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: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23   NEXT
5thGuards       8/20/2007 7:52:09 AM
Russia is not Europe?

Anyway French navy has a slight advantage over UK navy atm , that 2 small carriers with harriers can not compare to the French De gaulle , sure it had some problems but now its fine with Rafales its a very strong projection and its well protected , French have the most advanced frigate in the world La Fayette while British Type 23 is not close in capability.
British Type 42 Destroyers are not exactly world class since they are not multipurpose they are good for Anti Air but weaker for everything else. Both have similar Sub fleet , so id say french have a slight advantage atm , but in the near future British will have a stronger navy no doubt about that.That is of course when the Astute SSN's , Type 45's and CVN's come in service.

 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234       8/20/2007 9:21:50 AM

Russia is not Europe?

Anyway French navy has a slight advantage over UK navy atm , that 2 small carriers with harriers can not compare to the French De gaulle , sure it had some problems but now its fine with Rafales its a very strong projection and its well protected , French have the most advanced frigate in the world La Fayette while British Type 23 is not close in capability.
British Type 42 Destroyers are not exactly world class since they are not multipurpose they are good for Anti Air but weaker for everything else. Both have similar Sub fleet , so id say french have a slight advantage atm , but in the near future British will have a stronger navy no doubt about that.That is of course when the Astute SSN's , Type 45's and CVN's come in service.


1. The Laughitup is not the world's advanced frigate. It is a one hit and your sunk piece of junk. The best frigate at the moment is a MEKO: it depends on whose variant of Meko you want to call best.. 
2. The CdG has serious design faults.
3. The British sub fleet is arguably boat for boat despite some mechanical and design faults the finest on Earth.
4. The Type 42, long in the tooth, does what the Forbin, today, can not. Provide a legitimate area air defense escort.
5. The French port avions 2 is up in the air. The QE2s look like a done deal.
   
Herald

 
 
Quote    Reply

5thGuards       8/20/2007 11:29:58 AM



Russia is not Europe?

Anyway French navy has a slight advantage over UK navy atm , that 2 small carriers with harriers can not compare to the French De gaulle , sure it had some problems but now its fine with Rafales its a very strong projection and its well protected , French have the most advanced frigate in the world La Fayette while British Type 23 is not close in capability.
British Type 42 Destroyers are not exactly world class since they are not multipurpose they are good for Anti Air but weaker for everything else. Both have similar Sub fleet , so id say french have a slight advantage atm , but in the near future British will have a stronger navy no doubt about that.That is of course when the Astute SSN's , Type 45's and CVN's come in service.



1. The Laughitup is not the world's advanced frigate. It is a one hit and your sunk piece of junk. The best frigate at the moment is a MEKO: it depends on whose variant of Meko you want to call best.. 
2. The CdG has serious design faults.

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

4. The Type 42, long in the tooth, does what the Forbin, today, can not. Provide a legitimate area air defense escort.

5. The French port avions 2 is up in the air. The QE2s look like a done deal.

   

Herald


 


1. Alright I agree with MEKO , though comparing UK and French navy UK frigates are not as advanced as La Fayette you have to agree with that.

2. Yes it does , as I said , but it has Rafales on board and a good defence system while Invincible has Harriers and very poor amarment, you choose what you rather have.

3. The finest sailors probably , the best navy not even close , when you count power you have to compare the fleet power and capability of destroying another and id say UK has a slight advantage over France in this case but it is certainly far from beeing the strongest , both US and Russia are able to destroy the british sub fleet if compared against 1 and another without any other factors.

4. As I said Type 42 is good , but lacks other purpous , its pretty good for air cover but not very good for anti ship combat.

5. As I said when new carriers , astute's and type 45's will all come to service UK will be far more capable than French Navy , but at the moment its only comparable.
 
Quote    Reply

5thGuards       8/20/2007 11:34:50 AM



Russia is not Europe?

Anyway French navy has a slight advantage over UK navy atm , that 2 small carriers with harriers can not compare to the French De gaulle , sure it had some problems but now its fine with Rafales its a very strong projection and its well protected , French have the most advanced frigate in the world La Fayette while British Type 23 is not close in capability.
British Type 42 Destroyers are not exactly world class since they are not multipurpose they are good for Anti Air but weaker for everything else. Both have similar Sub fleet , so id say french have a slight advantage atm , but in the near future British will have a stronger navy no doubt about that.That is of course when the Astute SSN's , Type 45's and CVN's come in service.



1. The Laughitup is not the world's advanced frigate. It is a one hit and your sunk piece of junk. The best frigate at the moment is a MEKO: it depends on whose variant of Meko you want to call best.. 
2. The CdG has serious design faults.

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

4. The Type 42, long in the tooth, does what the Forbin, today, can not. Provide a legitimate area air defense escort.

5. The French port avions 2 is up in the air. The QE2s look like a done deal.

   

Herald


 


1. Alright I agree with MEKO , though comparing UK and French navy UK frigates are not as advanced as La Fayette you have to agree with that.

2. Yes it does , as I said , but it has Rafales on board and a good defence system while Invincible has Harriers and very poor amarment, you choose what you rather have.

3. The finest sailors probably , the best navy not even close , when you count power you have to compare the fleet power and capability of destroying another and id say UK has a slight advantage over France in this case but it is certainly far from beeing the strongest , both US and Russia are able to destroy the british sub fleet if compared against 1 and another without any other factors.

4. As I said Type 42 is good , but lacks other purpous , its pretty good for air cover but not very good for anti ship combat.

5. As I said when new carriers , astute's and type 45's will all come to service UK will be far more capable than French Navy , but at the moment its only comparable.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    As I observed before........   8/20/2007 11:50:56 AM
you have a long way to go, before I take youn seriously.
 
Your conclusions are fiundamentally flawed.
 
You look at things in isolation and accept  propaganda instead of things as they are used in the aggregate and proven over time.
 
Example: by true objective criteria, the CdG is less effective than an Invincible. Why? Because the Invincible is there on station  fighting or patrolling while the CdG is continuously laid up as a harbor queen and rarely risked in sustained operations. It doesn't even come down to CATOBAR versus STOVL. A CATOBAR that is poorly designed and a harbor queen is of less value to me than a STOVL that works competently day in and day out. Same as for the Type 42, versus a Forbin. If it works, it works. If it fails, even if it is the "new thing", then what use is it? 
 
THAT is why you fail. You don't look at the true capability. 
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

TDidier       8/20/2007 12:20:17 PM

you have a long way to go, before I take youn seriously.

 

Your conclusions are fiundamentally flawed.

 

You look at things in isolation and accept  propaganda instead of things as they are used in the aggregate and proven over time.

 

Example: by true objective criteria, the CdG is less effective than an Invincible. Why? Because the Invincible is there on station  fighting or patrolling while the CdG is continuously laid up as a harbor queen and rarely risked in sustained operations. It doesn't even come down to CATOBAR versus STOVL. A CATOBAR that is poorly designed and a harbor queen is of less value to me than a STOVL that works competently day in and day out. Same as for the Type 42, versus a Forbin. If it works, it works. If it fails, even if it is the "new thing", then what use is it? 

 

THAT is why you fail. You don't look at the true capability. 

 

Herald



As usual... laughtfull ;))
 
Comparing an Invincible to the CdG is your best funny show Herald. And always the sames "faulty design" about the CdG, some minor problem quickly solved...
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 ;))  ) , carrying E2-C Hawkeye (the clueless name for awacs...) and still for some years Super-Et (Sem-5, not the sem-0 that crushed the RN during the Malvinas war, understand? ).
Please note that the CATOBAR CdG is able to put those 20t+ aircrafts in the air...
For the rest CdG sail since a while now, you can just search a bit on google.
 
About the so marvelous T45, you know what I think about... If Sampson works, then maybe could this ship fill the wide gap in air-detection that the RN is suffering, but still the escorter need to be escorted against anything coming low and detected lately or anything diving or even, anything sailing.
 
For the rest I thing that the reduction of the RN to the french size of naval forces is a british political will due to the umpossibility to maintain such a number of vessels regarding the real health of UK economic state.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    T'didier   8/20/2007 12:39:47 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
 
 
 
 
Quote    Reply

5thGuards       8/20/2007 2:15:23 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.

 
Quote    Reply

Wicked Chinchilla       8/20/2007 2:41:54 PM
Being unreliable is quite a defect...
 
Just ask all of the Vietnam vets who were issued the M16 before it was "fixed."
 
Ruggedness and a proven combat record goes much farther than statistics on paper.  You also cant simply "fix" a flight deck layout problem.  You can carry 100+ aircraft, if you cant get them into and out of the air efficiently and safely then the only planes that count are the ones that you can actually launch.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234       8/20/2007 3:01:34 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
 
Quote    Reply
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