Russian navy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-6FetbIt3ac

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rocmgI5jndI

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4jS3msHkF6E

File: 1493264594614.gif (2MB, 320x320px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x320px

>>33833178
>A FUCKING RAMP

You'd be an idiot not to take any armed force seriously no matter what their capability is.

File: proxy.jpg (189KB, 643x960px) Image search: [Google]

189KB, 643x960px

>>33833339
And then there's this guy.

File: 1483446497913.gif (888KB, 220x220px) Image search: [Google]

888KB, 220x220px

>>33833178
>other than that I am rather in educated.
>in educated.

you cant make this up

>>33833531
>Be grammar Nazi
>Use no punctuation
>Start sentence with small letter
>Ignore apostrophe

>>33833351
wtf are they doing?

>>33833616

Notice the lack of harnesses, they're keeping their centre of gravity low by crawling so they wont be blown away by the wind.

>>33833178

Any navy with active SSBN is not a joke.

>>33833640
sure, i get it, but what were they trying to do in first place? set up flags?

>>33833616
It's not
>A
>Fucking
>Ramp

It's
>A
>Fucking
>Slide
Commies are having fun.

>>33833311
well that was informative. Thanks mate.

for everyone who doesn't want to listen to an hour on youtube and doesn't know this already: TLDR russian military cabailities are a shadow of the soviet union cababilities.
They army and doctrine is a mostly defenisve one with a lot of denial operations.

Soviet Navy = local threat and headache

Russian navy = joke

>>33833578
Holy shit that's not even his worst violation. He should have said "one cannot make this shit up". It is a second person indefinite sentence and as he is not addressing a specific person he should use the "one" form.

Fucking plebs

File: muh british logistic.png (113KB, 880x1098px) Image search: [Google]

113KB, 880x1098px

>>33833178
>should it be taken seriously?
Only if you're not US.

>>33835743
>TLDR russian military cabailities are a shadow of the soviet union cababilities.
That is well known,they simply dont have the funds and personnel that was qualified is dying out,because post communism transition there is no new people taking over.

>>33837079
wew

>>33837079

That'd be why Russia regularly supports worldwide deployments and permenant overseas postings of a worldwide group of territories.

Oh wait.

After the shitshow that was the Kuznetsov's hilarity filled """deployment""", there really isn't much to boast about in terms of logistics. There's a reason Russia isn't regarded a blue water navy.

>>33837384
>That'd be why Russia regularly supports worldwide deployments and permenant overseas postings of a worldwide group of territories.
>What is Syrian express?
>Who is patrolling African coast with Iran, China, US and others?

Russian submarines are actually a serious offensive threat

>>33837435

So basically proving his point then that Russia isn't a blue water navy and is only carrying out limited operations on a small scale.

>>33838004
Yes. To their own crews.

>>33839449

Reminder that the US has lost more nuclear subs than Russia.

>>33833178

They're underfunded and have terrible luck, but never forget that they have nuclear subs with missiles ready to launch. They're at least on the top 10 for that reason alone, though China is eclipsing them and does not have the same reputation of failure.

>>33837079
>muh britainnia rules the waves

File: Kuz (2).png (333KB, 560x397px) Image search: [Google]

333KB, 560x397px

From the Kuz? Hell no.

>>33835743
True. Very true. But in their theater of operations, their "near abroad", they can be very effective. They simply can't project power anymore.

>>33839627
Why didn't they make it nuclear powered? They clearly have the technology for that considering they have multiple nuclear cruisers and icebreakers. And it makes even more chance for a carrier where exhaust can actually hamper flight operations.

>>33839489
US Navy
>USS Threasher
>USS Scorpion

Soviet/Russian Navy
>K-8
>K-219
>K-278
>K-429
>K-141(Kursk)

So no, Ruskies lost more nuke boats than the states.

File: image.jpg (82KB, 558x314px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 558x314px

>>33841202
Not a loss but we can't forget about the whiskey on the rocks shit show.

File: 4363673635.jpg (31KB, 428x428px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 428x428px

>>33833178
To be fair Russia has little business building a vast navy. With as much landmass and border regions Russia provides, it's logical from their perspective to invest in ground forces, fortifications, and silos.

Comparative to the United States, where the country is situated between two vast oceans, it makes sense.

Not a salvaboo. Just playing devil's avocado

>>33833178
>Russian navy just a fucking joke

It is

File: 1485733665467.png (86KB, 1094x581px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 1094x581px

history lesson time!

