Official: France to get a second aircraft carrier

[fantassin]

It's been announced tonight that Jacques Chirac has decided that France's second aircraft carrier will be built jointly with the UK. All together, three similar hulls should be built.

It will be bigger than the Charles de Gaulle but it wont use nuclear power.

It will use catapults to launch the Rafale multi role fighters that are currently entering service.

The in service date has not been announced but can be expected for around 2015

[Sixgun Symphony]

The first name of this aircraft carrier was "Richelieu" but for political reasons it has been renamed Charles de Gaulle (under Jacques Chirac's government) after the famous WWII general.

*source* (http://frenchnavy.free.fr/ships/aircraft-carrier/charles-de-gaulle/cdg.htm)



Ainsi pourquoi appelé a-t-il été changé? Sûrement Richelieu était autant d'un géant comme de Gaulle?

[ShadowNeo]

Maybe Chirac didn't think so. Not that the name is of much concern anyway. When you say it is being built jointly with the UK, is this referring to UK contractors or a joint project with the MoD?

[BlackRain]

Just curious?

What does France need aircraft carriers for anymore?

Status of Current French Carrier Fleet

CV FOCH (R 99): She was retired from French service in October 2000. It will be upgraded in French shipyards and operated by the Brazilian Navy (Marinha do Brazil).

CV CLEMENCEAU (R 98): The Clemenceau was discommissioned on October 1st 1997, it has been replaced by the CVN Charles de Gaulle. She is now moored in Toulon harbor (naval cemetery) and will be transferred with the CV Foch to Brazil as a spares magazine ship.

CVN CHARLES DE GAULLE (R 91): The Charles De Gaulle is a 38,000 ton, nuclear powered French aircraft carrier launched in May 1994. The Charles de Gaulle was officially handed over to the French Navy on 28 September 2000. The ship operates a fleet of 40 Rafale M combat aircraft, the Super Etendard and three E-2C Hawkeye airborne early warning aircraft. The ship also supports the AS 565 Panther and Dauphin helicopters.

http://membres.lycos.fr/haristo1/CDG003.jpg

Left to right: ITS Maestrale (F 570), FS De Grasse (D 612), USS John C. Stennis (CVN 74), USS Port Royal (CG 73), FS Charles de Gaulle (R 91), HMS Ocean (L 12), FS Surcouf (F 711), USS John F. Kennedy (CV 67), HNLMS Van Amstel (F 831), and ITS Luigi Durand de la Penne (D 560)

[Rantanplan]

http://membres.lycos.fr/haristo1/CDG003.jpg

What is that? The no germans allowed fleet!?!?!?!

[Smoothie104]

I heard they are building the New French Navy with glass bottom boats, does anyone know why?

[Operation Ivy]

Why is thing not going to be nuclear powered? :|

And how many carriers does the US have?

[Praxus32]

We have twelve Super Carriers plus another twelve Wasp and Tarawa Class Amphibious Assault ships capable of carrying 20 Harriers +6 Helicopters(more then British Invincible Class Carriers).

[fantassin]

The new carrier should be the fruit of a joint project with the UK in order to reduce costs for the two parties involved.

The hull will be similar for the two countries but the bridge should be quite different since FR uses conventional catapult-launched aircrafts (Rafale, Super Etendards and Hawkeyes E2F) and the UK should then be using the VSTOL version of the F35.

The main contractor should be the UK part of the French company Thales.

It's a big step forward for the European defence even though I am sure it will lead, as always, to a lot of bickering on both sides of the Channel.

As far as the propulsion mode, nuclear power is more expensive and it would have also closed the door to a joint UK/FR project.

[Jack Mehoff]

How many countries have aircraft carriers?

I know US, UK, France, India, China(?), Russia all have at least one.

Who else?

[Uninen]

Brazil, Spain, Italy, Thailand.. maybe some others also..

*Edit*

China does not have a single carrier.. they may have some in the future, but as of now, their only carrier functions as floating Casino.. and even that was bought from Russia.. :)

[fantassin]

[quoteWhat does France need aircraft carriers for anymore?[/quote]


To evacuate over a hundred stranded US citizens from Liberia like in 2003 for example; or to bomb Taliban positions in Afghanistan in 2002, or Hizballah positions in the Lebanon in 1983...just a few examples.

