Military Review

Where, sir, did you get carried away? Is De Gaulle really affordable for you?

100
Both laughter and sin. Emmanuel Macron, President of France, has officially announced that a program is currently underway to develop a new nuclear aircraft carrier to replace the country's existing Charles de Gaulle aircraft carrier.



News stunning. So much has already been written about Charles de Gaulle, how many times we have already discussed this floating catastrophe, and here you are ...

I just want to sing a paraphrase from a film about the musketeers: “Where, sir, did you really get carried away? Really you can afford "De Gaulle"? "

But it turns out that the aircraft carrier rake is pulling Macron to itself. Few accidents, few irradiated sailors, few frankly funny situations - let's continue! Well, if finances allow - why not? We are not going to advise the French on how to spend money from the budget in this difficult time? We will not. We have our own budget, our own problems.

They want another strange ship - good luck to the shipbuilding company "Naval Group", which is owned by the state (albeit partially, but nevertheless), which, as they say, "has already created the concept art of the new ship."

Concept art even sounds scary. It will be PANG, or Porte Avion Nouvelle Generation, which in French sounds like "a new generation aircraft carrier."

Sounds scary. Especially considering that the aircraft carrier was doing it now of the old generation.

But there is a nuance: Macron made this statement not at a press conference or during an address to the people, but during a visit on December 8 to Framatome, a company that builds nuclear reactors and related equipment.

It is clear that it is Framatome who is going to build the power plants for the new ship. It is logical, because it was in the workshops of this company that the "Charles de Gaulle" unit was born, which proved to be so excellent during the service of the ship. And what, the move reported? Well, yes, not 27 knots, but 24, but this is because the propellers were from other ships. And more than two hundred irradiated people are also tolerable.

By the way, the French government also has a controlling stake in Framatome ... So everything is reliable.

In France, it is believed that by 2038 "Charles de Gaulle" will finally get the country's treasury with its endless repairs and accidents, so the best that shines for him is disassembly and disposal. It is very difficult to say how good the radioactive needles from de Gaulle will be.

Therefore, today Macron decided that it was high time to think about a new leader for the French fleet.

“Charles de Gaulle, as you know, will end his service in 2038. That is why I decided that the future aircraft carrier, which will represent our country and our fleet, will be nuclear, like Charles de Gaulle, - said Macron.

Uh ...


French nuclear aircraft carrier "Charles de Gaulle" / French Navy

It is expected that the new aircraft carrier will be slightly larger: 300 meters in length against 262 at De Gaulle, a displacement of about 75 tons versus 000 tons at De Gaulle.

Two K22 nuclear reactors will power the ship's propulsion system and give the ship a speed of up to 27 knots and power all systems of the aircraft carrier, including electromagnetic catapults for aircraft.

In general, the aspiration of the French military and non-military is understandable. Build a huge ship, providing jobs for many in the nuclear industry. Build planes for him.

In general, nothing new. Considering how valuable the Charles de Gaulle has become for the French fleet, the new ship will not need much effort to outperform its predecessor.

There are many questions. And to nuclear reactors, and to electromagnetic catapults. How “good” the Rafali took off from the Charles de Gaulle - if it is also on the new ship, it’s just awful. With all the talk that electromagnetic catapults are universal and reliable ...

According to available information, the new aircraft carrier will be able to normally accommodate about 30 fighters. It may have originally been Dassault Rafale-M fighters, but according to the French military, the ultimate goal is to carry the next generation fighters (NGF), which is now being developed under the Future Air Combat System (FCAS) program.

New aircraft for a new aircraft carrier ... no, if this is implemented, it will be very significant and significant. If you implement.


Source: weapons.technology.youngester.com

If everything is clear with the planes, France and Germany are developing a program, the drones will be supplied by Airbus. Nice kit, there is someone to work with. The FCAS program of one of the concepts involves the use of one new generation fighter, accompanied by three UAVs.

However, all this splendor is still under development. But there is time, as much as 18 years. This is a lot, this amount is enough to complete the development and even build everything you need.

Another question is how well it will turn out in fact?

Its predecessor, the Charles de Gaulle nuclear-powered aircraft carrier, which was actually equal in cost to the American Nimitz-class aircraft carrier, did not perform well. To spend more than half of the 20 years of service in repairs is absolutely not serious.

However, it is not for us to judge. But the fact that if the situation does not improve dramatically, then the French fleet is unlikely to be blessed with a new flagship. More precisely, the flagship may appear, but how real it will be a combat ship ...


Photo: Marine nationale

In general, about "Charles de Gaulle" is more than enough to make it worth thirty times to think about whether it is worth repeating at all history nuclear aircraft carrier, which is not capable of anything.

