France’s nuclear-powered aircraft carrier Charles de Gaulle has been deployed to the eastern Mediterranean as part of a wider French naval response to rising tensions linked to the conflict involving Iran.
The carrier and its accompanying strike group were directed south after the situation in the Middle East escalated, with Paris seeking to reinforce European security and contribute to the protection of maritime traffic in the region. The deployment forms part of a wider French naval presence that includes additional frigates and support vessels operating across the Mediterranean and Red Sea. France has also indicated that naval forces may support efforts to safeguard commercial shipping routes if the situation deteriorates further.
French President Emmanuel Macron said the naval deployments are intended to help maintain maritime security and stability as tensions have increased across the region. The move followed growing concern about threats to shipping and regional infrastructure, including a recent drone strike on Cyprus which prompted European governments to review security arrangements in the eastern Mediterranean.
Operating from international waters, the carrier provides France with the ability to deploy combat aircraft and surveillance assets without relying on land bases. Aircraft embarked on the ship can conduct air defence patrols, reconnaissance missions and strike operations while supporting allied naval forces in the area.
Commissioned in 2001, Charles de Gaulle is the flagship of the French Navy and the only nuclear-powered aircraft carrier in service outside the United States Navy. The vessel measures around 261 metres in length and displaces roughly 42,000 tonnes at full load. Nuclear propulsion allows the ship to operate for extended periods without refuelling, giving it significant endurance and operational reach.
The carrier can embark an air wing of up to around 40 aircraft, typically centred on Rafale M multirole fighter jets supported by E-2C Hawkeye airborne early warning aircraft and naval helicopters. The ship uses a catapult-assisted take-off and arrested recovery (CATOBAR) system with steam catapults and arrestor wires, allowing conventional fixed-wing aircraft to operate from the flight deck.
Defensively, the carrier is equipped with Aster 15 surface-to-air missiles, Mistral short-range missile systems and close-in guns designed to counter aircraft and missile threats. Sensors and electronic warfare systems provide air search and tracking capabilities as part of a layered defensive network alongside the ship’s escorts.
Like most aircraft carriers, the vessel normally operates as the centrepiece of a wider carrier strike group. This typically includes air defence and anti-submarine frigates, a nuclear-powered attack submarine and support ships, forming a task group capable of sustained maritime and air operations.
Worth to note that 19 out of 23 major surface vessels of the French marine have been deployed either to the Med or to the strait of Hormuz
That is a very high availability rate.
Indeed. But how long can they keep that up….
But then again no one is expecting this war to last too long
They are doing better than us, and the whole world knows it, embarrassing.
They have over 20 escort vessels, the UK only 14, not to mention those available. They make quite good use of their single aircraft carrier, and better than the UK. They have reasonable amphibious forces, unlike the UK with only three Bay-class vessels. Like it or not, they are the leading military power in Europe. This far-left government and the previous one were more concerned with disarming Great Britain, and they are succeeding. There are hardly any escort vessels available, and the RAF has only 140 fighter jets while France has approximately 250. That’s the way it is.
In what world is the current government far-left? They basically just picked up from where the Tories left off but with a little bit more financial sensibility.
Is financial prudence simply about removing and scrapping equipment and not ordering a single new ship, plane, or tank since they came to power?
They haven’t done so because we’re broke as a nation. Around £80 billion more was spent by the government between 2024 and 2025, borrowing costs are skyrocketing. Every time they try to raise money the right-wing press kick up a fuss and half the time labour end up backtracking. I want more to be spent on defence too but isn’t there already a £20 billion blackhole in the MOD budget and that’s just to get things we’ve already ordered, a hell of a lot more would be needed to get more weapon systems. Not to mention our procurement system clearly isn’t fit for purpose.
Is there a black hole in the NHS orGB energy or any other govt department budgets?
Plenty of money being chucked at all sorts of things other than defence! Any other budget restrained by fixed % of GDP?
According to Google the NHS had a £1 billion pound deficit the previous tax year, I imagine most departments probably do. Defence is obviously a difficult one because it takes years/decades and billions of pounds to get anything meaningful. There is “plenty of money” but it’s being spent on things like topping up pensions, debt interest and universal credit. What little is left is spent trying to make the UK more productive.
Don’t think it matters how long they can keep it up, it’s more about sending a message. Mission accomplished, huge diplomatic victory for France
You do realise we have a carrier sharing agreement with France right so that one of us has a carrier available at all times? That’s specifically why CDG is in the eastern Mediterranean and PoW is in port on 5 day readiness preparing to go to the North to guard Europes Northern flank.
It’s also worth pointing out that the CDG only has two French escorts with her.
People on this forum were s**ting bricks when PoW left port with just two British escorts on a peace time mission and part of the reason CDG can deploy to the eastern Med with two escorts is that she is being joined by a British AAW and Greek frigate.
Indeed this is all an example of exactly how the system should work in cooperation with our new closest allies France who is also deploying aircraft to Akritoni just like us.
Wrong.
Why? Not disagreeing, just saying that saying somethingis wrong without expanding on it isn’t very helpful.
“But then again no one is expecting this war to last too long”
All the experts are saying this is far from over. The only person saying it won’t last long is Trump, because TACO man is looking for an off-ramp now that the economic consequences of his actions are destroying what little chance the GOP had in the midterms. Which is why the war objectives change from hour to hour, as they realise Iran won’t bend the knee like Venezuela did.
Embarrassing for our Navy. Ours never seem serviceable. What is wrong with our Navy?