[Uninen]

Yeah..

Frances navy and foreign legion are always kept busy in Africa, their wars in there are just not talked much about.. :)

[fantassin]

It's true but it's not JUST the foreign legion that goes overseas.

The French army has been an all regular force for several years now and every unit can be deployed.

It sounds sexyer to say "foreign legion" all the time but it's just not true; the FR army has 20 Infantry Bn, only two are FL.

In Ivory Coast at the moment, all the infantry units are line, mechanized infantry units but in a "light" (VAB APCs and trucks) role.

In Kabul, it's a constant rotation between line, airborne and marine units.

The FL has only 2 inf Bn, 2 Engineers Bn and 1 Cavalry Bn; the other units are either training or depot units. Those units permanently based overseas are "skeleton" units with generally one rifle Co and one HQ Co ready to take on reinforcements coming from France in case of needs.

[MARK.TIGGER]

I think the French and the Royal Navy will be lucky to see the new carriers as I think its going to end up another CVA 01.
A carrier designed in the 1960'6/70's to replace the British large carriers where effectivly the treasury called the shots in everything it was eventually dropped.
And as the British chancellors sums don't add up there will be huge budget cuts mainly from the defence budget because the sacred cows of education, Health and social security couldn't be asked to cut their budgets. ANd Big defence projects like Carriers will be the first to go. Any way for the British to get the carrier it will need aircraft and if the democrats are elected i would say they'll cut the defense budget so bye bye JSF STOVL.

[oldsoak]

I hope MARK.TIGGER is wrong, but he could well be proven right. However, I think the French may well build without us if we opt out. Be a rather obvious way to rub it in when they have new build CV's to our erm... none. Besides they have consistenly demonstrated an ability to go it alone - and they may yet do it again.

[fantassin]

Tony Blair has phoned Jacques Chirac yesterday to congratulate him on that choice (which was also, BTW, the French navy's choice).

The hull of the French CV could be laid in Saint Nazaire, in the shipyard where the Queen Mary II was built.

[Praxus32]

I wonder if they will ever get the second one to work :D

[fantassin]

It worked (and works) well enough to bomb the Talibans.

From globalsecurity.org

Charles de Gaulle


The Charles De Gaulle is a 38,000 ton, nuclear powered French aircraft carrier launched in May 1994 The ship operates a fleet of 40 Rafale M combat aircraft, the Super Etendard and three E-2C Hawkeye airborne early warning aircraft. The ship also supports the AS 565 Panther and Dauphin helicopters. There are two lifts, measuring 19 x 13 m, which have a load capacity of 36 tons. The hangar has a floor area of 140 x 30 metres and a height 6.1 metres. It accommodates 20 to 25 aircraft. The main deck consists of a main runway angled at 8.5 degrees to the ship's axis and an aircraft launch area forward of the island. The runway and the forward launch area are each equipped with a USN Type C13 catapult rated to handle aircraft up to 22 tonnes and capable of launching one aircraft per minute. The runway is 195 metres long and the whole deck measures 260 x 64 metres.

The ship's weapons are managed by a Senit Combat Management System, CMS Model 8. The system has the capacity to track up to 2,000 friendly and hostile targets. The weapon control system consists of two Sagem Vigy 105 optronic directors. The ship has two Sagem Vampir search and track systems. The ship is fitted with the Aster 15 surface-to-air missile launchers, Sylver vertical launch systems, installed on the edge of the deck, with two launchers (16 cells) on the starboard side forward of the bridge and two launchers on the port side aft of the bridge. The ship has two six-cell Sadral launching systems for the Mistral missile positioned on the edges of the main deck about 45 metres (starboard side) and 36 metres (port side) aft of the Aster missile launchers. The ship is also equipped with eight Giat 20F2 guns and four decoy launchers are installed, two on either side of the ship firing chaff to 8 km and infra-red flares to a range of 3 km.

Charles de Gaulle nuclear-powered aircraft carrier is the largest fighting ship ever built by a European shipyard. Designed to operate 40 Rafale M aircraft, it will be the main unit of the French Navy's surface fleet. The Charles de Gaulle was officially handed over to the French Navy on 28 September 2000.

