“This is not just a boat”: the French Ministry of Defense refused to build a second aircraft carrier

28
“This is not just a boat”: the French Ministry of Defense refused to build a second aircraft carrier

PA-NG aircraft carrier concept


France has a single aircraft carrier, Charles de Gaulle, which serves the fleet since 2001. However, many local experts and politicians insist on the need to build a second ship, pointing out that otherwise the country may lose the ability to defend its interests at sea and, as a result, lose its military and diplomatic rating.



According to estimates made in 2017, the construction of a new generation aircraft carrier PA-NG will take 10 years and cost 4,5 billion euros, that is, 450 million euros or 0,2% of GDP will have to be allocated annually.

On August 28, the head of the General Directorate of Armaments Emmanuel Chiva on BFMTV aired the position of the Ministry of Defense on this issue, in fact declaring the abandonment of plans to build a new ship:

The second aircraft carrier is infrastructure, this is the second crew, these are new aircraft, not to mention training and maintenance. So it's not just a boat.


Earlier in 2019, Admiral Pierre Vandier, chief of staff of the French Navy, said that the main concern was the possibility of manning, since the fleet has lost half of its personnel since 1990:

We no longer have the personnel to provide them to the main crew of an aircraft carrier in 2032 and reach 900 people in 2035 to start testing.


The admiral offered to make a choice - either abandon one of the nuclear submarines, or recruit new sailors and train them for 10 years. But the main problem is the financing of the aircraft carrier. In 2019, Admiral Jean-Philippe Rolland presented an estimate of the cost of maintaining the already operating Charles de Gaulle at about 200 million euros per year: 120 million for maintenance, 60 million for personnel, 20 million for the maintenance of related infrastructure.

    Our news channels

    Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

    28 comments
    Information
    Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
    1. +2
      2 September 2023
      Right. By 2035, aircraft carriers will be such easy prey that it makes no sense to build them now.
      1. +6
        2 September 2023
        Quote: Rumata
        Right. By 2035, aircraft carriers will be such easy prey that it makes no sense to build them now.

        Right. But not for this reason, but because another geopolitical adversary will forget how to build them ...
        that is, 450 million euros or 0,2% of GDP will have to be allocated annually.

        France's nominal GDP is 2,8 trillion, which means 0,2% = 5,6 billion.
        Translation difficulties ...
        1. -2
          2 September 2023
          In 100 million France can not dial? They don't want to keep.
          And Shoigu and Gerasimov 15 years ago already foresaw the sunset of Av.
          We have 10 thousand borders of steppes, deserts, mountains, etc. xxx. Except moreokian
          1. +1
            3 September 2023
            And Russia’s borders at sea are three times longer than on land.
        2. +1
          2 September 2023
          They even had only one "de Gaulle", and it is smaller and cheaper. Two such large ones, France simply "can't pull it." From the very beginning I said that talking about two aircraft carriers is a show-off for visitors))) there will be one - purely for representative functions. It is possible that they will be combined with the English ones, although these are ships that are completely different in armament.
      2. +1
        2 September 2023
        It just makes sense. This is an airfield near enemy territory.
        1. +1
          2 September 2023
          Quote from Flying Medved
          This is an airfield near enemy territory.

          Near enemy territory, it is more of a target.
      3. -1
        3 September 2023
        Tell this to those who continue to believe that Tbilisi / Kuznetsov, standing at the pier and / or on a long repair 80% of the time since the mid-90s, is a powerful weapon
      4. 0
        3 September 2023
        They are already a good target for hypersonic anti-ship missiles and cannot oppose them in terms of air defense am
    2. +2
      2 September 2023
      Well, good. There will be less tension in the world
      1. +6
        2 September 2023
        Quote: Cypa
        Well, good. There will be less tension in the world

