Have French Genrals and Admarials crisied goverment policy before? just curious because I know it happens in Anglosphere contries [USA,UK,AUS]. I just haven't herd about it happing in france
Marine Nationale (French Navy)
- Thread starter Spacearrow99
- Start date
Spacearrow99
Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #82
Yes
Here is a link to a Le Figaro article. Retired French Vice Admiral Laurent Merer is talking about why France must maintain its Naval effort.
http://www.lefigaro.fr/debats/2008/...-moyens-de-securiser-nos-routes-maritimes.php
Here is a link to the French National Assemby site. Herve Morin is talking to the Committe of National Defence and Armed Forces, about the reorganiztion of the French Ministry of Defense.
http://www.assemblee-nationale.fr/13/cr-cdef/07-08/c0708023.asp#P5_207
Last edited:
FREMM ASM only have one helo while existing French ASM frigates and many navies use two for that purpose. Japanese even use three. Is that enough?
They also lack short defence capabilities like Simbad/Tetral.
Tourville & DeGrasse were upgraded with good towed sonars in 1995. Any idea of what will happen to these sonars when the ships retire? Can they be installed on LaFayette class?
They also lack short defence capabilities like Simbad/Tetral.
Tourville & DeGrasse were upgraded with good towed sonars in 1995. Any idea of what will happen to these sonars when the ships retire? Can they be installed on LaFayette class?
French defence budget mostly goes to French payroll and French defence contractors.If the economy's growth falters in the coming quarters, and the budget deficit explodes, Sarkozy will have more urgent spendings to make to keep people happy than to increase the defence budget
cheers
contedicavour
New Member
Hmm how much do you think a senior sergeant is paid in France ? Don't expect much more than 25-30k.
On top, if you don't replace personnel when they retire, you will have to pay for outsourcing of services to external companies. Barracks don't just clean themselves and wasting the precious time of military personnel on outsourceable tasks would be nonsense.
cheers
contedicavour
New Member
Well, if the generals and admirals complain they risk getting the Socialists next time round. It could only go worse, after listening to what Fabius, DSK and Royal were saying about defence matters in the internal primary debates. With the PS, PA2 is doomed, fullstop...
cheers
Pa2
http://defensenews.com/story.php?i=3488563&c=EUR&s=SEA
I don't follow the French Navy closely, but that caught my eye earlier whilst on Defense News, and if it is to be believed, Frances budget problems could be deeper than we first thought. I think that if PA2 is built, then as has been mentioned already in this thread, FREMM will be cut to pay for it.
http://defensenews.com/story.php?i=3488563&c=EUR&s=SEA
I don't follow the French Navy closely, but that caught my eye earlier whilst on Defense News, and if it is to be believed, Frances budget problems could be deeper than we first thought. I think that if PA2 is built, then as has been mentioned already in this thread, FREMM will be cut to pay for it.
Spacearrow99
Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #88
DCNS have put high cancelation payments in the contract for the second batch of FREMMs, so the PA2 program maybe out of luck. The Sarkozy can't order the PA2, and cancel the second batch know after the recent Le Ponnant incident. If the Sarkozy orders the PA2, I think the second batch of FREMMs may be delayed for few years.
Or the French MOD could make a deal with DCNS to build a smaller conventional carrier. Of course, the second batch of FREMM would've to be cut. But France could upgrade the La Fayettes ASW and AAW systems with the money saved from the cancelation of the PA2.
Last edited:
While size does matter a bit in the cost of a warship, more steel does cost more, its whats place inside the steel structure which costs much much more. For example, cutting one of/or the SAMs systems aboard a ship will cut the cost of the carrier much more than cutting the steel size of a carrier.
I suggest the Treasury cut the size of a new hospital wing instead. Same story.
I suggest the Treasury cut the size of a new hospital wing instead. Same story.
Spacearrow99
Member
- Thread Starter Thread Starter
- #90
I wasn't talking about the steel size of the PA2. The ports of Brest and Toulon will have to be adaptated for the maintenance and the homeporting of the PA2. Theses port adapatations will be included in the price of the PA2.
Last edited:
This is new I thought the French didn't have the same problem as the British for the Home porting of the PA2 I thought Brest didn't need to be updated for the PA2. Is the changes as significant as Portsmouth[thats where I belive QE's are porting]
contedicavour
New Member
Well the defencenews article proves that things are all but clear on defence procurement. The economy is slowing so fast that the budget deficit is soaring. I would expect eventually the PA2 and the 2nd batch of FREMM to be preserved, but the 3rd batch of FREMM (the last 5 IIRC) are certainly doomed and all programmes (including Barracuda) are likely to be stretched over a few extra years to make yearly costs lower.
