Marine Nationale (French Navy)

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member
Its a shame that they are only building 1. 2 is 1 and 1 in none as I read here recently
Yes, imagine you urgently need your only aircraft carrier to evacuate your citizens abroad, or for other support missions, and it just entered heavy periodic maintenance.
 

SolarisKenzo

Well-Known Member
France can barely afford one, two is currently out of discussion.
They might share the second with another country (Italy?) but I honestly don't see it as a realistic option.
 

Murse

New Member
France can barely afford one, two is currently out of discussion.
They might share the second with another country (Italy?) but I honestly don't see it as a realistic option.
I didn't know they were that cash poor. So it begs the question, why do it? National pride and job creation/maintenance i suspect, but what capabilities or platforms will they miss out on to pay for it?
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
The only time French have 2 carrier fleet are the time of Cold War with Foch and Clemanceu. Since CDG, they only have one CVN, and not surprising that CDG will only be replace by another one CVN.

Let's compare between RN two carrier and Marine Nationale (MN) one carrier. RN shown that they relies on allies coop to have full operational CAG. Sometimes on escorts requirement and sometimes on the Air Wing (with US Marines F-35B). While MN relies mostly on their own assets.

Perhaps they can afford two carriers, but not two fully MN assets CAG (as like condition of RN that admitted they don't have assets to cover 2 CAG simultanously). Seems MN doctrine as French, is to have independencies of CAG more important. If they can only afford 1 CAG, why bother with 2nd carrier (as back up).
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
The only time French have 2 carrier fleet are the time of Cold War with Foch and Clemanceu. Since CDG, they only have one CVN, and not surprising that CDG will only be replace by another one CVN.

Let's compare between RN two carrier and Marine Nationale (MN) one carrier. RN shown that they relies on allies coop to have full operational CAG. Sometimes on escorts requirement and sometimes on the Air Wing (with US Marines F-35B). While MN relies mostly on their own assets.

Perhaps they can afford two carriers, but not two fully MN assets CAG (as like condition of RN that admitted they don't have assets to cover 2 CAG simultanously). Seems MN doctrine as French, is to have independencies of CAG more important. If they can only afford 1 CAG, why bother with 2nd carrier (as back up).
I guess 2 carriers would be useful albeit never deployed together as two sets of escorts couldn’t be manned even if the funding was available.
 
Top