Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

CVF and Carrier Strike thread

If you are thinking about the French Navy, they do not want 2 carriers. They'd much prefer more frigates than 2 carriers and very little else.
I am, but then im very much of the opinion if you want a carrier you need 2 - even if you are only rotating through active and reserve.

I appreciate that would be far easier for the UK than the MN
 
I am, but then im very much of the opinion if you want a carrier you need 2 - even if you are only rotating through active and reserve.

I appreciate that would be far easier for the UK than the MN

I do not think the RN is seen as an example to follow in the MN at the moment. The skills are respected but the format of the force is seen as quite strange
 
I do not think the RN is seen as an example to follow in the MN at the moment. The skills are respected but the format of the force is seen as quite strange
result of defence cuts rather than a planned structure.

But a carrier operational and 1 in reserve would free up a frigate or 2 manpower and still retain the capacity to always have a carrier.

Easy enough for the UK - but the MN will be nuclear and im not so sure mothballings viable
 
result of defence cuts rather than a planned structure.

But a carrier operational and 1 in reserve would free up a frigate or 2 manpower and still retain the capacity to always have a carrier.

Easy enough for the UK - but the MN will be nuclear and im not so sure mothballings viable

The choice of nuclear power for the PANG has not been made yet. Regarding the format, with China being more and more pressing, there is a growing need for frigates and OPVs in the French EEZ.
 
The choice of nuclear power for the PANG has not been made yet. Regarding the format, with China being more and more pressing, there is a growing need for frigates and OPVs in the French EEZ.

I thought Nuke was an established requirement - but perhaps i mistranslated something
 
This is more or less the bit id previously read in French press

As it will be an aircraft carrier of around 70,000 tonnes, because of the size of the aircraft, it won’t be equipped with K15 boiler rooms like on the Charles de Gaulle, but it will be necessary to develop K22 boiler rooms, of a similar design but bigger and more powerful.

I took that as indicating it was gong to be nuclear
However reading the link that quote was presented without context It will need rather than if its nuclear it will need
 
This is more or less the bit id previously read in French press

As it will be an aircraft carrier of around 70,000 tonnes, because of the size of the aircraft, it won’t be equipped with K15 boiler rooms like on the Charles de Gaulle, but it will be necessary to develop K22 boiler rooms, of a similar design but bigger and more powerful.

I took that as indicating it was gong to be nuclear
However reading the link that quote was presented without context It will need rather than if its nuclear it will need

Nuclear went from the generally accepted mode of propulsion of the PANG to a subject for debate. AFAIK, the decision is not made yet.
 

Majorpain

War Hero
This is more or less the bit id previously read in French press

As it will be an aircraft carrier of around 70,000 tonnes, because of the size of the aircraft, it won’t be equipped with K15 boiler rooms like on the Charles de Gaulle, but it will be necessary to develop K22 boiler rooms, of a similar design but bigger and more powerful.

I took that as indicating it was gong to be nuclear
However reading the link that quote was presented without context It will need rather than if its nuclear it will need

Charles de Gaulle shares her reactors with the Sub's, but paying to develop a new bigger one with a production run of two max would be eye watering expensive. The only game in town is the Americans, and they are unlikely to share their tech!
 
Charles de Gaulle shares her reactors with the Sub's, but paying to develop a new bigger one with a production run of two max would be eye watering expensive. The only game in town is the Americans, and they are unlikely to share their tech!

As the MN is unlikely to ask. The nuclear industry is very powerful in France and having a US reactor in the MN capital ship would be completely unthinkable.

Catapults are a different story since none are domestically produced.
 
As the MN is unlikely to ask. The nuclear industry is very powerful in France and having a US reactor in the MN capital ship would be completely unthinkable.

Catapults are a different story since none are domestically produced.
Is there any reason why the PANG wouldn't use gas turbines and electromagnetic catapults?
 
Is there any reason why the PANG wouldn't use gas turbines and electromagnetic catapults?

None I can think of. The electromagnetic catapults are going to be tested according to the above link.

Still about the Aéronavale, the US DSCA has approved yesterday the sale of 3 Advanced Hawkeye E-2D to France.
 
This is more or less the bit id previously read in French press

As it will be an aircraft carrier of around 70,000 tonnes, because of the size of the aircraft, it won’t be equipped with K15 boiler rooms like on the Charles de Gaulle, but it will be necessary to develop K22 boiler rooms, of a similar design but bigger and more powerful.

I took that as indicating it was gong to be nuclear
However reading the link that quote was presented without context It will need rather than if its nuclear it will need

They couldn't live with us having bigger ones, could they.
 
CdG hasn't been the most successful ship on that front.

She's one of only four classes of CVN ever built and the only nuclear-powered surface warship ever designed and built in W Europe. It's arguable that on that basis, she's been a roaring success. It's fair to say that aside from the shielding issue they had to redesign for, none of her other issues are related to her plant.

The French paid the UK £100M for the design rights to QEC, back in the day. A good point to start from whether they opt for kettles or not. Might be a bit tricky to work them in given QEC propulsive layout, but I'd be surprised if they haven't been thinking about it for a few years.
 

Cold_Collation

LE
Book Reviewer
She's one of only four classes of CVN ever built and the only nuclear-powered surface warship ever designed and built in W Europe. It's arguable that on that basis, she's been a roaring success. It's fair to say that aside from the shielding issue they had to redesign for, none of her other issues are related to her plant.

The French paid the UK £100M for the design rights to QEC, back in the day. A good point to start from whether they opt for kettles or not. Might be a bit tricky to work them in given QEC propulsive layout, but I'd be surprised if they haven't been thinking about it for a few years.
Cost is also a factor, though (sorry, not throwing it in as a counter-argument late in the say). Cost of operation was a factor in us not going nuclear.
 

Latest Threads

Top