Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use How to Behave on an Internet Forum
Surface Forces Discussion Board
   Return to Topic Page
Subject: French and British Navys in 2017
usajoe    8/20/2007 4:51:10 AM
Right now the british have a small edge as the top navy in europe, but 10 years from now the French second aircraft carrier to complement the nuclear Charles de Gaulle, Horizon Destroyers,Fremm multipurpose frigates,and the 1st Barracuda ssn will come into service along with the Rafales, and E-2C Hawkeyes. the British will have their 2 new Queen Elizabeth class carrieres,Type-45 Destroyers,Astute Class ssn, and the F-35 replacing the Harriers. So on paper bolth will have simmler capabilities, and size, the same as now but with more Global projection power,and the difference then as is now will be British naval tactics and training which i think is just a tad bit better, and that is what I think is going to keep them the number 1 navy in europe.
 
Quote    Reply

Show Only Poster Name and Title     Newest to Oldest
Pages: PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23   NEXT
B.Smitty       8/20/2007 3:06:41 PM

3. The British sub fleet is arguably boat for boat despite some mechanical and design faults the finest on Earth.


I think the US, with its 3 Seawolfs and soon-to-be 4 Virginias, would have to be considered a cut above the UK's 7 Trafalgars. 

Just MHO.

 
Quote    Reply

andyf       8/20/2007 3:15:27 PM
no, he's got a point. the RN was crushed utterly by those  super etendards.the whole taskforce was sunk , the malvinas held and the british soldiers shipped back as POW to argentina , where they were made to file past a 120' statue of galtieri and say 'sorry'
- oh, I remember. that was a dream
 
Quote    Reply

TDidier       8/20/2007 3:34:26 PM

Where is the CdG right now?

 

Where is the Invincible?

 

How many sea days does the CdG actually have?

 

Whose ship has the flight deck layout problem?

 

Whose ship has the power plant problem?

 

Whose ship has the PROVEN combat record?

 

Whose ship did what it was designed to do without extensive modificatiosn and rebuilds.

 

Whose ship did not have shaft vibration problems and have a defective screw shatter?

 

Herald

 

 

 


1) CdG is in a dock for a common maintenance period as any war ship in the world as well as any US (for exemple... only exemple) nuke carrier.
2) Invincible? Monthballed or soon to be ;))
 
3) A lot, here is a timeline year per year (including the problems and the way they were fixed, relatively quickly due to the fact that thisd ship is a prototype of a considerable technologic achievement ).
 
ht*p://www.netmarine.net/bat/porteavi/cdg/hist1999.htm
 
4) Invincible has a deck layout problem, a so tiny deck but engineers even didn't manage to give an access to the totality of the space to aircrafts, look at front of the mall...
About CdG, the deck was (shortly) augmented to assure a total security to E2-C when turning because the live test didn't correspond to the Grumman recommandations.
 
5) As well as the rest... A problem, quickly fixed on a prototype.
UK nuke powerplant still are killing or injuring tens of years after their service entry.
 
6)Proven combat record? Of course Invincible, but about sending war fighters other a war zone, CdG enjoye maybe the same mission number ( over Afghanistan ), but 20 years younger.
7) No major extension. A deck a bit langer...
 
8) About the screw, yes it was shamefull. But the former screw builder finally has had the contract.
 
Didier
 
 
Quote    Reply

frog       8/20/2007 4:58:28 PM
Quoting the TDidier

"But now, here comes the true world.
Invincible is an helicopter carrier cruiser able to carry 5 to 8 ground attack Harrier...
CdG is a medium sized aircraft carrier able to carry 35 aircrafts and 5 Helos. Including Rafale (5/4.5 gen. fighter, not so bad at all for a "clueless" patrolboat ;))"

Firstly this is a debate about the RN and French Navy in 2017, not today, however stooping to today.

I seem to recall seeing a lot more than 5 to 8 ground attack harriers on the Invincible class carriers, their designed to operate some 20 aircraft or 16-18 Harriers, although I reckons we could get more on board if we had more, and quoting numbers involved in recent exercises won't help you win your argument. Regarding the Charles de Galle, there were a lot of set backs during the construction which lead to delays and many of the problems that have been or are being rectified. Strategically the RN is in a far stronger position than the French Navy, remember the RN is the only Navy who's Nuclear Subs have sunk enemy ships on operations.

