Fantasque Time Line Index du Forum Fantasque Time Line
1940 - La France continue la guerre
 
 FAQFAQ   RechercherRechercher   Liste des MembresListe des Membres   Groupes d'utilisateursGroupes d'utilisateurs   S'enregistrerS'enregistrer 
 ProfilProfil   Se connecter pour vérifier ses messages privésSe connecter pour vérifier ses messages privés   ConnexionConnexion 

commentaires RN/MN APOD/FTL

 
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet    Fantasque Time Line Index du Forum -> Divers
Voir le sujet précédent :: Voir le sujet suivant  
Auteur Message
marklbailey



Inscrit le: 05 Jan 2008
Messages: 121
Localisation: Canberra, Australia

MessagePosté le: Mer Juin 30, 2010 08:31    Sujet du message: commentaires RN/MN APOD/FTL Répondre en citant

Note de Loïc : divisé à partir du sujet sur le Bismark
Note from Loïc : split from the Bismarck topic


I understand the rationale behind this and do not wish to discuss it: FFO is different from APOD and has very different drivers.

I would like to offer an alternative view for comparison. It may be of interest.

In APOD, we looked at the effect on RN dispositions of having the French capital ship force available.

These are profound.

First, the availability of the slow MN battleships is very helpful. It allows the RN to continue its planned refit schedule, so Rodney is in the yard in late 1940 for a proper refit.

However, the MN battleships are a 'wasting asset' (they cannot be replaced) and cannot be operated very intensively without risking long repair or refit periods. But the good news is that they do not have to be. The RN and MN old battleship forces take the strain off each other and by 1942 will allow BOTH to achieve higher operational tempo than the RN old battleship force did in 1942.

The two MN battlecruisers are extremely useful ships. BUT both will not always be available. One can be guaranteed to be available at all times.

The RN battlecruiser force is three old ships, of these three one will always be in dock.

Therefore, the solution is obvious.

Force H becomes the battlecruiser force, with all 5 BC assigned to it, for 3 ships operational at any time under Vice Admiral Somerville. The RN ships are based at Gibraltar for operations and maintenance, the MN ships at Gibraltar for operations but at Oran for maintenance.

This makes Force H the 'swing force', able to 'swing' from this central position into the Mediterranean or Atlantic at need, and fast enough to do this properly.

This is a very valuable strategic tool which did not exist in OTL.

The effect on the Home Fleet is also profound. That is where Richelieu goes.

As a very modern ship with MN escorts and as the most powerful French battleship, she should be a Squadron flagship (with RN units attached) BUT this can only happen after full communications and tactical integration of the RN and MN (MN conforming to RN standards) is achieved. This will take at least a year, so will occur after May 1941.

There are still not enough modern battleships so PoW is still available during her work-up for emergency use.

This is why, in APOD, the Battle of the Denmark Strait saw Richelieu, with PoW attached, but with Vice-Admiral Holland [edit] aboard PoW. He had to be there as communications and tactical integration had not reached the point where he and his staff could smoothly operate from Richelieu.

perhaps this effect on RN fleet dispositions may be of interest.

Regards: Mark


Dernière édition par marklbailey le Jeu Juil 01, 2010 07:06; édité 1 fois
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Fantasque



Inscrit le: 20 Oct 2006
Messages: 1336
Localisation: Paris

MessagePosté le: Mer Juin 30, 2010 09:21    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant

I agree that the maintenance and repair programme of the RN is to be affected by the disponibility of MN ships.

The issue is the possible repair and modification of RN Hood.
It was planned OTL.

Would have been implemented at this time is an open question.

F
_________________
Fantasque
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
loic
Administrateur - Site Admin


Inscrit le: 16 Oct 2006
Messages: 8936
Localisation: Toulouse (à peu près)

MessagePosté le: Mer Juin 30, 2010 09:26    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant

Je pense que le tempo des opérations navales en Méditerranée fin 1940 / début 1941, qui est plus important qu'OTL, empêchera une importante divergence :
- en 1940, les Alliés comprennent qu'ils ont l'opportunité de mettre l'Italie KO, il ne faut donc pas mégoter
- en 1941, ils doivent réagir à l'offensive italo/allemande (Corse/Sardaigne, Yougoslavie/Grèce, Mer Egée).