Maybe you really shouldn't?
Author:
100 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Lipchanin
    Lipchanin 14 December 2020 04: 53
    -3
    to think thirty times over whether it is worth repeating the history of a nuclear aircraft carrier at all

    Yes, not thirty, but three hundred thirty.
    And in general, why do the French need him? What colony are they going to defend, or who to conquer? request
    1. Vladimir61
      Vladimir61 14 December 2020 05: 08
      +13
      Quote: Lipchanin
      And in general, why do the French need him?
      The French Republic will not be able to sleep peacefully as long as the Queen of Britain has newer pendants in the form of "Queen Elizabeth". This rivalry is historical.
      1. Lipchanin
        Lipchanin 14 December 2020 05: 13
        +5
        Quote: Vladimir61
        The French Republic will not be able to sleep peacefully as long as the Queen of Britain has newer pendants, in the form of "Queen Elizabeth".

        Well then, it is clear. The eternal confrontation between "roast beef" and "frog pads"
        Although the Germans call them "island monkeys"
      2. Graz
        Graz 14 December 2020 06: 20
        +7
        the same eggs only in profile, limes also have problems with eternal breakdowns and downtime for aircraft carriers
      3. prior
        prior 14 December 2020 07: 51
        +4
        In this situation, it is even somehow offensive for the Germans.
        The French have an aircraft carrier, the British have an aircraft carrier, but the Germans do not.
        Well, old lady Merkel! Shake the money, build your wunderwaffe too.
        1. Alexander I
          Alexander I 14 December 2020 14: 30
          0
          Workers from Africa take away all the money, but so far they can not build anything.
        2. nedgen
          nedgen 14 December 2020 22: 17
          +1
          Can not. The overseas chef doesn't allow it. And this is not jokingly said
      4. TermNachTer
        TermNachTer 14 December 2020 13: 07
        +3
        If you so want an aircraft carrier, let them buy the "Prince" from the British. Each will have an aircraft carrier)))
      5. tralflot1832
        tralflot1832 14 December 2020 19: 02
        +2
        So the British, too, freak out with their aviks, they also stand welded to the pier, Lizka because of the problems of the deadwood leaks, they say the screws are of the wrong system, the Prince of the MCO seems to have filled one up to the neck. Can they buy it from the Americans? am
    2. Doccor18
      Doccor18 14 December 2020 10: 38
      +4
      Quote: Lipchanin
      to think thirty times over whether it is worth repeating the history of a nuclear aircraft carrier at all

      Yes, not thirty, but three hundred thirty.
      And in general, why do the French need him? What colony are they going to defend, or who to conquer? request

      There really is something to think about ...
      One nuclear aircraft carrier with an air wing of 30 aircraft, even 5-6 generations, clearly does not qualify for the title of superweapon. For this ship to constantly ensure the country's interests at sea, at least 3 aircraft carriers are needed. So much France will not master. And one ship, as before for 9 months a year, will be incapable of combat ... The fighter and the tank fell into a technological and financial impasse - the "consumable" of the war became "brilliant". The aircraft carrier has never been simple or cheap, but now the very possibility of having several such ships is becoming a pipe dream for all but two superpowers. The very idea of ​​a "floating airfield" is also promising, but it is necessary to seriously think about its further development and to change something. It is necessary to create measures to coordinate the cost reduction of these combat units. Perhaps .. the implementation of the development of combat UAVs can solve these problems ...
      1. Avior
        Avior 14 December 2020 11: 48
        +4
        the very possibility of having several such ships is becoming a pipe dream for all but the two superpowers.

        India, China, USA, England. There are even more of those who claim to own light aircraft carriers. Italy, Japan. Turkey with aircraft carriers, but no planes :)
        1. Doccor18
          Doccor18 14 December 2020 12: 37
          +8
          Good afternoon.
          India has 1 aircraft carrier, and even that one cannot be called multipurpose and modern. Vikrant has been under construction for 14 years and the process continues. And again, not a multipurpose one. Vishal is a matter of the future ...
          British couple of aircraft carriers with a whole bunch of shortcomings who just did not criticize. Well, a couple is better than one. But this is not enough to constantly have your own AUG in the sea ...
          I do not consider "light aircraft carriers" to be aircraft carriers. A horse and a quivering doe cannot be crammed into one body, no matter how hard you try.
          The bottom line is the United States and China. China's aircraft carriers also do not yet shine with capabilities, but the program is being implemented so rapidly that in the next 10 years the PLA Navy will have 5-6 aircraft carriers, of which 2-3 will be truly multipurpose.
          1. Alex777
            Alex777 14 December 2020 14: 05
            +2
            Macron voices the creation of a European army.
            For this army, an aircraft carrier is needed as a flagship.
            Except France, no one in Europe will build it.
            I believe the EU will pay for the construction. hi
            1. Doccor18
              Doccor18 14 December 2020 16: 47
              +4
              Quote: Alex777
              Macron voices the creation of a European army ... hi