File: 1485734417074.png (39KB, 1117x602px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 1117x602px

>>33842034
Part 2

>>33841881
The whole issue is that Russia tries to put its navy into vastly outsized roles. Russia has built its fleets and navy multiple times only to see it smashed through its own incompetence or bad luck.

The russian navy's worst enemy is time and itself

>>33842034
>>33842057
All of this got me wondering.

Would Tojo's tactics at Tsushima have worked against a better trained navy? Because from what I understand the shitty Balkan Fleet managed to score a considerable number of hits on the Japanese battleship line.

>>33842282
Baltic*

>>33837079
>Its better to have a huge navy mostly rotting at anchor that relies on incompetent conscripts to fill its ranks than to have a professional blue water navy with fewer ships that get used all the time!

>>33842282
Yes.

It depends on how the better trained fleet reoriented itself. Tojo had superior positioning and aggressive recon elements. Irrespective on capabilities Tojo had significant factors aiding him.

File: Chinese-aircraft-carrier-ex-Varyag-Chinese-Peoples-Liberation-Army-Navy-PLAN-j-15-aesa-J-15-Flying-Shark-Shi-Lang-OPERATIONAL.jpg (363KB, 1248x830px) Image search: [Google]

363KB, 1248x830px

>>33833178
>>33839627
>>33841907
Why is the Kuznetsov chugging smoke so much?

The Chinese Kuznetsov-class carrier, Laoning (pictured), doesn't seem to shit smoke so we know that the Kuznetsov isn't supposed to do that

>>33842831
Chinese did a serious refit on them. Boilers i heard were the same just newer with better machinery along with it.

Plus fuel quality. Russians use some absurdly shitty quality fuel oil.

>>33842958
Are the Russians too proud to ask the Chinese for help? Also why don't they buy Chinese ships to replace their older Destroyers and Cruisers? They are obviously concerned that their Navy is getting obsolete at an incredibly fast rate, but they are only cranking out 1 or 2 frigates every 4 years

File: 1474301348484.jpg (608KB, 1000x971px) Image search: [Google]

608KB, 1000x971px

>>33842831
something about that pic is off. I want to say that all the things in the pic are CGI, but I can't say exactly why i think they are.

>>33843025
Russians are extremely proud to the point where I expect them to make the same fucking mistake in the future when dealing with Asia as they did with Japan.

China and Russia dont see eye to eye. Russia in the past has invaded and butchered its way into China alongside of the other European powers and the Cold War disputes lingers in the memories.

File: Kuz (4).jpg (98KB, 790x444px) Image search: [Google]

98KB, 790x444px

Have more smoke.
If Bill Hicks were still alive he'd advocate for moderation.
>>33843031
>I want to say that all the things in the pic are CGI, but I can't say exactly why i think they are.
Everything's too shiny and chrome.

>>33843025
>Are the Russians too proud to ask the Chinese for help?
Partially, probably. Mainly its because if they don't have money to pay their own ships yards, they don't have money to pay Chinese ship yards.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (137KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 1280x720px

>>33843031
Nah lad, it seems to be pretty real

>>33843079
That's because new PLA ships are shiny my dude

>>33843079
>>33839627
>>33833178
When the fuck is Wargaming going to add the Kuz to World of Warships? It comes with its own fuckmothering smokescreen ffs.

>>33842958
Boiler were modified with different tube bundles installed. the superheat tubes are further away from the flame front and thicker so that they don't burst when the atomizing steam is run at the original design pressure for the burners. basically they fixed a fucked soviet boiler design.

>>33843025
>Are the Russians too proud to ask the Chinese for help? Also why don't they buy Chinese ships to replace their older Destroyers and Cruisers? They are obviously concerned that their Navy is getting obsolete at an incredibly fast rate, but they are only cranking out 1 or 2 frigates every 4 years
Because Chinese tech is shitty late Soviet tech for the most part?

>>33843070
>Russians are extremely proud to the point where I expect them to make the same fucking mistake in the future when dealing with Asia as they did with Japan.
What's the problem with Japan?

>China and Russia dont see eye to eye. Russia in the past has invaded and butchered its way into China alongside of the other European powers and the Cold War disputes lingers in the memories.
Relations have never been better actually.

