# French navy to get two new nuclear powered almost super-carriers, first by 2038



## MarkOttawa (8 Dec 2020)

US Navy will love, proper carriers too:



> President Macron Announces Start of New French Nuclear Aircraft Carrier Program
> 
> French President Emmanuel Macron today officially green-lighted the construction of a new nuclear-powered aircraft carrier as part of the PANG program. The future flagship of the French Navy is intended to replace the existing FS Charles de Gaulle (R91) aircraft carrier around 2038.
> 
> ...



Mark
Ottawa


----------



## dapaterson (8 Dec 2020)

As a Canadian, may I say, it's refreshing to see other nations taking 18 years to get a ship into the navy.


----------



## Good2Golf (8 Dec 2020)

dapaterson said:
			
		

> As a Canadian, may I say, it's refreshing to see other nations taking 18 years to get a ship into the navy.



Because multiple nuclear reactors aren’t any more complicated than a few off-the-shelf marine diesels and a GT...


----------



## Colin Parkinson (8 Dec 2020)

Combined with the QE's Europe's ability to project power will be quite significant once these are in service.


----------



## Weinie (8 Dec 2020)

Hmmmmmm.........launch in 2038.

Am I the only one on this site that thinks that the "conflict and confrontation" envelope in 2038 will be so different from what we see now that carriers will be only valuable as HA platforms?

China's Navy will crest in about 10 years, they will be a blue-water Navy, but advancements in missiles, AI, and UAV's will constrict them from being a dominant force. That aside, I am not sure of the force projection that the French Navy hopes to accomplish here.


----------



## CBH99 (9 Dec 2020)

Weinie said:
			
		

> Hmmmmmm.........launch in 2038.
> 
> Am I the only one on this site that thinks that the "conflict and confrontation" envelope in 2038 will be so different from what we see now that carriers will be only valuable as HA platforms?
> 
> China's Navy will crest in about 10 years, they will be a blue-water Navy, but advancements in missiles, AI, and UAV's will constrict them from being a dominant force. That aside, I am not sure of the force projection that the French Navy hopes to accomplish here.




I agree with you that come 2038, carriers may have seen the way of the battleship.

That being said, France is a colonial power, and more than carries it's weight militarily.  If nothing else, having a carrier to support operations in their current/formal colonies is probably just good planning.  (Plus it builds & sustains not only their shipbuilding industry, aircraft manufacturing industry, but a variety of other industries also.  So it could be viewed as a good way to keep lots of people employed, while further developing some very special capabilities.)


----------



## SeaKingTacco (9 Dec 2020)

Plus, even if the balance shifts towards UCAVs by then, they still need a place to land, get fuel, be repaired and re-armed.


----------



## dimsum (9 Dec 2020)

SeaKingTacco said:
			
		

> Plus, even if the balance shifts towards UCAVs by then, they still need a place to land, get fuel, be repaired and re-armed.



Agreed.  RPAS have the endurance/range, but quick (relatively-speaking) turnaround is always going to be a benefit.  Having a mobile airfield will always be useful, if not essential.


----------



## Weinie (9 Dec 2020)

Dimsum said:
			
		

> Agreed.  RPAS have the endurance/range, but quick (relatively-speaking) turnaround is always going to be a benefit.  Having a mobile airfield will always be useful, if not essential.



I suspect that RPAS would be the only thing they could reasonably carry/launch, as any near peer military will have hypersonic, long range carrier killers that will result in the carrier being far from the targets.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (7 Jan 2021)

dimsum said:


> Agreed.  RPAS have the endurance/range, but quick (relatively-speaking) turnaround is always going to be a benefit.  Having a mobile airfield will always be useful, if not essential.





SeaKingTacco said:


> I have been reading the “shortage of base personnel“ thread with interest And have been nodding my head in agreement with our crappy personnel management stories. Our Senior AESOp was posted this past summer from Victoria to Shearwater, despite him saying that all he wanted was 10 more months before he retired at 35 years of service. He would even submit a release memo, requesting 1 Apr 21 as a release date. instead, all he got back from the Career Manager was a terse “posting refusal equals compulsory release on your COS date, move now!” email in reply.  I tried to patiently explain to the gaining CO and the CM that this was a bad idea- he had enough leave banked that he could basically move across Canada, get to Shearwater, submit a release memo and and leave pass, thus depriving the new unit of a Senior body for an entire year. Which he did. His replacement showed up at our unit. I interview him to find out that he had wanted the Shearwater posting all along, but it was denied to him- presumably just so the CM and Senior AESOp mafia could burn two cost moves  and teach a MWO a lesson (while depriving units of effective senior leaders). Does no one at D Mil C do actual sanity checks on moves?


A mobile airfield that can also do 35+ kts in a pinch is very advantageous.  Carriers have advantages over fixed airfields WRT targeting.  

Airfields locations are known and advances in missiles make them easy pickings.  A Carrier has a serious advantage in this regard.


----------



## FSTO (7 Jan 2021)

Weinie said:


> I suspect that RPAS would be the only thing they could reasonably carry/launch, as any near peer military will have hypersonic, long range carrier killers that will result in the carrier being far from the targets.


Countermeasures such as spoofing and decoys can make the mobile airfield a tough hit. All those fancy brochures and cools videos of the tethered hulk do not mention that the target has a say in the engagement as well.


----------



## Humphrey Bogart (7 Jan 2021)

They also fail to mention that the Carrier is inside a massive layered air defence bubble protected by many other ships, boats and aircraft.  

You may be able to detect the Carrier but getting missiles or torpedoes to it is a lot harder than it looks.  You would have to bypass screening forces, the destroyers, aircraft and a cruiser or two accompanying the carrier, not to mention the carriers own defensive systems.  Oh and throw in a couple of submarines for good measure.

A Carrier task group has an almost incomprehensible amount of firepower.  These aren't the Carriers of WWII, they have some serious standoff capabilities plus they carry more aircraft than most Nation's actual air forces.


----------



## tomahawk6 (7 Jan 2021)

The French will use its carrier in the Med and or around the coast of Africa. Nigeria or Mali shouldn't pose much of a threat to France.


----------



## Colin Parkinson (15 May 2021)

A good look at the French Mistral class amphibious assault ships. The narrator is a bit annoying though.


----------