I think the tempo of naval operations in the Mediterranean in late 1940 / early 1941, which is more important than OTL, will prevent a significant difference:
- In 1940, the Allies understand that they have the opportunity to knock out Italy, so let's put all available assets in the game.
- In 1941, they must react to the Italian/German offensive (Corsica / Sardinia, Yugoslavia / Greece, Aegean Sea).

_________________
On ne trébuche pas deux fois sur la même pierre (proverbe oriental)
En principe (moi) ...
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
loic
Administrateur - Site Admin


Inscrit le: 16 Oct 2006
Messages: 8936
Localisation: Toulouse (à peu près)

MessagePosté le: Mer Juin 30, 2010 09:33    Sujet du message: Re: An Alternative View Répondre en citant

marklbailey a écrit:
Force H becomes the battlecruiser force, with all 5 BC assigned to it, for 3 ships operational at any time under Vice Admiral Somerville. The RN ships are based at Gibraltar for operations and maintenance, the MN ships at Gibraltar for operations but at Oran for maintenance.

There is no real need to maintain 5 BC together (with 3 available), since there is no threat of such magnitude on the German of Italian side. Having one group of 2 (British) in the north, another of 2 (French) in the Med, plus one in reserve/yard) makes more sense.
marklbailey a écrit:
This is why, in APOD, the Battle of the Denmark Strait saw Richelieu, with PoW attached, but with Vice-Admiral Hood aboard PoW. He had to be there as communications and tactical integration had not reached the point where he and his staff could smoothly operate from Richelieu.

Don't you mean KGV instead of Hood ?
_________________
On ne trébuche pas deux fois sur la même pierre (proverbe oriental)
En principe (moi) ...
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
mescal



Inscrit le: 06 Jan 2010
Messages: 71
Localisation: Paris

MessagePosté le: Mer Juin 30, 2010 11:57    Sujet du message: Re: An Alternative View Répondre en citant

loic a écrit:

marklbailey a écrit:
This is why, in APOD, the Battle of the Denmark Strait saw Richelieu, with PoW attached, but with Vice-Admiral Hood aboard PoW. He had to be there as communications and tactical integration had not reached the point where he and his staff could smoothly operate from Richelieu.

Don't you mean KGV instead of Hood ?


I think he meant Vice Admiral Holland aboard PoW (instead of aboard HMS Hood)

Admiral Hood had long been dead by the time Wink
_________________
Olivier
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
loic
Administrateur - Site Admin


Inscrit le: 16 Oct 2006
Messages: 8936
Localisation: Toulouse (à peu près)

MessagePosté le: Mer Juin 30, 2010 12:31    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant

The presence of Richelieu avoids engaging the PoW which is not ready. The KGV is (barely) ready. So I wanted to say : "Don't you mean KGV instead of PoW ?"
We therefore could see Richelieu+KGV instead of Richelieu+Hood (or even Richelieu+KGV+Hood - poor Bismark).
_________________
On ne trébuche pas deux fois sur la même pierre (proverbe oriental)
En principe (moi) ...
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
marklbailey



Inscrit le: 05 Jan 2008
Messages: 121
Localisation: Canberra, Australia

MessagePosté le: Jeu Juil 01, 2010 07:03    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant

Jacques

I agree That the maintenance and repair of the RN Program Is To Be Affected By The N. disponibility of ships .

The Following Is The possible repair and modification of RN Hood .
It Was Planned OTL .

Would Have Been Implemented at this time is open year issue .


Within APOD we are still looking at the RN refit and construction programs in detail recently. Hood is the most difficult of the three most important ships (Rodney, Nelson and Hood in that order).

Hood had refits as follows:
June-August 1939
March-June 1940
January-March 1941

Nelson
major refit June1937-January 1938
major refit July 1944-January 1945 (for the Pacific)

January-August 1940 following mine damage 4 December 1939
September 41-April 1942 following torpedo damage 27 September 1941

Rodney
major refit September-November 1938
December 1939 docked to repair serious rudder defects
May-August 1941 in Boston

As you can see, Jacques, the issue is obvious! Hood did not get damaged and went through a routine cycle of medium refits, which kept her in service. The planned reconstruction of 12 December 1938 is impossible, as it includes a complete repalcement of machinery, costs four million pounds and takes teh ship out of the war for at least 30 months.