              As long as there is the United States, there will be no "European army" ... hi
              1. Alex777
                Alex777 14 December 2020 16: 50
                +1
                While there is. And the aircraft carrier is planned to be launched in 18 years.
                Do you guarantee that in 18 years there will still be the USA? And what? wink
                1. Doccor18
                  Doccor18 14 December 2020 17: 11
                  +3
                  Quote: Alex777

                  Do you guarantee that in 18 years the United States will still be?

                  I don't know what will happen tomorrow. What are 18 years old ..?
                  1. Alex777
                    Alex777 14 December 2020 17: 32
                    +2
                    Here he is, Macron is far-sighted! wink
      2. Kuz
        Kuz 15 December 2020 11: 45
        +16
        Quote: Doccor18
        the idea of ​​a "floating airfield" is also promising, but its further development needs to be seriously thought about and something must be changed. It is necessary to create measures to coordinate the cost reduction of these combat units

        Improving their protection is equally important. The means of attack are becoming more and more effective.
    3. Sahalinets
      Sahalinets 14 December 2020 11: 07
      +17
      1. France has a lot of overseas territories, so it may well be necessary to use the aircraft carrier. Let's remember the story of the Falklands! Nobody imagined that this would happen, but it did. But few people know that shortly before that the Britons were going to get rid of the aircraft carriers altogether, and sell the Invincible to someone. And then they would not have recaptured the islands ...
      2. ShdG quite participated in wars and was moderately useful.
      3. An aircraft carrier is an attribute of a great power, and France wants to be one.
      4. Loading the domestic industry.
      5. Maintaining critical competencies.
      6. Well, export is not excluded.
      As for the mockery of ShdG, it is not for us to laugh at them, having a crippled Kuzya ...
    4. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 14 December 2020 11: 18
      +11
      Quote: Lipchanin
      And in general, why does the French need him? Which colony are they going to defend?

      their overseas territories. Have you heard of these?
      1. English tarantas
        English tarantas 14 December 2020 12: 00
        +7
        Wait, now geography experts will tell you that all this is nothing at all, and the French themselves do not need these scraps, and they have forgotten about them for a long time, and in general there is nothing there and no one lives, and no one will fight for this garbage will not be.
    5. Sergej1972
      Sergej1972 14 December 2020 15: 25
      +1
      The French Republic, thanks to the presence of overseas regions and territories, mainly insular, controls huge water areas.
      1. Volder
        Volder 15 December 2020 00: 13
        +1
        Quote: Sergej1972
        The French Republic, thanks to the presence of overseas regions and territories, controls huge water areas.
        Observes the water areas and neighboring territories. She does not control anything.
    6. Boris ⁣ Shaver
      Boris ⁣ Shaver 14 December 2020 17: 21
      0
      Quote: Lipchanin
      whom to win?

      May be in time for Erdogan's funeral
  2. Mykhalych
    Mykhalych 14 December 2020 05: 19
    -6
    The most important thing is to declare, designate, and the question of expediency is secondary. PR move from a loser president. wink
    1. Lipchanin
      Lipchanin 14 December 2020 05: 27
      +17
      Quote: Mykhalych
      PR move from a loser president.

      Why immediately a loser.
      Who has not dreamed of sleeping with their teacher. And he did it lol
      1. Mykhalych
        Mykhalych 14 December 2020 05: 52
        +1
        Quote: Lipchanin
        Who has not dreamed of sleeping with their teacher. And he did it

        Respect! laughing
    2. Mordvin 3
      Mordvin 3 14 December 2020 05: 48
      +4
      Quote: Mykhalych
      PR move from a loser president.

      Losers are not attacked over and over again. And the Americans declared de Gaulle a loser after de Gaulle sent them a steamer with dollars and demanded gold for them. Well, the SLA in addition.
      1. Mykhalych
        Mykhalych 14 December 2020 05: 54
        0
        Quote: Mordvin 3
        Losers are not attacked over and over again. And the Americans declared de Gaulle a loser after de Gaulle sent them a steamer with dollars and demanded gold for them. Well, the SLA in addition

        Actually, I meant the current President Macron ... repeat
        1. Mordvin 3
          Mordvin 3 14 December 2020 05: 56
          +1
          Quote: Mykhalych
          Actually, I meant the current President Macron ...

