[Newsbot]

Title: Nato urges Spain not to refuel Russian warships on their way to Aleppo
Category: World
Posted By: martin14
Date: 2016-10-26 05:14:54

[martin14]

Surely a decision or pressure like this should be made in private, rather than this stupidly public statements from NATO ?

What kind of idiot alliance is this, when one member agrees to a refueling, and now gets criticized in public for it, to the point of making ourselves look foolish and very disunited ?

Putin having a good laugh, but getting ready for the war which Hillary will bring.

[Jabberwalker]

Spain may be the last navy on Earth other than the Russians to carry bunker C (now that Preserver is gone!)

Look at the crap coming out of that carrier's funnel!

[Thanos]

Refuse them access to any NATO port except for an emergency situation. Return to full Cold War policy towards the Russian navy. Full shadowing and fly-overs when they're in allied territorial waters.

[martin14]

Thanos Thanos:

Refuse them access to any NATO port except for an emergency situation. Return to full Cold War policy towards the Russian navy. Full shadowing and fly-overs when they're in allied territorial waters.

The Russians already backed out of refueling in Spain.

They brought 2 tankers with them, the Kuznetsov has it's own range of 8000 miles,
they could fill up in 4 other countries, and bring tankers down from the Black Sea.

Cueta was picked to see the reaction, and he got to watch it on the news.
Another win for him, and we look like idiots.

[Nuggie77]

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

Spain may be the last navy on Earth other than the Russians to carry bunker C (now that Preserver is gone!)

Look at the crap coming out of that carrier's funnel!

Canada hasn't used bunker c since the 60's

[Jabberwalker]

Nuggie77 Nuggie77:

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

Spain may be the last navy on Earth other than the Russians to carry bunker C (now that Preserver is gone!)

Look at the crap coming out of that carrier's funnel!

Canada hasn't used bunker c since the 60's

Nope.

The AORs burned it. Preserver, Protecteur and Provider were/are steam turbine. Preserver was just paid off, this month. The cold war DDE's and DDH's that lasted until the 21st century were all steam turbine, as well .... bunker. The gas turbine 280's were the first that did not burn it and the Frigates, of course, drink stove oil.

We officially got out of the bunker business just a couple of weeks ago.

[Nuggie77]

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

Nuggie77 Nuggie77:

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

Spain may be the last navy on Earth other than the Russians to carry bunker C (now that Preserver is gone!)

Look at the crap coming out of that carrier's funnel!

Canada hasn't used bunker c since the 60's

Nope.

The AORs burned it. Preserver, Protecteur and Provider were/are steam turbine. Preserver was just paid off, this month. The cold war DDE's and DDH's that lasted until the 21st century were all steam turbine, as well .... bunker. The gas turbine 280's were the first that did not burn it and the Frigates, of course, drink stove oil.

We officially got out of the bunker business just a couple of weeks ago.

Actually, no. The RCN has not used bunker c since the 60's. The current fleet and the AOR's, 280's and the old steamers burned distillate fuel.

[BartSimpson]

What does this really accomplish aside from just creating needless and petty animosity with the Russians?

[Jabberwalker]

Nuggie77 Nuggie77:

Jabberwalker Jabberwalker:

Nuggie77 Nuggie77:

Canada hasn't used bunker c since the 60's

Nope.

The AORs burned it. Preserver, Protecteur and Provider were/are steam turbine. Preserver was just paid off, this month. The cold war DDE's and DDH's that lasted until the 21st century were all steam turbine, as well .... bunker. The gas turbine 280's were the first that did not burn it and the Frigates, of course, drink stove oil.

We officially got out of the bunker business just a couple of weeks ago.

Actually, no. The RCN has not used bunker c since the 60's. The current fleet and the AOR's, 280's and the old steamers burned distillate fuel.

What a waste of money.

[martin14]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

What does this really accomplish aside from just creating needless and petty animosity with the Russians?

Making ourselves look foolish by having a public spat about it certainly
helped our image.

The Russians are refueling at sea atm.

[Nuggie77]

Actually, no. The RCN has not used bunker c since the 60's. The current fleet and the AOR's, 280's and the old steamers burned distillate fuel.[/quote]

What a waste of money.[/quote]

Can't burn bunker in a gas turbine.

[Jabberwalker]

Nuggie77 Nuggie77:

Actually, no. The RCN has not used bunker c since the 60's. The current fleet and the AOR's, 280's and the old steamers burned distillate fuel.

What a waste of money.[/quote]

Can't burn bunker in a gas turbine.[/quote]


It's a BIG waste of money to burn stove oil in a boiler that drives a steam turbine, and that is mostly what the Canadian Navy had at sea for the four dacades after the 1960's There were only four gas turbine powered ships in the entire navy until the 1990's and they were welded to the jetties during the Trudeau and Chretien years.


What a waste of money.

[Nuggie77]

It's a BIG waste of money to burn stove oil in a boiler that drives a steam turbine, and that is mostly what the Canadian Navy had at sea for the four dacades after the 1960's There were only four gas turbine powered ships in the entire navy until the 1990's and they were welded to the jetties during the Trudeau and Chretien years.


What a waste of money.[/quote]

What would have been a waste of money was having the AORs carrying 3 different types of fuel including aviation fuel. There were other reasons for getting rid of bunker fuel, including environmental rules. AS can be seen from the picture of the Russian ship, it burned very dirty. It also had to heated in the fuel tanks. Besides, NATO went to a standard fuel.