Becuase of her December 1939 mining, Nelson was in good condition 1940-41,a s a major refit was included in the repair period. However, the ships of this class are still being planned to send to Asia, so she still needs tropicalisation (remember, this class was the 2nd battle Squadron of the Home Fleet 1932-1941!)

Rodney was in poor condition because her planned major refit (5-6 months) of 1940 could not be afforded. They needed the ship too much, ran her far too hard, and this ruined her. That's why she was paid into reserve in November 1945 and Nelson lasted another 2 years.

So the refit schedule in APOD is within a month or two of the following:
Rodney December 1940-May 1941
Nelson June 1941-November 1941

(Both ships will be in the Eastern Fleet in Singapore when the USA declares war on Japan in November 1941.)

Now, with the old RN BC concentrated at Gibraltar, and 1 of the 3 cycling through the Dockyard, Hood is taken care of.

(Loic, we have not attrited the RMI nearly as fast in APOD as in FFO, this is why I discussed this in APOD terms. Concentrating the BC is strategically necessary in APOD. Matters in FFO may be quite different.)

So, Jacques, it is quite interesting to quantify the impact of the MN remaining in action this way. It makes a serious difference and has a really important 'stabilising' effect on the RN's building and capital ship major refit programs.


I'll correct the VADM Hood error (obviously I did not drink enough Jamaican rum when writing that post!)

Regards: Mark
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
marklbailey



Inscrit le: 05 Jan 2008
Messages: 121
Localisation: Canberra, Australia

MessagePosté le: Jeu Juil 01, 2010 07:21    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant

Loic

Citation:
The presence of Richelieu avoider Engaging the PoW WHICH IS not ready. The KGV is ( barely ) ready. So I wanted to say : " Do you mean KGV INSTEAD of PoW ? "
Therefor we could " see Richelieu + KGV + Hood INSTEAD of Richelieu ( Richelieu OR Events + KGV + Hood - Bismark poor ).


Oh, I see what you mean.

KGV was fully operational at that time, having commissioned on 1 October 1940, worked up until 2 December 1940 and joined the Fleet at Scapa Flow on that date.

We will not have Hood in the Home Fleet in APOD during 1940-41. She is in Force H.

PoW was commissioned on 18 January 1941. Her unpreparedness has consistently been a little bit overstated. The problem with her turrets was debugging them (or 'tuning' them), not completing them. Her main armament was not formally handed over to the Admiralty until 27 APril 1941. HOWEVER, she was in Scapa Flow as a member of 2nd Battle Squadron doing her workups from 25 March 1941. These workups revealed defects in her main armament, which is why the contractors stayed with her. This was not unusual with a new ship. So she is available in APOD under the same restrictions. So teaming her with the fully worked up and modern Richelieu is sensible, it reduces risk.

What is done with her in FFO is none of my business, and I would not be comfortable commenting on that, so I will not.

Regards: Mark
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
loic
Administrateur - Site Admin


Inscrit le: 16 Oct 2006
Messages: 8936
Localisation: Toulouse (à peu près)

MessagePosté le: Jeu Juil 01, 2010 08:20    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant

Mark, since KGV (operational, indeed) is in the Home Fleet in your timeline, she should be sent against the BS in place of PoW.

For Rodney : the ship is still needed to escort convoys against German raider in 1940, the more so because the French and British are "reshuffling" their convoy routes (in fact, adding new routes) to take into account the important French needs in North Africa.
_________________
On ne trébuche pas deux fois sur la même pierre (proverbe oriental)
En principe (moi) ...
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Fantasque



Inscrit le: 20 Oct 2006
Messages: 1336
Localisation: Paris

MessagePosté le: Jeu Juil 01, 2010 08:23    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant

The story of the HMS HOOD is to be put in context.

