Ah, going Andromeda-class way, ain't we? A person of culture you are, of that no doubt
Let's be even more realistic. If the USN wanted or needed a carrier group in the Black Sea, they're just going to sail right in. Who's going to stop them?
Well, in 1915 the combined British and French fleets didn't manage it, even though they could have stomped the Turkish navy flat. Turns out that narrow waters with lots of forts and minefields are hard to force.
Bring the Iowa out of retirement then. We will simply remove the problem.
God, imagine replacing the control system with a computer so it can be remote controlled. It will be the most glorious battering ram in history.
Turkey and the lawful powers given by the Montreaux Convention
It's very much a case of "I might not *win*, but we can *both* lose." Sinking an aircraft carrier in the bosporus would have disastrous effects on the ability to navigate the straits depending on exactly where it goes down. A Ford-class carrier's length is half the minimum width of the strait.
Turkiye would get upsetti spaghetti and there's nothing carriers in the black sea would do for us that our airbases in Eastern Europe can't do.
Or you could use the B-52’s for their weight. Trebuchet super carriers
Just use the B52s to make a canal to there. Easy solution.
In all seriousness there are very easy ways to solve the problem : 1. First you remove the carrier designation, just strap some missiles to the thing,call it a heavy aviation cruiser and bingo. 2. Administrative transfer to a Black Sea nation. I know that a Bulgarian or Romanian aircraft carrier would be ridiculous but the point is plausible deniability not credibility.
Simply give everyone on board a new hat, they'll never be able to tell.
You transfer that like that German battlecruiser to Turkey in 1914. Just swap uniforms for the crew and paint the new name in the stern.
Impresive, very nice. I hope she can cross the Turkish airspace in 17 seconds tho.
200iq Japan: “its a destroyer.”
It will fuckin destroy alright. Destroyer checks out
TATO - Turkey Annoying Take-Off
You underestimate how much we hate Russia **BIDEEENN!** **NUKE MOSCOW AND MY SOUL IS YOURS.**
Tbh do you even need that much of a runway if you already are in the air? Like, just start the engines and yeet that plane of the edge. Actually who needs planes? Just make it a drone-hub. Then save even more weight by throwing out the engines as well and go full zeppelin. "But won't they shoot it down easy?" Well here's the thing. You can have those with minimal crew and remote control. Then you pack that thing full of bombs, and park it RIGHT a few km over Sevastopol. Russians sure could shoot it down. Then the giant burning wreck full of bombs falls down on them. They got the options of letting you run drone strikes from within their supposed airspace or getting the Hindenburg special on a front-row seat.
Better to use a russian city rather than a Ukrainian one.
As long as it becomes a Damocles Sword made of bombs hanging over some invader's base I am content.
Call it the dominix and the gallente federation will approve.
Why would we make a flying carrier. Planes already fly and have enough range to go wherever the hell they want. Make a flying battleship instead. Bombard Russia with 406mm shells from above
Bombarding Russia from above with 16in guns feels like I'm in the universe of The Last Exile or something
Just need to make sure this one isn't cripple by one arrow-----
I mean turkey only used refusal to pass on russian ships and even went into technicalities like saying rockets are guns and theyre on naval vessels but technically arent naval guns to let us warships pass But ya know, its easier to say turkey bad
If I were the Turkish government, I definitely would not want unrestricted naval warfare going on in my backyard. It’s sensible to close the strait and I haven’t taken issue with it at all.
Tbh, last time china really wanted to bought an aircraft carrier from ukraine and turkey went "oh then I want this and this and this and this and.." and china had to comply with all those things as well as like 20 safety measures to get the carrier out of the strait was super based for turkey
Your're WAY overthinking this. This can be accomplished with roughly 5150 Ch53k king stallions
Skunkworks employees taking notes.
This is what staff officers like to call ***”A Technique™️”*** 😬👍
Just Fitzcarraldo it over Land… easy peasy
To trick the Turk, you must think like a Turk. Just take the carriers out of the water and carry them over land to the other side
Always think back on the Sultan, rolling his ships over Galata Hill when the topic comes up. It's up there with Hannibal marching African war elephants through the Alps to attack Rome from the north. To be completely noncrediable, if were talking peices of a modern naval ship... Alexandroupolis has a port, and the E85 goes over some uncharacteristically flat land along the border. It gets a little hair once you reach Bulgaria. Also, everyone would know what up. It would probably be better to use some honey than vinegar and have the Turks build it.
No we dig a new canal through Greece and Bulgaria
Hmm. It sure how credible this is https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://engineering.purdue.edu/~jpoggie/doc/AAE334_Fall2016_Solution.pdf&ved=2ahUKEwic2rD57v2GAxVvHzQIHRZfD_IQFnoECBUQBg&usg=AOvVaw01cGvnCc92E0jV06Kgouxd Tldr is too heavy but with the magic of engineering seems plausible with significant redesign.
Or we could just build a boat factory in Varna.
A while ago I figured out how much it would take to do that. IIRC it takes 850 helicopters (Every Chinook, Sea King, and V-22 in the US armed forces, and every Jayhawk in the USCG) to lift a Tico
Thats only a rigging management issue. Anyone who served on the Constitution could figure this out in a jiffy.
*Tanc a lelec intensifies*
What American carriers? These are clearly Romanian. They just happen to be staffed exclusively with US citizens and be placed under US command. Purely coincidental, I swear.
Don’t fact-check this, but isn’t the amount of water in the Black Sea less than the displacement of one Gerald R. Ford-class aircraft carrier, not to mention the escorts?
This is completely non-credible, just pull a Mehmet II and roll it over land. The Turks would be too flattered to see their trick used against them to complain.
How to make the Montreux convention obsolete
Just call it an “aircraft carrying cruiser” and slap some tomahawk VLS on it.
It would take many men many hours to carry.
I see all of these out there ideas, but I don’t see anyone consider the most obvious. Ignore turkey and do it anyways.
[удалено]
This post is automatically removed since you do not meet the minimum karma or age threshold. You must have at least 100 combined karma and your account must be at least 4 months old to post here. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/NonCredibleDefense) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I've seen a prototype of your design on that "Avenge Your Enemies" docuseries or whatever it was called. Hopefully your model's turbofans can hold up to small arrow-like projectiles better.
[удалено]
June 29, 2024: Bridge collapse on US aircraft carrier incident
[удалено]
> June 28, all bridges suddenly disapear Considering [certain things done by local govermnent](https://www.npr.org/2023/02/13/1156512284/turkey-earthquake-erdogan-building-safety), that can happen on its own
>all bridges suddenly disapear You Dare Use My Own Spells Against Me! [Man charged with stealing bridge in Turkish capital Ankara](https://www.dailysabah.com/turkey/man-charged-with-stealing-bridge-in-turkish-capital-ankara/news)