File: w1_destroyer_smoke-screen.jpg (91KB, 900x662px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 900x662px

>>33843119

That did actually used to be a thing during WW1, the ships would belch out so much smoke at full steam that you wouldnt be able to see anything, this meant in line the ships behind wouldnt be able to see past the ship in front very well, if at all

File: 1493302235094.jpg (72KB, 300x319px) Image search: [Google]

72KB, 300x319px

>>33843474
So many lies and ignorance in one post, wew!

File: small island.png (142KB, 642x943px) Image search: [Google]

142KB, 642x943px

>>33837384
>>33842315
>Small islander's damage control
Oh boy here we go again.

>>33843925
Which part of it? Fact that every new Chinese naval "innovation" over the last 20 years has been imported from Russia?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0uz1iJF0JEQ

>>33843954

>Italy-tier economy's damage control about its """navy""" that belongs in a museum consists of deflecting attention to a much-reduced """great power""" that has gone from number one to barely relevant over the past century.

I think someone is projecting here...

>>33837079
>>33843954
>spams his images so much he's actually recognizable

Sad!

And I mean truly sad. That you can only make Russia look strong is by comparing yourself to a (in your own words) small island.

>>33843954
>russian talking about damage control
Good one, lad.

File: Firefox_Screenshot_2017-04-06T15-38-48.951Z.png (337KB, 1016x924px) Image search: [Google]

337KB, 1016x924px

>>33844206
>>33844265
>>33844368
>Small islanders on suicide watch
Every fucking time.

File: IMG_0036.jpg (365KB, 1920x1371px) Image search: [Google]

365KB, 1920x1371px

>>33840942

>Why didn't they make it nuclear powered?

They ran out of money.

>>33845125
>>Italy-tier economy's damage control about its """navy""" that belongs in a museum consists of deflecting attention to a much-reduced """great power""" that has gone from number one to barely relevant over the past century.

Projecting SO HARD

File: r-r-rule br-britannia1.jpg (146KB, 851x630px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 851x630px

>>33845311
>Island slav posting

>>33845196
Wait, I'm reading it right? They planned to build nuclear supercarrier with catapults?

So they had a technology? So why they built Kuznetsov in first place? It just a waste of money.

>>33845593

Most likely Soviet navy needed it fast. They were in handicap position because they lacked an aircraft carrier. So diesel-powered system would probably be more faster to design and build.

>They planned to build nuclear supercarrier with catapults?

Not just planned. It was actually built and later sold to China.

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

File: 1310498381546.jpg (28KB, 400x400px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 400x400px

>>33845736
Are you drunk, Canadian, or just retarded?

>>33845765
0/3. Try again.

>>33833190
underrated post my good man

>>33839449
It's fun to joke and all, but the vast majority of their subs have been operating without incident for many decades.

File: fuck you and your prius.jpg (58KB, 700x406px) Image search: [Google]

58KB, 700x406px

>>33833190

>>33845352
>>33845125
>>33843954
I hope the Kremlin is paying you for this shit, otherwise it really is sad

>>33845593
Soviet naval doctrine was not focused on aircraft carriers to begin with. It seems they were wanting to change that towards the latter years of the Soviet Union, but it was going to take time and money. Easier to quickly pump out at least one carrier to start gaining experience with carrier operations. The fall of the USSR doomed the projects they had planned.

File: 1493365107155 (1).png (482KB, 1264x3074px) Image search: [Google]

482KB, 1264x3074px

>>33842034
>>33842057
Mandatory /k/arrier screencap

>>33845125
Hello armatard, are you off the pills or out of your cell again?

>>33845736
That's not the one. The Chinese carrier was the Riga, which was Kuznetsov class. No catapults. Why didn't you read the article you yourself posted? The Ulyanovsk was supposed to the nuclear supercarrier with catapults. They started it, but stopped.

>>33833178
Does it run on whale fat?

File: r-r-rule br-britannia2.png (41KB, 855x717px) Image search: [Google]

41KB, 855x717px

>>33845824
>>33845943
Why is it so easy to trigger island slavs? It is because their island is so small?

>>33843031
It's the painted-that-morning fresh paint. Modern navies tend to have a rotating paint schedule

>>33841694
Hilarious.

>>33846099
The only one who brought up the anglos was you. Everybody knows the UK is a has-been. Defending the Russian Navy by picking on the UK is what we call "damning with faint praise".

>>33846911
You don't have to defend the Russian Navy to pick on the small island's one. On the contrary, when it goes all cocky about the Russian Navy just passing by, small islanders are just asking to be laughed at.

