[WilderBill]

So the French don't want to in any way get involved in taking down Iraq. They won't help us. They won't support us. Nothing.

So why do you suppose they have moved a carrier to the eastern Mediteranian????

Would they support Saddam to try to save all their investments in Iraq?

What do you want to bet that there are both American and Israeli subs shaddowing the carrier just in case? :scrutiny:

[Blackhawk]

They're just positioning themselves to join the U.S. when the shooting starts so they'll save face for the victory to claim that was their intention all along.

[WilderBill]

That is the obvious explanation. It may even be true.
Did I mention I don't think we should trust the French?

[Bullet]

The only thing the French did right was to invent French Fries. Wait a minute I don't think they even did this.

[Gary H]

They are covering all bases. The French like to be on the winning side. I'm not so sure they really care which side. I doubt that the U.S. will share war planning with the French. After all, in 1998 their inspectors were tipping off the Iraqi officials.

[WilderBill]

I think that if the French were intent on being on the winning side, they would have come right out and supported us from the begining unless they think Iraq stands a chance.

(Any bookies out there want to quote us the odds on that?)

[Gary H]

Not so much the winning side should there be war, but the winning strategy. They would show themselves to be relevant.

[Mike Irwin]

The French have a carrier?

More like they have a floating disaster...

[WilderBill]

I think they have two.
They carry 60's vintage Miarage fighters and A4s. I believe they are upgrading the attack planes to Toranados.

Also, India has two carriers. Who knows what they carry.

[4570Rick]

We have, through out the years, provided financial, material, logistical, and moral support to France.
































No good deed goes unpunished. :banghead:

[Lennyjoe]

Will be funny seeing them French Navy guys jumping off the ship the first time a torpedo or bullet flies their way. :rolleyes:

[KMKeller]

Is it true that French Naval vessels only go full speed when in reverse?

[M1911]

They carry 60's vintage Miarage fighters and A4s. I believe they are upgrading the attack planes to Toranados.There is no Tornado capable of landing on a carrier and never has been. France has been introducing the multirole Rafale and apparently it is operational in small numbers:

http://www.airforce-technology.com/projects/rafale/

[capt_happypants]

Bullets? We just need to point a loudspeaker in their general direction, set the volume to "11", and broadcast "GUTEN TAG!"

On a practical level, what good will that French flattop be? We won't be sharing tactical intelligence with them, and if the French have any intention to interfere with U.S. combat operations, they face FIVE Carrier Air Wings and various Navy nastiness.

[bedlamite]

Washington post article (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A59326-2003Feb11.html)

DeLay is trying a more personal approach. "I was at a celebration of India's Independence Day," he told reporters, "and a Frenchman came walking up to me and started talking to me about Iraq, and it was obvious we were not going to agree. And I said, 'Wait a minute. Do you speak German?' And he looked at me kind of funny and said, 'No, I don't speak German.' And I said, 'You're welcome,' turned around and walked off."

:D

[MonkeyMan]

I wish I could remember where I saw this:

Going to war without the French is like going hunting without an accordian.:D

OK, Mssr. d'Accordian, you can go just stay quiet and out of the way.:neener:

[dev_null]

Also, India has two carriers. Who knows what they carry.Good food, I'll bet!

-0-

[Mike Irwin]

The Charles De Gaulle is the only current active French carrier. Took 12 years to build and deliver to the French Navy, with significant construction issues throughout. It's also apparently a rather "hot" place to work, as there are allegations that the reactors are inadequately shielded.

The Foch has been placed in reserve, so France has a single operational carrier of dubious quality and reliability with a top speed of only about 27 knots, and with a design aircraft complement of less than 1/2 of America's OLDEST aircraft carrier, the Kitty Hawk.

Should make a nifty target, though.

[Jim March]

Check this link out if you haven't already:

http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?s=&postid=110803

WSJ on the motives of France/Germany - they don't want the US discovering the level of covert support for Saddam's WMD programs. Just theory, but it makes sense.

