Very nice design indeed. 60,000 ton CATOBAR carrier.
Be nice for France (who would almost certainly build a second for themselves) and Brazil who is talking about maybe two as well.
Aircraft Carriers II (Closed to posting)
- Thread starter Jeff Head
- Start date
- Status
Be nice for France (who would almost certainly build a second for themselves) and Brazil who is talking about maybe two as well.
thunderchief
Senior Member
Which is highly unlikely . France has systematic economic problems (labor cost , demographics , cultural values ... ) . So even if the situation does get somewhat better , they would spend money on other issues (ones that bring votes
) Spending money to spend more money is always a winning strategy
But in the end , both interventions (Libya and Mali) would not bring much extra revenue for France . True , war in Libya did influence Indian decision to purchase Rafale , but most likely they would go for that plane anyway . France doesn't have guts for old fashioned ruthless colonial policy , and without that it's useless to get dragged in local wars . And what would they do with two carriers ? What is a benefit for Brazil to spend money on two carriers and accompanying ships ?
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Hate to be a party breaker
As for Brazil , looks like São Paulo (former Foch) is enough for them for now . With modernized A-4s they have enough capacity for local threats (if any) .
The Trend is to more carriers not less and Economics is a strange wind that changes randomly. A4 is a Joke of a Fighter best suited to flight training not combat. Foch is a very old Ship older then the Chinese Liaoning And procured for the Same reason to get the Brazilians Rated and trained on Carrier ops
It's The Royal Yacht. Unless they can get some fighters on that deck it's nothing but a floating Royal Pleasure boat.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
National security and national solvreignty are usially good one as are Jobs and Well Navys do in fact create some degree of Jobs.Which is highly unlikely . France has systematic economic problems (labor cost , demographics , cultural values ... ) . So even if the situation does get somewhat better , they would spend money on other issues (ones that bring votes
'Spending money to spend more money is always a winning strategy
National intrests in the 21st Century are not the only reason one maintains a navy International are to. France has built Carriers It's a linch pin of there Defence stratigies Once a Nation has procured a Craft of that type National Pride and Defence stratagy has a hard time loosing it. Look at the Ausies and Canada they both had carriers and once they gave them up.. they lost A lot of there power base. They moved from Navy to Coast guard.
Defence of National intrests, Projection of Power, Control of Solverign Sea rights, National Prestige, Reigional Rights, Extra reigonal Security...
Why Does China Want a Carrier? just about the Same Why Does the US maintain a fleet of them? Same Reasons. Why Does Russia Want back in the Carrier Game? Once more.
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
I got a Kick out of the Avengers Helicarrier being hull number 64. The same hull number as USS Constilation.
thunderchief
Senior Member
Aircraft carriers are tools of the foreign policy and not just expensive toys . As such , any country must decide is the cost of having aircraft carrier worth of it . Brazil has decided to stick with one carrier navy . It's more than enough for them . Upgraded A-4s would do the job if any) until something better comes along .
thunderchief
Senior Member
Broken window fallacy :
Military brings economic benefit only if it forces other side to "release" some resources which they would not do voluntarily or if it destroys competition . Examples are famous "Black Ships" or destruction of German (European) industry in ww2 which did bring a benefit to USA .
And so ? Both countries are now in better shape (economically speaking ) than France , and yet they don't have much of security threats .
China needs a carrier fleet mostly for South China Sea and latter for Indian Ocean , to secure that sea route . USA needs large aircraft carrier fleet to secure military dominance and thus economic survival . Russia doesn't really need aircraft carrier and they don't have one (they have aircraft carrying cruiser) . They would need more than one to become world power again , and they could not afford it .
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Incase You have not noticed this the Russian Economy is on the rebound. They are moving to a Fuel empire, And with that they have begun a build up. Among the Goals of that Build up New Carriers adopting a Western Style of Formation and Use. To do this they are Using the Sales of Carriers and carrier Aircraft to India.
Second Although They are better in Economics Both the Ausies and The Candian military are Dependent on Other nations to watch and Maintain there intrests. France as part of the EU is more or less tied to The EU's fate.
Third As A nation Bazili is on the Rise along with india and China. China Gets most of the Press. Their is a Rule about any one thing in the military Thunder, That rule is this "one is none, two is one." If Brazil found it's intrest threatened and the Foch was under over haul they would like the French everytime there carrier returnes to port be out of there Ace card. Same reason why the brits want two QE's and The Chinese want more carriers. If your lead boat is sunk ( literal or Proverbial) so are you.
Fourth
A4 was never built for any real work as a Carrier force plane. Built in the 50's like the Foch. It was the "Tinker Toy Bomber" If you want to see there specs in action Read what happened to the Argentine SkyHawks in the Falklands War, Spoiler They were all Shot down.
Second Although They are better in Economics Both the Ausies and The Candian military are Dependent on Other nations to watch and Maintain there intrests. France as part of the EU is more or less tied to The EU's fate.
Third As A nation Bazili is on the Rise along with india and China. China Gets most of the Press. Their is a Rule about any one thing in the military Thunder, That rule is this "one is none, two is one." If Brazil found it's intrest threatened and the Foch was under over haul they would like the French everytime there carrier returnes to port be out of there Ace card. Same reason why the brits want two QE's and The Chinese want more carriers. If your lead boat is sunk ( literal or Proverbial) so are you.
Fourth
A4 was never built for any real work as a Carrier force plane. Built in the 50's like the Foch. It was the "Tinker Toy Bomber" If you want to see there specs in action Read what happened to the Argentine SkyHawks in the Falklands War, Spoiler They were all Shot down.
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
Very nice design indeed. 60,000 ton CATOBAR carrier.
Be nice for France (who would almost certainly build a second for themselves) and Brazil who is talking about maybe two as well.
Certainly a big carrier and just shy of the Queen Elizabeth, so annoying when you see smaller carriers with CATOBAR and then larger QE with STOBAR
If France and Brazil go it together the unit price might come down, I mean if France buys one and Brazil two then certainly it will favour France from a financial perspective
For carriers I do. I recited them recently when someone asked me a similar question.
- Status