Britain couldn’t have won the Falkland war without there carriers (although you could argue they reconquered them, but in defence of a part of their country)
I feel this is a bit backwards. Britain can get away with relatively few defense on their oversee territories because they have aircraft carrier power projection. They could still have won the Falkland wars without carriers if they put a proper military force on the island to begin with.
Also the current biggest threat and main reason we need this new jet is the Russian threat to mainland Europe. And I don’t see the 5 European aircraft carriers that currently exist playing a major role here (and 3 of them already have F-35s anyway).
So let’s get the plane we actually need first. I’m sure France’s oversee territories will be fine with just the Rafales protecting them for now.
You’re not reading what people tell you completely. The UK have overseas territories, the netherlands, italy, spain, and several more.
And we need power projection to protect our sea trade like the bab el mandeb strait, the Suez strait, and more. The rafale having a naval variant didn’t stop many overseas countries without airplane carriers from choosing it with its non-naval capabilities.
And we need power projection to protect our sea trade like the bab el mandeb strait, the Suez strait, and more.
I agree. But we’re far from that. Let’s bother with developing a carrier capable plane when we have started building some more carriers. If relations with the US continue to deteriorate we can even get the Brits on board again next time.
The rafale having a naval variant didn’t stop many overseas countries without airplane carriers from choosing it with its non-naval capabilities.
Acquisition of expensive military hardware is very political and France has some good international relations. So with two planes of such similar capabilities that really doesn’t say that much about the plane.
I feel this is a bit backwards. Britain can get away with relatively few defense on their oversee territories because they have aircraft carrier power projection. They could still have won the Falkland wars without carriers if they put a proper military force on the island to begin with.
Also the current biggest threat and main reason we need this new jet is the Russian threat to mainland Europe. And I don’t see the 5 European aircraft carriers that currently exist playing a major role here (and 3 of them already have F-35s anyway).
So let’s get the plane we actually need first. I’m sure France’s oversee territories will be fine with just the Rafales protecting them for now.
You’re not reading what people tell you completely. The UK have overseas territories, the netherlands, italy, spain, and several more.
And we need power projection to protect our sea trade like the bab el mandeb strait, the Suez strait, and more. The rafale having a naval variant didn’t stop many overseas countries without airplane carriers from choosing it with its non-naval capabilities.
I agree. But we’re far from that. Let’s bother with developing a carrier capable plane when we have started building some more carriers. If relations with the US continue to deteriorate we can even get the Brits on board again next time.
Acquisition of expensive military hardware is very political and France has some good international relations. So with two planes of such similar capabilities that really doesn’t say that much about the plane.