Rafale M replacement program launched...

The initial artist impressions released by Naval Group confirm some of the technical details, which Naval News has been reporting since July:

Nuclear-powered (CVN) with two K22 reactors (2 x 220 megawatts thermal)

Length between 940 and 970 feet

Full load displacement around 70,000 – 75,000 tons

Maximum speed: 26 to 27 knots (similar to Charles de Gaulle)

Propulsive power would be around 80 megawatts delivered to three or four shaft lines

Total power around 110 megawatts, including the electrical plant

Future air wing: 32 next-generation fighters with two to three E-2D Advanced Hawkeyes and a yet-to-be-determined number of unmanned carrier air vehicles.

Two side elevators with 40 tons lifting capacity

Three 300-foot electromagnetic catapults (EMALS) by General Atomics

Flight deck: 3.9 acres

Aircraft hangar: 54,000 square feet

Crew: 900 and 1,080 sailors (not including the air element of 550 to 620 sailors) with higher comfort compared to Charles de Gaulle.

Thales SeaFire Radar

Principal Anti Air with MBDA Aster surface-to-air missiles for self-defense

https://news.usni.org/2020/12/08/presid ... 3kqTo5IV98

More pictures of the model in French......

https://www.creusot-infos.com/news/vie- ... 7o_LrLTAKM

Why are they planning a carrier so large for an air wing so small? A 75,000 ton carrier should easily accommodate 55-60 aircraft. If all they want to carry are 30 fighters, 2 or 3 E-3D's and a few drones, hell, they could do that with a design the size of their current carrier.

I don't think they have said how many UCAV:s they are planning?
nEUROn are quite large, with a wingspan of 12,5 m and Dassault's original plan was to have an even larger nEUROn, which I guess they are still planning for the production version, as they are talking about using the M88-engine?

I don't think reason is noticeable number of drones but much better conform of crew. For example QE isn't much smaller have up to 40 fighters, no catapult system which surely take space.

So where did space go? Crew conform.

French new carrier probable also have similar conform to crew as QE have.

More aircraft fuel, more aircraft ordnance.
Space for future upgrades.
Crew comfort.
More hangar space "just in case", e.g. for surge ops.
Do we know the size of FCAS fighter? May be larger than Rafale. BTW Rafale M don't have folding wings to save weight and increase commonality, so 1) French Navy might have requested a larger carrier because CdG was "too small" 2) Dassault might similarly not make the naval FCAS a wing-folder so they know they need more space.
I don't know much about reactors, but they must be heavy?
Maybe they decided to use more armor than is currently the norm on the ships?
Reported displacment might still go down or up because it way too early in the project.

French carriers have one extra space eating requirement: they carry nuclear weapons, so they need specific storage space for those with all the additional security requirements they entail. That's probably one of the reasons the displacement will be so much higher than the Queen Elizabeth class. At least they'll have 90 feet length catapults on this design instead of the 75ft of the CDG which has been quite the hindrance.

French carriers have one extra space eating requirement: they carry nuclear weapons, so they need specific storage space for those with all the additional security requirements they entail. That's probably one of the reasons the displacement will be so much higher than the Queen Elizabeth class. At least they'll have 90 feet length catapults on this design instead of the 75ft of the CDG which has been quite the hindrance.

Speaking of Catapults.....It crazy that the PANG will only have three EMALS not four! This is beyond perplexing as sortie generation is a critical factor in projecting power and everything to an Aircraft Carrier.