Of course in FTL we will have significant differences and improvements compared to the RN situation OTL from July 1st 1940 onwards, but the main difference for 1940 will probably be:
(i) The continuing burden sharing with the French MN in the Med.
(ii) The availability of Dunkerque and Strassbourg as fast BC, and probably operating from Oran-Gibraltar.
(iii) A definite improvement in the cruiser force as less space is to be patrolled (the French empire is no more “hostile” and we have the addition of French cruiser).

The MN Richelieu is an important asset but one needing some preparation. I don’t expect the ship to be fully ready before December 1st.

The situation of HMS HOOD is then to probably be the following one:

(i) No action at Mers-el-Kebir.
(ii) Probable action, with other French ships, against Sardinia and providing distant escort for French convoys of the “Big Moving” on July 5th to 10th.
(iii) From July 30th to October 1st there is a vacuum. The Battle of Britain is not to begin before the very end of September. The Italian Navy is to be checked then knocked out (Judgement FTL). There is time for a Refit but not a too long one as Richelieu is then not fully operational. The HOOD is probably to be in Gibraltar wit the combined British-French mobile force. Or it could be sent at Rosyth for a minor Refit (but without action off Mers-el-Kebir and gun wear, damage to Hood’s turbines, this is to be mostly confined to some improvements in the radar fit and AA guns).
(iv) From October 1st to November 30th the ship is to be at Scapa Flow with the usual trade. It is possible that it would train with Richelieu. The first possible action with Richelieu could be the covering of the minelaying force, which took place from November 24th to 29th.
(v) In December to early March, there is still an opportunity for a refit. In OTL it took place from January 16th to March 18th . However, ULTRA warnings are implying a large German-Italian operation in the Med from mid-January on. I the suspect that a minor refit is probably to be done but the ship is again to be in Gibraltar from mid-January till early March.
(vi) As intelligence has been gained on KM Bismarck by then the HOOD is to be recalled to Scapa by late March. The RN never intended to send the HOOD alone against the Bismarck and there is an opportunity to team with Richelieu, giving the spare time to complete training of PoW.
(vii) From mid-April on the HOOD is to be on her OTL pattern of patrols and stay in Iceland and Scapa. The intercept group is to be formed with RN HOOD as the leading ship (she has the communication, command and control needed for), MN Richelieu, MN Algérie, 4 RN DD and 4 MN DD.

I agree with HMS Rodney refit but this would prevent the reconstruction of HOOD. However the planned reconstruction would have been scheduled for the second part of 1941, with the addition of both Richelieu and Prince of Wales. I assume that plans would have to be made for reconstructing the ship once the PoW would have been fully operational (early June 1941). However, this would be too late…

F
_________________
Fantasque
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
marklbailey



Inscrit le: 05 Jan 2008
Messages: 121
Localisation: Canberra, Australia

MessagePosté le: Ven Juil 02, 2010 04:33    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant

Loic
Citation:
Mark, since KGV (operational, indeed) is in the Home Fleet in your timeline, she should be sent against the BS in place of PoW.

For Rodney : the ship is still needed to escort convoys against German raider in 1940, the more so because the French and British are "reshuffling" their convoy routes (in fact, adding new routes) to take into account the important French needs in North Africa.


In APOD, KGV is doing what she did in OTL as there are no drivers to change it. When the Bismarck breakout occurs, there have to be two heavy intercept groups, as dictated by geography. That's the GI (Denmark Strait) group, Richelieu and PoW, and the IUK group, KGV and Nelson. The BC force (Force H Hood, probably Repulse and one of the two MN BC) is racing north to reinforce and forms the third group.

I'd like to discuss the MN BB and BC refit schedule at some point, we have them doing relatively little in late 1940 in APOD to catch up on maintenance, but need to refine it more than it currently is.

The convoy route reshuffle has been sorted out in APOD. There is a new route Recife-Dakar carrying the Plate grain and meat, Brazilian oats, coffee, timber and hides etc. The independents from the Cape join convoys at Dakar too. Dakar is the lynchpin. This is a route covered by aircraft and also by cruisers, it does not need BB at this stage as teh 2 german BC cannot reach it and still have safe fuel margins.