          Ah, this ... Macaroni he is macaroni ... crying
      2. Lipchanin
        Lipchanin 14 December 2020 05: 57
        +1
        Quote: Mordvin 3
        Losers are not attacked over and over again

        Yes, in general, we are talking about macron.
        The late de Gaulle cannot promote himself in any way request
        1. Mordvin 3
          Mordvin 3 14 December 2020 06: 00
          +3
          Quote: Lipchanin
          Yes, in general, we are talking about macron.
          The late de Gaulle cannot promote himself in any way

          Yes, I somehow did not immediately drove. And I respect de Gaulle.
          1. Lipchanin
            Lipchanin 14 December 2020 06: 03
            +2
            Quote: Mordvin 3
            And I respect de Gaulle.

            Yes, everyone respected him in the USSR.
            We were then really friends with France
            1. Mordvin 3
              Mordvin 3 14 December 2020 06: 05
              +2
              Quote: Lipchanin
              Yes, everyone respected him in the USSR.
              We were then really friends with France

              Arriving in the USSR, de Gaulle first went to Stalin's grave, if I am not mistaken.
              1. Lipchanin
                Lipchanin 14 December 2020 06: 10
                +1
                Quote: Mordvin 3
                Arriving in the USSR, de Gaulle first went to Stalin's grave

                Did not hear request
                1. Mordvin 3
                  Mordvin 3 14 December 2020 06: 17
                  +3
                  Quote: Lipchanin
                  Did not hear

                  I read in the Komsomolskaya Pravda, like. Yes, I did. In the 66th year. I stood over the grave for 20 minutes. Although he was discouraged from visiting the grave.
                  1. Avior
                    Avior 14 December 2020 09: 16
                    +1
                    To be honest, it is doubtful.
                    You can also find mention that he allegedly visited the graves of Stalin and Tukhachevsky, with whom he once sat in the camp.
                    It is clear that he definitely could not visit the grave of Tukhachevsky.
                    1. Mordvin 3
                      Mordvin 3 14 December 2020 09: 22
                      +1
                      Quote: Avior
                      To be honest, it is doubtful.
                      You can also meet

                      1. Avior
                        Avior 14 December 2020 09: 31
                        +2
                        I saw this video.
                        Please note that it is not Rubinsky who speaks about visiting Stalin's grave, at least, but just an anonymous voice-over.
                        This is already the Brezhnev era, but my attempts to find a documentary or at least a memoir confirmation of this fact by any of my contemporaries did not end with anything. and I asked myself a question - who exactly confirmed that this visit to the grave was? and didn't find anyone.
                        There was no grave of Tukhachevsky at all, this is understandable.
                      2. Mordvin 3
                        Mordvin 3 14 December 2020 09: 33
                        +1
                        I noticed that the video is from the first channel.
                      3. Avior
                        Avior 14 December 2020 10: 00
                        +1
                        I have no illusions about the reliability of unsubstantiated statements by any channel.
                        In my opinion, the story of how the electronics on the American destroyer was turned off and the crew was written off to the shore, also from the first.
                        If in the frame they said, according to the memoirs of such and such ..., it would be clear where to look.
                        But the visit is mentioned often, but no one says where it came from.
                        The fact that he came at the invitation of Podgorny, who accompanied de Gaulle, is all the more doubtful because of Podgorny's attitude to Stalin.
                        Such a visit at that moment is something out of the ordinary.
                        In principle, it was not difficult for de Gaulle to visit Stalin's grave, it is next to the Mausoleum. But it would be the kind of event that everyone would mention.
                        But I have never seen any mention of such an extraordinary event by my contemporaries.
                        About the official confirmation, even more so.
                        hi
                2. Mordvin 3
                  Mordvin 3 14 December 2020 09: 30
                  +1
                  There is also de Gaulle's memoirs. He invited Stalin to France.
                  1. Avior
                    Avior 14 December 2020 09: 43
                    0
                    it's not the same thing all the same. He was in the same cell with Tukhachevsky.
                    De Gaulle came to the USSR at the invitation of Podgorny, and Stalin's grave did not fit very well.

                    if information about visiting Stalin's grave corresponds to reality, there must be a source of this information somewhere.
                    Then it was a serious question, there was not even a bust on Stalin's grave, someone should have mentioned it.
                    But I haven't found any credible source for this information.
                  2. Mordvin 3
                    Mordvin 3 14 December 2020 10: 09
                    +1
                    Quote: Avior
                    Then it was a serious question, there was not even a bust on Stalin's grave, someone should have mentioned it.

