There is no MASURCA ships to spare with the Argies. Because there were only three of them, two frigates plus the Colbert cruiser (that third MASURCA system was rather unlucky: it lost its frigate to 42 Crusaders, then bounced off Jeanne d'Arc to land on Colbert at least).
Do you know if the third MASURCA system also bounced off the ship that became Aconit?
I also recall (but not necessarily correctly) that 6 Suffrens were initially planned. Did the 4 unbuilt ships become Aconit and the Tourville class?
I doubt that Aconit and the Tourvilles were originally planned as additional ships of Suffren class. This is because I also recall that 5 Aconit class were originally planned, but only one had been built before it was decided that a larger ship was needed and that became the Tourville class.
I've heard that one of the reasons why the Embraer-Short Tucano won the contract to replace the Jet Provost in the RAF was to repay the Brazilian Government for helping the UK during the Falklands War.
Is that true? And if it is, what was the help that the Brazilians provided?
Not directly true.
Yes there was a desire to keep Brazil sweet and patch up any diplomatic spats post-Falklands - but by far what attracted attention was Embraer's expertise in flogging civil aircraft to emerging markets (hoping to get the Shorts 330 and 360 a leg up no doubt) and the balance of payments and hopes that they might order more UK weaponry (already had Niteroi of course and would go on to buy Lynx for them). I don't think there was any attempt to push Hawk though (Brazil happily building MB.326 copies still).
Brazil also loaned some Bandeirante MPA to the Argenitinian's during the war. They were pretty neutral. They impounded the Vulcan (and pinched the Shrike that was hanging) quite reasonably. The Tucano buy was also a bit of a gift to Shorts Bros. (who proceeded to make them all slightly different sizes...).
Short Bros. was one of Northern Ireland's biggest employers.
I suspect that keeping the firm in business was a very important factor in the selection of the Tucano. The DeLorean debacle was recent history and that was small beer compared to the economic and political consequences of Shorts going bust.
Keeping Shorts in business was always a prime concern to keep its workforce employed in what was a high unemployment area; not to mention the political consequences.
But everything with the Thatcher government comes with a twist. The files I've seen talk far more about polishing Shorts up for privatisation. A company building SAMs, airliners and trainers along with other aerostructures work was more attractive to buyers. Remember at this time the USAF had brought the Sherpa, which seemed to indicate big things.
A lot was put onto the potential links with Embraer. Indeed Shorts attempted a stretched 360 as the 450 in cooperation with Embraer in 1985 but Embraer declined to commit and ATR was pushing the segment hard anyway.
In 1987 came the FJX feederliner jet in cooperation with de Havilland Canada and this became the government's flagship project with which to make Shorts saleable. A buyer quickly came forward in 1989... Bombardier, so Shorts ended up making Canadair Regional Jet assemblies which was a direct competitor to the Shorts/DHC FJX...
As with everything related to Shorts, nothing went to plan!
Keeping Shorts in business was always a prime concern to keep its workforce employed in what was a high unemployment area; not to mention the political consequences.
But everything with the Thatcher government comes with a twist. The files I've seen talk far more about polishing Shorts up for privatisation. A company building SAMs, airliners and trainers along with other aerostructures work was more attractive to buyers. Remember at this time the USAF had brought the Sherpa, which seemed to indicate big things.
A lot was put onto the potential links with Embraer. Indeed Shorts attempted a stretched 360 as the 450 in cooperation with Embraer in 1985 but Embraer declined to commit and ATR was pushing the segment hard anyway.
In 1987 came the FJX feederliner jet in cooperation with de Havilland Canada and this became the government's flagship project with which to make Shorts saleable. A buyer quickly came forward in 1989... Bombardier, so Shorts ended up making Canadair Regional Jet assemblies which was a direct competitor to the Shorts/DHC FJX...
As with everything related to Shorts, nothing went to plan!
All I can add is that the Company had a large debt from the Belfast not selling in the expected numbers. I read that in an article in The Economist in the second half of the 1980s that was discussing the privatisation of Shorts.
I recall reading that a "Mascura Junior" system which was equivalent to the USN's Tatar/Standard MR was proposed or even reached the prototype stage. Is my recollection correct?
I recall reading that a "Masurca Junior" system which was equivalent to the USN's Tatar/Standard MR was proposed or even reached the prototype stage. Is my recollection correct?
No because I'm in "Microsoft World Hell" working on my next post.
If it's not a case of false memory syndrome I read it in The Illustrated Encyclopedia of the World's Rockets and Missiles by Bill Gunston. There might be a PDF copy of it on the internet. If you're on Scribd I advise you to look there first.
And I also advise anyone who isn't a member of Scribd to sign up as it's well worth the subscription.
