Quote:
|
France spends a lot only on its SSBN fleet and that because it uses a 3 sub fleet system, it has to focus its spending in 3 areas not just 2, they still deploy SSK's as force multipliers the RN and USN do not this free's up money to invest in high end SSN's catch is you don't get many for your money.
|
Sorry, but what.
France hasn't used SSK for decades, FYI. One of its private companies designs some, but that's all, the military budget hasn't spend money on developping these for more than 50 years (the last French SSK class, Agosta, was commissionned in the Seventies). If you're curious, the Royal Navy built SSK after the French stopped doing so (the Upholder class was commissionned in the Eighties).
Quote:
|
I cannot comment on specifics or give specific details, but i can say the F21 has a long way to go before it out ranges a MK48 ADCAP MOD-7, however its roughly en par with Spearfish current block 2.
|
Maybe, though from what I've seen, it appears the new batteries have higher energy density than the Otto fuel used in the ADCAP, which is quite interesting, particularly as batteries allow much better modulation of the speed.
Quote:
The French SSBN and British SSBN knock for knock has many factors to it, while the French do have very good SSBN's there's a reason for it, a lot of technology is shared between the UK USA and France, and the defense industries are co owned il explain that part in my next bit, but operationally the French have a very good boat and one that is en par to Vanguard and id say superior to the Ohio.
French technology comes about from a multitude of sources and its due in no small part to the co operation of working with other European and American partners, point in case here is the MBDA Exocet if you look up the B in that acronym you find it stands for BAe Systems.
|
When it comes to strategic deterrence, though, France has a pretty clear doctrine of not getting anything foreign for the tech. Coopertion, yes, but the tech itself has to be national (the division of MBDA doing the M51 is quite separated from the rest, IIRC, or how nuclear-capable jets are ITAR-free).
I honestly and wholeheartedly mean no disrespect as you appear to have travelled more and met a lot more people related to the Silent Service than I did, but it seems that the French arm could be a blind spot. As another poster reminded, there is a bit of a Cold War legacy of friendly (or not so friendly, depending on the people) institutional Francophobia among NATO partners (and, TBH, from anyone who met the wonderful, friendly and highly agreeable de Gaulle, a man who never, ever, eveeeeeer pissed any ally of his) which might create some bias when it comes to the perceived effectiveness of things.
This report from RAND is about aviation rather than boats, but it is pretty interesting in that it highlights the differences in mindset for military procurement and how there can be a large discrepancy between funding and results in some cases (explaining in hindsight why the Typhoon, with much more funding, got such a ranking with the Swiss evaluation):
https://www.rand.org/pubs/reports/R1148.html
Though I'm not going to pretend the Rubis/Amethyste are anywhere close to a LA, for example. Their main advantage was to exist, which is already something quite useful in itself.