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
french stratege       8/23/2007 5:23:07 PM
It is not because UK and USA won WW2 that it means their WW2 submarine campaign was better and that it give them advantage today in a completly different technological era.
 
 I note once again that no one debates the thrust of my argument that the EU in general can not support itself without the US led NATO. That is pathetic in my view.
A group of EU nation (if it includes France as we are the only one to have the full set of capabilities including C4ISR and reco satellites) can perfectly go without US.
The US excuse if often an excuse to do nothing when motivation lack like in Yugoslavia where all nations have a different view on the subject and were reluctant to involve themselves prefreing often that the problem solve it self and USA were the only one to federate a common position.
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234       8/23/2007 6:50:11 PM

It is not because UK and USA won WW2 that it means their WW2 submarine campaign was better and that it give them advantage today in a completly different technological era.

 



 I note once again that no one debates the thrust of my argument that the EU in general can not support itself without the US led NATO. That is pathetic in my view.


A group of EU nation (if it includes France as we are the only one to have the full set of capabilities including C4ISR and reco satellites) can perfectly go without US.

The US excuse if often an excuse to do nothing when motivation lack like in Yugoslavia where all nations have a different view on the subject and were reluctant to involve themselves prefreing often that the problem solve it self and USA were the only one to federate a common position.


Who restricts the US and British victories to WW II? There was a very deadly cold war fought under the Arctic, poseur 1.
The RN was there as well as the USN. It was hard fought BUMP AND SCRAPE and we AMERICANS owe the British big time for our victory.
 
Herald
 
Herald.
 
Quote    Reply

RockyMTNClimber    FS have you lost your mind?   8/23/2007 7:11:51 PM

It is not because UK and USA won WW2 that it means their WW2 submarine campaign was better and that it give them advantage today in a completly different technological era.

 



 I note once again that no one debates the thrust of my argument that the EU in general can not support itself without the US led NATO. That is pathetic in my view.


A group of EU nation (if it includes France as we are the only one to have the full set of capabilities including C4ISR and reco satellites) can perfectly go without US.

The US excuse if often an excuse to do nothing when motivation lack like in Yugoslavia where all nations have a different view on the subject and were reluctant to involve themselves prefreing often that the problem solve it self and USA were the only one to federate a common position.


I made those comments on another thread (Britannia Flees the Seas). Why in the world would you copy/paste them to here to reply?
Check Six
 
Rocky
 
Quote    Reply

Herald1234    ??????????????????????????   8/23/2007 7:18:34 PM
I'm sorry I didn't catch that.
 
Poseur 1 must have thought he had a point he could plagiarize?
 
Herald
 
Quote    Reply

RockyMTNClimber    For the key to UK submarine warfare....   8/23/2007 7:26:26 PM
Google: Perisher Course
 
ht***tp://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_18/perisher.htm
 

by JOC David Nagle, USN

Photo of HMS Talenthttp://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_18/images/HMS-Talent.gif" width=287 align=left>From January through July 2002, I was an exchange officer attending the British Submarine Command Course, more commonly known as “Perisher”. The British have been running Perisher twice a year since 1917, but until 1994, it dealt exclusively with diesel submarines, and navies throughout the world sent their prospective commanding officers to be tested by the British over six months of tactical training. Until I reported, there had never been a U.S. Navy officer “on course”.

With a historical failure rate of 25 percent, everyone wonders on the first day how many classmates will be there at the end – the odds are that with a look to your left and right – and including yourself – you’re seeing at least one officer who won’t make it.

If we passed, we would be added to “The Wall” at the British Submarine School in Plymouth, United Kingdom, where the names of all Perisher graduates are inscribed. It would certainly be a tremendous honor and personal achievement for me to be the first graduate with “USN” after his name.

I was serving as the Navigation/Operations Officer on USS Memphis (SSN-691) when the detailer called to ask if I wanted to be among those considered for selection to Perisher. Without thinking about it too long, I said yes. During my tour on “The Mighty Memphis,” I deployed to the North Atlantic twice and participated in a host of other interesting operations. It was a challenging and enjoyable tour, and with the reputation of Memphis as strong as it is, I’m sure it played a big part in my selection to the course.

At Sea in Another Navy – and “Foreign” English
When I arrived in the United Kingdom in late January, I reported to the British tactical training team headed by Lt CDR Stewart Little. Stewart, a served Executive Officer and Officer-in-Charge at the training facility, was to be my mentor for the eight weeks of indoctrination that prepare participants for Perisher.

As I began the program, it was difficult not to feel a little overwhelmed by the prospect of learning not only the differences among platforms, but also of understanding Royal Navy ships and tactics well enough for command at sea. Language differences were the first hurdle. The “Queen’s English” as spoken in the UK can be a challenge. I was frequently asking people to speak more slowly or to repeat themselves. And in ship-driving, they even give rudder orders differently. “Port 15, steer North” was part of my new jargon, and notably, calling an angle on the bow of “Port 30” could well be met with an acknowledgement from the helm that he now had “30 of Port Wheel on.”