French air defense ships were
- two MASURCA frigates (never remember their name, yes, Suffrens - these two. )
- a third MASURCA on Colbert (opportunistic move)
- 4*Tartar on 4*upgraded T-47
Sticky point: MASURCA was a huge and cumbersome monster like Terrier and Sea Slug. My readings of you naval experts along the year clearly show Sea Slug ships were not exactly a good bargain: big ships, rapidly obsolescent missile. MASURCA was similar, that's why not more Suffren. With one of them screwed for Crusaders, plus some more canned as too expensive.
MASURCA drove the Suffrens to 7000 tons, and that was too much for the French Navy. They were lucky to have the Colbert 12 000 tons cruiser hanging around. Plus Jeanne d'Arc as our own Victorio Venetto. The third and last cruiser - De Grasse - was too old and cramped to pull a MASURCA update (1937 hull). It ended as nuclear command ship at Moruroa before being scrapped in the early 1970's.
Every single other ship is ASW or Exocet, with air defense being gun or Crotale later. There have no clear relationship with Suffrens AFAIK.
- In the 1980's two Tartars were taken from two old T-47, send back to USA for upgrade, and mounted on the two Cassards, presently at the end of their lives with the utterly obsolete old missile.
so basically, French air defense ships in the age of missiles boils down to
- MASURCA: 2*Suffren + Colbert
- Tartar
- 4*T-47 first
- 2*Cassard later
And that's it, for Cold War. No more until the 2010's and the Horizons.
Ah yes, the "67" and "70" frigates. They were not Suffrens for air defense indeed, but 100% ASW from the keel up. My understanding is that Aconit (67) was a failure and one-shot, then same player shoot again and Tourville happened.
Ah yes, the "67" and "70" frigates. They were not Suffrens for air defense indeed, but 100% ASW from the keel up. My understanding is that Aconit (67) was a failure and one-shot, then same player shoot again and Tourville happened.
Bottom line: after 1960, all three armies were penny-pinched because of the Force de Frappe. That thing ate a truly enormous slice of the French military budget.
Plan Bleu was essentially squeezed between the Force de Frappe (before) and the oil shock + Giscard after 1974. So it never went very far.
Of course the three armies soon got the message and rushed to grab nuclear weapons to recover some of their money.
The AdA got Mirage IVA first, then Plateau d'Albion, then tactical nukes on Jaguars and III-E, then ASMP.
The Army got Pluton and Hadès missiles.
The Navy got boomers, then tac nukes on the Super Etendard (Etendard IVM couldn't lob an AN-11/21/21/52, too heavy) and then ASMP, providing the carriers with a second strike capability.
one of the few French missile accronym with a meaning, MASURCA = this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mazurka
A missile named after a freakkin' Polish dance.
Then again, not worse than a nuke called GREEN CHEESE.
- In the 1980's two Tartars were taken from two old T-47, send back to USA for upgrade, and mounted on the two Cassards, presently at the end of their lives with the utterly obsolete old missile.
According to 1980s editions of Jane's the Cassard class was terminated at 2 ships because the Americans decided to stop making the Standard SM-1 missile.
I think a couple others were canned on cost grounds - on top of what you mention.
I have to say that, compared to the countless SEA-something missile British missile frigates (sea cat, sea slug, sea dart and the like) the french missile ships seems to be quite few. A paltry MASURCA with some Tartar on top...
Yup, but that's the moment when Crusaders crashed the party. It went the following way
- third Suffren or 42 Crusaders ? cheese or cake, but not both
- French navy top brass is badly split and bickering (Foch and Clem too small for self air defense, leave the job to moar Suffrens you dummy - nah, missile are dumbs against snoopers - what, Etendard IVM can handle snoopers. No, they can't: not subsonic with no radar and few AAMs. On and on it goes into circles, the debate - Blah blah blah, as would say Greta Thunberg).
- De Gaulle is angry, then reminds he knows one sailor he can fully trust: his son Philippe (presently 101 years old, still alive and kicking)
- De Gaulle asks his son, son says "Crusaders, screw Suffren, MASURCA is an expensive dud, 42 interceptors a better bargain"
- De Gaulle kick the navy rear end, and Crusader it is
- Angry French Admiral badly burned by his meeting with De Gaulle, tells one pilot toying with the shiny new Crusader "Sure, look at it well. Because this is the last time, before a helluva long time, you will get new interceptors."
The year was 1964 and surely enough, took 35 years to 1999 to replace the Crouzes.
Yup, but that's the moment when Crusaders crashed the party. It went the following way
- third Suffren or 42 Crusaders ? cheese or cake, but not both
- French navy top brass is badly split and bickering (Foch and Clem too small for self air defense, leave the job to more Suffrens you dummy - nah, missile are dumbs against snoopers - what, Etendard IVM can handle snoopers. No, they can't: not subsonic with no radar and few AAMs. On and on it goes into circles, the debate - Blah blah blah, as would say Greta Thunberg).