                    The stove was. 66th year. Khrushchev has already been thrown off, political commander Brezhnev ruled. And de Gaulle fell out with the Americans because of their paper bucks.
                  3. Avior
                    Avior 14 December 2020 10: 20
                    +1
                    After all, there are several graves, others with busts, the slab was striking ..
                    Although there are graves all from the history textbook.
                    At the time of the visit, Khrushchev was thrown off, but there was still no talk of mentioning Stalin.
                    There, after all, many people who threw off were not strangers, let's say, Khrushchev was.
                    Stalin was still under a complete ban.
                    In general, to be honest, I am skeptical about this story until I see the direct source of this information.
                    hi
      3. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
        Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 14 December 2020 11: 49
        +2
        Quote: Mordvin 3
        Arriving in the USSR, de Gaulle first went to Stalin's grave, if I am not mistaken.

        aha, right in Vnukovo-2, stepping off the ladder of his "caravel", he demanded to be taken to Stalin's grave, and then to "Romeo and Juliet" in Bolshoi.
        Why write nonsense?
    3. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 14 December 2020 11: 14
      +2
      Quote: Lipchanin
      Yes, everyone respected him in the USSR.

      yes, yes ... Especially the cartoonists.



    4. Past the crocodile
      Past the crocodile 14 December 2020 13: 35
      +1
      For the next two, too. As soon as the left led France, and the friendship came to an end.
  • Pessimist22
    Pessimist22 14 December 2020 06: 03
    +7
    I am surprised why some France has the money and production capacity to build such a ship, but Russia does not?
    1. Lipchanin
      Lipchanin 14 December 2020 06: 12
      -8
      Quote: Pessimist22
      I am surprised why some France has the money and production capacity to build such a ship, but Russia does not

      How many years has France been under sanctions and what is it?
      And it looks like the military leadership decided that we simply do not need him.
      With "Kuzey" there is a complete smut
      1. Pessimist22
        Pessimist22 14 December 2020 06: 30
        +4
        And what about sanctions and the construction of the Navy?
        1. Jacket in stock
          Jacket in stock 14 December 2020 06: 44
          +1
          Quote: Pessimist22
          And what about sanctions and the construction of the Navy?

          Despite the fact that a modern combat ship is a very complex complex of various systems. And the same France does not have to make all of them on its territory from its components and materials. It can quite successfully develop new systems in cooperation with other countries, and buy ready-made ones, produced in any other country.
          Yes, and she can sell her products to anyone (almost), earning very substantial money on this to maintain and develop her science and industry.
        2. Lipchanin
          Lipchanin 14 December 2020 07: 19
          +1
          Quote: Pessimist22
          Moreover, the sanctions and the construction of the Navy

          Your words
          I wonder why there is money in some France

          In your opinion, the budget is getting more money from the sanctions?
          1. Vladimir247
            Vladimir247 14 December 2020 14: 39
            +2
            And in your opinion, the budget is not formed from taxes? And what is our government for? To sigh sadly, about sanctions, or for
            in order to work?
            1. Nemchinov Vl
              Nemchinov Vl 15 December 2020 11: 41
              +1
              Quote: Vladimir247
              ... about sanctions, or for
              in order to work?
              not. in order to work - the population, not the government, a fact !!!
      2. Jacket in stock
        Jacket in stock 14 December 2020 06: 31
        0
        Quote: Lipchanin
        And it looks like the military leadership decided that we just don't need him

        On the contrary, nothing has been decided yet.
        And about the repair of "Kuzi" ringing endlessly, and about plans for a new "no analogs".
        And it seems like plans to bring the shipbuilding capacity into line ...
        Another question is, whom are we going to capture, which natives to pacify? Or also, for bohgatism?
      3. Past the crocodile
        Past the crocodile 14 December 2020 13: 41
        +3
        By sanctions, do you mean incompetence, theft, corruption and moral decay of the Russian ruling class?
        1. Vadim237
          Vadim237 14 December 2020 14: 29
          0
          There is simply no more significant spending in other areas - the construction of a new aircraft carrier will cost the budget under a trillion rubles with all the accompanying aircraft wing armament, equipment to provide a home base, etc. Now two helicopter carriers are being built in the Crimea, and from the beginning it is necessary to deal with corvettes and frigates with ships providing MRK submarines and then aim at the aircraft carrier.
    2. Mordvin 3
      Mordvin 3 14 December 2020 06: 31
      +3
      Quote: Pessimist22
      why in some France there is money and production capacity to build such a ship, but not in Russia?