With, 2 Horizon, 12 FREMM (2 being FREDA) and the 5 Lafayette France would still have a strong escort fleet for the 2 carriers and the Mistral LPDHs. The SSNs could be cut from 6 to 5 or even 4 to make up for missing money.
cheers
contedicavour
New Member
Ouch I just found this on today's edition of Le Figaro, France's best selling daily. If you want a full translation you can use google, but in a few words the situation is worse than I thought, as the PA2 is seriously being questioned because of the inadequate budget...
cheers - er actually no, this time it is ouch :shudder
Le second porte-avions français sur la sellette
Samuel Laurent (lefigaro.fr) avec AFP
21/04/2008 | Mise à jour : 17:22 | .
Le Charles de Gaulle (DR)
Le ministre de la Défense Hervé Morin a confirmé dimanche que la situation budgétaire rendait «difficile» la construction d'un second bâtiment pour suppléer le Charles de Gaulle.
La rumeur agitait les milieux de la défense depuis quelques semaines, Hervé Morin l'a confirmée dimanche au Grand Rendez-vous Europe 1-Le Parisien : «la situation budgétaire de l'équipement de nos forces rend difficile la construction du second porte-avions».
Depuis la mise à la retraite du Clémenceau en 1997, la France ne possède qu'un seul porte-avions, le Charles de Gaulle. Une situation handicapante, puisque ce bâtiment doit être mis en cale sèche durant six mois tous les 200 jours, soit plus d'un tiers du temps.
Lors de la campagne présidentielle, la question avait été abordée par Nicolas Sarkozy et Ségolène Royal. Le futur chef de l'Etat avait expliqué, lors d'un entretien avec la revue Défense : «La décision de se lancer dans la construction (d'un nouveau porte-avions) doit s'apprécier relativement aux marges de manœuvre dont nous pouvons disposer et à la lumière des arbitrages capacitaires».
3,5 milliards d'euros
Quelques mois plus tard, lors d'une convention de l'UMP sur le sujet, il avait nuancé son propos, parlant de «question de cohérence» et insistant sur la nécessité de «se poser la que®stion de la permanence à la mer de notre groupe aéronaval». Une prise de position plus favorable à cette construction, donc. Hervé Morin avait d'ailleurs indiqué, le 25 juin 2007 sur France Inter : «A priori, nous aurons un second porte-avions. C'est, disons, acté».
Mais les difficultés budgétaires de la France ont changé la donne. «C'est un arbitrage que nous avons à faire, qui sera fait dans les semaines qui viennent», a assuré dimanche Hervé Morin. Le Livre blanc sur la Défense, attendu d'ici à l'été, devrait trancher.
L'autre question est celle d'une éventuelle «mutualisation» de la construction avec la Grande-Bretagne. Une position qui avait les faveurs de Ségolène Royal durant la campagne. Elle permettrait de répartir l'effort financier, estimé aux alentours de 3,5 milliards d'euros, selon un rapport parlementaire datant de février. La Défense conteste ce chiffre et parle, elle, de 3 milliards.
cheers - er actually no, this time it is ouch :shudder
Le second porte-avions français sur la sellette
Samuel Laurent (lefigaro.fr) avec AFP
21/04/2008 | Mise à jour : 17:22 | .
Le Charles de Gaulle (DR)
Le ministre de la Défense Hervé Morin a confirmé dimanche que la situation budgétaire rendait «difficile» la construction d'un second bâtiment pour suppléer le Charles de Gaulle.
La rumeur agitait les milieux de la défense depuis quelques semaines, Hervé Morin l'a confirmée dimanche au Grand Rendez-vous Europe 1-Le Parisien : «la situation budgétaire de l'équipement de nos forces rend difficile la construction du second porte-avions».
Depuis la mise à la retraite du Clémenceau en 1997, la France ne possède qu'un seul porte-avions, le Charles de Gaulle. Une situation handicapante, puisque ce bâtiment doit être mis en cale sèche durant six mois tous les 200 jours, soit plus d'un tiers du temps.
Lors de la campagne présidentielle, la question avait été abordée par Nicolas Sarkozy et Ségolène Royal. Le futur chef de l'Etat avait expliqué, lors d'un entretien avec la revue Défense : «La décision de se lancer dans la construction (d'un nouveau porte-avions) doit s'apprécier relativement aux marges de manœuvre dont nous pouvons disposer et à la lumière des arbitrages capacitaires».