- De Gaulle is angry, then reminds he knows one sailor he can fully trust: his son Philippe (presently 101 years old, still alive and kicking)
- De Gaulle asks his son, son says "Crusaders, screw Suffren, MASURCA is an expensive dud, 42 interceptors a better bargain"
- De Gaulle kick the navy rear end, and Crusader it is
- Angry French Admiral badly burned by his meeting with De Gaulle, tells one pilot toying with the shiny new Crusader "Sure, look at it well. Because this is the last time, before a helluva long time, you will get new interceptors."
The year was 1964 and surely enough, took 35 years to 1999 to replace the Crouzes.
The Argentine Type 42s were ordered in 1970 and completed in 1976 and 1981 respectively.
I don't see why French industry can't make another pair of Masurca systems for the French substitutes. That would help the French because the R&D cost would be spread over 5 systems instead of 3. It might also reduce the running costs by spreading the overheads over 5 systems instead of 3.
Although it would be better if they are armed with the (possibly mythical) Masurca Junior which was equivalent to Tatar/Standard MR.
I was going to suggest (as a joke) that the Argentines pay for the ships in corned beef rather than Argentine Pesos, but I suspect that the French don't know what corned beef is. Which was the punch line of the joke because I doubt that it meets the higher standards of Gallic cuisine.
The closest you might come is to sell two Georges Leygues class frigates to Argentina which should be in service by March 82.
Crotale is closer to Seawolf than Seadart but otherwise not bad.
To give Argentina another carrier you could let them have Arromanches.
As it happens I imagined the 2 destroyers as the AA version of C70, but armed with Masurca Junior instead of Standard MR.
As already noted the Argentines bought their Type 42s in 1970 and were completed in 1976 and 1981 respectively. These are the order and delivery dates for the 2 French destroyers that would be purchased in their place.
I also thought they'd buy 4-6 C70AS in place of the MEKO 360H2 and 6 A69s to go with the 3 they bought in the "real world" in place of the 6 MEKO 140s.
Which was an anti-ship missile and there was another missile named after the macguffin in Beau Jeste.
Red Shoes, Red Duster, Orange Nell and Orange William were missile projects.
Red Shoes was also the name of a 1950s film made by Powell and Pressburger that I can highly recommend. Robert Helpmann would go on to be The Child Catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang was in it.
There was also Violet Club a high-yield atom bomb. Club's a good name for an atom bomb, but Violet is a common girl's name as well as a colour.
However, Yellow Sun is a brilliant name for a hydrogen bomb. Except the point of the Rainbow Codes naming system was that the name didn't reveal the function.
It's not long after the Argentines scrapped Independencia, which was refitted to a similar standard to Arromanches when it was HMS Warrior. As far as I know they were in the same material condition in 1971 so the Argentines would keep Independencia if they wanted a second carrier.
Furthermore, Bonaventure might have been available (that is if the Canadian Government was willing to sell it) so the Argentines would have preferred to buy her as she had a steam catapult and had recently completed the 1960s version of a SLEP refit.
The only way that I can see Argentina buying Arromanches is to provide a source of spare parts.
I don't remember this being asked before and haven't checked the thread to see if it has.
Does swapping France with the UK mean that the latter doesn't sell 2 Type 42 destroyers to Argentina and in their place the former sells 2 Masurca armed destroyers to Argentina instead?
Does it also mean that France doesn't sell Super Etendards, 3 A69 corvettes and Exocet missiles to Argentina? What do the British sell in their place. I was going to say Buccaneers and Martels in place of the Super Etendards and AM39 Exocets but I doubt that the Argentine aircraft carrier could cope with the Buccaneer.
...the second Argentines carrier would be Hermes before her conversion into a commando carrier whose place in the Royal Navy after 1973 would be taken by Albion.
Yup, but that's the moment when Crusaders crashed the party. It went the following way
- third Suffren or 42 Crusaders ? cheese or cake, but not both
- French navy top brass is badly split and bickering (Foch and Clem too small for self air defense, leave the job to more Suffrens you dummy - nah, missile are dumbs against snoopers - what, Etendard IVM can handle snoopers. No, they can't: not subsonic with no radar and few AAMs. On and on it goes into circles, the debate - Blah blah blah, as would say Greta Thunberg).
- De Gaulle is angry, then reminds he knows one sailor he can fully trust: his son Philippe (presently 101 years old, still alive and kicking)
- De Gaulle asks his son, son says "Crusaders, screw Suffren, MASURCA is an expensive dud, 42 interceptors a better bargain"
- De Gaulle kick the navy rear end, and Crusader it is
- Angry French Admiral badly burned by his meeting with De Gaulle, tells one pilot toying with the shiny new Crusader "Sure, look at it well. Because this is the last time, before a helluva long time, you will get new interceptors."
The year was 1964 and surely enough, took 35 years to 1999 to replace the Crouzes.
The Argentine Type 42s were ordered in 1970 and completed in 1976 and 1981 respectively.