>>33846997
This thread is about Russia's Navy. You're the one trying to divert and make it about the Royal Navy

File: argentina vs britain.jpg (127KB, 1200x1223px) Image search: [Google]

127KB, 1200x1223px

>>33847372
No, the argument started from anon saying it should be taken seriously if you're not the US, which made a couple of small islanders a bit slaty. And it's always entertaining to pick on small island and its navy. It's like clockwork.

>>33847412
That's not true, you brought up the Royal Navy out of nowhere. There are no salty brits in this thread, you're the only one talking about them.

File: there is no need to be upset.gif (713KB, 325x203px) Image search: [Google]

713KB, 325x203px

>>33847478
>There are no salty brits in this thread
Sure thing, ladm8chap.

>>33847412
That is a hilariously inaccurate image
And you're the fuck talking about the royal navy like anyone gives a shit about them
It's the 21st century vatnik, and USA no 1, and the Russian navy is embarrassing in comparison

>>33833178
1.they know their carrier position at all times.
2.not under command of 70yo twitter-trained orangutan.

File: f3bf6e115fd47502ac0c1cb3b7a74ffb.jpg (243KB, 1280x775px) Image search: [Google]

243KB, 1280x775px

The U.S navy is a joke

>launch 59 cruise missiles against target in syria

only 29 make it, a 62% failure rate


>be unstoppable U.S carrier group

Be infiltrated by Chinese diesel sub multiple times.


>Be Russian navy

>single ship able to take out entire carrier group

priceless.

>>33847633
>And you're the fuck talking about the royal navy like anyone gives a shit about them
Small islanders sure do judging by how easily they get triggered every time trying to ridicule the Russian Navy backlashes at them.

>>33847665

Is there a nation on earth who doesn't ridicule the Russian Navy? Thats hardly just the Bongs who do it.

Daily reminder that even fucking Japan does it regularly.

>>33845125
>There is only one confirmed death during the Cod Wars: an Icelandic engineer accidentally killed in the Second Cod War while repairing damage on an Icelandic gunboat.[10]

r.i.p. Guðni Jóhannesson :(

>>33847613
>ladm8chap
I'm an american you dunce.

>>33847664
what are anti-missle defence systems

File: we've gone too far.jpg (32KB, 563x601px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 563x601px

>>33847664

>>33847664
It's even more pathetic when you realize how much money that airstrike costs and the fact those were produced only 2 years ago.

>>33847764
Even the Russians reported they haven't shot any of them down.

>>33847717
And just like that anon said, if you're not the US you pretty much don't get to do it. And when you do you get extremely slaty when it turns out Russian Navy is just better than yours. Like small islanders on /k, who are just so easily triggered by this fact.
>>33847754
Alrighty, m8.

>>33845765
Is all the same thing, no?

>>33847665
This entire thread is basically about ridiculing the Russian navy you moron

>>33848000
Too bad brits got all salty in it, innit lad?

>>33847879

You keep saying others are the ones who are easily triggered, but you're the one with the selection of screenshots that you post every time someone badmouths the Russian navy. That sounds more like you are the one who is triggered.

>>33848121
That's the thing. Every time I post them they trigger the small islanders who then proceed trying to prove they are not triggered only further proving how salty they are about getting the backlash from just a couple of screens.

File: sad.png (170KB, 1217x933px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 1217x933px

>>33848165

No, not really. It just makes you look pretty obsessively pathetic.

File: admiral blazeit.jpg (281KB, 1280x850px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 1280x850px

>>33848172
What is really pathetic however is that each one of these pictures if followed by a plume of small islanders' salt about as much as Kuznetsov was followed by a plume of smoke on his recent journey.

>>33848278

See you claim again that but as I'm digging through your post history and there's a clear defensiveness to anything that is Russian. So it seems like you are the seriously triggered one any time that someone bad mouths Russian equipment.

File: 98569607c466ef4512f047d079e83d102a3ea279e8add37024cd9bc2de38dd74.png (54KB, 1024x749px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 1024x749px

>>33848278
>dude weed lmao
>please don't make fun of my coal powered LARP carrier
Makes it even more pathetic. Is there a single country Russia hasn't been rekt by?

File: 1478957201001.jpg (48KB, 960x646px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 960x646px

>>33848332
>No-no-no-no, I'm not triggered by a picture, YOU are triggered!
See, the thing is in the end it is always the small islanders who get salty about having an inferior navy.
>>33848345
chap her majesty ship richmond lmao

File: 1482000562720.png (6KB, 377x330px) Image search: [Google]

6KB, 377x330px

>>33842831
>Why is the Kuznetsov chugging smoke so much?

