France Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
- Thread starter navyreco
- Start date
Jura The idiot
General
Jura The idiot
General
asif iqbal
Lieutenant General
They did the same thing during early days of the Typhoon development
If they don't get it their way they just end up leaving and doing it their own way
French are so stubborn
If they don't get it their way they just end up leaving and doing it their own way
French are so stubborn
Jura The idiot
General
ooh la la
"France plans to boost the 2019 defense budget by €1.7 billion to €35.9 billion (by U.S. $2 billion to $42.2 billion), up 5 percent from the present year, the Armed Forces Ministry said. That spending increase excluded pensions and will represent 1.82 percent of gross domestic product, part of a French bid to hit a target of 2 percent of GDP by 2025, the ministry said Sept. 25."
etc.:
"France plans to boost the 2019 defense budget by €1.7 billion to €35.9 billion (by U.S. $2 billion to $42.2 billion), up 5 percent from the present year, the Armed Forces Ministry said. That spending increase excluded pensions and will represent 1.82 percent of gross domestic product, part of a French bid to hit a target of 2 percent of GDP by 2025, the ministry said Sept. 25."
etc.:
It is their money. The French wanted a common aircraft for both carrier operations and air force operations. They also wanted an airplane with air-to-ground support. They wanted to replace all their previous airplanes (Jaguar, Mirage F1, Mirage 2000, F-8P Crusader, Etendard and Super Etendard) with just one. The other partners just wanted a cheap air-to-air fighter since they already had the Tornado for bombing missions. In the long run the Eurofighter was extended to add air-to-ground support to it in later tranches. As for the UK it would have been better off if the Eurofighter could be used in a carrier. They wouldn't need the F-35B that way. There were even carrier based Eurofighter proposals at one point. But the UK carrier program was delayed so much, it almost made the lack of F-35Bs irrelevant.
The ones happiest with this decision were probably the Germans because they are cheap like crap. They're worse than Uncle Scrooge when it comes to military procurement.
So you may say what you may about the French, but they probably got the best plane out of that deal.
Same thing with the Leopard 2 vs the Leclerc. Sure the Leopard 2 sold more because it was cheaper. But it's cheaper precisely because it is less advanced. After the results Turkey had with their Leopard 2s in Syria vs the UAE with their Leclercs in Yemen... I think the Leopard 2 is overrated.
Last edited:
TerraN_EmpirE
Tyrant King
Cheap Typhoon I am laughing so hard I am crying... people pick on the Panther for its cost yet it costs just as much as the Eurofighter.
Another good one... XD.
The Eurofighter would have needed more time and money to navalize just like the Panther C version. Not just the gear and tail hook but the one thing the French forgot on the Rafale folding the wings. And the British would have needed to invest in far more equipment for the Queen Elizabeth class. Catbar and Stobar are not cheap. The British made there choice some time back and they don't seem to be looking to seriously go back to Cats and Traps.
None anyone took seriously. At best they were viewed as a scheme to put pressure on the US to let the UK play a more active role in the program.
As opposed to the French who flat out cancelled their half of the program.
Wait what? Uncle Sam cheap? The largest military by Navy, Air and ground power cheap?
The Germans have been very very stingy no denial but what would make you think that the US is scroogy? What did we not donate Nimitz class ships to the EU? I mean really the US DOD can be very very extravagant.
They like the Typhoon ended up with the best of the last generation of fighters. A bird that does fair but not really a super fighter in any category.
It was cheaper because most of the units sold to the ME and around the world were second hand. Farther more it doesn't help if you are using a variant from the 1980's and taking fire from ATGM that were designed specifically to destroy it.
Wait wait... really?
First the UAE only deployed a small number of their Leclerc tanks to the fight and as yet actual reported battles are few and far between.
By contrast the Leopards were deep in the conflict and more over were facing trained combatants with modern ATGM.
This leads to second.
The Leopard 2A4 is OLD. The Germans rebuilt their tanks regularly and basically built the Leopard 3 when they made the Leopard 2A6. The Turkish army has been blocked from upgrade so their Leopard 2A4 because the relationship between Turkey and Germany soured.
By contrast the UAE invested in the Leclerc even going so far as to upgrade there protection with reactive armor tiles not used on French Leclerc. The Turkish army didn't do that.
I assume you mean the USA.. but you have to be joking....observe;
wait a second.. Did you mean the Real Uncle Scrooge? If so my apologies...
Last edited:
The Leopard 2 has an ammo rack on the side of the tank. With really thin side armor. You hit it and the turret flies off. It also has a worse suspension and FCS than the Leclerc. That's even without taking into account those ERA packages and the like. Saudi Arabia has a lot of money, more than the UAE, yet their M1 Abrams haven't worked all that well in Yemen either. It's an obsolete tank design and the US does not have an export armor kit for it that's up to modern standards. The most modern armor kits only exist in limited numbers and are for US only use.
The Rafale does not have folding wings because it was decided so, as a cost saving measure. It suits their purposes just fine. As for the French carrier program, it was delayed because the French back-pedalled on having a conventionally powered carrier. The conventional power was a government decision to ensure commonality in design and was against the interests of the armed forces who saw it as a step backwards. They wanted a nuclear powered carrier. I would say it's a good thing they delayed the program. The Chinese are currently building conventionally powered EMALS CATOBAR carriers. The QE design was obsolete the moment they decided to use a ski-ramp on such a large carrier. It is about as obsolete as the basic Kuznetsov design.
The Rafale does not have folding wings because it was decided so, as a cost saving measure. It suits their purposes just fine. As for the French carrier program, it was delayed because the French back-pedalled on having a conventionally powered carrier. The conventional power was a government decision to ensure commonality in design and was against the interests of the armed forces who saw it as a step backwards. They wanted a nuclear powered carrier. I would say it's a good thing they delayed the program. The Chinese are currently building conventionally powered EMALS CATOBAR carriers. The QE design was obsolete the moment they decided to use a ski-ramp on such a large carrier. It is about as obsolete as the basic Kuznetsov design.