      They probably don't have floating docks.
    3. Jacket in stock
      Jacket in stock 14 December 2020 06: 39
      +9
      Quote: Pessimist22
      why in some France there is money and production capacity

      Because France is not "some sort", but the second economy in Europe, with centuries-old traditions of industry and, in particular, shipbuilding. At one time it had extensive overseas possessions, and still has some.
      1. Pessimist22
        Pessimist22 14 December 2020 07: 39
        +1
        It is clear why France, lacking such reserves of oil, gas, metals, timber and other resources, is the second economy in Europe and the standard of living of the population is higher than in the richest country in the world, Russia?
        1. Jacket in stock
          Jacket in stock 14 December 2020 07: 44
          +5
          Quote: Pessimist22
          Why is France, without such reserves of oil, gas, metals, timber and other resources, the second economy in Europe and the standard of living of the population is higher than in the richest country in the world, Russia?

          How bae people have known for two hundred years
          As the state grows rich,
          And what lives, and why
          He does not need gold,
          When a simple product has.


          As for the reserves of oil, gas, metals and timber, by the way, you are wrong. Why do you think they needed all these overseas territories? And although the territories have become formally independent, the reserves are still owned by French firms. Including even our reserves, even though we were not their colony.
          1. Sergej1972
            Sergej1972 14 December 2020 15: 35
            0
            The overseas territories and departments of France are neither formally nor de facto independent. They are considered an integral part of the French Republic. Their population participates in the elections of the President and the National Assembly of France. You are probably confusing the currently existing overseas departments (regions) and overseas territories of France with the former colonies and protectorates of France that gained independence. In the former colonies, French business is indeed very active. Except, perhaps, Indochina.
        2. Bagatur
          Bagatur 14 December 2020 08: 49
          +1
          If only France ... Germany, Japan ... they were defeated, so what? There is nothing underground, but there are people and the state their own business for experts! while in Russia "victory parade", there is a daily "parade of labor and law"!
  • Nitarius
    Nitarius 14 December 2020 06: 29
    -4
    where he buries then we will all ...
  • Jacket in stock
    Jacket in stock 14 December 2020 06: 33
    +7
    And the French, as the author correctly noted, have the right to decide for themselves where to spend their budget.
    Moreover, if everything is so bad, then they definitely need a new good ship instead of the old bad one.
    1. Lex_is
      Lex_is 14 December 2020 07: 58
      +6
      Moreover, they plan not instead of but after. In 2038, de Gaulle will be 38 years old, for the ship is already prohibitive age, and the aircraft carrier is designed and built for a long time, so they think in advance, about a replacement.

      They, stupid, have not read Roman's justification that aircraft carriers are not needed.
  • fif21
    fif21 14 December 2020 07: 50
    +5
    Roma, envy in silence. hi Military spending in Russia is already an enormous burden on the economy of a regional country. hi
  • KVU-NSVD
    KVU-NSVD 14 December 2020 08: 04
    +5
    Where did the author get the idea that the projected ship would be as problematic as De Gaulle? It is more logical to assume that the mistakes of the previous project will be taken into account and corrected. Another question is what, apart from the status, does the aircraft carrier give to France?
    1. English tarantas
      English tarantas 14 December 2020 11: 54
      +3
      Well, first of all, everyone who has a weapon, whatever it may be, it makes it possible to use it. And secondly, he will give the French a considerable status, and it does. Still, having a modern aircraft carrier is an indicator of the military and economic power of a country, but if an aircraft carrier, then it is immediately clear - one must reckon with.
  • Bagatur
    Bagatur 14 December 2020 08: 45
    0
    Well, what about Russia? Do you have a "Smoking Kuzya" to call him an avionist? How long did he spend in battle and campaign during his entire service life? Oh, the Syrian epic does not speak better ... Where is he now and when will he be in line with all his flaws? Rather, the Frenchman has a new flagship and a full-fledged AUG near it will be earlier than in Russia "Kuzya" will be put into operation ...
  • mmaxx
    mmaxx 14 December 2020 08: 59
    -2
    And I am an ardent fan of aircraft carriers. Let them build. More money will be thrown away. Repairmen work. Look, the French will run out of money faster.
    1. Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg)
      Evgeny Goncharov (smoogg) 16 December 2020 05: 10
      0
      God forbid they will be told about Zircon on VO, or, even worse, they will show a cartoon. The capitalists will remain with the money.
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 14 December 2020 09: 06
    +4
    Technically, the French can build .... Politically, Turkey will soon have to be restricted in the Mediterranean. The USA do not know how they will behave here. Here is another question - how can the French independently use force on such a scale?
    This is all about the question "France should take the Dardonelles"
  • Maks1995
    Maks1995 14 December 2020 09: 13
    +9
    Very much like a story about a fox and grapes.
    The article oozes with the thought "not needed, not needed, not needed", and frightens with either radioactive needles or electromagnetic catapults,
    But without saying anything specific for the whole article, except for the well-known tone and size
    1. Paragraph Epitafievich Y.
      Paragraph Epitafievich Y. 14 December 2020 13: 49
      +2
      Quote: Max1995
      The article oozes with thought

