New Nuclear Aircraft Carrier for France Order Confirmed

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 24 лис 2024

КОМЕНТАРІ • 33

  • @CROM-on1bz
    @CROM-on1bz 4 дні тому +10

    Yes, the CDG had problems when it was launched, but they were resolved quickly and for 20 years it has provided a competitive service. Its speed of 27 knots allows it to launch its Rafales even with zero wind, so no need for more.

  • @tonystevens9278
    @tonystevens9278 2 дні тому +1

    The design concept certainly looks very impressive. Supposedly one of the key issues with the CDG is that she has needed nuclear refueling more frequently than US' carriers where for the Nimitz and Ford classes that is only undertaken once in their fifty year lifespans. It will be interesting to know if that will be the case for the new ship?

  • @danielh4032
    @danielh4032 День тому +3

    Looks like a far better and more capable will carrier than this horribly compromised British ones.

  • @hermes6910
    @hermes6910 4 дні тому +5

    Please check what you say before saying it...
    The CdG had major problems in the beginning, and is limited by design choices, it had no more problems than the first ford, nimitz or.... QE which are even less complex than any CATOBAR CVN.
    1:30 Reactors are not the limit of propulsion, they're enough to propel it faster.
    The problem with propulsion is in the design of the kinematic chain.
    2:10 No, you need 3 ships to be sure of having one at sea, another failure.
    2:25 Construction was going very well, it was political choices that delayed its commissioning, nothing to do with the ship or its design.
    2:49 France invested 200 million euros in the design phase of the PA2 a CATOBAR QE class based design, but the UK abandonned the CATOBAR design and so the politicians didn't support the project further. I don't understand why the Nimitz is mentioned here? France doesn't do anything to compare itself with the US, please stop this US centrism...
    4:02 And again, NO, they are still SSBN reactors ! Just a brand new and more powerful design for the heavier new class of France SSBN.
    4:15 The PANG is going to have around the same speed of the CdG, 27kts is not a random number, it's the minimum speed for plane to take off.
    5:00 Absolutely not, it's still possible to have steam catapults... they're just less efficient and add constraints to aircraft.
    8:15 Because you think steam catapults can't ? Of course they can! It's just more complicated to setup.
    8:22 Yes and No. The limited number of aircraft (an aircraft being dronized or not!) is just due to the larger size of the NGF compared to the current Rafale.

  • @nosaltadded2530
    @nosaltadded2530 4 дні тому +3

    "Burning water in a boiler"? What?

    • @hermes6910
      @hermes6910 4 дні тому

      I mean... yes somehow, what was the "steam" for in "steam catapults" for you ?

    • @nosaltadded2530
      @nosaltadded2530 4 дні тому

      @@hermes6910 English?

    • @velisvideos6208
      @velisvideos6208 2 дні тому

      There is a Finnish idiom about "burning ice", generally referring to something unpleasant and incredibly slow.
      Probably "burning water" is somewhat more pleasant, but not much...

    • @TheBooban
      @TheBooban День тому

      @@nosaltadded2530the nuclear reactors boil water to produce steam. This steam is then used to power the catapults and other stuff. That’s why you see “smoke” on the flight deck. That’s steam; hot water.

    • @nosaltadded2530
      @nosaltadded2530 День тому

      @@TheBooban Having been an ABH and served on an aircraft carrier or two I know that your response is complete nonsense! My fellow ABE's were in charge of the cats and arresting gear. I spent many a cold day and night using the steam heat on the cat tracks to keep my feet warm. My comment was about the nonsensical and grammatically erroneous remark of "burning water". Not about burning fuel oil in a boiler or using a nuclear reactor to heat water to produce steam. Water does not burn. Today there's a new technology where steam is replaced by electromagnetic energy. Idiots do make videos about things they know nothing about, and other idiots make stupid comments about things they know nothing about. So, why don't you spend a few years on one of these ships as I did before you make more ridiculous remarks. Clown!

  • @mattcat65
    @mattcat65 16 годин тому

    Does anyone know if this PA-NG is going to be named Richelieu?

  • @BravoDelta-rq9rp
    @BravoDelta-rq9rp День тому

    By the way, it will be easier to build a 310 meters/1000 Ft nuclear ship than a small one like the CdG....

