Marine Nationale Discussions and Updates

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Agree, the additional crew requirements for 2 CV/CVNs are an expensive long term cost. same applies to aircraft although they could be dual use, AF and naval. The willingness of Euro members to help out may be the key to one or two ships wrt escorts, crewing, and aircraft. If not, it may be an indication that the viability of EU defence cooperation is somewhat fragile.
 

StobieWan

Super Moderator
Staff member
NUWARD is planned to provide around 170 MWe output in civilian applications, which suggests an overall usable power output in the 350-500 MWt range, or around three times the output of K15.

The involvement of both Technicatome and Naval Group in NUWARD firmly suggests a future use of it or a derivative project in naval propulsion.


Manning concerns have been mentioned here and there, including as to the size of a single carrier already.

Manning concerns would be the big driver I'm sure - the RN has had to perform a very active balancing act to get to where it is now with their force levels.

There was talk of a European defence force at one point with some shared infrastructure - the UK was the main opponent to that but if Germany and France did engineer some closer ties for defence, I suppose you might see some exchanges of escorts.

I can't see it happening myself.
 

kato

Defense Professional
Verified Defense Pro
if Germany and France did engineer some closer ties for defence, I suppose you might see some exchanges of escorts.
I can't see it happening myself.
Kinda late for that. The last deployment of the Charles de Gaulle CSG conducted entirely with only French assets for escort was the first Operation Chammal deployment in 2014.

Since early 2015 (i.e. 5.5 years) Charles de Gaulle was formally deployed for about 25 months - 22 months were spent in refit, 19 months in pre-/post-deployment and smaller training exercises.

During these deployments she spent:
  • 15% not escorted by ships of another European Navy (half of it on a combat deployment, other half on a cruise to India and Singapore)
  • 60% on combat deployment overseas (strikes in Syria and Iraq) escorted by German, British and Spanish frigates on rotation.
  • 25% escorted by Danish, Portuguese and Belgian frigates (2-4 months at a time each) on training and presence deployments within mostly European waters (and beyond that - Red Sea).
This does not include joint training and temporary integration into the CSG for a few weeks with Italian, Greek, Dutch, German, Belgian, British, Portuguese, Danish and Spanish ships during this time.

During the "off time", in particular when Charles de Gaulle was in refit, German and Spanish instead were integrated into US carrier groups for - each - around 4 month deployments, although not for combat.
 
Last edited:

swerve

Super Moderator
Developing a new reactor for one or two vessels at most, an awfully expensive proposition, especially post- COVID. If the reactor used for SSBNs could be tweaked for greater output or perhaps trying to accommodate two of them in a future carrier may be be the best path for the nuclear option.

From a cost perspective, perhaps a design similar to QE(CATOBAR modified) with an additional MT30 is the best option assuming this setup has the power for EMALS and IEP. Anybody know if steam catapults are still available? Is the waste heat from the GTs sufficient for generating the required steam or would a separate steam production system be needed?
When David Cameron appointed an idiot as Defence secretary & he decided to switch the QEs to cat & trap without bothering to check the cost & timescale, talk was of adding a separate steam generator. There was definitely not enough waste heat.

I don't think anyone is building steam catapults. The Chinese have been reported to be working on EM catapults. Maybe it'd be possible to buy & refurbish steam catapults from a retiring US CVN, but why?
 

KiwiRob

Active Member
Manning concerns would be the big driver I'm sure - the RN has had to perform a very active balancing act to get to where it is now with their force levels.

There was talk of a European defence force at one point with some shared infrastructure - the UK was the main opponent to that but if Germany and France did engineer some closer ties for defence, I suppose you might see some exchanges of escorts.

I can't see it happening myself.
Remember last year Merkle said Germany was interested in an aircraft carrier, the sensible approach to this would be to team up with France, building 2 or potentially 3 modified cat and trap Queen Elizabeths would make a lot of sense.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
Remember last year Merkle said Germany was interested in an aircraft carrier, the sensible approach to this would be to team up with France, building 2 or potentially 3 modified cat and trap Queen Elizabeths would make a lot of sense.
Yes it would make sense, especially if they were conventionally powered. A Franco - German CBG would be pretty powerful, especially with French SSNs lurking in the neighbourhood and German SSKs nosing around. The French and Germans are getting closer militarily and if Germany increases its defence spending to 2% GDP they would have a very strong military.

A combined French - German carrier aircraft program to replace the Rafale in French service would work, possibly 5.5 or 6 gen. They would also have to design a carrier capable AEW&C and a COD. Either modifying a CN235 to create a naval variant, or using a tiltrotor. Augusta Westland have a tiltrotor, the AW609, that they have been flying for a while and are waiting for FAA certification for civilian sales. The aircraft is small, but the technology itself can be used on a future aircraft.

Of course it all comes down to money and there's not much of that spare at the moment.
 

