France mulling the idea of building 2 (two) PANG carriers.
75,000 tdw
30-40 aircraft including:
Rafale F5
FCAS
Hawkeye
Nh-90 choppers
PANG x 2
France mulling the idea of building 2 (two) PANG carriers.
75,000 tdw
30-40 aircraft including:
Rafale F5
FCAS
Hawkeye
Nh-90 choppers
Yes please
I beg you
Kino...
They should build a third, EU-funded for EU missions.
>They should build a third, EU-funded for EU missions.
Non
Frick you and frick Europe/European Union
We wont, no money.
t.frog
They have to
Why? To constantly try meet the bong? They have bigger budget than us we have other needs.
No, because it's the minimum number required if you have a carrier force.
3 would be ideal but that would really be over the top financially wise
We do not have budget i just told you
Russian refugee in Nice? Frick off Black person
We have the 3rd biggest budget in western europe
If they just bought a bong carrier the bongs would probably lend them spare parts and a carrier if they needed it that badly and theirs was damaged.
Would mean they could probably get away with 1.
Qu'on coupe les vivres à la CAF (et aux cafres) ainsi qu'à la sécurité sociale pour les non-blancs et tu verras par miracle comment on aura le budget pour en construire 10
Would be the same for Germany and UK
The french actually know how to build carriers
Yet they only have 1
We used to have three of them, and the CDG was supposed to have a sistership, but it was canceled in the 90s due to financial issues
Nuclear
Flattop
100% interoperability with USN
Yes 1 but good
But if 1 has to spend the time when its most needed in refit or repair you might aswell not have any.
Wrong, 1 is better than 0 because carrier operations and carrier pilots need years of learning and practicing
Your point is correct but operationally speaking if you need to use your carrier and its in for repair it is as good as hqving none.
I dont think it's in drydock more than 2-3 months every year and that is normal after a long sail to the pacific
True, but that's only for a third of the time. The other 2/3rds you have a carrier. Better than nothing as far as I am concerned and I give them big props for not skimping on the caps and nukes. The reeal question is whether they are gonna advance to the EMALS or stick with steam.
They are taking the EMALS from the americans from what I read
>from what I read
Official releases or random, unsourced posts somewhere?
Lemme try to remember, I think I read it last week
Thanks, appreciate the effort. Interested in the topic I just have yet to see anything even halfway credible one way or the other.
So the US govt approved a Foreign Military Sale to France for EMALS, that means they are cleared to purchase it if they choose it
Sauce here:
https://www.dsca.mil/press-media/major-arms-sales/france-electromagnetic-aircraft-launch-system-emals-and-advanced
Other than that if you type "PANG EMALS" and choose News in google there are several articles but I don't know how accurate they are
Sweet, I'll give it a look over.
>they are cleared to purchase it
I put low weight on this. Could just be the burgers trying to push for them to buy it, isn't necesarily any indication of French interest.
In any case I think it's best to just buy it all together, it's a way too complex system that can bury the whole project if it fails. Even the americans have problems with it on the Ford class and they can throw mountains of $$$ at the problem until they fix it. By 2040 it should work fine
>In any case I think it's best to just buy it all together, it's a way too complex system that can bury the whole project if it fails
I don't really disagree with you for the most part. The issue is that its not the French way. They like to go it alone and stand on their own two feet, even when that can end up seeming wasteful. That said, there is some utility to having an ally that isn't so interconnected/dependent on you. To make a Star Trek reference that you likely won't get: Reminds me of the Klingon ships once the Breen entered the war. ...now I can't stop imagining French Klingons and its hilarious.
Hey I am all for going at it alone, I am a fan of French tech but I also want it to succeed and not be dragged by problems
>I put low weight on this. Could just be the burgers trying to push for them to buy it, isn't necesarily any indication of French interest.
If I recall correctly we build the steam catapults under license too. At least those on the older carriers maybe not those on the CdG.
Given it's a really important part allowing for complete interoperability it's quite possible we buy or buy the licence to make those from the US.
A lot of components parts in the french military is US made, only export products are french/EU made to avoid ITAR bans.
Its absolutly better than nothing as a whole i just meant if you needed it when it was in port for repair/maintainance. Im not trying to argue in bad faith.
>France needs a carrier in N.Africa asap
>Its in refit ergo cant be used
US/Britain wouldnt have this issue because they have 2/more than 2.