Now for my vision of 2017

By 2017 the RN will be operating some 6 maybe 8 First Class Air warfare destroyers capable of shooting down any Golf Ball's a French Admiral may lob in the Type 45's Direction. Secondly both the RN and French Navy will each be operating 2 Medium Sized Aircraft carriers. The 2 RN carriers should be able to operate upto 40 F35's (Pure 5th Generation Aircraft, with the UK buying some 130+ aircraft) from their decks as well as AEW support either from their decks or the flight deck of a supporting ship. The French Navy will be operating the CdG which as you've said will be able to operate some 35 Rafaeles and 5 Helicopters, so basically 32 Rafaeles and 2 Hawkeye's, If the French Navy get lucky they may find themselves operating a PA.2 essentially a modded QE class carrier, with similar capabilities to the RN. The RN will also by 2017 have some 6 operational Astutes, with probably one assigned to the carrier task group. The Royal Navy will also have about a Dozen Type 23 Frigates, operating the most advanced towed array sonar in the world (albeit designed in France, if memory serves). Ok whilst some equipment (mentioned above) for the Royal Navy may not become available by 2017, the ball will be rolling for the purchase of above equipment, and some of the above kit will have been delivered. My guess as to who's the stronger come 2017, we'll just have to wait and see how many delays come about, we can debate who's the stronger on paper until hell freezes over, the truth is in the pudding, but I see a Brighter Future for the Royal Navy.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    When predicting the future, look at the past.    8/20/2007 5:17:14 PM
The RN has always had the edge on the French Marine even when it was outnumbered.
 
French victories and technical parity was a rare condition.
 
If the British fix Aster, I damn well guarantee you that the French will be totally outclassed.
 
The Type 45s are that good,
 
The Astutes are that good.
 
When I stated that sub, for sub the British despite theur design and mechanical deficiencies may have the finest submarine force on Earth, I factor all factors. British submarine crews are incredibly well trained, well led, and extremely dangerous. That counts for a lot. I wouldn't discount the Astute, technically, either.
 
Herald   
 
Quote    Reply

frog       8/20/2007 5:27:15 PM
Missed this earlier,

Tdier care to elaborate, or provide some useful and helpfull links to clarify:

"
5) As well as the rest... A problem, quickly fixed on a prototype.
UK nuke powerplant still are killing or injuring tens of years after their service entry."

I've found a reference to a certain French aircraft carrier and Radiation problems here:

Quoting "onetheless, the Charles de Gaulle has suffered from a variety of problems [see James Dunnigan's "How NOT to Build an Aircraft Carrier"]. The Charles de Gaulle took eleven years to build, with construction beginning in 1988 and entering service in late 2000. For comparison, constructino of the American CVN 77 began in 2001 with a projected delivery in 2008. The 40,000 ton ship is slower than the conventionally powered Foch, which she it replaced. The propellers on the CDG did not work properly, so she recycled those of the Foch. The nuclear reactor was problematic, with the engine crew receiving five times the allowable annual radiation dose. The flight deck layout has precluded operating the E-2 radar aircraft."

link

 
Quote    Reply

5thGuards       8/20/2007 5:32:16 PM








Where is the CdG right now?





 





Where is the Invincible?





 





How many sea days does the CdG actually have?





 





Whose ship has the flight deck layout problem?





 





Whose ship has the power plant problem?





 





Whose ship has the PROVEN combat record?





 





Whose ship did what it was designed to do without extensive modificatiosn and rebuilds.





 





Whose ship did not have shaft vibration problems and have a defective screw shatter?





 





Herald





 





 





 






You look at things the wrong way and I think you need to think a little before you post.

Claiming that a Carrier is ineffective because it has problems is low.

As I said before CDG has problems but that can not be a reason its more ineffective as Invincible.

When comparing the two which Carrier is far more capable? I think you already know the answer.

You can not say that 1 Carrier that is far more effective than another can not compare just because it is unreliable, you can't just choose and say CDG is useless because this and this and this has problems , thats bullcrap , compare the Carrier's true capability and tell me which is more effective ? If you say Invincible then you will disapoint me.
CDG proven itself in combat same as Invincible.



Falklands versus what?

 

I hope you don't lead men. You'll get them killed.

Herald


1. Im not a sailor

2. You claimed Invincible has prooven itself in combat , and though that CDG has not , and I said that it actually did , Afganistan.