Well, they’re not placing orders for any new ships other than those placed years ago. All they’ve done is retire ships. The RFA Argus, the Albion-class frigates, the MCMV, auxiliary vessels, etc., etc. Great Britain spends more money than France on defense, but gets considerably less in return. Where’s the money?
Ask about the ratio of senior officers to overall strength comparing France and UK. We are very top heavy.
MOD is no longer fit for purpose. Too much focus on DEI etc and not enough on combat readiness.
Senior Officers need to be held to account as well as politicians I suggest.
Two things, a power system issue with T45 which happens on a bleeding edge technology and an over optimism on the life extension capability of the type 23 hull.
S**t like this happens all the time with navy’s all over the world including France and the USA but especially in Russia and China.
It’s just few people take the time to study other navy’s and just assume we re s**t at everything because the Daily Mail told them so.
It’s a crappy position to be in regarding escorts but solutions are in hand, the T45 PiP program is well under way and new frigates are being pumped out by two large naval facilities.
And the island nation the UK has sent?. Come on some will no doubt defend our poor showing and shockingly low ship readness rate.
No need for a carrier,we are operating out of Akrotiri and bases in the gulf states! That is our contribution to the defence of the region.
Akrotiri is permanently on station, how long can France keep its only carrier there?…
Don’t be daft man, we should station expensive vulnerable aircraft carriers next to every RAF base all over the world. Got to show the airforce what for old chap 🧐
Lest pull PoW of her patrol in the high north and stick here right next to CDG so we can show the French what a real carrier looks like what what 🤣
I say let the French position their vulnerable expensive carrier next to an RAF base. It’ll mean there’s somewhere they can fly their jets off to should it be sunk 😏
So is France, bases in Jordan and a pretty big base in Abu Dhabi (naval and airforce)
Hmm, and after spending all that money, we’re stuck with carriers with single type fixed-wing aircraft.
How many fifth generation aircraft are onboard the CDG? How many 5th gen aircraft in the world are capable of operating of CDG? Only 5 US carriers have F35C capability so the QE’s represents 30% of the global 5th gen large carrier capacity in the world.
If you are really worried about having another fixed wing aircraft on the QE class you will find the sword fish is more than capable 😀
Posturing by the French 🤷🏻♂️
Why are you trolling? Fair play to the French. Strategically independent of the USA and a better military capability with an indigenous industry supported by government orders to back it up. That’s also why after the USA, France are the second highest exporters of military goods.
In response to the inevitable cries of ‘why aren’t we sending a carrier?’: The PoW is supposed to be working up for a major deployment to the High North in order to boost NATO Arctic security and keep Mr Trump happy. The benefit of deploying a carrier to the Middle East in preference to just flying from Al Udeid or Akrotiri depends largely on what kind of sortie rate you feel the need to generate. The CdG has in fact never demonstrated a particularly good sortie generation rate, but then France has only one airbase in the Middle East, which is a small facility in UAE capable of hosting a maximum of six aircraft, i.e. without a carrier in the region they’re poorly equipped to deploy any amount of airpower at all.
they have a base in Jordan part of the prince hassan air base
That’s true, but I think it’s use is permitted by Jordan specifically for Operation Chammal (and presumably defending Jordan’s airspace).
Our main problem was notreacting quick enough to the US buildup. Sure, we don’t have enough surface vessels by a long way. Or land based AA assets. Main point – carriers and Type 45s wouldn’t be needed if we had enough ground based assets on station! This situation is a major wake up call for Starmer – just hope he doesn’t switch off the alarm and go back to sleep.
I did read that the French Carrier has been diverted from planned NATO ops in the High North.
So surging so much here means they’ll then need some downtime after?
The French Navy is surging, while the Royal Navy is struggling. Yes, the French deployment is not sustainable, however it shows massive visibility and power projection. The problem for the French will come in a few months when a high number of ships will all need maintenance at once. HOWEVER, the sheer fact they are able to do this in the first place shows that they are obviously managing this well. What’s the point in having 6 high end destroyers if you struggle to deploy 2 at the same time. Yes, we might be able to keep a presence in the Middle East for far longer, as when Dragon needs to come home, we can rotate another T45 in it’s place, but 1 ship doesn’t show any form of power or intent.
Maybe the British win when it comes to combat power, purely due to the capabilities of the T45, but the French have it nailed when it comes to power projection and political influence.
Sometimes you win a conflict by purely flooding an area with numbers. T45 is better when it comes to swarms, but it’s still only one ship…
A chart doing the rounds on SM, which shows starkly the collapse of the RN, courtesy of the Labour and Conservative parties, assisted by the Lib Dems from 2010.
Year by year, Frigate orders.
96. 3
96. 0
97. 0
98. 0
99. 0
00. 0
01. 0
02. 0
03. 0
04. 0
05. 0
06. 0
07. 0
07. 0
09. 0
10. 0
11. 0
12. 0
13. 0
14. 0
15. 0
16. 0
17. 3
18. 0
19 5
20. 0
21. 0
22. 5
23. 0
24. 0
25. 0
26. 0
The 3 in 96 were the last of 16 T23s.
Some bright spark worked out it was 1979 when labour last ordered a Frigate.
And at the present day, not one ship yet ordered that was not already planned.
Now some of us now all this who study defence constantly, but it seems the penny is dropping elsewhere as well.
War footing? Urgency? At pace? Warnings from HMG?
Righto.
Utter scum.