On the British side, the British government wants its shipbuilding industry to begin restructuring in accordance with the Defence Industrial Strategy before it awards the future aircraft carrier (CVF) contract. British yards shipyards are visiting French facilities, and looking to benefit from their improvement and the French have offered to help, for a price. The quid pro quo is that British shipyards adopt French production standards and methods, and that the British agreed to design changes that accommodate French requirements (provision for larger ammunition storage holds, special secure storage areas the French can use for nuclear weapons, etc.) There is some thought that adoption of identical standards could lead to the building of common sections for the three carriers, but that hasn't gone past the discussion stage at this point.
Firstly it says the French made us adopt their own production standards and design requirements; the article says its possibly to allow construction of common sections for ours and their future carriers. Why would either France or UK allow the others Shipyards to build part of their fleet? I cant see the benefits of commonality here.
Also why would we agree to the option of nuclear storage on the carriers, do we currently do so? I thought our nuclear deterrent was purely trident based. And lastly, why would we accept larger ammunitions holds, is it not better to have smaller isolated units in case of accidents?
Oh and an unrelated side note. The wiki on the De Gaulle says a couple of MI6 spooks were caught on it during construction to look at how they were sheilding its reactor. DOes anybody have more info on this? Surely if we wanted a nuclear powered carrier back them we would the same sheilding design as we use in our subs?