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
usajoe       8/21/2007 8:12:32 PM
 CDG is intended for power projection and has more aircraft and is more usefull in that
 
No really that is what i have been trying to tell you that the CDG has more power projection,
it is a true ACC and besides the US carriers is the most powerful carrier in the world, the Kuz
is not a true carrier, so as i said before the CDG gives France what no other European country
has at the moment a true carrier!
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234       8/21/2007 8:26:27 PM


Ok look first of all CDG is a nuclear carrier and Kuznetsov is not, second the CDG has AWACS with
E-2C Hawkeyes and Kuznetsov doesnt,  the 15 Rafale Ms and 17 Super Étendards are more powerful than the
12 SU-33 and 5 SU-25's that the Kuznestov has. And also CDG has top of the line electronics, better trained crew
members, and I will take the ASTER sam's over the SA-N-9 Gauntlet. The only thing that the Kuznetsov has over
the CDG is its larger has  SS-N-19 Shipwreck ASM, and more Vodka on board not that the Russian will  be drinking
on duty LOL!. Sirously I dont know what you'r talking about besides the US NIMITZ carries CDG is the most
Powerful carrier in the World!.


Joe I think you need to stop writing such foolish posts , alot of your posts are full of nonsense.
First of all you think that Kuznetsov would attack CDG , and even claim they would attack with Su-33's , you have no clue have you?
First of all Kuznetsov was made to protect Russian strategic subs.
Second of all they would not attack CDG with Kuznetsov but Oscar subs that would get within 600km range and shot shipwrecks and disapear in ocean.
Third of all even if you for some reason want to compare Kuznetsov and CDG without any other ships , allthough it was not design for that Kuznetsov could sink CDG with granits.



You claimed that the CdG had comparable combat experience to an Invincible.

I just pointed out you don't know what you write again. I put nothing in your mouth. You put your foot there, all by yourself.

Herald

Herald I think you missunderstood me I never claimed that CDG has more combat experience and I completly agree with you on that , but I was simply saying that it does have combat experience.

Cheers.





I did not misunderstand you at all. You don't escape from what you wrote, period.
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

5thGuards       8/21/2007 8:27:53 PM
No really that is what i have been trying to tell you that the CDG has more power projection,
it is a true ACC and besides the US carriers is the most powerful carrier in the world, the Kuz
is not a true carrier, so as i said before the CDG gives France what no other European country
has at the moment a true carrier!


Thats true but Kuznetsov is a powerfull anti ship and anti air and anti sub vessel intended to protect sub fleet , you sounded like you were saying how CDG is more powerfull than Kuznetsov don't deny that , now if you think about Power projection thats a different story , but that still does not help France in any way.
You said France is a more powerfull navy and I said it has no chance going head on vs RN , now proove me wrong? And explain how is French navy stronger if it cannot defeat the navy that is supposed to be weaker?
 
Quote    Reply

5thGuards       8/21/2007 8:29:13 PM




Ok look first of all CDG is a nuclear carrier and Kuznetsov is not, second the CDG has AWACS with
E-2C Hawkeyes and Kuznetsov doesnt,  the 15 Rafale Ms and 17 Super Étendards are more powerful than the
12 SU-33 and 5 SU-25's that the Kuznestov has. And also CDG has top of the line electronics, better trained crew
members, and I will take the ASTER sam's over the SA-N-9 Gauntlet. The only thing that the Kuznetsov has over
the CDG is its larger has  SS-N-19 Shipwreck ASM, and more Vodka on board not that the Russian will  be drinking
on duty LOL!. Sirously I dont know what you'r talking about besides the US NIMITZ carries CDG is the most
Powerful carrier in the World!.


Joe I think you need to stop writing such foolish posts , alot of your posts are full of nonsense.
First of all you think that Kuznetsov would attack CDG , and even claim they would attack with Su-33's , you have no clue have you?
First of all Kuznetsov was made to protect Russian strategic subs.
Second of all they would not attack CDG with Kuznetsov but Oscar subs that would get within 600km range and shot shipwrecks and disapear in ocean.
Third of all even if you for some reason want to compare Kuznetsov and CDG without any other ships , allthough it was not design for that Kuznetsov could sink CDG with granits.



You claimed that the CdG had comparable combat experience to an Invincible.

I just pointed out you don't know what you write again. I put nothing in your mouth. You put your foot there, all by yourself.

Herald

Herald I think you missunderstood me I never claimed that CDG has more combat experience and I completly agree with you on that , but I was simply saying that it does have combat experience.

Cheers.