Ananda

Well-Known Member
They would also have to design a carrier capable AEW&C and a COD. Either modifying a CN235 to create a naval variant, or using a tiltrotor. Augusta Westland have a tiltrotor, the AW609, that they have been flying for a while and are waiting for FAA certification for civilian sales. The aircraft is small, but the technology itself can be used on a future aircraft.
With maturity of tiltrotor technology, I do have impression the next generation COD or AEW&C will use aircraft on that aspects of performance.

The USN already moving to tiltrotor for their next COD. The space available also for taking over the roles of AEW&C even ASW and rescue. Using Osprey for ASW, AEW and COD will be more efficient, then using three separate airplane as doing right now.
However for Euro tiltrotor, I just wondering whether there will be enough market to justify AW/Leonardo developing Tiltrotor in Osprey class.

Combining both German and French resources, will be 'theoritically' provide enough capabilities for two or even three well equip CBG. Somehow French and German cooperation on that level, seems relative more likely compare to other Euro nation, and certainly not with UK.

Question is right now, whether both Armed Forces can have more integrated scope of Operations and priority to make it workable on long term projection.
 
Last edited:

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
With maturity of tiltrotor technology, I do have impression the next generation COD or AEW&C will use aircraft on that aspects of performance.

The USN already moving to tiltrotor for their next COD. The space available also for taking over the roles of AEW&C even ASW and rescue. Using Osprey for ASW, AEW and COD will be more efficient, then using three separate airplane as doing right now.
However for Euro tiltrotor, I just wondering whether there will be enough market to justify AW/Leonardo developing Tiltrotor in Osprey class.

Combining both German and French resources, will be 'theoritically' provide enough capabilities for two or even three well equip CBG. Somehow French and German cooperation on that level, seems relative more likely compare to other Euro nation, and certainly not with UK.

Question is right now, whether both Armed Forces can have more integrated scope of Operations and priority to make it workable on long term projection.
The USN has only just upgraded to the latest Hawkeye model, so they wont be interest in a Osprey based system anytime soon. The RN are currently introducing the Crowsnest system based on the Merlin Helicopter, so same there.
 

Todjaeger

Potstirrer
The USN has only just upgraded to the latest Hawkeye model, so they wont be interest in a Osprey based system anytime soon. The RN are currently introducing the Crowsnest system based on the Merlin Helicopter, so same there.
Actually, the notion of an EV-22 has been raised previously, alongside PV-22 or SV-22, for MPA/ASW ops. The ASW portion has been deemed 'not viable' IIRC due to noise issues. I believe this is due to onboard cabin noise making it difficult for a sonar operator to listen even with headphones.

The EV-22 I would not dismiss just yet though, as they could permit more US vessels to carry an embarked AEW capability as well as vessels belonging to US allies. The E-2 Hawkeye is a great bird, but requires a CATOBAR carrier of a certain size. I am not aware of it being able to takeoff even from large flattop amphibious vessels like the USN's Wasp-class LHD or America-class LHA.
 

Redlands18

Well-Known Member
Actually, the notion of an EV-22 has been raised previously, alongside PV-22 or SV-22, for MPA/ASW ops. The ASW portion has been deemed 'not viable' IIRC due to noise issues. I believe this is due to onboard cabin noise making it difficult for a sonar operator to listen even with headphones.

The EV-22 I would not dismiss just yet though, as they could permit more US vessels to carry an embarked AEW capability as well as vessels belonging to US allies. The E-2 Hawkeye is a great bird, but requires a CATOBAR carrier of a certain size. I am not aware of it being able to takeoff even from large flattop amphibious vessels like the USN's Wasp-class LHD or America-class LHA.
The French operate the Hawkeye of the CDG, so it can be done from a relatively small Carrier, though of course CATOBAR. So the LHA/LHDs can’t operate them. I would be pretty sure that the USN would have looked pretty hard at the EV-22 before going with the Hawkeye D upgrade, to many advantages to at least not look at this option.
One of the things that may not be in the public domain, is how does those huge Propellers interfere with putting Sensor systems on a Tilt Rotor.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
When David Cameron appointed an idiot as Defence secretary & he decided to switch the QEs to cat & trap without bothering to check the cost & timescale, talk was of adding a separate steam generator. There was definitely not enough waste heat.

I don't think anyone is building steam catapults. The Chinese have been reported to be working on EM catapults. Maybe it'd be possible to buy & refurbish steam catapults from a retiring US CVN, but why?
When the consideration to convert from STOVL to CATOBAR was underway, which option, steam or EMALS? Was the IEP capacity sufficient for EMALS or would additional diesels or an additional MT30 have been required? I can imagine as the F-35B progressed and the F-35C was falling behind together with soaring conversion costs, an assessment of electrical requirements for EMALS wasn’t a high priority. EMALS at the time was even more troublesome than the JSF. As you say, an idiot defence secretary didn’t give much consideration to such a conversion.
 
Top