The first order of business was to study relevant submarine systems from the command perspective – not necessarily the in-depth knowledge I was used to, but it would have to do. I also began to practice periscope-employment techniques in the trainer. A large portion of the course is devoted to learning how to operate a submarine safely at periscope depth amid high contact densities. Rapid, accurate target setups and a disciplined approach to contact management were critical aspects of Perisher on which I would s

 
Quote    Reply

usajoe    5th Guards   8/23/2007 8:09:12 PM
Dude , I was not pointing out sub fleet give them power projection ( Except SSGN ) , but a Kuznetsov aircraft carrier with 36 Su-33's , SSGN's with Cruise missiles , ALOT MORE Amphibius ships than France,ALOT MORE Transport aircraft than France , ALOT MORE equipment and soldiers than France. And they have VDV paratroopers CERTAINLY give them more power projection , French power projection is not big , seriusly , UK beats them easly , you are really overestimating French power projection and underestimating Russian power projection.

Regarding your TRAINING in sub fleets , French are somewhat better trained , but are you really JOKING if you think that it gives a huge difference that 6 inferior subs can beat 20 better or at least equal subs + 20+ diesel subs that are very good too +  huge ASW support that Kuznetsov + Surface fleet can offer ??
They have no chance , and I would not dare to claim otherwise if im not completly sure they have no chance at all.
French navy might have better maintaince, so what, is it gonna help the launch missile or defend against them? Russian navy has good enough maintaince to sail anywhere, launch missles and defend your self.
Unless you think French sailors are geneticaly superior to other sailors in the world.
 
Here is the list of all the major Russain Ships and Subs that are in Active service and even some of them have problems
going to sea.
 1 ACC- Adm. Kuznetsov- since 1991 has gone out to sea a handfull of times, just came back after 2 years of undergoing repairs because of technical problems and a lack of funding.
 
2 Kirov class battlecruisers
 
8 Sovremenniy class destroyer, 1 Udaloy 2 class destroyer, 1 Kashin class destroyer - total 10 Des.
 
1 Neustrashimy Class frigate, 1 Gepard Class Frigate, 11 Krivak class frigates- total 13 Frg.
 
And also there are 2 Cruisers one of each Kara and Kashin that may still be in service.
 
Now th SUB fleet
 
6 SSN- 5 Akula 1 and 1 Akula 2  class submarines.
 
8 SSGN- Oscar 2 class submarines.
 
16- Diesel-electric submarines- Kilo class submarines.
 
13- SSBN- 6 Delta 3, 6 Delta 4 class and 1 Typhoon class submarines.
 
TOTAL MAJOR SHIPS IN SEVICE- 71- 28 Surface Ships, 43 SUBS.
 
Now how are they so much better than the French.
In SSN they bolth have 6, and the 16 Diesel Kilos are not that big of a threat as the
Akulas.so all the Russians have is 8 more capable Subs of the Oscar 2 class SSGN's
and the 4 French SSBN's are mor advanced than the Russian 12 Delta class SSBN's,
and the Borei SSBN was laid down in  1996  and still has not been commissioned.
In Des and Frg. they have about the same numbers operational  France has 11 Frg. and
13 Des. The russians have 2  very Powerful Cruisers of the Kirov class and the french have
no Cruisers, The French have a  CVN the Russians dont.
Now the French have  A TOTAL OF 34 MAJOR SHIPS IN SERVICE.
Yes that is about half of the Russian size. But they do have much better training and
morale than the Russians and do have a better force projection than the Russians.
 
Now on the rest of the Navy yes the Russians do have more suport ships
like second class Frg or Corv- Rus-39 Fra 9-
Patrol Boats Rus- 21 Fra -18
LSD, LST, LSH, LPD,LC- Fra 6 Rus 27
Minesweepers- Rus 56 - Fra 13
and Russia also has more Fleet Oilers and other
suport ships than France, and has Tu-22 bombers and a lot more ASM,
but again yes near their shores the Russians have a good Defensive Navy
and have some good Subs, but their lacking of a true Carrier, GMD,
good maintenance or training, and not having any major navel bases out side its
shores they dont have the quality or force projecton of the French Navy.
 
Quote    Reply

gf0012-aust       8/23/2007 8:21:36 PM

Google: Perisher Course
 

ht***tp://www.navy.mil/navydata/cno/n87/usw/issue_18/perisher.htm 
Just as a small aside.  USN officers have been attached to Collins subs for pre-Perisher training.  They train up in the sub warfare training area off of western australia and then go for their finals after that.


 
 
Quote    Reply

5thGuards       8/23/2007 9:40:39 PM
 Here is the list of all the major Russain Ships and Subs that are in Active service and even some of them have problems
going to sea.
 1 ACC- Adm. Kuznetsov- since 1991 has gone out to sea a handfull of times, just came back after 2 years of undergoing repairs because of technical problems and a lack of funding.  <--- Active since a few days , we can safely say its in good shape.
 
2 Kirov class battlecruisers <--- Wrong , 1 Kirov class battlecruiser ( 2 are beeing refited atm ) , 1 Kara class cruiser , 3 Slava class cruiser. And Kuznetsov is also a cruiser and a aircraft carrier.
 