I did not misunderstand you at all. You don't escape from what you wrote, period.
 

Herald


Don't act like a ass all the time.

I politely ask you to search for the statement where I have claimed that CDG has more combat experience than Invincible.

Cheers.
 
Quote    Reply

usajoe       8/21/2007 9:04:30 PM
Thats true but Kuznetsov is a powerfull anti ship and anti air and anti sub vessel intended to protect sub fleet , you sounded like you were saying how CDG is more powerfull than Kuznetsov don't deny that , now if you think about Power projection thats a different story , but that still does not help France in any way.
You said France is a more powerfull navy and I said it has no chance going head on vs RN , now proove me wrong? And explain how is French navy stronger if it cannot defeat the navy that is supposed to be weaker?
 
If you go back and read what I wrote you will see that i said that the CDG is a more powerful true (Air Craft Carrier)
i said that maybe like 5 times, ok the Kuznetsov has more ASM, and its role is more of a Crusier and its to protect
subs not for power projection like the Nimitz or CDG. So i am going to say it one more time because i dont think
you are understanding me the CDG is the only true ACC in Europe and also the most powerful (Air Craft Carrier).
Now abou the French navy and the Russians, ok yes the Russains have more ships and more subs, but ship for ship
and sailor for sailor the French have more advanced ships and way better trained and led sailors, the Russains have not
build a new ship since the collapse of the USSR, they have just started to build ships again after 15 ears of almost
no activity, they hardly went out to sea, and just like there air force counterparts they just started to get money
and started again to show some activity. And the very few exercises they had always led to some accident, or some
ships could not even go out because they were in such bad shape, yes they did start to fix these problems lately
but they have a long way to go to become a modern and proffesional Navy like its western counterparts.
And one more thing I am not Russian or French i am American so I dont have any buyest opinion and dont suport
one over the other.
 
Quote    Reply

5thGuards       8/21/2007 10:56:58 PM

Thats true but Kuznetsov is a powerfull anti ship and anti air and anti sub vessel intended to protect sub fleet , you sounded like you were saying how CDG is more powerfull than Kuznetsov don't deny that , now if you think about Power projection thats a different story , but that still does not help France in any way.
You said France is a more powerfull navy and I said it has no chance going head on vs RN , now proove me wrong? And explain how is French navy stronger if it cannot defeat the navy that is supposed to be weaker?
 

If you go back and read what I wrote you will see that i said that the CDG is a more powerful true (Air Craft Carrier)

i said that maybe like 5 times, ok the Kuznetsov has more ASM, and its role is more of a Crusier and its to protect

subs not for power projection like the Nimitz or CDG. So i am going to say it one more time because i dont think

you are understanding me the CDG is the only true ACC in Europe and also the most powerful (Air Craft Carrier).

Now abou the French navy and the Russians, ok yes the Russains have more ships and more subs, but ship for ship

and sailor for sailor the French have more advanced ships and way better trained and led sailors, the Russains have not

build a new ship since the collapse of the USSR, they have just started to build ships again after 15 ears of almost

no activity, they hardly went out to sea, and just like there air force counterparts they just started to get money

and started again to show some activity. And the very few exercises they had always led to some accident, or some

ships could not even go out because they were in such bad shape, yes they did start to fix these problems lately

but they have a long way to go to become a modern and proffesional Navy like its western counterparts.

And one more thing I am not Russian or French i am American so I dont have any buyest opinion and dont suport

one over the other.




1. I get what you meant but first you didn't sound like that , but ok lets leave that

2. French does not have more advanced submarines than Russia that info is false.
 Rubis is ---> 1ST GENERATION
Viktor III ---> 2nd generation
Sierra & Alfa ---> 3rd generation
Akula ---> 4th generation

3.French does not have warships capable of fighting Cruisers ( Kirov , Slava ) their best ship with anti ship capability is Tourville , they have only 2 , its quite impresive but it would not come close to penetrating the defence.

4. Your right about sailors not trained good and French sailors trained good , and that does make a difference , but they can't even closely compare they are VASTLY outnumbered and outpowered in this case.