[Mike Irwin]

I've suspected that for a long time, Jim. Especially of the French.

[WilderBill]

I didn't have any specs on the French carrier, but I susspected it wasn't near up to ours. I'm surprised it has nuck power. Of course, I'm also surprised it is any further from France than the Bay of Biscay!

[Bulldozer]

The Clemenceau and Foch were the French's first major carriers. The Degaulle, as previosuly stated, has some "teething troubles."

As far as aircraft embarked, Super Etendards and F-8K Crusaders were the norm, until the small scale introduction of the Naval Rafale. I believe that France finally retired their Alize ASW aircraft. I think France also has some E-2 Haweye aircraft in service, but I do not believe that these are maritime.

The French navy seems to think of their aircraft as fine wines -- of a certain vintage.

As far as India, their two carriers are stocked with Sea Harriers and Sea Kings, plus Kamov helos.

Argentina and Brazil also have carriers with A-4 Skyhawks. Did you know that the Australians at one time had a carrier as well?

[Mike Irwin]

Here's a specifications page on the French "Gutless De Gaulle."

www.warships1.com/FREcvn01_CDGaulle_specs.htm


Essentially you can sum it up with Mon Dieu! Quelle Poo!

A modernized American Essex class carrier from the 1960s was more capable than the De Gaulle.

[Waitone]

The French are acting like the French because they do not want the US and hence the world knowing how much of the Iraqi WMD program was built with French equipment and expertise. Unbeknownst to most of the world the French are the world leaders in applied nuclear technology on a commercial scale. The only area where the US leads is in the area of small nuclear reactors. The US has virtually abandoned nuclear technology. The French are the world's leaders.

And that is why they will sign on to the war at the last minute so they can be in a position to continue to coverup from the inside.

I think we'll have a new term for duplicity after we see the extent of French involvement.

[WilderBill]

Argentina? Brazil?
To help put that 27knot speed into perspective, I talked to a guy that was on a shakedown cruise for a US carrier. He said the top speed is classified, but he could say for a fact that they hit over 60 knots...on two of the four reactors!
Kinda makes you wonder why the French even bothered to have a carrier. Maybe they thought they should keep up with Argentina?

[jmbg29]

Thus

http://www.thehighroad.org/attachment.php?s=&postid=112359 :evil: :evil: :evil:

[Selfdfenz]

on any occassion the French place military forces in close proximity to a potential site of combat:
1. they may be easily located due to the malodorous smell downwind from their point of deployment due to all the pant-loads
2.the fishing must have cooled off wherever said carrier previously was.
S-

BTW what does it mean ....wine clarified with beef blood.
That sounds nasty. Like something you would catfish with. Do the French actually do something like that?
S-

[Mike Irwin]

We had a discussion about top speed of carriers over on TFL.

Quite frankly, 60+ knots is urban legend.

That pronouncement comes from a Naval architect I know who has more than a little experience with carrier design teams.

I've also been fortunate enough to speak with a former carrier XO. When I asked him about the speed claims, he just rolled his eyes when I asked about the 50-60 knot plus claims.

All sorts of astonishing numbers have been floated for top speed on America's nuke carriers -- one person even claimed to have clocked a Nimitz going 102 miles per hour.

Yeah, right.

As for the sailor who claimed they were going 60+ knots on 2 of 4 reactors?

Kind of hard, given that no US carrier has ever been built with 4 reactors.

Enterprise has 8 (of which I believe 6 are operational, 2 have been decommed as they're no longer necessary because of technology advances), and the Nimitz and Roosevelt classes have 2 reactors per carrier.

Most realistic top speed for an American nuke carrier is probably around 40 to 45 knots, and that would be a strain.