The Charles de Gaulle is the most sophisticated, highest performance warship ever built in Europe. She offers massive air power, a highly-integrated combat system, and impressive endurance. Deploying 40 modern combat planes plus early-warning aircraft, she can conduct 100 air missions a day. As the center-piece of a carrier group, she can perform vital duties in any waters.

Two catapults accelerate aircraft (Rafales, Hawkeyes, and modernized Super Étendards) to over 300 km/h in just 75 meters. The flight deck can launch one aircraft every 30 seconds or handle a mass landing of 20 aircraft in just 12 minutes. Data links (to NATO standards L16 and L11) allow Hawkeye early-warning aircraft to transmit tactical situation data in real time to naval units and combat aircraft.

The Senit 8 CMS enables CIC officers and the OTC to monitor 2,000 tracks in real time and engage air, naval and shore targets in fully-integrated mode. As part of one of the most modern systems of its type ever deployed, Aster 15 hyper-agile anti-air missiles provide protection against attacking aircraft and missiles. The aircraft carrier acts as the hub of an extensive communications network exchanging data over 50 simultaneous links with naval and air units plus shore-based command centers.

The Satrap stabilization system system offers exceptional performance. At 20 knots with the rudder at 30°, heel is just 1°. Reduced platform motion means the flight deck can handle 25-ton aircraft up to sea state 6.

In addition to state-of-the-art stabilization, communications and automation — including the Senit 8 CMS and the Shipmaster IPMS — all onboard facilities were designed and developed using the latest technologies, including CAD and virtual reality. All basic concepts correctly foreshadowed the design and construction of warships now at the proposal stage.

Specifications

Power Plant 2 Nuclear Power Plants;
Two propellers with 4 blades each, 80,000 ch (56,000 kW);
Electric power: 21,400 kW
Length, overall 262 meters
Flight Deck Width 65 meters
Total Height 75 meters
Displacement 35,500 tons
40,600 tons (full load)
Speed 27 knots
Aircraft 35-40
Aircraft Elevators 2
Catapults 2
Runway Floor Space 12,000 m©˜
Hangar Area Floor Space 4,600 m©˜
Crew Ship's Company: 1,950
Armament 2 Aster 15 missile systems (16 each)
2 Sadral systems (6 each)
8 Giat 20 F2
Combat Systems 2 Raccal-Decca
1 DRBJ 11 B
1 DRBV 26 D
1 DRBV 15 C
1 Arabel
1 Vampir DIBV 1 system
2 DIBC 2A (Vigy 105) systems

1 ARBR 21 radar detector
2 ARBB 33 jammers
4 Sagaie decoy-launchers
SLAT system
SAIGON system
SENIT 8 system
TACAN : VRBP-20A
Launch Rate 1 aircraft/30 seconds
Munitions Storage 550 tons
Fuel Storage 3,400 tons
Endurance 45 days

[Operation Ivy]

So whats it gonna run on if its not nuclear powered? wont that mean many a more supply ships with oil im guessing will have to travel with it

[fantassin]

Yes, it's the whole fleet oiler idea...or PRE in french (pétrolier ravitailleur d'escadre).

But with permanent bases in Africa, the Pacific, South America, the Indian Ocean and many other places around the globe, refuelling wont be a problem for the French Navy.

Nuclear propulsion actually makes it impossible to even stop in many nuclear-hostile countries.

[Operation Ivy]

it sounds like France is building up a fleet to fight the US :D

[fantassin]

The french Navy had one carrier before WW2, the Béarn, and then always two or more after WW2. So it's not building a fleet, it's just maintaining it.

There is a need for 2 carriers when one is doing its maintenance work which can be quite long on a CVN.

BTW, since the CdG is using US made catapults, E2F Hawkeyes and since the FR Navy pilots are now trained by the US Navy, I doubt a war is on the agenda...

The stupid politicians and journalists who are exciting one population against the other are bearing a heavy responsability in this one.

[MARK.TIGGER]

Fantassin and the cock ups in the CdeG build were? ;)

I think making it a multinational programme will be interesting look at eurofighter/airbus/concord etc etc how many have come in on time and on budget. Added to which the chancellor of the exchequer in he UK would rather waste the money else where!! and unfortunatley the French navy will get caught up in UK domestic politics.

[MARK.TIGGER]

currently diesel electric seems to be flavour of the month with the Royal Navy. But who knows.