I don't see why French industry can't make another pair of Masurca systems for the French substitutes. That would help the French because the R&D cost would be spread over 5 systems instead of 3. It might also reduce the running costs by spreading the overheads over 5 systems instead of 3.
Although it would be better if they are armed with the (possibly mythical) Masurca Junior which was equivalent to Tatar/Standard MR.
I was going to suggest (as a joke) that the Argentines pay for the ships in corned beef rather than Argentine Pesos, but I suspect that the French don't know what corned beef is. Which was the punch line of the joke because I doubt that it meets the higher standards of Gallic cuisine.
Which was an anti-ship missile and there was another missile named after the macguffin in Beau Jeste.
Red Shoes, Red Duster, Orange Nell and Orange William were missile projects.
Red Shoes was also the name of a 1950s film made by Powell and Pressburger that I can highly recommend. Robert Helpmann would go on to be The Child Catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang was in it.
There was also Violet Club a high-yield atom bomb. Club's a good name for an atom bomb, but Violet is a common girl's name as well as a colour.
However, Yellow Sun is a brilliant name for a hydrogen bomb. Except the point of the Rainbow Codes naming system was that the name didn't reveal the function.
About 10 years later Bonnie Langford had the misfortune to play Mel Bush, the worst Doctor Who companion ever written. She was the stereotypical utterly useless female character who did nothing but scream. Writing her out in favour of Ace (one of the best Doctor Who companions ever written) was a mercy killing.
That's no criticism on Ms Langford personally or of her acting ability. She made the best of a bad character. And if there was an award for best screamer in Doctor Who she'd win it hands down.
Which was an anti-ship missile and there was another missile named after the macguffin in Beau Jeste.
Red Shoes, Red Duster, Orange Nell and Orange William were missile projects.
Red Shoes was also the name of a 1950s film made by Powell and Pressburger that I can highly recommend. Robert Helpmann would go on to be The Child Catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang was in it.
There was also Violet Club a high-yield atom bomb. Club's a good name for an atom bomb, but Violet is a common girl's name as well as a colour.
However, Yellow Sun is a brilliant name for a hydrogen bomb. Except the point of the Rainbow Codes naming system was that the name didn't reveal the function.
Yup, but that's the moment when Crusaders crashed the party. It went the following way
- third Suffren or 42 Crusaders ? cheese or cake, but not both
- French navy top brass is badly split and bickering (Foch and Clem too small for self air defense, leave the job to more Suffrens you dummy - nah, missile are dumbs against snoopers - what, Etendard IVM can handle snoopers. No, they can't: not subsonic with no radar and few AAMs. On and on it goes into circles, the debate - Blah blah blah, as would say Greta Thunberg).
- De Gaulle is angry, then reminds he knows one sailor he can fully trust: his son Philippe (presently 101 years old, still alive and kicking)
- De Gaulle asks his son, son says "Crusaders, screw Suffren, MASURCA is an expensive dud, 42 interceptors a better bargain"
- De Gaulle kick the navy rear end, and Crusader it is
- Angry French Admiral badly burned by his meeting with De Gaulle, tells one pilot toying with the shiny new Crusader "Sure, look at it well. Because this is the last time, before a helluva long time, you will get new interceptors."
The year was 1964 and surely enough, took 35 years to 1999 to replace the Crouzes.
The Argentine Type 42s were ordered in 1970 and completed in 1976 and 1981 respectively.
I don't see why French industry can't make another pair of Masurca systems for the French substitutes. That would help the French because the R&D cost would be spread over 5 systems instead of 3. It might also reduce the running costs by spreading the overheads over 5 systems instead of 3.
Although it would be better if they are armed with the (possibly mythical) Masurca Junior which was equivalent to Tatar/Standard MR.
I was going to suggest (as a joke) that the Argentines pay for the ships in corned beef rather than Argentine Pesos, but I suspect that the French don't know what corned beef is. Which was the punch line of the joke because I doubt that it meets the higher standards of Gallic cuisine.
Which was an anti-ship missile and there was another missile named after the macguffin in Beau Jeste.
Red Shoes, Red Duster, Orange Nell and Orange William were missile projects.
Red Shoes was also the name of a 1950s film made by Powell and Pressburger that I can highly recommend. Robert Helpmann would go on to be The Child Catcher in Chitty Chitty Bang Bang was in it.
There was also Violet Club a high-yield atom bomb. Club's a good name for an atom bomb, but Violet is a common girl's name as well as a colour.
However, Yellow Sun is a brilliant name for a hydrogen bomb. Except the point of the Rainbow Codes naming system was that the name didn't reveal the function.
Today I realised that I've misspelt MASURCA as MASCURA for 30-plus years. I frequently misread my misspelling as mascara which I found amusing.
I also misspelt Georges Leygues as Georges Legumes for a very long time and knowing what legumes meant in French amused me too.