Assuming their propulsion system works like I believe it works, there are three possibilities:

1.) It's steaming like a motherfucker at near flank speed, firing all boilers as hot as they can go.

2.) A drunk vatnik fell asleep on the oil atomization controls, meaning that the oil being sprayed on the burners in the boiler is a near-solid stream instead of a nice, burnable mist, meaning that most of that fuel oil doesn't burn when admitted and smolders up the exhaust like a backwoods tire fire. This assumes that the systems involved work, but are not being used correctly.

3.) [Most Possible] Through the long history of refits, overhauls, lack of maintenance and cleaning as shown in pictures, the oil atomizers in one or more boilers simply don't work correctly and as a result spew smoke when said boilers are lit, which would explain why the Kuz spewed smoke at some points in her journey, but not others.

>>33837435
>Syrian express
Didn't they have 1 ship sink and another two break bad enough they required towing to port the ONE time they tried that?
>who is patrolling African coast with Iran et al
Certainly not Russia. Because having one ship stuck in port along the African coast for 4 months because they can't figure out how to fix it well enough to get it to limp home isn't patrolling.

>>33839489
1. No, it's 2 vs. 5 and a suspected 6th.
2. The US has had 4x more nuclear subs than Russia has.

>>33848399

Listen, you can keep calling anyone who upsets a brit, but this doesn't change anything about the fact that you get upset every time someone says something not positive about the Russian armed forces.

File: Task Group.png (2MB, 1060x1148px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1060x1148px

>>33833178

yay navy

>>33848501
And the indicative of me being upset is that I post the same couple pictures every time, and every time they trigger the small islanders just as effective? I mean whatever makes you sleep at night, sure, but at least have some consistency. I wouldn't have posted them for months if it didn't have such a deeply slated return from the bongs.

File: fuuuuuuuuk.jpg (56KB, 602x360px) Image search: [Google]

56KB, 602x360px

>>33842831
>Why is the Kuznetsov chugging smoke so much?

>Meanwhile in the kitchen

>>33848564
what's that black cracker?

>>33833190
fpbp

>>33848590
Cooked blood mushrooms.

File: n8umjWj.png (3KB, 698x1284px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 698x1284px

>>33848536

The indication is that every time somebody talks shit about the Russian navy you posts those exact images to deflect criticism away and accuse anyone who calls you retarded a brit.

You don't even know if the people who reply are bongs or not since there's no flags! The fact of the matter is that you've got a history of being defensive of not just Russian ships but tanks and SAM systems.

People calling you retarded for posting retarded images is not them being triggered.

>>33848449
For goys that have no idea what I'm talking about:
https://youtu.be/1KpOjyjCFVg?t=169

The way fuel-oil fired steam propulsion works is pretty similar to how coal-fired steam propulsion in them olden days worked, with some differences. It's easy to picture something from the movie Titanic, with the line of boilers and coal-shovellers feeding them, well the boilers work pretty similarly, but without the coal shovellers. Each boiler has something similar to a stove burner or pilot light inside, and fuel oil gets sprayed onto it at different feed rates and atomization rates depending on how hot you need the fire to be to reach adequate steam generation. The steam that is generated is fed to a turbine whose RPM is controlled based on how fast the ship must go. The process of atomization is basically a small sprayer underneath the fuel oil feed that sprays some steam through the falling fuel oil so that the stream gets broken up and burns better and more cleanly. This is important because the atomization needs to change based on how much fuel oil is being admitted to the boiler. When you have too much steam being sprayed, the oil doesn't burn well if at all, but if it is sprayed too little, it burns, but very inefficiently. You can tell a ship is atomizing too much if it spews blueish smoke out the stack, but if it atomizes too little, you get clouds of pure-black smoke.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6MnuIHWAWw
This video of the USS Hornet goes through some of the basics of how steam turbine propulsion systems like that on the Kuznetsov work, though it doesn't really get into the atomization process.

File: 1478664140823.png (864KB, 769x592px) Image search: [Google]

864KB, 769x592px

>>33848449
>>33848681
Someone please screencap these for me so I don't have to type them again for the next Kuznetsov thread.

>>33848630
That's because every time I post the exactly couple of images it turns out it is small islanders who are trying to compensate for their lackluster of a navy.
>You don't even know if the people who reply are bongs
Who on earth except for bongs would get triggered by these pics?
>retarded images
There's not need to get this upset, poor little thing.