  • @SpyrosCharalambous-h3l
    @SpyrosCharalambous-h3l День тому

    ❤good

  • @lionelroussel7371
    @lionelroussel7371 День тому

    Il sera prêt pour 2038

  • @Fulgrim76
    @Fulgrim76 4 дні тому +4

    Vu l'état de l'économie française actuelle et future, c'est pas demain la veille.^^

  • @bigal2876
    @bigal2876 2 дні тому +1

    Burning water? Yeah my ex could do that…

  • @bret9741
    @bret9741 День тому

    Might be smarter to just order a Ford class from the US.. call it IOUSA.. or Normandy or Utah Beach.

    • @mattcat65
      @mattcat65 16 годин тому

      Not likely to happen. Trump would never sell a Ford class carrier to the French. However, for the right price, he might sell them the Nimitz and/or the Eisenhower since they would otherwise be in line for decommissioning anyway...

  • @bigal2876
    @bigal2876 2 дні тому

    Now that’s funny that they lost their props. Like the rifles for sell, “never fired, dropped once!”

  • @616CC
    @616CC 2 дні тому

    Paying a quarter of your budget for the catapults is mindlessly stupid. F that I’ll take “complicated” or cheap 😂 steam catapults

    • @mattcat65
      @mattcat65 16 годин тому

      Unlike the Brits, the French have made it a priority to be fully compatible with the US Navy. F/A-18's land and take off from the CDG all the time, but they don't like the ski jumps the RN carriers have. Since the USN is going to charge $1.3B for the French to use the American Magnetic Catapult System, it's less likely that Trump will accuse Paris of stealing American technology and canceling the deal...

  • @3EyedBro-tk2yt
    @3EyedBro-tk2yt День тому

    Rivals US Ford class? One country has a century of experience building them, the other country has built one.

    • @nosaltadded2530
      @nosaltadded2530 День тому

      Chinese Tofu Dreg.

    • @mattcat65
      @mattcat65 17 годин тому +2

      Before the CDG, the French Navy built and operated the Foch and Clemenceau, both oil fired and fully compatible with USN aircraft.

    • @justicerules1373
      @justicerules1373 7 годин тому

      ​@@nosaltadded2530, stupid!

  • @ŞakirŞiribom
    @ŞakirŞiribom 4 дні тому +1

    China builds 1 aircraft carrier in about 5 years. We, the Turks, have finished the design of our own aircraft carrier and proceeded to the stage of producing parts. We will finish it in about 6 years. France can't build this ship in 10 years because World War 3 will have already broken out.

    • @francinesicard464
      @francinesicard464 3 дні тому +2

      Nuclear aircraft carrier? I doubt it.

    • @K3ppa
      @K3ppa 2 дні тому +7

      You haven’t build any Carriers while being a Turk. Your design would take another year or two for testing. Then 8-10years atleast to make it if you are funding it enough. Don’t say anadolu is turkish. Its spanish juan carlos. Own design takes time to make. So in reality your carrier might be available around 2038.

    • @Beyllion
      @Beyllion 2 дні тому +6

      You're ridiculous. They could have this carrier ready for 2030 if they wanted but that's not the point. They currently DON'T want to operate two carriers at once because they lack the people to man 2 (nuclear technicians are very rare). Same problem with most navies. The construction of this one is planned to finish when the current carrier will reach the end of its life and for the 6th gen Rafale replacement. That why it's planned for 2038, not because they can't go faster.
      Also please do not compare the turkish carrier, that carrier doesn't even exist, it's just an idea for the moment and it's not even funded while the budget for the PANG has been approved already. Also the PANG is far more complex to build than any conventional carrier as its nuclear-powered and catobar equipped and built for the future (6th gen planes, directed energy weapons, drones).

    • @K3ppa
      @K3ppa 2 дні тому +4

      @ turkey hasn’t even created its own carrier till date. Their LHD is Spanish Juan carlos. Their own carrier will not finish before 2038

    • @avb4805
      @avb4805 День тому +2

      Please don't compare the french navy with the turkish navy... that's ridiculous 😂

  • @LOLOVAL-os3pq
    @LOLOVAL-os3pq День тому

    PANG = PA NG = Porte Avion , Nouvelle Génération and no PN AG to 0'14 !!