French Navy Vs. Chinese or Indian Navy

Norman · Jul 22, 2004

I was looking into the French falklands thread, and researched the Indian Navy a bit. The modern navy is relatively large (see http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/NAVY/Link4.html), and getting bigger. Additionally, the Chinese Navy is getting bigger, and may be a bit more modern. (see: http://www.stormpages.com/jetfight/jiangwei_houjian_zhongb.htm)

Can any one construct a scenario where the modern nation of either country gets into a naval struggle with France?

Grey Wolf · Jul 22, 2004

No, but the British newspapers are crying that after the latest round of defence cuts (Fight Terrorism with defence cuts !!!) the French will have a bigger navy than Britain for the first time since....er, the last time

Grey Wolf

Landshark · Jul 22, 2004

Grey Wolf said:
No, but the British newspapers are crying that after the latest round of defence cuts (Fight Terrorism with defence cuts !!!) the French will have a bigger navy than Britain for the first time since....er, the last time

Grey Wolf

And just how do they expect us to fight the next war with France?

God I hate "New" Labour.*

*Though to be fair I also hate the Tories, the Liberals, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and all those loudmouthed Irish bastards of any religion.

Matthew Craw · Jul 22, 2004

I believe it's the first time since the 1690s, certainly since the riegn of Louis XIV.

Moreover, recent command reforms to further our "partnership" with the Americans will effectively eliminate our ability to operate independantly on a significant scale, leaving France and Rusia as the only European powers with any independant power-projection capability.

Predictably enough the right wing xenophobes who are always so quick to defend our sovreignty from the "threat" of the EU see nothing wrong with this abrogation of an independant defense policy.

I can't imagine a Franco-Chinese clash, but don't the fFrench have a couple of islands in the Indian Ocean?

Grimm Reaper · Jul 22, 2004

I was under the impression that the UK was finally getting serious about a new class of light carriers, 2-3 in number, each carrying 40-50 aircraft? If so, this would put London ahead of France or Russia in the power projection business.

Matt, what reductions are these? And why are you blaming the Tories for what Labor is up to? I may personally disagree with the Democrats on some issues, but I have no doubt where the buck stops right now.

Landshark, the important thing is that you are not prejudiced but simply hate everyone equally!

LOOK! BAGPIPES!!! RUN SHARKIE!

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I WANTED your opinion I would read it in your entrails

Matthew Craw · Jul 22, 2004

I'll believe those carriers are for real once they're laid down and not a second before, anyway, the French are also planning to builf=d 2 comparable CVAs, I guess the Charles De Gaulle soured them on the CVN concept for a while.

and i wasn't blaming the Tories for the defense cuts, I was merely, ona related but distinct subject, pointing out the hypocrasy in their stauch defense of sovereighnty from Brussels, but abject surender towards washington.

Landshark · Jul 22, 2004

Grimm Reaper said:
ILOOK! BAGPIPES!!! RUN SHARKIE!

EAT HOT LEAD YOU TARTAN BASTARDS!!!!!!!!!!!!

Valamyr · Jul 23, 2004

I think Britain should switch policies in this regard. Align more towards the EU, and vouch for a common european defense. Of course, that stance is probably a pipe dream, but it would be better than tying herself to the americans so helplessly.

Paris and Berlin would give great influence to London and are right next door. With a rising China and a declining America this century, a strong European bloc will be needed to establish a stable tripolar world, with Russia edging on both sides.

If Europe misses the boat, I predict a China-America duel (so to speak) over the 21st century, with Russia backing China with endless and much needed natural ressources against control of its former sphere.

What can I say, I hate monopolies. And there's nothing more dangerous than a monopoly of arrogance.

carlton_bach · Jul 23, 2004

Valamyr said:
What can I say, I hate monopolies. And there's nothing more dangerous than a monopoly of arrogance.

I live in Europe. Thrust me, whatever the US have a monopoly on, it isn't arrogance.

Darth · Jul 23, 2004

Norman said:
Can any one construct a scenario where the modern nation of either country gets into a naval struggle with France?

China invades one or more French Pacific islands.

India invades one or more French Indian Ocean islands, or Djiboti.

Dave Howery · Jul 23, 2004

Doesn't India have two small former Brit carriers? or are those only for Harrier type planes? IIRC, France has at least one modern carrier (Clemeceau?), and one or two smaller ones. China doesn't have any carriers, so France vs. India would be the better lineup.