In a similar vein British people who learn to speak German are amused to learn that former Chancellor of Germany Helmut Kohl was Mister Cabbage. (I know because I am one of them.)
That and British people find Helmut amusing because it sounds like Helmet.
Yup, but that's the moment when Crusaders crashed the party. It went the following way
- third Suffren or 42 Crusaders ? cheese or cake, but not both
- French navy top brass is badly split and bickering (Foch and Clem too small for self air defense, leave the job to more Suffrens you dummy - nah, missile are dumbs against snoopers - what, Etendard IVM can handle snoopers. No, they can't: not subsonic with no radar and few AAMs. On and on it goes into circles, the debate - Blah blah blah, as would say Greta Thunberg).
- De Gaulle is angry, then reminds he knows one sailor he can fully trust: his son Philippe (presently 101 years old, still alive and kicking)
- De Gaulle asks his son, son says "Crusaders, screw Suffren, MASURCA is an expensive dud, 42 interceptors a better bargain"
- De Gaulle kick the navy rear end, and Crusader it is
- Angry French Admiral badly burned by his meeting with De Gaulle, tells one pilot toying with the shiny new Crusader "Sure, look at it well. Because this is the last time, before a helluva long time, you will get new interceptors."
The year was 1964 and surely enough, took 35 years to 1999 to replace the Crouzes.
The Argentine Type 42s were ordered in 1970 and completed in 1976 and 1981 respectively.
I don't see why French industry can't make another pair of Masurca systems for the French substitutes. That would help the French because the R&D cost would be spread over 5 systems instead of 3. It might also reduce the running costs by spreading the overheads over 5 systems instead of 3.
Although it would be better if they are armed with the (possibly mythical) Masurca Junior which was equivalent to Tatar/Standard MR.
I was going to suggest (as a joke) that the Argentines pay for the ships in corned beef rather than Argentine Pesos, but I suspect that the French don't know what corned beef is. Which was the punch line of the joke because I doubt that it meets the higher standards of Gallic cuisine.
Suffen was completed in 1967, Duquesne in 1970 Colbert received her Masurca in a refit that lasted from 1970 to 1972 which suggests that the system was still in production in 1970.
I don't see why restarting Masurca production in 1970 would be too hard even if the Argentinian order was received after production to meet French contracts had been terminated. Especially for the "right price" as it's known scientifically.
I don't see why the naval dockyards at Brest and Lorient that built the Suffrens couldn't build 2 more for export in the 1970s. They've got the ability to build the hulls because Lorient built 3 Tourvilles of similar size between 1970 and 1977. They've got the ability to build the steam turbines because 3 sets of steam turbines were built for the Tourvilles between 1970 and 1977.
Not going to happen on account of the age of the hull.
And it wouldn't be worth the loss of 6" guns that would have to be removed.
However, if they were going to do that better to fit it to Nueve de Julio her sister which was decommissioned at the end of 1977 but not scrapped until 1983.
The lady on the interview panel was played by Kelly Brook, known to me as The Chatham Chest because a) she's from Chatham and b) because she has a large...
The C70 programme was like a penis. - It went up and down.
Originally there were 3 ships in the 1970-75 New Construction Plan.
Which by 1973 had been increased to 24 (initially 12 AS & 12 AA and then 18 AS & 6 AA) to be completed by 1985 under Plan Bleu
Which by 1979 had been reduced to 9 ships (6 AS and 3 AA)
Which by 1982 had been increased to 12 ships (8 AS and 4 AA) to completed by 1990.
Which by 1988 had been reduced to the 9 ships (7 AS and 2 AA) that were actually built. The last was completed in 1991.
My "by" dates refer to the relevant edition of Jane's Fighting Ships. E.g. 24 C70 first appears in Jane's Fighting Ships 1973-74.
You're probably referring to the 8th C70AS which was cancelled as an economy measure. It was cancelled somewhere between 1983 and 1984. That's because Jane's 1982-83 says 8 C70AA were planned, 1983-84 isn't on Internet Archive and 1984-85 is the first edition to say that the 8th C70AS was cancelled as an economy measure.
It turned out that I was telling porkies by saying that the 3rd and 4th C70AA were cancelled because the Americans decided to stop making the SM-1 missile.
Unlike the 8th C70AS they were actually ordered (both on 27th April 1984) and received names (Courbert and Chevalier Paul). The Jane's for 1984-85 says that all 4 ships were to be armed with the Mk 13 GMLS removed from the T47 destroyers. It also says that the third and fourth ships were to be laid down at Lorient Naval Dockyard in 1984 for completion in 1993 and 1994.
Jane's 1985-86 isn't on Internet Archive.
Jane's 1986-87 says that they were laid down at Lorient Naval Dockyard in May 1986 & May 1987, would be launched in 1989 & 1990 and were due to complete in 1993 & 1994. It also says that they would be armed with a VLS firing Standard SM-2 missiles.