It is a shame UK couldnt find the money for no ramp but 2 with ramps trumps 1 without i guess so you can see the thought process.
I think it has seen some serious time in dock at stages in its life. Not sure what time it spends now though.
That would be good.
Kek no
>Britain wouldnt have this issue
Entirely true. Instead they have to worry about fuel, no long-range AWACS (the kind that matters for an expedition), and lower payload on strike packages. Its all a trade-off. I think its great that they each went a different way with it and can play off each other's strengths.
>Worry about fuel
Kind of mooted when a carrier needs food and other stores plus they have more replenishment ships than france.
>Long range recon
This is the main one, i think the E3 has 100 miles more range and can stick around for twice the time as the merlin.
>Kind of mooted when a carrier needs food and other stores plus they have more replenishment ships than france.
Thank you for not engaging in good faith. Totally makes me want to continue this conversation. Buh-bye
>they have to worry about fuel,
QE class can sale half way around the world on one tank and is followed by tankers and supply ships wherever it goes operating from a large UK network of bases around the world.
>no long-range AWACS
The UK can put up 24 hour AEW, CGD can't as it only embarks two Hawkeyes. The UK is looking at replacing it's Merlin crowsnest with fixed wing UAV's which will provide 24 hour endurance EACH.
>and lower payload on strike packages.
F35B can take off from a ramp and fly further, and with a heavier armament than Rafale. It can do this with a full internal weapons load for a stealth mission profile.
>QE class can sale half way around the world on one tank and is followed by tankers and supply ships wherever it goes operating from a large UK network of bases around the world.
You're a moron.
>I think it has seen some serious time in dock at stages in its life. Not sure what time it spends now though.
Not any more than any other ship of that type.
In fact, going by the availability rate of US carriers, much less.
It jas 70% overall availability, US ones make do with 50% but that's by design.
France cant use its carrier for this entire year almost
Motherfricker I will cut your fat gut up, do you even read the Marine Nationale monthly magazine? The CdG is in a mission 3/4 of the time, you are thinking of the Cuckuzoff
Its in dock right now for 7 months you dumb c**t. CdG is not in mission 3/4 of the time you literal moron.
You shit eating immigrant, it's literally a lie you throw out that diseased mouth
https://twitter.com/MarineNationale/status/1658506909656154128?t=nVwTx1r9xfodyrjJRZF0YA&s=19
>Navy The Charles de Gaulle has just entered the basin for an interim maintenance period, which will last until the end of the year, under the project management of @navalgroup
Why are you so angry? Is it because your wrong and have been caught out lying? Or just because your a seething frog with half a carrier at any time?
This is a rare occurrence, the rest of years it's 75-90% away on missions you moron
Shut the frick up and appologise for beinf wrong you disingenuious frog c**t
Frog posters i swear, how dumb are they?
NO, the last time it was out of action for 18 months
>The French navy's only aircraft carrier is back in action following an 18-month, $1.5-billion overhaul that compelled French aviators to practice aboard an American flattop.
So in 2017 it was out for 18 months now in 2023 its out for 7 months. The carrier is trash and a dock queen.
A FRICKING RAMP
25/84 = 29.67%
>dock queen
This even buys into the dumbass conception that British carriers wouldn't also have to undergo midlife refits because they are made out of magic and Windsor farts.
Go frick yourself
It was in the indian ocean in january you idiot
Frick, when they check
Now bathe in cheese you dumb fricks its like arguing with a 3 year old. Never post again.
Who the frick are you culero?
1 that has to be refitted is better than having 2 but one is mothballed to refit the other
>Seething
Lets check
>2007
Down for 15 months
>2009
Oops back to Toulon
>2010
Electrical fault, back to Toulon after a few days into a 4 month patrol
>2017
Maintainance in dock for 18 fricking months
>2023
Maintainance in dock for what is guessed at 8 months
The facts are there moron check them for yourself the CdG does NOT have " 3/4 mission time " its a giant piece of snail shit.
Tell us about Prince of Wales now
>Froganon makes ridiculous claim about CdG availability
>Gets utterly btfo
>Whatabout RN
Im sorry but your cope is terminal and your obsession with the UK is unhealthy.