        The scale of tension in the world hardly depends on the French aircraft carrier, but your message is clear...
    3. The comment was deleted.
    4. +1
      2 September 2023
      They’ll build it, and they’ll design a new plane for it.
      1. +2
        2 September 2023
        won't build. Frog pools give money to Ukraine. they need more.
        there are no more euros left for the aircraft carrier.
      2. +2
        2 September 2023
        Considering what was spent on Banderland and events in Africa, this one is already a big question)))
        1. +1
          2 September 2023
          Two world-famous experts speak.
          1. 0
            2 September 2023
            tea is not worse than these .. experts.
            The text of your comment is too short.
    5. +2
      2 September 2023
      However, many local experts and politicians insist on the need to build a second ship, pointing out that otherwise, the country may lose the opportunity to protect its interests at sea
      I would like to know - from whom to “protect”? From refugees from Africa laughing , or from their own allies NATO? bully
    6. -6
      2 September 2023
      PA-NG aircraft carrier concept

      Now look how a real aircraft carrier concept should look like! Combat Aircraft Carrier Platform! Development of the Nevsky Design Bureau.
      1. +4
        2 September 2023
        Quote: Michael
        Now look how a real aircraft carrier concept should look like! Combat Aircraft Carrier Platform!

        The irreparable disadvantages of such projects: monstrous cost (if J. Ford pulled more than 10 yards, then this one ...), huge construction time (if standard aircraft carriers are built for 7-10 years), sluggishness and slowness, extreme vulnerability (for such a huge and it is difficult for a slow-moving object not to hit), severe restrictions on navigation (due to size and large draft), the loss of such a huge object simply demoralizes the army and the state. All these shortcomings cannot be corrected, which means that such projects will remain only on paper, in computer monitors and in the heads of incorrigible dreamers...
      2. 0
        3 September 2023
        This is what a real aircraft carrier looks like, that's why the Mendozas are angry that they didn't get it
    7. 0
      2 September 2023
      Seriously, without building a second aircraft carrier, it is the country, France, that will lose something ???
      It is clear that politicians, some experts, are dancing on tsyrls in front of the boss and the military-industrial complex, lured ... but about the layman, what is his interest? You can ... not talk about that, at all.
    8. 0
      2 September 2023
      Porte-Avions 2 (PA2) is a new aircraft carrier of the French Navy. The French Ministry of Defense presented data on the new nuclear aircraft carrier. PANG program: France will build a new aircraft carrier. Is the new French aircraft carrier a waste of time and money? - these are the headings.
    9. 0
      2 September 2023
      I am not an expert. But it seems that "Charles de Gaulle" did not turn out very well. https://topwar.ru/27803-sharl-de-goll-korabl-katastrofa.html
      1. +3
        2 September 2023
        Quote: Old Doctor
        It seems that “Charles de Gaulle” didn’t turn out very well

        On the contrary, a normal ship. Without praises and rabid criticism, we can say that the French miraculously managed to create a nuclear-powered aircraft carrier of the classical design, quite good for the first-born, but with a very moderate displacement. “The first pancake didn’t turn out well,” but a lot of money was poured in (which is not something unique for the first-born and only ship in the series). Despite its small displacement, this ship carries quite toothy combat squadrons of reliable information security in conjunction with carrier-based AWACS aircraft. In my humble opinion, all of De Gaulle’s problems lie in its modest (for a nuclear-powered ship) size and uniqueness for the French fleet.
    10. +2
      2 September 2023
      I think the era of huge ships is a thing of the past. Too easy and expensive prey for supersonic ...
    11. +1
      3 September 2023
      Why does the US need aircraft carriers? After a successful nuclear strike, aircraft carrier groups will sail and will be guaranteed to finish off what is left. After a successful Russian nuclear strike, there will be no one and nothing to sail on. We'll have to wait until the aircraft carrier groups are built. Only and everything. However, Russia is really unable to build and maintain the necessary and sufficient number of aircraft carrier groups. Taking into account geography, there should be at least four bases (Murmansk, the Black Sea or the Mediterranean, Vlalivostok, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky), two active groups in each base. This is unrealistic, at least not today. In any case, even this number will be clearly not enough to counter potential threats in the regions. This is enough just to drive the rebels, or to act in cooperation with other players on the world stage.
      1. 0
        3 September 2023
        In order not to swim to finish off, you can bang again, borrow from the Koreans rszo with tactical charges
    12. 0
      3 September 2023
      Quote: blackcat
      This is what a real aircraft carrier looks like, that's why the Americans are angry that they didn't get it

    "Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

    “Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"