Jane's 1987-88 doesn't say that they had been laid down or when they would be launched, but it did say that the projected completion dates were still 1993 and 1994. They still to be armed with a VLS firing Standard SM-2 missiles.
However, Jane's 1988-89 says that they had been postponed indefinitely pending the availability of the Aster VLS. It also said that the C70AA building programme had been slowed down considerably by finance problems and doubts about the increasingly obsolescent SM-1 missile system.
Jane's 1989-90 also says that they had been postponed indefinitely pending the availability of the Aster VLS. It also said that the C70AA building programme had been slowed down considerably by finance problems and doubts about the increasingly obsolescent SM-1 missile system, and the SM-2 is reported as being too expensive.
Jane's 1990-91 said exactly the same as the previous edition. I didn't go further to find their formal date of cancellation.
I recall reading that a "Masurca Junior" system which was equivalent to the USN's Tatar/Standard MR was proposed or even reached the prototype stage. Is my recollection correct?
No because I'm in "Microsoft World Hell" working on my next post.
If it's not a case of false memory syndrome I read it in The Illustrated Encyclopedia of the World's Rockets and Missiles by Bill Gunston. There might be a PDF copy of it on the internet. If you're on Scribd I advise you to look there first.
And I also advise anyone who isn't a member of Scribd to sign up as it's well worth the subscription.
I was wrong. It was false memory syndrome because my copy of The Illustrated Encyclopedia of the World's Rockets and Missiles by Bill Gunston says no such thing.
Although one would think that the picture of the missile mounted on a single-arm launcher was a Standard ER if it wasn't for the accompanying caption saying that it was a Masurca. Remove the booster and the result is a missile that looks suspiciously like a Tatar or Standard MR.
Therefore, there's no proof that there ever was a proposal for a "Masurca Junior" but I think there could and should have been.
I recall reading that a "Masurca Junior" system which was equivalent to the USN's Tatar/Standard MR was proposed or even reached the prototype stage. Is my recollection correct?
No because I'm in "Microsoft World Hell" working on my next post.
If it's not a case of false memory syndrome I read it in The Illustrated Encyclopedia of the World's Rockets and Missiles by Bill Gunston. There might be a PDF copy of it on the internet. If you're on Scribd I advise you to look there first.
And I also advise anyone who isn't a member of Scribd to sign up as it's well worth the subscription.
I was wrong. It was false memory syndrome because my copy of The Illustrated Encyclopedia of the World's Rockets and Missiles by Bill Gunston says no such thing.
Although one would think that the picture of the missile mounted on a single-arm launcher was a Standard ER if it wasn't for the accompanying caption saying that it was a Mascura. Remove the booster and the result is a missile that looks suspiciously like a Tatar or Standard MR.
Therefore, there's no proof that there ever was a proposal for a "Mascura Junior" but I think there could and should have been.
However there was AMCA being Command Guidance. Cancelled in the late 50'sin favour of HAWK. Essentially a sort of larger Nord AS.37 as a short range defensive SAM.
Ironically had they got the UKs computer companies behind it, it could have been formidable.
And the Contrevenes series of SAMs leading upto Micron. Earlier versions did feature as options for export cruisers by UK firms.
In the "real world" France had Les Trente Glorieuses of economic growth from 1945 to 1975. What if it had been Les Quarante Glorieuses by continuing until 1985?
And what if that had allowed Plan Bleu to be completed in full and on schedule? That is by 1985. What would the strength of the French Fleet be in the spring of 1982?
Personnel
Jane's Fighting Ships 1972-73 to 1979-80 say that personnel is to be increased by 5,000 under the 15-year plan. The MN's personnel strength in 1972 was 68,308 (from Jane's 1972-73) and in 1982 it was 69,130 all ranks in 1982 (from Jane's 1982-83). Therefore I think the MN would have had between 74 and 75,000 personnel in 1982 if Plan Bleu had been on schedule.
Ships and Aircraft
The first edition of Jane's that has the numbers of ships and aircraft planned in 1985 is 1973-74, which contains the following table.
This programme provides for the following fleet by 1985
This table is repeated in Jane's 1974-75.
The only difference in the equivalent tables in Jane's 1975-76 and 1976-77 it that number of SSBN is increased from 5 to 6.
Internet Archive doesn't have Jane's 1977-78.
Jane's 1978-79 says financial problems had added one year to the 1971-75 New Construction Plan and that this Plan and the 1977-81 Plan combined would not achieve the Plan Bleu strength.
The reduced Plan Bleu of 1977 provided for the following fleet by 1985
12 Fleet Submarines is the number eventually planned rather than the number to be in service in 1985. The first SSN wasn't laid down until 1976 and at 1977 wasn't scheduled to enter service until 1981-82. The second SSN was ordered in 1977 and wouldn't be laid down until 1979.