[Kaos]

CV FOCH (R 99): She was retired from French service in October 2000. It will be upgraded in French shipyards and operated by the Brazilian Navy (Marinha do Brazil)
Sao Paulo is already in use with the Marinha do Brasil.
Have a look here (http://www.spotter.com.br/Saopaulo/saopaulo.htm)
;)

[martinexsquaddie]

WELL ITS PROBABLY A CUNNING PLAN to make sure the uk carriers get built difficult to pull out of a dual national dealand once there built they will find plenty of work :lol:

[littlefrench]

The first name of this aircraft carrier was "Richelieu" but for political reasons it has been renamed Charles de Gaulle (under Jacques Chirac's government) after the famous WWII general.

*source* (http://frenchnavy.free.fr/ships/aircraft-carrier/charles-de-gaulle/cdg.htm)



Ainsi pourquoi appelé a-t-il été changé? Sûrement Richelieu était autant d'un géant comme de Gaulle?


Yes Richelieu was a "Geant" but the chirac's party is a Gaulliste party.

[DPGLAW]

I am surprised that the UK, our (American) Allies, would help those french scum. I am shocked that ths US didn't influence the UK not to build anything for the french, there is no reason we, or anyone for that matter, should be helping them. Only allies should share military technology and the French are certainly not any ally or the UK and by extension the US..... My basic questions is why would the UK help those French ****heads, what benefit does it hold for them..?

[OnTheRocks]

I am surprised that the UK, our (American) Allies, would help those french scum. I am shocked that ths US didn't influence the UK not to build anything for the french, there is no reason we, or anyone for that matter, should be helping them. Only allies should share military technology and the French are certainly not any ally or the UK and by extension the US..... My basic questions is why would the UK help those French ****heads, what benefit does it hold for them..?

You are an idiot

[FallenAngel]

I am surprised that the UK, our (American) Allies, would help those french scum. I am shocked that ths US didn't influence the UK not to build anything for the french, there is no reason we, or anyone for that matter, should be helping them. Only allies should share military technology and the French are certainly not any ally or the UK and by extension the US..... My basic questions is why would the UK help those French ****heads, what benefit does it hold for them..?

French pay for new aircraft carrier= money into the british economy = good.

or, if you prefer...

(1) Price of individual item goes down as the number of items produced goes up.
(2) 3 > 2
----------------
Therefore, each unit will be individually less expensive (slightly) = good.

Stop talking out of your ass.

[gregoire]

In fact it was renamed Charle de Gaule under socialist goverment that was a trick to get the CV funded by the gaulist party that held the majority in the parlement

[tooms]

I am surprised that the UK, our (American) Allies, would help those french scum. I am shocked that ths US didn't influence the UK not to build anything for the french, there is no reason we, or anyone for that matter, should be helping them. Only allies should share military technology and the French are certainly not any ally or the UK and by extension the US..... My basic questions is why would the UK help those French ****heads, what benefit does it hold for them..?

French pay for new aircraft carrier= money into the british economy = good.

or, if you prefer...

(1) Price of individual item goes down as the number of items produced goes up.
(2) 3 > 2
----------------
Therefore, each unit will be individually less expensive (slightly) = good.

Stop talking out of your ass.

its good for the both economies ;)

and its a good step forward for the rationalization of materiels in Europe

[Bacilluspolymyxa]

I am surprised that the UK, our (American) Allies, would help those french scum. I am shocked that ths US didn't influence the UK not to build anything for the french, there is no reason we, or anyone for that matter, should be helping them. Only allies should share military technology and the French are certainly not any ally or the UK and by extension the US..... My basic questions is why would the UK help those French ****heads, what benefit does it hold for them..?
You would be surprised with how much cooperation there is between the US, UK and the French on military technology for instance the US uses Thales sonars in the Avenger mine hunters the reason being that the US cannot currently produce a mine hunting sonar as good as the Thales model or as cheap, the UK also purchased Thales for the same reason. The French purchase and exchange military technology with US all the time so suck it up.

[oldsoak]

The French also produce some excellent ESM kit which the UK uses. The one area there is definitely not a trade in with the US is stealth technology, which not even the UK has access to in some areas. This can cause problems in that joint UK/French programmes are subject to US scrutiny to ensure we dont pass on any US/UK only technology. ( cynics say this is a way to ensure UK industry can only effectively co-operate with the US in future programmes ) The French are however pursuing their own stealth programmes. There is co-operation with Germany and Sweden as well so I wouldnt be suprised if they become a major player in that area, if they are not already.