The only monopoly America has is on 'superpower' titles.... no one else seems to want one....

Syphon · Jul 23, 2004

Landshark said:
And just how do they expect us to fight the next war with France?

God I hate "New" Labour.*

*Though to be fair I also hate the Tories, the Liberals, the SNP, Plaid Cymru and all those loudmouthed Irish bastards of any religion.

But what are your thoughts of the lost and lamented Monster Raving Loony Party.

Evil_evol · Jul 23, 2004

To answear your original post, what if the french defeated the vietnamese communists and kept it's indochinese colonies for a while. Combine this with a slower paced decolonization of the world and a militaristic china during some period and you've got your clash.

Norman · Jul 23, 2004

Evil_evol said:
To answear your original post, what if the french defeated the vietnamese communists and kept it's indochinese colonies for a while. Combine this with a slower paced decolonization of the world and a militaristic china during some period and you've got your clash.

I like it, as China grows in power, the Vietnamese and other groups turn to them for aid in seeking their independence. China grows it's Navy with the help of Soviet aid, and by when (1968 - 1972), a largely naval conflict erupts when the Chinese seek to interdict aid from France to their forces in the area.

Makes sense.

Tetsu · Jul 24, 2004

Dave Howery said:
Doesn't India have two small former Brit carriers? or are those only for Harrier type planes?

India currently has one carrier, the INS Viraat, which used to be called HMS Hermes; it's a Centaur-class carrier only capable of carrying vertical take-off/landing craft, such as the Harrier.

Actually, India just recently ended negotiations to purchase the Sovet carrier Admiral Gorshkov, which will replace the Viraat by the end of the decade. This carrier, a Kiev-class, does have the option of conventional aircraft, and in fact I think the Russians are including 16 MiG-29's in the deal.

The French Navy also only has one carrier, the Charles de Gaulle. It is nuclear powered, and of course supports conventional take-off/landing aircraft. France is, however, planning to build a new carrier, one based off a British design to debut in 2015. The construction timetable hasn't been released, but the new French carrier supposedly will be built around 2015, so it's a while away.

I suspect if France and India got in a tussle (much more likely than with China in my opinion, even though it's still unlikely), it would most likely be over French possessions in the Indian Ocean; which are fairly numerous (although a few are unihabited). France would probably triumph in the long run (in the naval aspect anyhow, an invasion of a country of one billion people is never, ever a smart thing for a country the size of Colorado.), but I don't quite know why these two nuclear powers would brawl over a couple of nearly useless islands.

Evil_evol · Jul 24, 2004

Norman said:
I like it, as China grows in power, the Vietnamese and other groups turn to them for aid in seeking their independence. China grows it's Navy with the help of Soviet aid, and by when (1968 - 1972), a largely naval conflict erupts when the Chinese seek to interdict aid from France to their forces in the area.

Makes sense.

But would the chinese really want/need/get any help from the russians? After all, they weren't exactly the communist equivalents to the US and the UK. With this happening, how would Australia, Great Britain and the Netherlands (including India and various other peices of land in the area) respond to this? I can actually imagine a conflict between NATO and China quite similar to the war in Vietnam develop from this. The nations of western Europe, still clinging on to their colonial empires must get pretty worried about a domino effect as the commies start supporting nationalist movement with force. Heck, this could even result in world war three.

aktarian · Jul 25, 2004

Norman said:
I like it, as China grows in power, the Vietnamese and other groups turn to them for aid in seeking their independence. China grows it's Navy with the help of Soviet aid, and by when (1968 - 1972), a largely naval conflict erupts when the Chinese seek to interdict aid from France to their forces in the area.

Makes sense.

Why? Wouldn't Chinese just march south into Vietnam like they did in OTL (only bigger force and agaisnt different enemy)? No need for big naval clash.

Norman · Jul 25, 2004

aktarian said:
Why? Wouldn't Chinese just march south into Vietnam like they did in OTL (only bigger force and agaisnt different enemy)? No need for big naval clash.

remember that there is oil under those waters, so if the aid given the Viet Cong is premised on access to the oil, then China needs to present its Navy.

aktarian · Jul 25, 2004

Norman said:
remember that there is oil under those waters, so if the aid given the Viet Cong is premised on access to the oil, then China needs to present its Navy.

And if it's premised on help to communist brothers?

Norman · Jul 25, 2004

aktarian said:
And if it's premised on help to communist brothers?

Publically premised on aid to fellow communists, privaely who knows?