This is also the version of Plan Bleu in Jane's 1979-80.
There's no mention of Plan Bleu in Jane's 1980-81.
Internet Archive doesn't have Jane's 1981-82.
Jane's Fighting Ships 1982-83 doesn't mention Plan Bleu either. However, it does have this table.
Planned Fleet Strength For 2000
The 2 nuclear powered aircraft carriers must be the pair announced in 1980 to replace Clemenceau and Foch. The first ship to be named Bretagne was to be laid down at Brest in 1983 and replace Clemenceau in 1990. The second ship to be named Provence would replace Foch some years later. Except that isn't what happened.
Transport de Chalaud Debarquement" or TCD was what the French called a Landing Ship Dock (LSD). The French had 2 ships of this type in 1982 so an increase to 3 ships was planned and indeed was carried out. The 2 existing ships were the Ouragan class of 5,800 tons standard. These ships were diesel powered.
A Baitment de Transport or BATRAL was a diesel powered Landing Craft Tank (LCT) displacing 750 tons standard. The MN had 3 in 1982 with another under construction and 2 more were planned.
I think it's notable that no replacements for the 5 existing LSTs were in the table. These ships were completed 1960-61, had a standard displacement of 1,400 tons and were diesel powered.
The 6 Baitments de Soutien Logistique (BSL) were probably the maintenance and repair ship Jules Verne of 6,485 tons standard displacement and the 5 Rhin class depot ships of 2,075 tons standard displacement. Jane's 1982-83 said Jules Verne was to be deployed to the Indian Ocean in 1982. Both classes were diesel powered.
Baitment Ateliers Polyvalent (BAT) literally means "multipurpose workshop buildings" according to Google Translate. I don't see any ships like this in the 1982-83 edition of Jane's. These might have evolved into the Bâtiment de Transport et de Soutien (BTS) because my personal copy of Jane's Fighting Ships 1986-87 shows that two of these were on order. Although only one was built. This diesel powered ship, the Bougainville, was ordered in 1984, laid down in 1986, launched in 1986 and completed in 1988.
The changes in order of importance to the thread
5 Replenishment Tankers
I think that the first Durance class Replenishment Tanker would have augmented the existing force of four ships and then the following four Durance class ships would have replaced by the four existing tankers. That increases the total number of tankers available in the spring of 1982 from four to five and after discounting the two tankers in the Indian Ocean increases the number of ships available to support the Task Force from two to three.
Increased funding in general and not adding a year to the 1971-75 New Construction Plan in particular might mean that the tanker Port Vendres was acquired a year or two earlier which would increase the total number of tankers available in the spring of 1982 from four to six and double the number of ships available to support the Task Force from two to four. However, this is probably wishful thinking on my part.
30 Frigates or Corvettes
24 C70 frigates were planned by 1985 from Jane's 1973-74 to 1978-79. This was reduced to 9 ships (6 AS and 3 AA) in 1979-80 and 1980-81. Jane's 1981-82 isn't on Internet Archive. However, it has been increased to 12 ships (8 AS and 4 AA) in Jane's 1982-83. When 24 units were planned the mix was initially to have been 12 AS & 12 AA and then altered to 18 AS & 6 AA. However, it's unlikely that any C70AA would have been ready by the spring of 1982 in either version of the plan.
The first ship was scheduled to be completed in 1978 so an average of 3 ships a year had to be built to completed all 24 ships by the end of 1985. (1978-85 = 8 years and 24 ÷ 8 = 3) Therefore, 12 C70AS would be available in the spring of 1982.
According to the "real" Jane's Fighting Ships 1982-83 the MN had 19 "destroyers" made up of 2 Suffren class, 3 Tourville class, 3 Georges Leygues class, Aconit, 3 T47 DDG (2 SPG-51, one Mk 13 launcher and 40 SM-1 missiles) and 6 destroyers of the 47/43/62 type fitted for ASW.
In "this timeline" Jane's 1982-83 would have shown 30 "destroyers" made up of 2 Suffren class, 3 Tourville class, 12 Georges Leygues class completed 1978-81, Aconit, 3 T47 DDG and 9 destroyers of the 47/53/56 type fitted for ASW.
In the "real world" there were 3 Masurca armed ships (including the cruiser Colbert), 3 Standard MR armed ships (the 3 T47s) and 6 Crotale armed ships (the 3 Tourvilles and 3 Georges Leygues) but in this "version of history" there were 3 Masurca, 3 Standard MR and 15 Crotale armed ships.
Carrier Borne Aircraft
Editions of Jane's from the late 1970s and early 1980s say that due to financial restrictions one of the Clemenceau class carriers was operating as an ASW helicopter carrier with a reduced crew but they also say that both ships were fully operational fixed wing aircraft carriers from mid-1981. They also say that a full-strength air group was 40 fixed wing aircraft and 4 helicopters which comprised 10 Crusaders, 16 Super Etendards, 4 Etendard IVP, 10 Alizés, 2 Super Frelons and 2 Alouette IIIs with the fixed wing aircraft organised into fights of 10 machines.