Critically, this pulls about 30% of the ships (15-20% in tonnage) from the North Atlantic route, these are the smaller, older, slower tramps. In turn, this decreases convoy numbers and increases their speed on that route, and slashes weather damage to ships, cutting repair yard labour and allowing more labour for the RN's programs, and to the other solution we are working up based on APOD drivers for the merchant ship and shipbuilding issue.

it also makes Brazil extremely important, an issue I am addressing with Guilherme.

Jacques

Fully concur with your assessment, we have long since factored this in to the Recife-Dakar convoy route with its standard 40 ship 7 knot (SOA) convoys.

it is pleasing to see independent confirmation.

Dakar is a Godsend: LRMPA can be based there, it has a good port and an excellent roadstead, and (unlike Freetown) it is healthy.

The MN cruiser force is also a Godsend. It is modern, though, but it liberates many of the old RN crusiers (C and D especially) for this route, which is short enough for them to be efficient, without beaing beaten to death by the weather. The MN just does not have any obsolete cruisers!

Two C/D with a convoy will distract a panzershiffe long enough for the convoy to escape. We also have to look at the driver for a long range maritime attack capability. I suspect there would be a Coastal Command Wellington TB Squadron based at Dakar quite quickly.

As to Hood, bear in mind the differences in APOD. We did not find the operations in FFO against Sardinia to be logistically supportable, so Corsica and Sardinia remain in Axis hands in APOD. We also altered the Taranto attack, as Bearn was not assessed to be capable of supporting an efficient attack force. Her deck cycle was too slow and the daylight attack too dangerous (per RN planning for such an attack during the Abyssinnian Crisis), but even with ehr slow deck cycle and overall poor condition, she was used to provide the flare-droppers (relieving the RN of this role and improving the attack) and especially the critical withdrawal phase fighter cover with her modern Brewsters.

We have the BoB beginning at a low level in August, and other differences.

All that said (I am merely pointing our differences in the drivers between FFO and APOD, nothing more), your plan for Hood in your post seems to be logical and rational, and in accordance with your drivers in FFO.

For APOD, Rodney will just get a good, solid refit (focussing on her machinery, which was in a poor state). With Nelson going in to refit in mid 1941 we are examining replacement of her 6" battery with 4.5" AA. Not really sure on the drivers yet, though.

I agree, BTW, that the RN would share its discoveries about shell interferance with the MN very early. I do not see MN vessels having the dispersion issue in either APOD or FFO.

We have had one of the MN BC strike a mine in APOD, causing modest damage (I'll have to check which one).

That was done deliberately, to get one of them into a refit to conclude no later than December 1940. The other would then cycle through.

Richelieu and Jean Bart have long been addressed.

What of teh old BB, though?

DFrom 1937 to May 1940, what were the refit cycles of Lorraine, Bretagne, Provence, Courbet and Paris?

Also, did you evacuate Ocean?
If so, she'd be an excellent candidate for refit and return to service as a trade protection ship. Again, that Dakar-Recife route is a benign place to use such ships effeciently.

I understand that Ocean did not have her main armament removed when she was transferred to training use in 1938. Is this true?

Regards: Mark
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
loic
Administrateur - Site Admin


Inscrit le: 16 Oct 2006
Messages: 8936
Localisation: Toulouse (à peu près)

MessagePosté le: Ven Juil 02, 2010 10:41    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant

Mark, I really don't see why you make all these changes in APOD. The Tarranto attack is not a Pacific-like battle, it's a one-shot attack the Bearn is perfectly able to do. Moreover, the land-based Italian planes will mostly have been neutralized by long-range attacks from Malta and won't be able to chase the retiring fleet. About Sardinia, the logistics lines from North Africa and Corsica are very short and the defense is weak.
The BoB beginning at a low level in August : do you mean the attempt to block naval trafic ?
Now, I don't want to restart the FFO/APOD discussion here ...