 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234       8/20/2007 5:56:37 PM
Two Rafales that needed landbased Mirage 2000 laser targeting pod support to drop some bombs on fleeing tribesmen? This is combat proof? As in fighting off enemy air attacks, cruise missle attacls covering an amphibious landing, beating off  submarine attacks, deterring surface ship attacks? Go away, before I really lose my temper and unload on you, fanboy.  
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

usajoe    5thGuards    8/20/2007 6:07:14 PM
Russia is not Europe?
 
There is no way in hell you can compare the Russian navy to that of France or Britan
The Russais ACC Admiral Kuznetsov almost never goes out to sea, its Submarines force
is shrinking and rusting away, and its Akula and Oscar class ssn are on match for the
British Trafalgar or the new Astute, or the French Rubis class. The Russian Naval Aviation
pilots get less than 30 hours of flight training a year, sailor for sailor the British and French
are many times better trained and led than their Russian counterparts. Even back in the cold war days
the Soviet Navy was not given as much attantion as the other services, Russia is not known for its great
Naval tactics and victories, The British and french Navys outclass the Russian one in every aspect
except size and Nukes.
 
Quote    Reply

5thGuards       8/20/2007 6:45:37 PM
Two Rafales that needed landbased Mirage 2000 laser targeting pod support to drop some bombs on fleeing tribesmen? This is combat proof? As in fighting off enemy air attacks, cruise missle attacls covering an amphibious landing, beating off  submarine attacks, deterring surface ship attacks? Go away, before I really lose my temper and unload on you, fanboy. 
 
Herald
 


Herald why are you such a idiot , the Super Etendard did much over 100 combat missions , and YES I CALL THAT COMBAT EXPERIENCE.



There is no way in hell you can compare the Russian navy to that of France or Britan
The Russais ACC Admiral Kuznetsov almost never goes out to sea, its Submarines force
is shrinking and rusting away, and its Akula and Oscar class ssn are on match for the
British Trafalgar or the new Astute, or the French Rubis class. The Russian Naval Aviation
pilots get less than 30 hours of flight training a year, sailor for sailor the British and French
are many times better trained and led than their Russian counterparts. Even back in the cold war days
the Soviet Navy was not given as much attantion as the other services, Russia is not known for its great
Naval tactics and victories, The British and french Navys outclass the Russian one in every aspect
except size and Nukes.


You are wrong in every account exept that the UK and French sailors are better trained , you need to get your facts straight.
You can't even remotely compare the French and UK sub fleet to Russian fleet .
Ok the UK fleet is slightly comparable but for the French you have to be joking , thats too funny , care to explain how 6 Rubis class submarines ( BTW LESS CAPABLE than Akula ) are gonna sink a sub fleet of 60 submarines?
There is no chance of comparing the sub fleets , Russian sub fleet is still 2nd in capability after USN.
Allthough UK is not that far away their crews are excelently trained , I only wish they had more Astute class SSN's.
The Surface fleet on the other hand is very comparable , sure the Russian fleet has great Anti ship missiles and those nasty Slava and Kirov cruisers ( well only 1 Kirov ) . Comparing the fleets in capability :
UK with its Invincible class , Type 42 and Type 22/23 Frigates.
France with its CDG , Georges Leygues , Tourville ( only 2 ) , La Fayette and Floreal
Russia with Kuznetsov , Kirov cruisers , Slava cruisers , Sovremenny , Udaloy's

In capability there is no question that Russians have a big advantage when Ship vs Ship combat just look at their Slava and Kirov cruisers , those are some amazing warships with amazing anti ship and anti air capability.
No question they are more capable ships.
Now lets forget all that Russia has bullcrap rusty boats , the rusty boats are already destroyed.
The fleet operating atm is pretty good.
But now comes the tricky part , the sailors from both UK and France are better trained.
And that alone can contribute alittle to the UK and French performance.
But now comes the second tricky part , Russians have Tu-22M3 Backfire's , and that alone makes the fleet far more capable , Backfire's would sink the ships like no tomorow and don't even dare say that Harriers can intercept them its madness.
So on the open sea Russians can beat both UK and French navy with Backfire's , get it?
And if 1 fleet can beat another in open sea without aircover id say its stronger , how could you posibly else messure the strenght ?

But when the situation is near UK or French shore then they would use air cover and it would be too hard for backfire's to defeat the fleet since they would get intercepted .



 
Quote    Reply
PREV  1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23   NEXT



 Latest
 News
 
 Most
 Read
 
 Most
 Commented
 Hot
 Topics