>>33848722

Again, you don't know that.

And because maybe people actually care about the subject who can see beyond the moronic nationalism that goes on, see that something retarded is posted. It's entirely beside the point.

Like I've said, you post those images only when someone triggers you by shittalking the Russian navy. So you can keep the circle argument going in typical Kremlinbot fashion if you want, I've made my point and others can see it.

>>33848449
>[Most Possible]
It's not most possible, it is exactly the case with it and the destroyer class that uses the same type of boilers. They got fucked up beyond any repair in the 90s and crew incompetence didn't help back in the time. I had some really nice article from navy-korabel on this matter saved, but I can't find it anywhere and it's in Russian anyway.

>>33848811
I know that from the fact the no one on earth would give a single flying fuck except for bongs. And the consistency with which it triggers them only multiplies this confidence.
>Muh subject, muh nationalism
The subject is that some small islander or a burger keeps trying to nourish his nationalism and jingoism by picking on the Russian Navy, but starts to cry and whine when it backlashes at him with just a couple of pictures that somehow keep getting him salty for months and months continuously.

>>33848722

>Who on earth except for bongs would get triggered by these pics?

You post them when threads about US making Russia its naval bitch come up.

You post them when threats about EU vs Russia come up.

You post them when threads about China being superior to Russia at sea come up.

Deflection is the name of the game in its extremes here.

>>33848917
>I know that from the fact the no one on earth would give a single flying fuck except for bongs. And the consistency with which it triggers them only multiplies this confidence.

No you don't. Prove it. Prove that only bongs reply to you. This is twice in this thread alone that you've misidentified someone as a bong.

You can't unless you have access to the IP address that reply to the threads. You're just making shit up to back your narrative that the British are out to get the Russian navy.

>The subject is that some small islander or a burger keeps trying to nourish his nationalism and jingoism by picking on the Russian Navy, but starts to cry and whine when it backlashes at him with just a couple of pictures that somehow keep getting him salty for months and months continuously.

ABEW ABEW ABLEW EVERYONE IS OUT TO GET POOR OLD IVAN ABEW ABEW.

The only one who seems to be crying is you. You don't know who posts those threads. But what we do know is that you have a bias for Russian equipment, so what does that say about you then?

File: JwNPAckJDiPsI.gif (780KB, 325x203px) Image search: [Google]

780KB, 325x203px

>>33848399
>chap her majesty ship richmond lmao
Getting a bit frustrated?

>>33849117
And every time there are small islanders who get triggered. It's like clockwork.
>>33849130
>Prove it
Why? I'm not the one on suicide watch posting walls of angry defensive text as a reaction to a couple of wikipedia screenshots that don't fit into the worldview of a britbong.

File: Screenshot_20170504-011626.jpg (531KB, 720x1229px) Image search: [Google]

531KB, 720x1229px

>>33848720
Just spam this at the vatnik the next time he shows up

File: 1477927468964.png (109KB, 534x548px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 534x548px

>>33849130
There's seriously no point in trying to argue with vatniks, they'll just call you butthurt ad nauseum until you leave out of frustration or the thread archives.

>>33849189

Because you're making a claim that it is a FACT. You need to prove it something to be considered a FACT.

>>33849206
>prove it for something

>>33849206
The thing is I don't need to do anything, since you are already salty from just a couple of wikipedia screenshots.

>>33849262

Ah, yes of course. I'm the salty one when you cry that big strong Russia is bullied online by "American and Britbongs" when you have no actual proof that it actually is.

>>33849194
Thanks anon.

File: article-2533846-1A6B679900000578-569_306x423.jpg (25KB, 306x423px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 306x423px

>>33849296
I only post wiki screenshots. You however whine about the fact that I post them basically asking me to stop. but I will only stop when you will stop getting triggered by the simply fact that the British Navy is a lackluster compared to the Russian one. So basically never.

>>33849346

That's not an answer to the point, you've already said something like this several times. Fact of the matter is that you have a victim complex when it comes to people discussing Russian equipment.

>>33849366
The only fact here is that you are blaming for a victim complex someone who posts wiki screenshots that trigger you for a number months by now.

File: __gangut_kantai_collection_drawn_by_and_dokari__4e7e1aed8306b22be3ebbb77f76c49f7.png (495KB, 752x683px) Image search: [Google]

495KB, 752x683px

>Russian Navy