Via Google Translate:
DCNS and STX France offers a new design of aircraft carrier
It was one of the stars - discrete - the Euronaval. Result of the work led by DCNS and STX France since the abandonment of the Franco-British aircraft carrier in June 2008, the new "PA2" was unveiled last week on the stand of DCNS. The overall design of the building is reminiscent of the project "Juliette", initiated by DCNS before a cooperation agreement is signed by London and Paris in March 2006. The new PA2 (aircraft carrier number 2) adopts a single island, which is preferred configuration of the Navy from the design to two islands of Carrier Vessel Future (CVF) of the Royal Navy. This unique structure, its architecture, optimizes aerology when a plane arrives at the landing. The building studied by DCNS and STX France has a lift-off point of 272 meters long and 70 meters wide. As the Charles de Gaulle, the track has three strands oblique stop and a barricade system for the retrieval of a downed aircraft. The hull is characterized by an elongated bulb and, on the back, adding a skirt. This structure avoids the trim by the stern and easy maneuvering of aircraft in landing. The tip of the bulb in the far back, the total length is 285 meters.
Moving the PA2 is, meanwhile, of 59,000 tons at full load (at Newbuilding). This building is lighter than the French version of CVF previously studied (65,000 tons). However, the carrying capacity of aircraft are identical, with infrastructure sized to 32 Rafale, Hawkeye 3 and 5 helicopters. "We did lose weight. This design has the previous form of an improved hull. Generally, the boat has been optimized to best meet the needs of the Navy, but in a very strong prospect of reducing costs, "said one engineer. Officially, no figures were given but, in corridors, it evokes a bill reduced by about 20%. The focus is on the budget necessary for the implementation phase, but also operations, with less maintenance and fewer crews through automation. Thus, the crew of PA2 is given to 1690 persons, of which only 900 for the conduct of the building. This is down significantly compared to Charles de Gaulle. Although smaller (261 meters, 42,000 tons) and shipping fewer devices, the current French aircraft carrier is armed with just under 2000 people (including carrier air group).
Three rows of trees and a conventionally powered
AP2 has two boilers to supply two steam catapults 90 meters long. Not yet mature and probably more costly, the concept of electromagnetic catapults, intended to equip the new U.S. aircraft carriers, was not retained. The model presented by DCNS and STX adopts an all-electric propulsion, with three diesel generators, gas turbine and three electric propulsion motors. The whole develops 85MW, 64 MW for propulsion only, which should allow the carrier to spin at 26 knots. The concept of the three rows of trees can, in case of damage to one of these lines, maintain a speed of 20 knots, sufficient to receive a large aircraft like Hawkeye despite strong constraints (no wind flaps the failed unit). For French manufacturers, the new design PA2 is the best compromise can be reached between the French industrial capacities, the cost constraints of the Department of Defense and the Navy's operational requirements. Simple and robust, using, where possible civilian technologies (equipment "COTS" shelf), PA2 revisited this makes maximum use of materials made reliable. This is particularly the case for speed cameras, with the use of Herakles, already selected for the 11 future multi-mission frigates (FREMM) of the Navy. There are also above the bridge of a surveillance radar SMART-S, sold by Thales in many navies. The defense system is also limited to two quad launchers for Aster 15 and artillery remote operated small arms.
Too expensive and the nuclear binding
Unlike the Charles de Gaulle, the design put forward by industry thus offers a conventional propulsion. The advantages of nuclear power are not challenged. This mode of propulsion offers undeniable operational advantages, limiting the need for storing ship aviation fuel, ammunition and food. It also avoids exhaust fumes could disturb the landing maneuvers. But as the experience of the current French aircraft carrier (commissioned in 2001) makes clear, the nuclear also imposes important constraints. The first is due to constraints related to nuclear safety. In peacetime, the building meets the same standards as a central EDF, except that it also serves as a floating airfield hosting bunkers and ammunition on which maneuvering aircraft carrying fuel, bombs, shells and other missiles. This concentration of risk in a small space creates a real headache for safety. Furthermore, current legislation, particularly strict, requires that any problems found to be resolved, even if the malfunction only affects one of many security systems operating in redundancy. This is what happened in mid-October with a safety valve, which required a standard exchange and, therefore, return to Toulon from Charles de Gaulle, who had sailed the previous day to its deployment in ocean India.
