France builds CVs instead of Dunkerques & Richelieus

MatthewB

Banned
This would have taken a leap of faith as Italy’s building the Littorios and updating its Cavours and Dorias, while Germany has the Bismarcks and Scharnhorsts. But France needs four CVs! So how do we get them?

These would be the Joffre-class aircraft carrier

And can France’s existing dreadnoughts be updated?
 
Last edited:

Driftless

Donor
Who would they consider to be enough of a threat to build four CV's (if you're replacing the Dunkerques & Richilieu's)? The Italian's, Japanese, Germans, dare we say British & Americans? I'm guessing the Med would be the most likely theater of operations and the South China Sea (off F.I.C.) next, then the North Atlantic commerce lanes, the Caribbean, and finally the South Pacific?
 
And can France’s existing dreadnoughts be updated?
What do you mean? They were updated during the interwar period. Stuff like trunked funnels, higher elevation for main armaments, enlarged bridgework, bigger masts (which means better fire control gear), more AA guns, reboilering, and some cases even aviation facilities. Given that they were originally 12 & 13.5in gun ships, there were about as upgraded as they could have under reasonable circumstances.
 
Last edited:

MatthewB

Banned
What do [sic] mean?
I mean updated like the Cavours, Dorias and for that matter the Kongos. The Cavours went from 21 to 27 knots. That’s what France needs, is speed.

But I only mention updating France’s battleships in order to get new carriers before new BBs are considered.
 
The Cavours went from 21 to 27 knots. That’s what France needs, is speed.
The rebuilding of the Cavours took almost as much as building new ones, taking almost as long, delayed the building of new battleships, and in the end wasn't really that great in hindsight (which to be fair shouldn't be considered).

Although given the lack of armor in the German pocket battleships (though it'll take until the Battle of River Plate in OTL to realize that treaty cruisers could take on them just fine) in theory the French could rely on their treaty cruisers to take on the german pocket battleships (which the dunkerques in OTL was supposed to counter).
 
Well... first up France is allowed 60kt of carriers under WNT and Joffres are about 18kt each.

Next. The Med is basically a lake and France can put land based aircraft over most of the western half. They are not going to be risking carriers there. So the Joffres are going to be used in the Atlantic as recon assets to find raiders. Most will end up trapped in the Caribbean. Most of those will end up scavenged to keep one operation as a light carrier that isn't compatible with any other Allied carriers.

The French dreadnoughts are such technological dead ends they are not getting updated.
 

MatthewB

Banned
Well... first up France is allowed 60kt of carriers under WNT and Joffres are about 18kt each.

Next. The Med is basically a lake and France can put land based aircraft over most of the western half. They are not going to be risking carriers there. So the Joffres are going to be used in the Atlantic as recon assets to find raiders. Most will end up trapped in the Caribbean. Most of those will end up scavenged to keep one operation as a light carrier that isn't compatible with any other Allied carriers.

The French dreadnoughts are such technological dead ends they are not getting updated.
My hope is that they join the free French fleet.
 
More interesting is the effect this will have on other navies. The Italians at least are going to think hard about adding a carrier of some sort to their fleet and I think the RN will push for their long planned trade protection carrier replacements for Argus, Eagle and Hermes to be built.
 
Instead of converting Bearn, build a 35,000 ton replacement for the lost battleship France. When 1927 comes around then build a sister ship as per the WNT and 3rd in 1929. After studying the early carriers of the other navies, In the 30’s now build your 3 carriers as per the 60,000 ton allotment. Modern battleships and carriers before the war.
 
More interesting is the effect this will have on other navies. The Italians at least are going to think hard about adding a carrier of some sort to their fleet and I think the RN will push for their long planned trade protection carrier replacements for Argus, Eagle and Hermes to be built.
Hi Peg Leg Pom.

Do you have any details of these proposed carrier replacements? Can you PM me please.