8 Sovremenniy class destroyer, 1 Udaloy 2 class destroyer, 1 Kashin class destroyer - total 10 Des. <-- Wrong , 8 Udaloy class destroyers , 1 Kashin class destroyer , 5 Sovremenny class destroyers. ( Gorshkov class in construction ).
 
1 Neustrashimy Class frigate, 1 Gepard Class Frigate, 11 Krivak class frigates- total 13 Frg. <--- 11 Frigates total not 13.
 
And also there are 2 Cruisers one of each Kara and Kashin that may still be in service.

Kara yes , Kashin is destroyer.
 
Now th SUB fleet
 
6 SSN- 5 Akula 1 and 1 Akula 2  class submarines.<-- Wrong , 9 Akula SSN , 1 Alfa SSN , 7 Sierra SSN ( I,II,II) , 4 Viktor III SSN.
 
8 SSGN- Oscar 2 class submarines. <-- Wrong 6 Oscar II SSGN.
 
16- Diesel-electric submarines- Kilo class submarines. <--- Wrong 17 Kilo SSK and 1 Lada SSK.
 
13- SSBN- 6 Delta 3, 6 Delta 4 class and 1 Typhoon class submarines. <-- 5 Delta III , 5 Delta IV , 1 Typhoon SSBN ( Test platform for Bulava missiles , after that it will be equiped with them ) 2 more Typhoon's in dock waiting for refit to carry new Bulava missiles.

TOTAL MAJOR SHIPS IN SEVICE- 71 ( 85 ) - 28 ( 31 ) Surface Ships, 43 ( 54 ) SUBS.
 
Now how are they so much better than the French.
-In SSN they bolth have 6 ( 6 vs 17 )
-and the 16 ( 18 ) Diesel Kilos are not that big of a threat as the
Akulas.
-so all the Russians have is 8 ( 6 ) more capable Subs of the Oscar 2 class SSGN's
-and the 4 French SSBN's are mor advanced than the Russian 12 Delta class SSBN's ( what the hell do SSBN's have to do with anything? and besides 12 Delta's carry more payload than 4 Triompants )
and the Borei SSBN was laid down in  1996  and still has not been commissioned. ( Almost finished )
In Des and Frg. they have about the same numbers operational  France has 11 Frg. and
13 Des.( They stand no chance against Kirov - Slava - Kuznetsov , and even if they would Oscar SSGN would be the line of defence they would need to penetrate and there is no way they would because they would wait silently in deep of the sea and when they would come close with surface fleet ( 600km ) they would launch Shipwrecks ( The Oscars ) and disapear in the ocean sinking alot of the surface fleet ) The russians have 2 ( 6 )  very Powerful Cruisers of the Kirov class ( + Slava + Kara + Kuznetsov ) and the french have
no Cruisers.
 The French have a  CVN the Russians dont. ( Kuznetsov is more effective Anti Ship , ASW , Anti air , and besides CDG would be useless , how would the french use them???? care to tell me? They would sacrifice all the fighters because they need to get past the huge air defence of Cruisers , no way , and if the CDG came closer Oscars would be waiting with Shipwrecks and they would lose CDG , they would not risk it )
Now the French have  A TOTAL OF 34 MAJOR SHIPS IN SERVICE.
Yes that is about half of the Russian size. ( betwen 2 - 3 times less , 34 vs 85 and far more than 3 times less in ship displacement ! ) But they do have much better training ( Agreed ) and
morale ( Are you joking ? How can you state that they would have a higher morale in t
 
Quote    Reply

usajoe    5thGuards    8/23/2007 9:57:27 PM
The numbers you put up ther even the ones I put up there are not 100% true
like as I said before that some of the ships are in bad shape and no one can really
give 100% information on the Russian armed forces.
And I am going to say this one more time the Russians have a good ASW,
and Defesnsive Navy, but they can not go to South America  and project offensive
power to any country that far away with their Navy. And that is a fact. 
 
Quote    Reply

5thGuards       8/23/2007 10:29:03 PM
The numbers you put up ther even the ones I put up there are not 100% true
like as I said before that some of the ships are in bad shape and no one can really
give 100% information on the Russian armed forces.
And I am going to say this one more time the Russians have a good ASW,
and Defesnsive Navy, but they can not go to South America  and project offensive
power to any country that far away with their Navy. And that is a fact.

1.Beeing that I know some high ranking sailors I think the numbers I told are very accurate.

2.RN ( even soviet navy in cold war ) was never intended for power projection but to defend the coast from any other navy that could pose a threat.
But still they can project power with Kuznetsov same as France can with CDG , there is not alot of fundamental differences both have a similar max number of fixed wing aircraft. And RN can use Oscar SSGN for cruise strikes, etc.
But besides their navy is not meant for that anyway.

3. Even if French navy could project a bit more power that does not mean it is stronger , if a fleet is overall weaker and unable to defeat another , i find it weaker and therefor france is not in the same league , by far.


 
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