RE: Dunkirk details...

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: Dunkirk details...

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> War in the Pacific: Admiral's Edition >> RE: Dunkirk details...

Page: << < prev 1 [2]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: Dunkirk details... - 9/12/2013 12:08:23 PM

catwhoorg

Posts: 686
Joined: 9/27/2012
From: Uk expat lving near Atlanta
Status: offline

John,

the premise is that the when building the two new Queen Elizabeth class carriers, the French would then buy/build a 3rd as a replacement for one of their existing carriers.

The 2nd British one 'Prince of Wales' would in effect act as the back-up for both navies, being used by the French when their carrier was in extended refits.

Throw in the issues between CATOBAR and ski-jump (the RN carriers will be the latter), and different military histories, it was pretty much doomed from the get go. The French officially withdrew from the idea in their defence review this year.

As I said, only a politician could be stupid enough to even dream this could work from the get go.

(in reply to John 3rd)

Post #: 31

RE: Dunkirk details... - 9/13/2013 8:26:12 AM

castor troy

Posts: 14330
Joined: 8/23/2004
From: Austria
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: catwhoorg

John,

the premise is that the when building the two new Queen Elizabeth class carriers, the French would then buy/build a 3rd as a replacement for one of their existing carriers.

The 2nd British one 'Prince of Wales' would in effect act as the back-up for both navies, being used by the French when their carrier was in extended refits.

Throw in the issues between CATOBAR and ski-jump (the RN carriers will be the latter), and different military histories, it was pretty much doomed from the get go. The French officially withdrew from the idea in their defence review this year.

As I said, only a politician could be stupid enough to even dream this could work from the get go.

you haven't heard about the United States of Europe?

_____________________________

(in reply to catwhoorg)

Post #: 32

RE: Dunkirk details... - 9/13/2013 9:09:55 PM

Skyland

Posts: 280
Joined: 2/8/2007
From: France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: catwhoorg

John,

the premise is that the when building the two new Queen Elizabeth class carriers, the French would then buy/build a 3rd as a replacement for one of their existing carriers.

The 2nd British one 'Prince of Wales' would in effect act as the back-up for both navies, being used by the French when their carrier was in extended refits.

Throw in the issues between CATOBAR and ski-jump (the RN carriers will be the latter), and different military histories, it was pretty much doomed from the get go. The French officially withdrew from the idea in their defence review this year.

As I said, only a politician could be stupid enough to even dream this could work from the get go.

A CATOBAR PoW was under study at that time. The cross use would be only for training activities during refit of one of the CV. So the idea was not so stupid. And the idea did not came from a politician.

_____________________________

War Options 1941 mod : https://sites.google.com/site/waroptionswitpaemod/

(in reply to catwhoorg)

Post #: 33