3,5 milliards d'euros
Quelques mois plus tard, lors d'une convention de l'UMP sur le sujet, il avait nuancé son propos, parlant de «question de cohérence» et insistant sur la nécessité de «se poser la que®stion de la permanence à la mer de notre groupe aéronaval». Une prise de position plus favorable à cette construction, donc. Hervé Morin avait d'ailleurs indiqué, le 25 juin 2007 sur France Inter : «A priori, nous aurons un second porte-avions. C'est, disons, acté».
Mais les difficultés budgétaires de la France ont changé la donne. «C'est un arbitrage que nous avons à faire, qui sera fait dans les semaines qui viennent», a assuré dimanche Hervé Morin. Le Livre blanc sur la Défense, attendu d'ici à l'été, devrait trancher.
L'autre question est celle d'une éventuelle «mutualisation» de la construction avec la Grande-Bretagne. Une position qui avait les faveurs de Ségolène Royal durant la campagne. Elle permettrait de répartir l'effort financier, estimé aux alentours de 3,5 milliards d'euros, selon un rapport parlementaire datant de février. La Défense conteste ce chiffre et parle, elle, de 3 milliards.
Agree it dose sound painful and coming from the defense minster is especially worrying that doesn't happen frequently or for good reason. The British program had many many problems but sounds more serious than the British problems.
How hawkish[how likely is Hervé Morin to fight for the carrier].
seems the British ordered the carrier at the right time before the financially crisis broke and it became more difficult to find the money.
all i can say is best of luck
http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/france-steaming-ahead-on-pa2cvf-carrier-project-01621/#more-1621
link from DID
Last edited:
contedicavour
New Member
Good question, if Morin is hawkish... unfortunately most ministers in France don't dare speak outloud until the President tells them to. After some cacophony that the press joyfully played on, now everybody just shuts up and follows the line...
... which by the way is something like "we are short of money, and there's a huge backlog of spendings awaiting to materialize".
cheers
... which by the way is something like "we are short of money, and there's a huge backlog of spendings awaiting to materialize".
cheers
Definitely true. And it is not uncommon to send a minister to try an inconvinient message first.
Purely hypothetical question, but...............
Should France's PA2 be cancelled (becoming more likely in my humble opinion), and the strain on the UK defence budget reaches crisis point where at least one capital project must either be curtailed or cancelled, would it not make sense for the UK to build a single carrier capable of facilitating catapult launched Rafael and F-35C's?
We would then at least be able to guarantee one European carrier battle group on call 365-days of the year protected by a combination of Horizon/T45's. If and when the UK carrier is in refit, a squadron of UK F-35C's could be cross-decked to the French carrier for joint operations. A mix of Rafael's and F-35C's would make for a potent package. The fact that the UK carrier will be completed prior to the arrival of the F-35 means we could do with a carrier capable aircraft as a stop-gap, why not French aircraft whilst their carrier is in refit/refueling.
I appreciate politics comes in to play, for example would the French risk their carrier in a Falklands scenario, where it was used to only protect British interests?
Any savings reference the UK defence budget could then be used to by additional T45's and / or Astutes.
I would rather see one UK carrier than none at all!
Should France's PA2 be cancelled (becoming more likely in my humble opinion), and the strain on the UK defence budget reaches crisis point where at least one capital project must either be curtailed or cancelled, would it not make sense for the UK to build a single carrier capable of facilitating catapult launched Rafael and F-35C's?
We would then at least be able to guarantee one European carrier battle group on call 365-days of the year protected by a combination of Horizon/T45's. If and when the UK carrier is in refit, a squadron of UK F-35C's could be cross-decked to the French carrier for joint operations. A mix of Rafael's and F-35C's would make for a potent package. The fact that the UK carrier will be completed prior to the arrival of the F-35 means we could do with a carrier capable aircraft as a stop-gap, why not French aircraft whilst their carrier is in refit/refueling.
I appreciate politics comes in to play, for example would the French risk their carrier in a Falklands scenario, where it was used to only protect British interests?
Any savings reference the UK defence budget could then be used to by additional T45's and / or Astutes.
I would rather see one UK carrier than none at all!
the French Withdrawal doesn't effect the UK carrier as the its been ordered long leads ect the program solid. The UK side of the CVF program is far futher ahead and the Two are solid
The European carrier ideia was mentioned by Royal during French presidential campaign reminds me of the MLF in 1960s
contedicavour
New Member
I agree, for 3 reasons
> the Rafale needs a catapult, which the QE CVFs don't have or need
> why should the RN bother to delay the CVF just to incorporate the catapults ?
> France cannot abandon the Rafale and anyway operates it from the CdG carrier
Besides, in case of disagreement over foreign policy, who decides to use the "shared" carrier ?
Actually the RN will be compatible with the Italian Navy because we'll operate the same F35B (even if of course Cavour is smaller than the RN QEs).
cheers