Look they have 6 Rubis SSN vs 17 Russian SSN's that are ALL superior. Not to mention the SSK's.
Their surface fleet has no chance of coming close the battlegroup , EVEN if they were superior to the surface force they won't get pass Oscar SSGN's.
But to be honest Kirov and Slava are capable of dispatching most of the Surface fleet as none has great anti ship capability except Tourville and La'Fayette , but im not even getting into that , they can't get past no way.
Even as i mentioned before , Backfires could sunk them all even if they are capable of getting past but they are not.
The only way they could threaten the RN would be that their sub fleet would be much more powerfull and capable of handling the sub fleet and surface fleet and that is far from the reality.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234       8/22/2007 12:09:06 AM








Ok look first of all CDG is a nuclear carrier and Kuznetsov is not, second the CDG has AWACS with
E-2C Hawkeyes and Kuznetsov doesnt,  the 15 Rafale Ms and 17 Super Étendards are more powerful than the
12 SU-33 and 5 SU-25's that the Kuznestov has. And also CDG has top of the line electronics, better trained crew
members, and I will take the ASTER sam's over the SA-N-9 Gauntlet. The only thing that the Kuznetsov has over
the CDG is its larger has  SS-N-19 Shipwreck ASM, and more Vodka on board not that the Russian will  be drinking
on duty LOL!. Sirously I dont know what you'r talking about besides the US NIMITZ carries CDG is the most
Powerful carrier in the World!.


Joe I think you need to stop writing such foolish posts , alot of your posts are full of nonsense.
First of all you think that Kuznetsov would attack CDG , and even claim they would attack with Su-33's , you have no clue have you?
First of all Kuznetsov was made to protect Russian strategic subs.
Second of all they would not attack CDG with Kuznetsov but Oscar subs that would get within 600km range and shot shipwrecks and disapear in ocean.
Third of all even if you for some reason want to compare Kuznetsov and CDG without any other ships , allthough it was not design for that Kuznetsov could sink CDG with granits.



You claimed that the CdG had comparable combat experience to an Invincible.

I just pointed out you don't know what you write again. I put nothing in your mouth. You put your foot there, all by yourself.

Herald

Herald I think you missunderstood me I never claimed that CDG has more combat experience and I completly agree with you on that , but I was simply saying that it does have combat experience.

Cheers.








I did not misunderstand you at all. You don't escape from what you wrote, period.
 



Herald




Don't act like a ass all the time.

I politely ask you to search for the statement where I have claimed that CDG has more combat experience than Invincible.

Cheers.


 

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.


Don't act like a ass all the time.^1

I politely ask you to search for the statement where I have claimed that CDG has more combat experience than Invincible.

Cheers.

 

Satisfied?

You asked and I answered.

You shouldn’t ask me to demonstrate to youwhat you wrote.

Though your tried to write a greater than statement; I ignored that implied LIE; because it was your rhetorical  way to squirm out of what you stupidly wrote. An equals statement is all I need to show the essential equivalence you thought both ships had-actually you thought the CdG was superior.
 
So;
 
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/119/367288191_3e4d42a21a_o.gif" width=315 border=0>

 

Now  if you want to try to call someone an ass, I suggest you
 
Quote    Reply

Lawman       8/22/2007 6:29:28 AM
Okay, ignoring all the hostility above, and not seeking to take sides, here is my position:
 
- The RN will have an advantage in terms of carriers and submarines in particular.
- Surface ship wise, the Lafayette leaves a lot to be desired, because although somewhat stealthy, she lacks any meaningful punch, with just the normal Exocets, and frankly, a pretty poor air defence missile. Crotale does not have the capability of Sea Wolf, which has proven itself in combat repeatedly, and has undergone real improvements.
- The RN's Type 23s may not be very stealthy, but they are excellent ASW platforms, and are better for this than any of the current French fleet.
- The RN does have hopes of replacing its final Type 22s, and all the Type 23s, it just can't push too hard for that until the carriers are under construction!
- The RN thus has an advantage in major categories, and at least parity in AAW and ASW capability.
 
Thus, the RN will have a modest, but noticeable advantage over the MN in 2017, as the original question asked.
 
Before that time, the answer is mixed:
 
- The RN currently lacks a proper fighter, since they have decided there is little urgenct need for it. If needed, they could probably have Harriers fielding radar pods and AMRAAMs relatively quickly, since there are reports that the RAF has actually tested the podded radar already. This was shown in flight aboard one of the RAF's test fleet of aircraft, and there are suggestions that more work has been done, though is on hold for now, since there is no urgency.
- The CDG is a heck of a nice carrier, despite being a little smaller than would be desired. It can carry good aircraft, and in reasonable numbers.
- The RN does have a major advantage in subs, since the MN's subs are far less capable, and there are less of them.
- The RN's ships do have better defences, with Phalanx or Goalkeeper on pretty much all of them, and Sea Wolf and Sea Dart on some.
- The MN has slightly newer escorts, but the RN does upgrade its ships too, and certainly for ASW the Type 23 will likely remain ahead for a good while yet! For AAW, yes, Sea Dart is getting long in the tooth, and is not as good as Aster, but it is still a heck of a good missile, with the proven ability to shoot down incoming missiles and even shells! It is better than the MN's AAW systems, with the exception of Aster, but since the RN and MN will both have Aster, that's will become a draw over time, though the Type 45's radar is rumoured to be somewhat better, though with a price tag to match!
 
