French military developments

Discussion in 'Europe and Russia' started by A.V., Aug 20, 2009.

  1. IndianHawk

    IndianHawk Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,122
    Likes Received:
    9,422
    70k ton !! IN will take cues also from this and will want Vishal at 60-70k tons. I guess future stealth jets will grow in size so carriers will have to grow too.
     
    nongaddarliberal likes this.
  2. nongaddarliberal

    nongaddarliberal Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Nov 1, 2016
    Messages:
    1,837
    Likes Received:
    5,344
    I think conventional propulsion would be prudent. Its more economical to produce, and easier to maintain.
     
  3. abhay rajput

    abhay rajput Regular Member

    Joined:
    Apr 10, 2016
    Messages:
    376
    Likes Received:
    808
    Yes it is true but conventional one cost a lot diesel , compared to nuclear reactors which only need refuelling in 15-20 years or so... It is true maintenance would be extensive on nuclear powered carrier but the overall cost will still be far cheaper than conventional power carrier in the long run... the truth is we can't make bigger nuclear reactors .. we need help from Russia for 190mw reactors , that's why we are leasing another nuclear submarine from Russia at the cost of 3 billion dollars...
     
  4. BON PLAN

    BON PLAN -*- Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2015
    Messages:
    4,313
    Likes Received:
    1,913
    Location:
    South of PARIS, France
    70.000 tons carrier is studied for 30T fighters. It's a maximum, and I have a doubt that next gen germano french fighter will be so heavy....

    Don't forget there is a communication war in europe between Tempest and FCAS. So I think that all the mock up, datas, spec.... about FCAS are to be taken with caution.

    My opinion is that FCAS will be very different than the mock up seen on Le Bourget.
     
    aditya10r and IndianHawk like this.
  5. BON PLAN

    BON PLAN -*- Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2015
    Messages:
    4,313
    Likes Received:
    1,913
    Location:
    South of PARIS, France
    but with far less range.
    France send its carrier all around the world. It not the same thing to refuel escort only than to refuel escort + main carrier ! and a tanker is a very fragile target...
    India, as far as I know, need mainly a carrier for Indian ocean ride. Not the same exigence.

    So Nuclear power for french carrier. I hope so.
     
    IndianHawk and nongaddarliberal like this.
  6. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    13,796
    Likes Received:
    6,480
    As the article mentions, we still have 10 nuclear reactors on the submarines. We need enough reactors to maintain full utilisation of the facilities or risk losing the capability to build and maintain them. With the reactors lasting longer between refueling, this is how we know they will go with the nuclear option. It is actually pointing to two nuclear carriers.
     
    IndianHawk likes this.
  7. Bhurki

    Bhurki Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2018
    Messages:
    860
    Likes Received:
    713
    It'll certainly have to 30+ tons if its a dominance fighter.
     
  8. IndianHawk

    IndianHawk Senior Member Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2016
    Messages:
    4,122
    Likes Received:
    9,422
    We can very well build 190 mw reactor. The Russian help is to build them as fast as possible.
     
  9. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    13,796
    Likes Received:
    6,480
    The MTOW is 30T as it mentions Rafale MTOW at 20T.
     
  10. Bhurki

    Bhurki Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2018
    Messages:
    860
    Likes Received:
    713
    It'll be atleast 40T Mtow..........
     
  11. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    13,796
    Likes Received:
    6,480
    The MTOW is going to be 33.5T.
     
  12. Bhurki

    Bhurki Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2018
    Messages:
    860
    Likes Received:
    713
    The designed hasn't been finalized yet, how did you come to that conclusion?
     
  13. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    13,796
    Likes Received:
    6,480
    The official dimensions are not yet known, but according to Aviation Week Bureau Chief Tony Osborne it should be 1/3rd or 1/4 bigger than a Rafale, with a Maximum Take Off Weight (MTOW) similar to the Mirage IV developed in the ‘50s.

    https://theaviationist.com/2019/06/...ighter-mockup-unveiled-at-the-paris-air-show/
     
  14. BON PLAN

    BON PLAN -*- Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2015
    Messages:
    4,313
    Likes Received:
    1,913
    Location:
    South of PARIS, France
    As Marcel Dassault said : the price of a fighter is direclty linked with its weight. See Rafale : far lighter than F15 and nearly as potent.
    The Mirage 4000 was a marvellous plane, but too costly for France. It will be the same for me.
     
  15. BON PLAN

    BON PLAN -*- Senior Member

    Joined:
    Dec 24, 2015
    Messages:
    4,313
    Likes Received:
    1,913
    Location:
    South of PARIS, France
    2 carriers.... If we have the money for one it will be nice.
     
    muzzies slayer and IndianHawk like this.
  16. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    13,796
    Likes Received:
    6,480
    With tens of billions invested to maintain nuclear sovereignty, they will do what is necessary. It isn't just for those jobs, Chantiers de l'Atlantique needs orders as well. Building the world's largest cruise ships will not last forever.
     
  17. Bhurki

    Bhurki Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2018
    Messages:
    860
    Likes Received:
    713
    You also need to factor the need of stealth.
    Neither mirage or rafale employ full LO features.
    On average an LO aircraft is 30-40% larger than the non LO aircraft performing the same duties.
     
  18. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    13,796
    Likes Received:
    6,480
    They have already factored that which is why it will be 30% larger than Rafale. The real game changer will be two engines that generate 30T of thrust. It will have Su-35 power on an airframe that weighs the same as F-35A.
     
  19. Bhurki

    Bhurki Regular Member

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2018
    Messages:
    860
    Likes Received:
    713
    An engine producing 15 tons of thrust will weight 1500 kg at the very least, 3 tons for two of them..
    Ratio of empty/engine weight for LO aircraft is around 6 due to requirement of larger wings to accomodate more internal fuel. This means it'll have to weight around 18 tons Empty, and carry around 9-10 tons of internal fuel, add around 8 tons of load capacity, thats about 36-37 tons. So MTow will be closer to 40 tons.
     
  20. Armand2REP

    Armand2REP CHINI EXPERT Veteran Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2009
    Messages:
    13,796
    Likes Received:
    6,480
    Using Russian technology it might weigh that much but we are well past that. It will be scaled up with the rest of the dimensions to weigh 1250kg each. The empty weight will come in around 13T. MTOW will be around 33T. That leaves 20T for fuel and payloads. That is plenty of carriage and leaves room for extra power when needed. MTOW is not about weighing the aircraft down so it can hardly fly. It is about loading it so that it can still complete the mission.
     

Share This Page