[DeltaElite]

The French won't interfere, unless they plan on surrendering to the US, just to get the war reparations money. :D

[Dogsoldier]

Hey, That's enough about the miserable French military.
Who do you run the Foriegn Legion? Huh? One of the finest fighting commands in the world.
.
.
.
.
Oh wait a minute
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
The Legion is made up of mainly American, Brits, Australian Germans....

.
.
.
.
.

Never mind........


:evil:

[Ledbetter]

Shouldn't they be over in Bagdad planting palm trees on the main street to shade Saddam's troops while they march to victory?

[TexasVet]

Okay, sombody explain to me how they are gonna drop a carrier when the shooting starts.:confused:

[WilderBill]

Yeah Mike, you're probably right about the speed. The guy's MOS was refueling planes, so he wasn't on the bridge and sure wasn't driving it! Sure sounds great though, huh?
I still wonder what the Froggies are up to, though. A carrier is kinda expensive to operate, just to be gettin' a better veiw of the action. :scrutiny:

[Mike Irwin]

Wilder,

Yep, you can get all sorts of astonishing claims from people who are there, but who aren't actually THERE.

I had an Air Force type guy once tell me in all seriousness that the super secret top speed of the SR-71 is actually close to Mach 25 :eek:

That would be, by the way, roughly 18,000 miles per hour.

Yeah. Right.

Oh, and did I mention that this guy was an Air Force paper shuffler who didn't come close to aircraft? :)

Now, as for your sailor buddy, I will give him the benefit of one doubt -- deck air speed in knots during launch operations.

When you launch aircraft, you go nose into the wind, and normally go pretty close to full power.

If you're on a carrier going 35 knots, and nose into a prevailing wind of 20 knots, there's your 55 knots apparent platform speed.

[LRRPS]

Wilderbill,

For your information and for all other ignorants who don't know what they say, the french Navy had 2 conventional flat tops (aircraft carriers) named the FOCH and the CLEMENCEAU.
The CLEMENCEAU was sold a year ago to the brazilian Navy,
remains the FOCH and a new built nuclear flat top, the CHARLES DE GAULLE.
There has never been any Mirage or A4 aboard those ships.
(Mirage 2000's are for the Air Force, the A4 Skyhawk is absent from the french armed forces inventory)
They carry vintage SUPER ETENDARD fighters as well as the expensive and modern RAFALE all weather fighter.

If you want more info pls let me know.

LRRPS.

[Mike Irwin]

"ignorants..."

Why the hostility, LRRPS?

If you've got information to share, please do so. If you've got an attitude to share, please don't.

As for the Clemenceau, www.warships1.com indicates that she was sold for scrap and that the Foch may be going to Brazil.

http://www.warships1.com/FREcv03_Clemenceau_specs.htm

That, however, does seem to be out of date from what I'm seeing on other sites on the web.

If you speak French, here's a nice website on the Foch...

http://aeronavale.free.fr/14f-pafoch.htm

I only speak a little French, but I think it's saying that the sale is complete and the Brazilians now own the former Foch.

A couple of web sites on the Brazilian navy indicate that the Foch is now in Brazilian service as the San Paulo.

[Pilgrim]

To help put that 27knot speed into perspective, I talked to a guy that was on a shakedown cruise for a US carrier. He said the top speed is classified, but he could say for a fact that they hit over 60 knots...on two of the four reactors!

Your expert is blowing smoke up your keester. The only U.S. nuclear powered aircraft carrier with more than two reactors is Enterprise, which has eight. All the Nimitz class carriers have two reactors.

See http://www.chinfo.navy.mil/navpalib/factfile/ships/ship-cv.html

Rated top speed for the Nimitz class carriers is 30+, a far sight less than 60 knots.

[Cactus]

Originally posted by TexasVet:
Okay, sombody explain to me how they are gonna drop a carrier when the shooting starts.