[OnTheRocks]

Well the Swedish navy already posesses Corvettes that employ stealth technology if Im correct.

[flickme]

Finally. They have almost got a fleet. LOL!

[littlefrench]

I am surprised that the UK, our (American) Allies, would help those french scum. I am shocked that ths US didn't influence the UK not to build anything for the french, there is no reason we, or anyone for that matter, should be helping them. Only allies should share military technology and the French are certainly not any ally or the UK and by extension the US..... My basic questions is why would the UK help those French ****heads, what benefit does it hold for them..?

You are an idiot

Yes he is.
DPGLAW i think you're really stupid. Don't forget that we are important allies to UK, that we do the european army togheter and that we belong to the same continent. What you said is really ridiculous. Don't forget that we are your allies too :lol:

[HoboWithAK]

That post 2 behind me, sounds like a lot of French beefed up info. They talk like all their "new" technology is record breaking- it isn't. U.S. and Russian carriers (or carrier, I believe russia only operates one now) have had more performance and technology in them for a while now. And besides, the de Gaull was a major f00kup. They stuck a submarine nuclear plant in a carrier. Who does that?

[Miles Teg]

They stuck a submarine nuclear plant in a carrier. Who does that?

They stuck 2 submarine nuclear plants in a carrier. Who does that?

[Parzival]

Why is thing not going to be nuclear powered? :|

And how many carriers does the US have?
I think the US has around 7 Carriers. That they Really us.

[Parzival]

it sounds like France is building up a fleet to fight the US :D
No, The French build a stronger army, Navy and airforce becouse they are affraid of muslims countrys like Pakistan e.t.c and North Korea. They know that in 10 years Pakistan and other muslims countrys will have the possibilty to send missils against Europe. And they will so fast as they can send there airforce and troops, to the country that sent missils against us.

[Parzival]

That post 2 behind me, sounds like a lot of French beefed up info. They talk like all their "new" technology is record breaking- it isn't. U.S. and Russian carriers (or carrier, I believe russia only operates one now) have had more performance and technology in them for a while now. And besides, the de Gaull was a major f00kup. They stuck a submarine nuclear plant in a carrier. Who does that?
I think the French carriers will be more modern and will have a higher technology then any of the Russians, UK or US carriers.

[Schwabo Elite]

Kitty Hawk, John F. Kennedy, Enterprise, Nimitz, Dwight D. Eisenhower, Carl Vinson, Theodore Roosevelt, Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, John C. Stennis, Harry S Truman [ex United States], Ronald Reagan sums up to 12 units.

The French carreirs will be bigger and more advanced than the older British carriers, but these are no fleet carriers anyway. Thus comparison is futile.
I doubt they will exceed the newest US carriers. The George H. W. Bush, though classified as a Nimitz-Class carreir, will incorporate alot new technology. I think you could compare the Charle de Gaulle with a Nimitz, though not as big, but France is not the US. France doesn't need to keep an "empire" of world wide bases and installations divided oder Atlantic and Pacific together. France will have to watch out for a carreir to be Mediterranean Sea fit, too.

SE

[wholagun]

I heard they are building the New French Navy with glass bottom boats, does anyone know why?

so they can see the old french navy.
Old joke, I heard it for the Polish and Canadian navies as well.

[Pégase]

this aircraft carriers will be taller than a Charles-De-Gaulle

with the CVF concept, the design allows to go from a STOVL version to a CTOL version and the inverse without too much problems
one of the advantages of the classic propulsion is that the hangar can be more spacious, this is better for more than 40 Rafales
the catapults will be longer , so the Rafs can take off more loaded
it could weigh around 55 000 t or more

pics of the project Thales :
http://www.defense.gouv.fr/actualites/dossier/d164/images/1372.jpg