However, the tables in Posts 172 and 173 show that one of the two Crusader flotilles converted to Super Etendards in 1979 and that due to Flotille 15F disbanding in 1969 the total was only 5 flights including one equipped with Etendard IVP reconnaissance aircraft. Would the French have been able to send Clemenceau and Foch to the Falklands with full-strength air groups in 1982? Or would one of them have to have a third flight of Super Etendards in place of the Crusader flight.
100 Super Etendards were planned in the "real world" but the total built was cut to 71. I'm guessing that some of the 29 cancelled aircraft would have been reconnaissance versions to replace the Etendard IVP. In this "version of history" 100 Super Etendards are built and some of the extra aircraft were reconnaissance versions that replaced the Etendard IVP. Furthermore, Flotille 15F reformed on Super Etendards in 1979 because Flotille 14F keept its Crusaders. This meant that there were 6 flotilles (2 fighter, 3 attack and one reconnaissance) in the spring of 1982 instead of 5 (one fighter, 3 attack and one reconnaissance) that really existed at that time.
The Crusader flotilles were maintained at full strength with an attrition batch purchased in the late 1970s. They were "low mileage" F-8E aircraft purchased from the USN and converted to F-8E(FN) standard by LTV.
Thus in April 1982 Clemenceau an Foch sailed from Toulon with full*strength air groups of 40 fixed wing aircraft and 4 helicopters, i.e. 10 Crusaders, 20 Super Etendards (16 attack and 4 reconnaissance), 10 Alizés, 2 Super Frelons and 2 Alouette III.
The French might send replacement aircraft to the forward base in South Georgia as deck cargo on one of the requisitioned merchant ships and use a crane ship to transfer them to the carriers.
2 Helicopter Carriers
Jane's 1972-73 and 1973-74 don't mention PH75. The first reference to the ship is in Jane's 1974-75 which says:
It was announced on 22 Jan 1974 that a nuclear powered aircraft carrier of some 18,00 tons would be laid down in 1975 to be completed in 1980. It is suggested that this ship might carry Harriers as well as helicopters.
Jane's 1975-76 has half-a-page on the ship saying that its trials were due in 1979 for service in 1980. The air group was 25 Lynx or 15 Puma or 10 Super Frelon. Passenger accommodation was provided for 1,000 with more austere accommodation on portable bunks for an extra 500 in the garage (forward of the hangar). Jane's 1976-77 has the same technical details, but trials and service had slipped to 1980 and 1981.
Jane's 1977-78 isn't on Internet Archive.
Jane's 1978-79 and 1979-80 both say that although the original plan allowed for her completion in 1980 the new 1977-81 plan states that she will not be laid down until 1981 although the technical details for the ship (now designated PA75) are the same as in 1975-76 and 1976-77.
Jane's 1980-81 has a note that says.
The nuclear carrier PA75 has been further postponed and is therefore no longer listed. Details in Jane's 1978-80 page 165.
In this "version of history" PH75 is laid down in 1975, underwent its trials in 1979 and was completed in 1980.
None of the above mention plans for a second PH75 class ship so I think the second helicopter carrier was Jeanne d' Arc. Although all the Jane's up to and including 1978-79 say she was a cruiser with 1972-73 calling her a Helicopter Cruiser (Croisseur Porte-Hélicoptère). Only Jane's 1979-80 and 1980-81 call the ship a helicopter carrier.
The lists of ships in Plan Bleu don't mention any guided missile cruisers, which suggest that PH75 was intended to replace Colbert. Or it wasn't included by accident. Or it was in the 30 frigates & corvettes and someone forgot to write cruisers, frigates and corvettes.
All of the above editions of say the following about Jeanne d' Arc.
In wartime, after rapid modification, she would be used as a commando ship, helicopter carrier, or troop transport with commando equipment and a battalion of 700 men.
Therefore, she and PH75 would form the core of the amphibious group.
Finally, as PA75 was nuclear powered she'd only need fuel for her helicopters which would reduce her logistical impact.
35 Avisos
My guess is that these would have been the 9 Commandant Rivière class and 26 A69s. Jane's Fighting Ships 1982-83 says that 9 Commandant Rivière class and 15 A69s were available in 1982 which makes a total of 24. I think the 11 additional A69s would be completed 1983-85 and that in the spring of 1982 the numbers would have been made up by retaining 11 of the 14 Le Normand class frigates that were completed 1956-60.
The Le Nomands weren't fast enough to work with Clemenceau and Foch but they'd be fine escorting the amphibious ships, tankers and the requisitioned merchant ships. Their gun armament of six 57mm in three twin turrets might be better in the AA role than the three single 100mm in the later ships.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
