Related time notes
- Bruships 262: Naval History Questions Answered Live2:02:36The conventional submarine fleets least welcome as opponentsQ&A
- Bruships 237: Modern Navy & Naval History Questions Answered Live...3:17:26Conventional submarines and U.S. fleet trainingQ&A
- Bruships 218: New Books! British Telecom is a terrible ISP! Naval History Questions Answered Live...5:19:29Conventional submarines as an AUKUS complementNotable Point
- Bruships 196: Naval History Questions Answered Live...2:02:22Why the Gotland class does not fit Canadian Arctic patrolsNotable Point
- Anti Submarine Warfare, a primer history & overview2:33:08Why Australia needs SSN range and transit speedQ&A
- Anti Submarine Warfare, a primer history & overview2:57:38Hydrogen-peroxide submarines as a Commonwealth conventional optionQ&A
- Patreon 59: Infrastructure in the Colonies: shipyards of the Commonwealth and Empire.2:39:36Why Polish geography favours land forces over carriersQ&A
- Bruships 58: Some Cool Books & Naval History Chat1:59:14XLUUVs and the future of the local SSK missionNotable Point
- Patreon 33: Amphibious ship development from 1980's to modern day.3:10:30More Upholders could lead to a Commonwealth SSKQ&A
- Shipbuilding through the 1880s-1950s3:10:36Why conventional submarines still matterChapter
- Shipbuilding through the 1880s-1950s3:17:17Why conventional submarines suit regional defenceQ&A
- Bruships 51: The Age of Iron3:52:22British conventional-submarine design work alongside SSNsQ&A
- Britain of the 1980s: Long Patrol P2/7 Keith Speed47:34Conventional submarines as a hedge while uncrewed systems matureNotable Point
- BAD SOUND - An Introduction to Making Mare Nostrum a Hollow Jest part 1 of 245:56The U-class legacy in confined-sea force designNotable Point
- 4000 Subscribers Thankyou Special – The Royal Navy if I were Prime Minister39:35Conventional-submarine partnership and Falklands basingNotable Point