I guess they could alway scuttle it!:)

[LRRPS]

Mike Irwin,

Thank you for the info,
I wasn't aware that both french conventional carriers were decommissionned (Clemenceau in 1997 & Foch in 2000) and that the Foch instead of the Clemenceau was sold to the brazilians.
Mea culpa!
Seems that they now have only one nuclear carrier, hope they're happy with it.
I went to the french sites and learned that the old Super Etendard recon version has recently retired. I guess the fighter version will follow soon. The Rafale will be their one and only fighter left, but it's a hell of a fighter!!!

LRRPS.

[LRRPS]

By the way, the speed of the Charles de Gaulle is 32 kts.

LRRPS.:rolleyes:

[1goodshot]

They will join in after all the work is done, they just want to play both sides of the game.

[Mike Irwin]

"By the way, the speed of the Charles de Gaulle is 32 kts."

It could easily be.

The French had ENORMOUS problems with the screws on the De Gaulle, both in manufacturing and in testing, and I believe installed a new set of screws in 2000 or 2001, although I'm not sure about that.

What kills me, though, is that the French, who are probably leaders in the nuclear field today, built a carrier that needs to be recored every 5 years.

Recoring (refueling) is a process that can take a LONG time, months or even a year or more. Conversely, US carriers only need to recore, on average, about every 12 years.

[LRRPS]

You're right Mike Irwin, recoring a nuclear flat top is time consuming, in fact it'll take more than a year to recore the Charles de Gaulle.
That operation will take place in 2006 I think, leaving them without a carrier for a long period of time.

LRRPS.

[WilderBill]

I think Mike has hit the nail on the head. If you are on deck, at launch speed, into the wind and maybe with a rough sea, the wind speed will be a lot more than the ship's speed and might seem like more than that.
It is odd that with all their nuclear experience they couldn't build a better reactor for their carrier, eseicially since it has become a one of a kind in their fleet.
LRRPS, I understand that ignorant only means I don't know something. I never claimed to be a nuclear carrier expert or even a sailor, only curious as to what the heck the Frech might be up to.
I do admit to being guilty of posting what I think I know rather than researching first. I expect that at least 90% of posts here fall into that catagory.
That does keep things flowing and interesting and if someone posts something that can be proven to be not factual there is usually someone out there to correct it.

[Pilgrim]

Don't feel bad. A good number of naval "experts" I have run into turned out to have been the third assistant to the butter cutter on the mess decks. I can see where your "expert" might have sold you a convincing bill of goods.

Bruce

[King]

One person's view of France........



A letter home from a Marine with the multinational force in Bosnia


Dear Dad,

A funny thing happened to me yesterday at Camp Bondsteel (Bosnia): A French army officer walked up to me in the PX, and
told me he thought we (Americans) were a bunch of cowboys and were going to provoke a war in Iraq. He said if such a thing happens, we wouldn't be able to count on the support of France.

I told him that it didn't surprise me. Since we had come to
France's rescue in World War I, World War II, Vietnam, and
the Cold War, their ingratitude and jealousy was due to surface, again, at some point in the near future anyway.

I also told him that is why France is a third-rate military power
with a socialist economy and a bunch of idiots for soldiers. I
additionally told him that America, being a nation of deeds and
action, not words, would do whatever it had to do, and France's
support, if it ever came, was only for show anyway.

Just like in ALL NATO exercises, the US would shoulder 85% of the
burden, and provide 85% of the support, as evidenced by the fact that this French officer was shopping in the American PX,
and not the other way around.

He began to get belligerent at that point, and I told him if he
would like to, I would meet him outside in front of the Burger King and whip his *** in front of the entire Multi-National Brigade East, thus demonstrating that even the smallest American had
more fight in him than the average Frenchman.

He called me a barbarian cowboy and walked away in a
huff. With friends like these, who needs enemies?

Dad, tell mom I love her,

Your loving daughter, Marybeth

[Finch]

The new French Military magazine...

http://www.blackwoodtech.com/linked/sos.bmp