Thank you :)
 
France was not so interested in building CV's though it felt it needed more capable fast capital ships to counter the threat of both Italian and German new construction, as well as feeling the need to replace the very weak existing capital ships, which did not compare well with the existing competition to start with, not even suggesting the new constructions elsewhere. (Courbet Class was already obsolete when build, as was basically the Bretagne class, both being not very well protected and with no possibilities to get modernized to the same degree other foreign navies modernized their older ships, like the Queen Elizabeth, Cavour, Andrea Doria, Kongo, etc.) Besides that, their only CV was a converted Battleship hull, which was only useful to show how not to convert a capital ship into a CV. Bearn as a CV was a disappointment with a small air complement only and a very slow speed and range, even worse than the HMS Eagle.

So France badly needed to modernize the capital ship part of the Marine National, choosing to do the big gun part first, as these were missed most. The value of the CV was not fully understood at the time so the choice was logical to replace the old and obsolete pre-war (pre 1914 design) Dreadnoughts with more capable ships first. The role of the CV was still supposed to be that of a supporting vessel for the big gun ships to start with. In this view the large seaplane carrier Commandante Teste was build for this purpose as well.

The start with Dunkerque and her half sister somewhat later, was primarily a response not to Italy, but to Germany starting the construction of the Deutschland class in the early 30's, with the later Richelieu class build in response mainly to counter the Italian Littorio class. Both were seen as badly needed to compensate for the obsolecense of the Courbet and Bretagne classes, leaving France no other option than to follow the rest of the world in the big gun ship armamentsrace. Buiding CV's instead would be seen as a giant gamble with no clear view what this would bring. Note the proposed CV's of the Joffre class in the 1939 program were not the most clever CV designs still, though including some novelties of interest, but still not the volume of airpower needed for modern CV operations, like the IJN, USN and even the Royal Navy started to develop around this time.
 
More interesting is the effect this will have on other navies. The Italians at least are going to think hard about adding a carrier of some sort to their fleet and I think the RN will push for their long planned trade protection carrier replacements for Argus, Eagle and Hermes to be built.

Why would Italy do that? Italy itself was basically one huge aircraft carrier, due to its geographical possitioning in the Mediterranean Sea.
 
Keeping up with the neighbours cool new toys.
France went to Washington expecting an allotment as large or larger than the Japanese. This was a reflection of prestige and past status but not current reality. Being lumped in with the Italians (who never expected parity) was particularly insulting. The best French ships were worse than the least capable ships that the RN, USN and IJN kept.

In a material sense, the WNT and LNT (which France didn't sign) had little impact on the rebuilding of the French Navy. France engaged in bilateral agreements with Italy, that's why the French built 2nd class ships but were the equal of Italian rebuilds. Germany upset this balance.

Turning back to the original slap at Washington. France can demonstrate that she is a 1st rank power by building 3 post-Jutland design ships in the 1920's just as the 1st rank naval powers have. Italy cannot match this. The French would have 3 proto Richelieus, of 35,000ton with 2 quad 16" and 24-26 knots or 2 quad 15" and 28-30 knots, probably the latter. These ships would render Italian naval power impotent. No need to compete in fast cruisers as they did. France still has the major mission of protecting SLOCs to North Africa but a 1st rate navy projects and protects France's prestige all over the world.

Instead of Bearn and a 1920's CA build a 10,000 ton experimental carrier. As you don't sign the London Treaty in 1930 this carrier doesn't count to your carrier tonnage, build 3 2nd generation carriers later.
 
Good question, why does Italy have two of them now?

The current Italian LPH's are ambhibious landing Hellocopterships officially, though like most of these can use VSTOL aircraft supplementing the hellicopters. They are not CV's like classical CV's with just the aircraft group as main means of operations, but use an airgroup fro secondary purposes.
 
A 1937 law gave all fixed wing aircraft to the Italian Airforce. This wasn't repealed until 1989 when the Navy acquired Harriers for the carrier Garibaldi.
 
Top