      well, this is the local naval skeptic Skomorokhov. To summarize his essay on the maritime theme, then all fleets are flawed, useless, expensive and generally unnecessary. Well, maybe they were appropriate in the era of great geographical discoveries, and even then - only the Chinese were right when they burned down their fleet and abandoned sea expansion. Here they are great. laughing
  • Engineer
    Engineer 14 December 2020 11: 42
    +2
    Gentlemen who follow the development of aircraft carriers.
    Why is the size of the air group so absurdly small?
    According to available information, the new aircraft carrier will be able to normally accommodate about 30 fighters.

    What is it like ? Or has the author got it wrong again?
    Roosevelt carried 84 planes and helicopters in Iraq
    1. Lex_is
      Lex_is 14 December 2020 12: 00
      +1
      All right.
      Displacement 75 tons
      300 meters length
      Width 40 meters
      Two K22 reactors with a capacity of 220 MW.
      General Atomics' electromagnetic catapult, similar to that stationed on Henry Ford.
      Crew of 2000 sailors, including 1100 flight crew and 500 flight personnel.
      Wing:
      30 combat aircraft (simultaneously on deck 25), first Rafale Marine, and then European aircraft of the future SCAF, drones, helicopters and AWACS Hawkeye aircraft.

  • Selevc
    Selevc 14 December 2020 11: 48
    0
    Macron generally behaves inside the country like a real African dictator and fights his entire presidential term most of all with his own people !!!

    Britain has built its own aircraft carrier and this is a click on the nose of the French elites !!! Now they are ready to at least blow up France, at least let it go around the world, but only to build their own aircraft carrier too !!!
    1. Avior
      Avior 14 December 2020 15: 16
      +4
      France actually already has an aircraft carrier
  • English tarantas
    English tarantas 14 December 2020 11: 51
    +3
    Few accidents, few irradiated sailors, few frankly funny situations - let's continue! Well, if finances allow - why not? We are not going to advise the French on how to spend money from the budget in this difficult time? We won't. We have our own budget, our own problems.

    And Cho, remember how ships were built in our country? Indeed, it is not for our MO to tell where and how to spend money. As it was said: "Success is the ability to go from one failure to another without losing enthusiasm," something like that. If De Gaulle did not work out, this does not mean that you need to stop building aircraft carriers. Why all this water, with thick hints, that the French have their hands in the wrong place, before every sentence in an article from the "News" section?
    1. Selevc
      Selevc 14 December 2020 12: 17
      -7
      Quote: English tarantass
      Why all this water, with thick hints, that the French have their hands in the wrong place

      The French have a much more modest experience in building and using an aircraft carrier fleet than their neighbors across the Channel and the Atlantic !!! The French have not yet gotten their heads in this, and Charles de Gaulle's career is a vivid confirmation of this ..
      Why build something unprecedented and gigantic without really having experience in building more modest aircraft carrier ships ??? You have to ask Macron !!! But the top of France behaves exactly like people who have long lost contact with reality - they are increasingly breaking away from the people and going into gigantism and building unprecedented wunderwaves !!! It looks like a harbinger of complete bankruptcy and collapse of France !!!

      Direct analogies with a Nikolaev tank the size of a two-story house !!! Everyone knows how this gigantism ended !!!
      1. Avior
        Avior 14 December 2020 15: 20
        +3
        The French have experience in building aircraft carriers and aircraft carrier ships
      2. Alexey RA
        Alexey RA 14 December 2020 18: 40
        +3
        Quote: Selevc
        Why build something unprecedented and gigantic without really having experience in building more modest aircraft carrier ships ???

        That is, three post-war French-built aircraft carriers (including one nuclear-powered one) are not enough for you? wink
        1. Selevc
          Selevc 15 December 2020 13: 05
          -1
          Quote: Alexey RA
          That is, three post-war French-built aircraft carriers (including one nuclear-powered one) are not enough for you? wink

          Listen so France and battleships built and also very huge - to tell you all this fought ???

          De Gaulle is a floating misunderstanding - how could a country with huge shipyards with rich experience in building large sea vessels build a ship whose propellers gave such a vibration that it was impossible to use the entire stern of the ship ???? ????

