Talk:Soviet aircraft carrier Varyag
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The name of this article needs to change as it is no longer the Soviet aircraft carrier Varyag but is now the "former Soviet aricraft carrier Varyag, now PLAN vessel of unknown name" The beginning of the article should be current and reflect Chinese military ownership of the vessel. --Devin
Indeed an interesting story! Any reports in what has happened since the beginning of November? --Anders Törlind
- I can't find any, which I find both surprising and frustrating. The hulk should be at the Suez canal by now, transit of which I would guess to be an operation almost as complex as the passage through Istanbul -- but I can't find anything!
One important fact that I didn't know where to put is that just because a tourist company is controlled by the PLAN doesn't mean that it isn't a real tourist company. The PLA ran a whole series of businesses in the 1990's. Most of those have been spun off.
- This fact seems to have been incorporated.
Personally, I think that the people who bought the carrier really do want to turn it into a floating casino. If the PLAN gets to look at it while it gets turned into a casino, so much the better.
- Where do you think they are they going to put it? (I'm not arguing, just wondering what you think.)
Something else that probably deserves mentioning is that in the late-1990's, a Chinese shipping company got a contract to salvage an Australian carrier, and reportedly, PLAN officers were all over the carrier as it was being disassembled.
- Get the details, create another article, add links!
Why is this article called Soviet aircraft carrier Varyag instead of Varyag?
- Because Varyag was to be a Kuznetsov-class multirole aircraft carrier. She was known as Riga when her keel was laid down at Nikolayev South (formerly Shipyard 444) on December 6, 1985, and she was launched on December 4, 1988, but she was renamed Varyag in late 1990.
In keeping with Wiki' naming convention shouldn't this be Varyag (Soviet aircraft carrier)? -- stewacide 07:25, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
- No. See Wikipedia:Naming conventions#Ship names. Mikkalai 07:51, 16 Dec 2003 (UTC)
[edit] Cost
The 20 million figure must be wrong it is most likely 200 million or 2 billion because 20 million is less then a rich mans yacht costs Deng 2005-1130 17.25 CET