About French BBs, here are quick informations

- Condorcet : torpedo-school since 1933, moved to Casablanca to keep this role (later moved to Australia for the French submarine group there)

- Océan (ex-Jean-Bart), scuttled at Toulon to block the harbour exit
Note : other ships suffering the same fate : transport-hospital ship Rhin (ex-Tourville), CL Thionville (former Austrian Novara), PS Nancy ; these were disarmed and used as barrack-ships since the 30'.
I have a doubt about the 305mm guns of Ocean not being removed when the ship was disarmed and transfered to training role in 1935 (and not 1938).

- Courbet : major refit in 1927-29 (boiler changed, smoke stacks joined), 1930-37 : gunnery school-ship, , est affecté comme navire-école (école du canon de Brest), 1937-38 : evaporation unit (?) refitted

- Bretagne : major refit in 1932-35

- Provence : modernized in 1932-35 (engines, boilers, evaporation unit (?))

- Lorraine : refit in 1936 (armament)
_________________
On ne trébuche pas deux fois sur la même pierre (proverbe oriental)
En principe (moi) ...
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Fantasque



Inscrit le: 20 Oct 2006
Messages: 1336
Localisation: Paris

MessagePosté le: Ven Juil 02, 2010 11:30    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant

Mark,

I understand the differences.

Loic is right about the MN Océan.

I know that HMS Rodney in OTL did get an US refit after the Bismarck action. Would it be possible in FTL to have it earlier?
I knew that the machinery was in a pretty poor state.

Too bad for HMS HOOD. The planned reconstruction was to take 18-24 months and I don't see a window of opportunity for that before late June 1941.

All the best

F
_________________
Fantasque
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
marklbailey



Inscrit le: 05 Jan 2008
Messages: 121
Localisation: Canberra, Australia

MessagePosté le: Ven Juil 02, 2010 12:32    Sujet du message: Répondre en citant

Thanks Loic, that is very, very useful information. I am working up a working document for battleship refit periods and your data will enable me to include the MN battleship force. This will benefit both APOD and FTL for 1940-41.

I shall have to amend my copy of Jean Labayle Couhat's French Warships of WWII. That is where the 1938 date for Ocean came from.

I think we all understand and are comfortable with teh fact that we just have different purposes for spending our time on both APOD and FFO (FTL). A good example: this is why we are looking very closely at creating a situation for enable the USA to declare war on Japan in November 1941. Such a situation will enable us to look at the effect of the US War Plans in the ORANGE series. I have been reading Miller's excellent 'War Plan Orange' again, and discussing it with John Lundstrom of 'Black Shoe Admiral' fame (he knows Miller). These discussions have taught us much about pre-Pacific war USN planning processes.

Frank has explained to me via email much of the purpose the European team has, and I regard those purposes as admirable. Again, Frank taught me much, and I am grateful to him for that.

APOD 'boss' is really Shane, not I. I am merely the most prolific writer: it is a relief from some very serious stress in my life. Shane writes very differently and much more slowly, and also has major involvement in at least one other alternative history.

Jacques, bearing in mind that most of the 1940-41 effect on the Royal navy of France fighting on is identical in APOD and FFO, I see no reason why there would be much difference in the BB refit schedules.

What we have identified here is that the Admiralty is not forced to abandon its normal policies on maintenance in either FTL or APOD. It WAS forced to abandon these policies in OTL as the emergency was so serious.

I think that Rodney could be refitted at about the same time in FTL and APOD (the drivers are similar), so in FTL you have an opportunity to refit her for up to six months between the end of 1940 and the middle of 1941. The dates can easily vary between the two projects, but teh general period will be the same. It is the availability of Richelieu which drives this as Rodney is a Home Fleet ship. But she can also be 'replaced for refit' by either Dunkirk or Strasbourg, if desired.

It is too bad for Hood, but that is the nature of things.

Regards: Mark
Revenir en haut de page
Voir le profil de l'utilisateur Envoyer un message privé
Montrer les messages depuis:   
Poster un nouveau sujet   Répondre au sujet    Fantasque Time Line Index du Forum -> Divers Toutes les heures sont au format GMT + 1 Heure
Page 1 sur 1

 
Sauter vers:  
Vous ne pouvez pas poster de nouveaux sujets dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas éditer vos messages dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas supprimer vos messages dans ce forum
Vous ne pouvez pas voter dans les sondages de ce forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Traduction par : phpBB-fr.com