          You call this the experience of the French ???? Haha !!! French shipbuilders, in comparison with brit and amers, simply have their hands growing out of the wrong place !!!
  • Undecim
    Undecim 14 December 2020 12: 36
    +9
    More than five hundred years have passed, and the German Brant's poem about the ship of fools is still fresh and relevant.
    I don’t mind giving advice
    Not knowing how to help myself.
    ...
    Deals earn the right
    Others teach yourself for glory.
    Instead of considering the project of a new aircraft carrier, the reader receives a collection of gossip, tales and twisted facts.
  • ares1988
    ares1988 14 December 2020 12: 42
    +1
    And who can explain: what is the "problem" of this ship? As far as I understand, most of the "children's ailments" were cured by the time they were put into operation (2001), and in 20 years he managed to fight in many places.
    1. Vladimir1155
      Vladimir1155 14 December 2020 22: 45
      +1
      Quote: ares1988
      who can explain: what is the "problem" of this ship?

      the problem of any product that is the only non-serial, too large and cumbersome, too complex, uses risky and poorly worked technologies (decks burn out, aerofinisher cables break, total dependence on the weather by the sea), and most importantly, all this is totally expensive, for example, to paint a rusty Kuzi deck so much paint as for the entire navy of the russian federation needs 21 420 m2 at a consumption of 500 g per meter 10 tons only on the deck and only 60 tons of paint is needed! .a couple of railway tanks ... this is not cured by age
  • Bersaglieri
    Bersaglieri 14 December 2020 13: 18
    +7
    Hmm. Kuznetsov is an even bigger burden for the Russian Navy than Charles de Gaulle is for the French Navy.
  • CastroRuiz
    CastroRuiz 14 December 2020 14: 13
    +2
    Avtoru zhirnoe minus.
    Na problemi s Kuznecovim i vobshche VMF nado smortet i ne nad fancuzami nasmechatsa.
  • APASUS
    APASUS 14 December 2020 17: 05
    +1
    This is rather a project of prestige, most likely there is no sense in it, but Macron set himself a goal - to bring France to the leadership of the EU. Why Trump can say Make America Great Again and Macron can't?
    1. Bersaglieri
      Bersaglieri 14 December 2020 17: 52
      0
      The leader of the EU is Germany. And then, France and Italy "push".
  • iskanderzp
    iskanderzp 14 December 2020 19: 56
    +3
    Novel! With all due respect, as they say in the glorious city of Odessa: "Don't tell my slippers"! "De Gaulle" was a trial balloon, the first experiment of its kind, which accordingly revealed "childhood illnesses." In the new ship, all this, of course, will be taken into account by the French. Therefore, your sarcasm is incomprehensible. Let us, for a second, assume that Russia has laid the "unparalleled" one. Do you really think that it (after a long stagnation in capital shipbuilding) will turn out without flaws and "sores"? Then go back to the beginning of my post ...)))
  • czes
    czes 14 December 2020 22: 25
    +3
    Yes, we can show our teeth. Why didn't you compare it with Kuzya? Topwar.ru is turning into a propaganda dump. Perhaps it's time to unsubscribe ...
  • Vladimir1155
    Vladimir1155 14 December 2020 22: 31
    0
    very interesting article by the respected Roman Skomorokhov, that's all right "In France, they believe that by 2038, Charles de Gaulle will finally get the country's treasury with its endless repairs and accidents, so the best thing that shines for him is dismantling and disposal. How good will the radioactive needles from "de Gaulle", it is very difficult to say. " But in this situation, why does Kuzya Rossi have France even overseas territories have warm seas for flights, and NATO will provide escort ships for them, but why should we? neither sew nor fasten
  • Aleks2000
    Aleks2000 14 December 2020 23: 10
    -2
    There is no AB specifics in the article. Absolutely. Alas.
  • Basarev
    Basarev 15 December 2020 01: 47
    -2
    The French need a nuclear aircraft carrier at least to support the school, not to lose the technologies of nuclear shipbuilding ... And the French economy is much better than ours, it can pull. Yes, and old de Gaulle, he had long overdue the need for a replacement. In general, a reasonable decision.
  • Tambov-there is god
    Tambov-there is god 3 February 2021 20: 09
    0
    Notice how long the corner deck is. Our Kuzma is shorter, although he is larger. This is exactly the reason why the cables break and the aircraft fail. We will not say anything about the pilots, the overload during landing is prohibitive.
  • Starshina
    Starshina 3 February 2021 20: 30
    +1
    I absolutely do not understand the author's irony over the aircraft carrier "Charles de Gaulle" ??? - especially if you remember the military exploits of Admiral Kuznetsov !!! As they say --- first look at your swamp and then at other croaks !!!
  • zenion
    zenion 18 February 2021 20: 32
    0
    All the troubles with him happened when a squadron of plates appeared over the aircraft carrier. We even managed to shoot this case on camera and created a documentary film - "The Sky Above Your Head". It was scary to watch how the plates were stuffed with an aircraft carrier.