But if you must, PoW suffered a faulty prop shaft guess where it was made? France lmao
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/french-firm-thales-is-focus-of-inquiry-into-faulty-aircraft-carrier-hms-prince-of-wales-jnws7c2lz
It returns to duty in autumn btw
>HMS Prince of Wales is not being cannibalised because it is off to be mothballed. The ship will be back in full service in the autumn,” Wallace declared.
Now appologise for being a complete mong and being wrong about the CdG not being a huge dock queen and being wrong about having me school you on pretty much everythinf
>suffered a faulty prop shaft guess where it was made? France
Bongoloids BTFO
all according to plan
>seething
projection
>Gets hit with the hard truth
>Copes about the Royal Navy
Lmao obsessed frog got upset when proven wrong and is now sperging
Which is why it's moronic to have only 1.
But the socialist governement we had in the early 2000's had their way with the military budgets (I mean we're talking about people that are unilateralists it's a miracle they only damaged the nuclear and military programs to a point it was salvageable).
France in defense livre blanc was always to have 2 carriers that way you can plan to have always one available for emergencies.
Chirac was a disgusting shitstain.
>Germany
Dead since 1945, thankfully
>and UK
They could, but call me back when they'll stop using third world tier ramps on their carriers
2>1
F35>Rafale
Not a bong but this is irrefutable, the onky thing the French have going for it is the hawkeye
I wasn't denying it either
The Rafale, is fully the equal of the F-35, Su-57 and J-20 as a fifth generation fighter. Like the KF-21, it is a 4.5 gen with development potential to be further upgraded to fifth gen. That is why many countries, such as India, Indonesia, Qatar and the UAE which have requested F-35s or were looking at other fifth gen options like the Su-75 and KF-21, are now Rafale users.
The Eurogay Typhoon meanwhile remains a 4-4.5 generation aircraft with no further development potential, and the countries who are using it primarily (UK, Italy, Spain etc) are all F-35 users and have no incentive to develop it further
phat ass nuclear girl?
don't give the french any ideas, they already sexualized a bayonet
Don't talk like that about my wife
>phat ass nuclear girl?
need
No offence but I don't think they have the budget
Will Poland ever build an aircraft carrier?
In an ideal world, Europe would have 5 supercarriers (excluding those Queen Elizabeth abominations)Japan and South Korea 2 a piece and Australia 2. Anything to free up US carriers to handle China and Iran at the same time
Why the frick would Japan or SK need supercarriers you brain dead spastic
Their nations exist to be airfields in the only conflicts they're expected to perform in
Nobody tell him
I wonder if they'd export a carrier to a private citizen.
Imagine having a yacht that is also your private airport and hangar.
Japan and South Korea depend 90% on imported Middle Eastern fossil energy.
With the US unwilling to provide maritime security, these countries have to protect their own oil by building an expeditionary naval capability
Carriers are otherwise useless in an East Asian war
>France mulling the idea of building 2 (two) PANG carriers.
It's also enduring regular riots because it can't afford to pay peoples pensions now, let alone in 10 years when the population is even older.
>france can't afford this
>noooo you can't say that in a discussion about an expensive pipe dream
You cant comprehend english pard'ner
I am English.
I'm profoundly sorry.
mauldite en soit trestoute la lignye
https://air-cosmos.com/article/les-emals-et-aag-du-futur-porte-avions-francais-62367
https://www.janes.com/defence-news/news-detail/france-provides-more-details-on-next-generation-aircraft-carrier
https://www.lesechos.fr/industrie-services/air-defense/le-porte-avions-charles-de-gaulle-aura-un-successeur-en-2038-1272164
Here's some of the most trustworthy source I know, respectively in French and English.
It's pretty much a done deal.
Oops, mean for
Why does France need power projection boats in the first place? What are they gonna do with them?
Unironically Africa and coalition/EU shit
>PANG
Pute A NèGre ?
Aircraft carriers are obsolete boomer tier shit just like MBTs. Only worthwhile use is to bully third world shitholes but you can just call the amerimutt navy for that, so no that shit is moronic. A better use for that money would be to invest it in more social programs for refugees
Nonsense, France has the 7th largest GDP in the world they could easily afford a couple of modest aircraft carriers. It’s only a matter of having the political will to force civil servants to eat a little austerity. I don’t know anything about France but I assume it’s the civil service spending like everywhere else that makes having nice things so difficult.
Friday morning bongs still haven't recovered from the French beating they got
have a nice day Armatard.
I am not that muskovyte pussy
Armatard,
I am not that homosexual