 
As for Russia, yes, they have some theoretically powerful ships, but they do not have the training to take advantage of them. In addition, as already stated, poor manning can be the difference between life and death. The sub fleet is not in a good state, and simply having larger numbers does not offset this. Also, I certainly wouldn't count Oscar II class boats as SSNs, since they are basically the same sort of size as a ballistic missile sub. They can defend themselves, but would not be a good choice to go sub hunting! The Kuznetsov is not a formidable carrier, it may be a formidable cruiser, but it rarely puts to sea, and the pilots do not have much experience, and there are small numbers of fighters.
 
As with most of the supposed 'Russian threat', it is largely based on mothballed equipment, and propagandised capabilties. Trying to compare fleets one vs one doesn't make any sense, since it is hopelessly unrealistic. On paper, the Russian fleet may be huge, but Admiral Gorshkov would not be smiling if he saw the state of the Russian Navy today. It would take a good few years of massive reinvestment to bring the Russian Navy anywhere near its '80s capability.
 
As for new kit for Russia, there has been much talk, but not much action! New submarines may be built, but it is not likely to be in great numbers, and no amount of "it'll be the best submarine ever built, and the US Navy will wish it was theirs" propaganda will make them better subs. It is entirely probably that the new subs will be equivalent to late model Improved Los Angeles class, or possibly a little better, but I really doubt they will be as good as Virginia, Seawolf, Astute or Barracuda.   
 
Quote    Reply

usajoe    Lawman    8/22/2007 7:32:20 AM
I agree 100%
 
Quote    Reply

5thGuards       8/22/2007 7:58:42 AM












Ok look first of all CDG is a nuclear carrier and Kuznetsov is not, second the CDG has AWACS with
E-2C Hawkeyes and Kuznetsov doesnt,  the 15 Rafale Ms and 17 Super Étendards are more powerful than the
12 SU-33 and 5 SU-25's that the Kuznestov has. And also CDG has top of the line electronics, better trained crew
members, and I will take the ASTER sam's over the SA-N-9 Gauntlet. The only thing that the Kuznetsov has over
the CDG is its larger has  SS-N-19 Shipwreck ASM, and more Vodka on board not that the Russian will  be drinking
on duty LOL!. Sirously I dont know what you'r talking about besides the US NIMITZ carries CDG is the most
Powerful carrier in the World!.


Joe I think you need to stop writing such foolish posts , alot of your posts are full of nonsense.
First of all you think that Kuznetsov would attack CDG , and even claim they would attack with Su-33's , you have no clue have you?
First of all Kuznetsov was made to protect Russian strategic subs.
Second of all they would not attack CDG with Kuznetsov but Oscar subs that would get within 600km range and shot shipwrecks and disapear in ocean.
Third of all even if you for some reason want to compare Kuznetsov and CDG without any other ships , allthough it was not design for that Kuznetsov could sink CDG with granits.



You claimed that the CdG had comparable combat experience to an Invincible.

I just pointed out you don't know what you write again. I put nothing in your mouth. You put your foot there, all by yourself.

Herald

Herald I think you missunderstood me I never claimed that CDG has more combat experience and I completly agree with you on that , but I was simply saying that it does have combat experience.

Cheers.










I did not misunderstand you at all. You don't escape from what you wrote, period.
 





Herald






Don't act like a ass all the time.

I politely ask you to search for the statement where I have claimed that CDG has more combat experience than Invincible.

Cheers.



 

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.



Don't act like a ass all the time.^1

I politely ask you to search for the statement where I have claimed that CDG has more combat experience than Invincible.

Cheers.



 


Satisfied?


You asked and I answered.


You shouldn’t ask me to demonstrate to youwhat you wrote.


Though your tried to write a greater than statement; I ignored that implied LIE; because it was your rhetorical  way to squirm out of what you stupidly wrote. An equals statement is all I need to show the essential equivalence you thought both ships had-actually you thought the CdG was superior.
 
So;

 

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/119/367288191_3e4d42a21a_o.gif" border="0" height="264" width="315">


 


Now  if you want to try to call someone an ass, I suggest you refrain from that impulse.

With the coolest of recognition;

Herald   






Then you prooven that you missunderstand me.
 
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