Actually I believe the Indian operated a medium carrier too.
This is a discussion on The Navy of Brazil within the World Armed Forces forums, part of the World Strategic Defence Area category; The Brazilian navy is in an elite club. Currently there are only two countries with large carriers (USA and Russia), ...
The Brazilian navy is in an elite club. Currently there are only two countries with large carriers (USA and Russia), and two countries with medium carriers (France, Brazil). The rest of the blue water navies have light carriers. The Type-22 and Niteroi-class frigates are not the most modern, but they are still very capable ships.
Lets discuss the equipments and capabilities of Brazil's navy here.
Last edited by F40Racer; 05-11-2009 at 01:38 PM.
Actually I believe the Indian operated a medium carrier too.
The San Paulo carrier is grossly under-defended and the fleet lacks any credible area-air defence capability. To put that into context here's something I made earlier. San Paulo is at the bottom middle (Click to enlarge)
The following analysis is slightly out of date because I hadn't confirmed the Mistral SAMs refitted on the San Paulo but that doesn't change the wider picture very much. Large aircraft carriers compared - Military Photos
not too mention it's Aircraft the A4Ku and TA4KU skyhawks are a very very dated attack aircraft and not suited too the multi role missions needed in a modern Carrier force. Brazilians Should be buying super Hornets or Rafale's for there navy along with there long awaited Next Air force Fighter, as these are the airframes most suited too the Launch and operation of the Sao Paulo (Foch)
There is no great genius without a mixture of madness.
Aristotle
MiG-29Ks might be cheaper
Probably for $$$. But it's be cheaper to fit a skijump to the ship, and reduce maintenance/training/crew etc etc.
If Brazil cannot afford that level of upgrade then they can't afford a carrier full stop.
Is Brazil still a partner in PAK-FA?
Last edited by planeman; 05-09-2009 at 05:25 PM.
The Problem with Using Mig29's off the Deck of the Sao Paulo is that the Take off on the Sao Paulo is CATBAR Catapult launched Arrested recovery where as the Mig is built for STOBAR Short Take off Arrested Recovery. Like Plane man Said the only way too make the Paulo a skijump or refit the mig too take the Cat.
Building the Jump would be easer the Stresses on the Cat would Rip the Front wheel off the Mig. although Cheaper too use the Costs and benefits I feel Favor The Rafale Or F/A18's they are Already Catbar ready Can Take off at a more rapid pace with larger weapon loads and last I read the Rafale and Hornet were in the Latest FX-2 running.
@ Plane man Last I Read Brazil was out. The Commander of the Brazilian Air Force, Juniti Saito, justified:"I do not want to blacken the image of Sukhoi, but the project did not fit into our necessities".
There is no great genius without a mixture of madness.
Aristotle
In addition to the US and Russia, and France and Brazil, the Indians (Viraat), the Spanish (Juan Carlos) and the Italians (Cavour) all have carriers that displace within a few thousand tons of the Sao Paulo...and they are more capable and better defended.
Within a few years China and the UK will be added to that group having larger carriers as well...although I would bet on a carrier group centered around a UK Invinsible class carrier right now over one centered on the Sao Paulo if it came to comparing the two.
Last edited by Jeff Head; 05-11-2009 at 11:14 PM. Reason: Correct Spelling
I would damn bet on the Brits if the carrier was invisible as well! Though it might be a challenge for the pilots when they are trying to fly back home!
Anyways, I would argue that due to the force structure of Brazil's navy, a carrier is not necessary for them; the money spent on buying and operating a carrier would have been better suited for buying more potent surface warships, and maybe an amphib.
Last edited by Jeff Head; 05-12-2009 at 09:05 AM.
Battles are won by slaughter and maneuver. The greater the general, the more he contributes in maneuver, the less he demands in slaughter.
-Winston Churchill
Invincible?
Bookmarks