Thales proposal for CTOL CVF
http://home.page.ch/pub/bertrand.bellaton@net2000.ch/thalesctolb.jpg

proposal for PA2
http://home.page.ch/pub/bertrand.bellaton@net2000.ch/pa2.jpg


some pics with Rafales aboard the CdG :

http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/embarque/galerie/avions/f_rafale.htm



http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/embarque/galerie/heracles/images/rafale_tous_le_monde_descend.jpg
http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/embarque/galerie/avions/images/rafale123surpont.jpg
http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/embarque/galerie/heracles/images/raf.jpg
http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/embarque/galerie/heracles/images/rafap.jpg
http://www.defense.gouv.fr/marine/embarque/galerie/heracles/images/cdg08128.jpg



and my favorite :D :
http://www.snecma.com/fr/press/media/img/big/aircraft_engines/SNEC1255.jpg[/img]

[Parzival]

Brazil, Spain, Italy, Thailand.. maybe some others also..

*Edit*

China does not have a single carrier.. they may have some in the future, but as of now, their only carrier functions as floating Casino.. and even that was bought from Russia.. :)
WTF. Thailand. WHy ahven't Sweden a Aircraft carrier :( We got a higher military expeditures then Thailand. This si not fare, Damn Leopard 2 a5 and JAS 39 Gripen. They cost us an aircraft carrier. :fork:

[Bacilluspolymyxa]

WTF. Thailand. WHy ahven't Sweden a Aircraft carrier :( We got a higher military expeditures then Thailand. This si not fare, Damn Leopard 2 a5 and JAS 39 Gripen. They cost us an aircraft carrier. :fork:
Vacon take some some consolation in the fact that Sweden is at the cutting edge of stealth technology and have actually produced and have in service the Visby stealth cutter and Kockums produce some of the best air independent conventional submarines in the world, diesel sub designer's around the world keep a weather eye on Kockums.

[mustamato]

http://home.page.ch/pub/bertrand.bellaton@net2000.ch/thalesctolb.jpg

Whoa! That´s a large carrier. When Sweden is scrapping its defence it´s good
to see that atleast some EU members still have some intelligent politicians.
Makes me proud to be European. Shall buy some french vine and celebrate
you new carrier :)

[wholagun]

Good to know that France is keeping the European Seas/water ways safe.

[Pégase]

for those who haven't seen it, there is a video of the Flottille 17 F over Afghanistan :

http://download.go-legion.com/movies/air%20force/super%20etandard/af_etendard.mpg

[Praxus32]

I think the US has around 7 Carriers. That they Really us.

We have 12 Super Carriers, and another 12 Amphibious Assault Ships capable of carrying up to 20 Harriers and 6 Chopers.

I think the French carriers will be more modern and will have a higher technology then any of the Russians, UK or US carriers.

Higher technology in what area?

There is no reason to believe it would be "higher tech" then any of the recent Nimitz.

I think you could compare the Charle de Gaulle with a Nimitz,

How so?

The average Nimitz is over twice the size as the Charles De Gaulle.

[Truthsayer]

WTF. Thailand. WHy ahven't Sweden a Aircraft carrier :( We got a higher military expeditures then Thailand. This si not fare, Damn Leopard 2 a5 and JAS 39 Gripen. They cost us an aircraft carrier. :fork:

Suck it up Vacon...why the hell should we get any aircraft carrier?

All our fighters, subs and stelthboats are made to make sure anyone messing with us will have to pay a big price when invading - not actually being able to stop an invasion (since Russia could have launched more fighters then we have ammo to take down back in the 80is).

And aircraft carrier is just an glorified runway, nothing else. We have several thousends of paved runways scattared throughout our country for the purpose of being able to launch any fighter with any airfield...

One aircraft carrier would be an extreamly large target to no use for us. What is next, getting a couple of battleships? ;)

[Pégase]

I think the US has around 7 Carriers. That they Really us.

We have 12 Super Carriers, and another 12 Amphibious Assault Ships capable of carrying up to 20 Harriers and 6 Chopers.

I think the French carriers will be more modern and will have a higher technology then any of the Russians, UK or US carriers.

Higher technology in what area?

There is no reason to believe it would be "higher tech" then any of the recent Nimitz.

I think you could compare the Charle de Gaulle with a Nimitz,

How so?

The average Nimitz is over twice the size as the Charles De Gaulle.

the defense budgets are not comparable
the US defense budget is around $400 billions, it's a bigger budget than the next 25 military Powers taken to gether !

big imbalance here, isn't it ?

[Pégase]

aircraft carriers are tools for the projection