At the same time, nuclear propulsion is "budget-". Several comparative studies have already been mentioned about the cost of 30 or 40 years between the conventionally powered and nuclear propulsion. The second allows, of course, to overcome the cost of bunkers, that is to say hundreds of thousands of tonnes of fuel consumed by the machines during the lifetime of the building. But rarely is assessed, or poorly, the additional cost to the atom, which requires safety measures and maintenance much heavier, not counting reloads of hearts (every 7-8 years) and the invoice related to the removal facilities once the building disarmed. Moreover, if France were to opt for a second aircraft carrier with nuclear propulsion, it would probably develop new boiler, which would take time and would increase the final bill. Therefore, even if manufacturers have been working on a nuclear option and the decision remains with the head of state, it is clear that conventional propulsion seems, today, most within reach of France . "It is not for me to guide a choice between nuclear or conventional. Everyone knows the benefits of a solution and the other, including the autonomy provided by nuclear. But it is clear that if we try to have an aircraft carrier quickly and cheaply, this is not the solution that brings the nuclear response, "said Patrick Boissier, DCNS Chairman.
Finally, although this is not the main handicap, it should be noted that a nuclear-powered vessel does not enter any port. Many countries refuse indeed to welcome this type of boat, which limits the possibilities of stopovers and thus the support points and support. The sailors, who go for long missions, have also suffered from this situation, which can affect morale.
The decision referred to the next term?
In 2008, Nicolas Sarkozy said he had deferred to 2011 or 2012 the decision to build, or not, a second aircraft carrier to the Navy. The goal is always to have a second platform able to accommodate the carrier air group of Charles de Gaulle when he is off technique. This is the principle of permanence to the sea, allowing France to have any time on this tool and diplomatic force projection only. This summer, while traveling to sites STX France in Saint-Nazaire, which would be built this building, the President said that this choice would depend on the economic context and made it clear that if the timing was not more favorable, the answer would probably be negative. As we have mentioned several times, the economic argument is primarily a pretext. For an aircraft carrier, it is about "only" 2.5 billion euros of investment over 7 years, compared to 15 to 17 billion euros that the Department of Defense spends annually in credits equipment. The main problem of the aircraft carrier, is its size and especially the political symbol it represents. A program of armor, fighters or even frigates will tend to go unnoticed, even if the cost is much higher. The carrier, however, requires real political commitment, this type of command that is inevitably subject to criticism (in the spirit, "an aircraft carrier that is as high schools or hospitals that are could build ") it would be very surprising that the Elysee, the approach of the presidential election of 2012, engages in such a way. That may be why Herve Morin, the Defence Minister, has pévoqué, last week, a decision late 2012 or early 2013, that is to say to the next legislature.
Perhaps the prospects for export
If only a Franco-French, the project probably little chance of success. International arrangements can, however, give him more credit. In terms of exports, although the market for this type of building is extremely limited, markets are, why not, possible. If cooperation with Great Britain lived, some now believe a rapprochement with Brazil, which has the firm intention to establish two carrier battle groups to defend its maritime interests. For this, the Brazilian Navy, which currently only has the old Sao Paulo (former Foch French commissioned in 1963), will need in the coming years, to build two new aircraft carriers. After the historic cooperation agreement signed in 2009 between Paris and Brasilia on submarines, there may be, from this point of view, a new card to play. Outside of Brazil, two countries want to develop their carrier battle tool. First India, with which France good relations (submarines have been sold including technology transfer). New Delhi has so far done the double challenge of replacing its aging aircraft carrier by a modernization of the former Russian Admiral Gorshkov (renamed Vikramaditya) and a building constructed locally (on Vikrant). However, both projects face difficulties and fall behind.
Another track, maybe more interesting, but politically very complex international, leads in Russia. Moscow has indeed announced its intention to bring up to five carrier battle groups by 2050. However, the country no longer has the technical capacity to make such buildings, much less know-how to implement them. Except surprise, France will soon sell projection and Command (BPC) to the Russian Navy. This contract will include a significant transfer of technology, aiming to put right, with methods and preceded Western, Russian shipyards that have not been able to modernize after the collapse of the USSR. After having provided assistance to Russia for the construction of large-gate attack helicopters, France (only with the United States to control the tool carrier) would be well positioned to support the industrial and marine Russia to build and operate new aircraft carriers. Obviously, such agreements, if they became a reality one day, would only result after long periods of negotiations, not only between the two countries, but also with other allies of France, as the United States, which would probably take a very dim lights a boost up in the long run, allow Moscow to counterbalance, even if only partially, of any American power on the seas. Some will find that a Franco-Russian cooperation on aircraft carriers is an unrealistic idea. But the wheel turns and the evolving geostrategic environment. For proof, Paris and London now to reflect on nuclear cooperation, reconciliation perfectly unthinkable a few short years.
Source:
http://www.meretmarine.com/article.cfm?id=114409