Better Value? France or Britain's armed forces

uk 75

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
27 September 2006
Messages
5,744
Reaction score
5,620
As of 2018 France seems to have managed to equip its Armed Forces with mainly French produced equipment whreas the UK has increasingly bought from foreign suppliers.
Which set of taxpayers has had better value for money?
I don't know. Hence the question
 
If only France could have money ( :'( ) to order more Rafale and improve them faster (F4 standard)... And prepare faster the new generation of fighters... :-\
 
No to mention that the new standard issue French rifle is a German upgrade of an American gun....

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2017/05/09/gun-manufacturer-heckler-koch-delivers-first-batch-of-assault-rifles-to-french/
 
cluttonfred said:
No to mention that the new standard issue French rifle is a German upgrade of an American gun....

https://www.defensenews.com/land/2017/05/09/gun-manufacturer-heckler-koch-delivers-first-batch-of-assault-rifles-to-french/

Hellfire
C-130J
Javelin
GMLRS
MQ-9

Highly probable future purchase: E-2D

https://www.navyrecognition.com/index.php/news/defence-news/2018/february-2018-navy-naval-defense-news/5972-french-navy-to-procure-e-2d-advanced-hawkeyes-for-2026-2028.html
 
A classic "military capability" Vs "freedom of action" question. Value is a nebulous thing. Do you want to stimulate/sustain your economy, or have better equipment for your armed forces?

E.g. majority of French combat air is still M2000
 
They can be equally atrocious. For example, French air tankers are vintage 1962. The three other tankers bought in the 90's (KC-135) have a wooden floor, for f**ck sake.
The Pumas transport helicopters, still the bulk of ALAT, (vintage 1968) have no de-icing systems. Also still a lot of Gazelles with that very vulnerable bubble of plastic around the pilot and gunner.

Wrong on the Mirage 2000. AFAIK the balance has shifted in favor of the Rafale, some times ago. And every other type has been retired.

Then again, the British build the largest ship outside the U.S since, what Yamato, a 70 000 tons carrier, and yet they managed to do that without putting any catapult on it. What's the point of building such a big ship only for VSTOL aircrafts ? Including AEW helicopters, since E-2 needs catapults ?
Which doesn't mean the CdG isn't screwed either: putting nuclear subs engines on an aircraft carrier, just to save money, resulting in a ship slower and less powerful than the ships it replaced...
The Type 45 had its share of trouble, and so has the Astute.

I would say the French screw a little less as far as procurement goes, but are strangled by lack of funding whatever happens.

At the end of the day, Horizon or Type 45, they are both superb ships, extremely capable, but strangled by budget cutters.
 
It is a great shame that UK and France have not
been able to pool resources more. Unfortunately
national interests are just too strong.
Some US equipment like the C130 and Chinook have really stood the test of time. Their European equivalents have
not fared so well.
Jaguar was perhaps the best Anglo French military programme. But it could have been much better.
The French FAMAS rifle and the SA80 seemed great in theory but the taxpayer would have been better served by
M16s
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom