Mistral News thread

JohninMK wrote:I wonder if the payment to Russia is coming under different budgets to minimise the headline figure?

PARIS (Sputnik) — The amount of compensation paid to Russia for terminating the contract on the delivery of two Mistral-class helicopter carriers by France does not exceed 1 billion euro ($1.1 billion), French government spokesman Stephan Le Foll said Wednesday. "I can tell you that the level of the cost for France is less than one billion euros, regardless of what is said. The exact value will be announced by lawmakers," Le Foll said at a press briefing, adding that no further compensation would follow.

Moscow and Paris signed a 1.2-billion-euro agreement for the purchase of two French Mistral-class helicopter carriers in 2011.

In November 2014, Paris suspended the delivery of the first ship, citing Moscow's alleged participation in the Ukrainian conflict. Russia has repeatedly denied the allegations.

Earlier in August, Moscow and Paris formally terminated the contract. France promised to reimburse Russia the entire sum it paid for the ships, while French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian later said that the refund would amount to less than the original price.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150826/1026223119.html#ixzz3jw6v4ibK

Probably due to the rouble's fall, less Euros are needed to refund the same amount of Roubles paid, with room to spare for compensation too.
Russia should be more than adequately reimbursed.
All in all, a win for everyone.

flamming_python wrote:

JohninMK wrote:I wonder if the payment to Russia is coming under different budgets to minimise the headline figure?

PARIS (Sputnik) — The amount of compensation paid to Russia for terminating the contract on the delivery of two Mistral-class helicopter carriers by France does not exceed 1 billion euro ($1.1 billion), French government spokesman Stephan Le Foll said Wednesday. "I can tell you that the level of the cost for France is less than one billion euros, regardless of what is said. The exact value will be announced by lawmakers," Le Foll said at a press briefing, adding that no further compensation would follow.

Moscow and Paris signed a 1.2-billion-euro agreement for the purchase of two French Mistral-class helicopter carriers in 2011.

In November 2014, Paris suspended the delivery of the first ship, citing Moscow's alleged participation in the Ukrainian conflict. Russia has repeatedly denied the allegations.

Earlier in August, Moscow and Paris formally terminated the contract. France promised to reimburse Russia the entire sum it paid for the ships, while French Defense Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian later said that the refund would amount to less than the original price.

Read more: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150826/1026223119.html#ixzz3jw6v4ibK

Probably due to the rouble's fall, less Euros are needed to refund the same amount of Roubles paid, with room to spare for compensation too.
Russia should be more than adequately reimbursed.
All in all, a win for everyone.

Surely the contract was signed in €, then the fixed amounts for compensation should be also in €. It is likely that the lower value of the rouble means more roubles instead of less euros. But still, the amounts have been payed? if not Russia, can have problems.

Russia has allowed France to sell the "Mistral" Egypt and the United Arab Emirates

http://www.mk.ru/politics/2015/08/31/rossiya-razreshila-francii-prodat-mistrali-egiptu-i-oae.html

Moscow has signaled that Russian equipment fitted on the two Mistrals that were built for Russia could stay on board if Egypt, the leading prospective buyer, bought the helicopter carriers, a French official said.

“Russia could accept India and Egypt receiving the equipment,” with Cairo the prime candidate for buying the warships, the official said Sept. 7. Russian authorities “let it be known” in negotiations with French officials about the cancellation of the 2011 sale contract.

Source: http://www.defensenews.com/story/defense/naval/ships/2015/09/12/french-offical-russian-systems-may-stay-aboard-mistrals-if-egypt-buys/71966558/

"France's National Assembly approved a bill on Thursday on terminating the contract on the delivery of two Mistral-class helicopter carriers to Russia. The implementation of the Mistral deal, reached in 2011, was initially suspended by France in 2014 over Russia's alleged participation in the Ukraine conflict. The Mistral deal was officially terminated in August. France repaid Russia around 900 million euro ($1 billion at the current exchange rates) in compensation for terminating the contract. Egypt, Canada, India and Singapore emerged as potential Mistral buyers after France suspended its delivery of the two ships to Russia, according to French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius."

Source: http://sputniknews.com/europe/20150917/1027125396/mistral-france-russia.html#ixzz3lzX6U2Tv

When I first read about France not giving Mistrals to Russia, I was like "Who cares these ships are worthless" but after doing more research on these kinds of ships and the amount of US military bases around the world, I now get why these types of ships are very important. I really hope Russia had gotten those Mistrals.

par far wrote:When I first read about France not giving Mistrals to Russia, I was like "Who cares these ships are worthless" but after doing more research on these kinds of ships and the amount of US military bases around the world, I now get why these types of ships are very important. I really hope Russia had gotten those Mistrals.  

If Russia really needed these barges then it should have built them itself. It is downright insulting to Russian history and current level to claim that it could
not produce equivalent products. But the fact is that these were yet more of Serdyukov's BS contracts to NATO states that served no purpose other than
some nonsense attempt at diplomacy. How quickly NATO attacked Russia using the coup it engineered itself in Ukraine as the pretext shows exactly the
worthlessness of this diplomacy.

par far wrote:When I first read about France not giving Mistrals to Russia, I was like "Who cares these ships are worthless" but after doing more research on these kinds of ships and the amount of US military bases around the world, I now get why these types of ships are very important. I really hope Russia had gotten those Mistrals.  

Well... they're handy for more localised power projection. But I wouldn't say they were super necessary for a WW3 type scenario. The major US bases would be quickly neutralized with stand off weaponry. Two heli-carriers are going to make stuff all difference in terms of destroying already established US bases if the proverbial s*** really does hit the fan. We won't be seeing island hopping WW2 shenanigans either. So in all honesty the loss of the Mistrals was fine, even great perhaps, given that we'll now see true Russian replacements.

Outside of a total war heli-carriers are, of course, very useful. So, while the Mistrals would of been handy to have, they're not exactly imperative for preparation of a doomsday conflict.

Russia received twice more than paid for Mistrals in ruble equivalent due to devaluation


"SOCHI, September 18. /TASS/. Russia has already received twice more than it paid for Mistral amphibious landing ships in ruble equivalent because of devaluation, Minister of Industry Denis Manturov said on Friday.
"As far as I know, they [France — TASS] physically returned money already long time ago. We paid on the basis of the budget formed in rubles; it [the amount of repaid funds] is twice more because of the rate, so we received exactly two times more in ruble mass," the minister said.
The contract for two Mistral class amphibious landing ships for the Russian Navy was concluded between Russia and France in summer 2011 but was suspended and ultimately terminated early in August 2015.
According to the agreement, Russia will receive compensation about €949.8 mln from France and will return all the Russian equipment mounted on board of Mistral ships. France, in its turn, will have ships in its full disposal with the right of resale."

Ruble devaluation really has a lot of...worth. 

Mike E wrote:Russia received twice more than paid for Mistrals in ruble equivalent due to devaluation


"SOCHI, September 18. /TASS/. Russia has already received twice more than it paid for Mistral amphibious landing ships in ruble equivalent because of devaluation, Minister of Industry Denis Manturov said on Friday.
"As far as I know, they [France — TASS] physically returned money already long time ago. We paid on the basis of the budget formed in rubles; it [the amount of repaid funds] is twice more because of the rate, so we received exactly two times more in ruble mass," the minister said.
The contract for two Mistral class amphibious landing ships for the Russian Navy was concluded between Russia and France in summer 2011 but was suspended and ultimately terminated early in August 2015.
According to the agreement, Russia will receive compensation about €949.8 mln from France and will return all the Russian equipment mounted on board of Mistral ships. France, in its turn, will have ships in its full disposal with the right of resale."

Ruble devaluation really has a lot of...worth. 

When one stands back and thinks about the above, it looks kind of silly. But the trick is that the inflation transient in Russia in the wake
of the devaluation was short lived and disappeared as of late spring. So twice the rubles is actually worth something. If the inflation hit 100%,
then the two rubles would be worth one pre-devaluation ruble. But the reality is that the cumulative inflation is around 20%.

I am quite sure that NATO was banking on a large inflation surge in Russia.

If Russia really needed these barges then it should have built them itself. It is downright insulting to Russian history and current level to claim that it could
not produce equivalent products. But the fact is that these were yet more of Serdyukov's BS contracts to NATO states that served no purpose other than
some nonsense attempt at diplomacy. How quickly NATO attacked Russia using the coup it engineered itself in Ukraine as the pretext shows exactly the
worthlessness of this diplomacy.

I agree Russia is largely wasting its time trying to improve relations with europe as long as europe is controlled by washington or brussels, because neither centre wants Russia as a friend or an ally... they want it as a resource box it can dig into occasionally when it needs it and expects it to keep quiet and tow the line the rest of the time.

Russia certainly could develop a Mistral class carrier type vessel, but they are no super ship builders... the french don't call them helicopter carriers, they call them command and projection vessels and that is exactly what they are... they would form the core of a landing fleet and would provide ground forces and air mobile forces to distant battlefields.... they would also manage the whole effort and of course provide ongoing support including as a hospital ship for the endeavour.

The concept was developed in 1997 and in october 2004 the first vessel of the class was launched... that is pretty good time for development and production, but then the French ship building industry has not been under funded for the last 20 odd years.

The new modular system/weapon/propulsion standards the Russian Navy is developing will actually make designing and building much faster, and later upgrades should be easier...

To put it in computer terms the windows operating system is not just an operating system... it is also a set of rules and standards.... and if you follow those rules and standards in your design then your software should work on any windows based computer system. Equally your new hardware should also work properly though it will need a piece of software called a driver to tell the operating system what the new hardware can do and how it works and what information it needs to work and what output it can create... if you install the driver you should just need to plug and play to get the new hardware to connect. Of course you will still need to test it to make sure it does not interfere with anything else and that it works properly...

The point is that the Russians could not have developed a mistral class carrier and had it in service last November.... they didn't buy Mistrals as a favour to France, they bought them for the Russian Naval Infantry. They bought them because they wanted them now.

Now they will have to make some themselves, though if the two Mistrals made go to Egypt or India then they might get some sales for their new Ka-52Ks and the electronics suite already installed on the two vessels...

Now they have the full designs of the Mistral class carriers and experience making portions of its hull.. I hope they take their existing plans and adapt them using what they have learned with Mistral and make an even better vessel better adapted to Russian needs and wants... they could certainly improve the self defence armament, but without reducing the helicopter carrying capacity and the vehicle carrying capacity and the troop carrying capacity and the hospital ship capacity... all of which makes it useful in war and in peace.

Mistral Saga, Good Ending (probably )

http://www.rt.com/news/316279-egypt-france-mistral-purchase/

France has agreed to sell two Mistral helicopter carriers to Egypt, which were originally ordered by Russia.

"They agreed on the principle and the terms of the acquisition by Egypt of the two [ships]," the French President Francois Hollande’s spokesman told reporters in a statement on Wednesday.

The deal was agreed at a high-profile meeting between French and Egyptian delegations in Paris.

GarryB wrote:I would disagree... if you only have ten ships and three are for anti sub use and three are for air defence and four are dedicated antiship destroyers then you can have three different engine types, with three different main battery missile launchers and different sensors and equipment... it actually makes rather more sense to standardise with one main battery missile launcher like UKSK, then all ten ships can be loaded with anti sub or anti ship or land attack missiles or mixtures... they can all have the same engine, similar sensors... whereas a large fleet you can afford to have very different types.

Such degree of specialisation is a choice. The ten ships can perform their different missions without having different engines.

GarryB wrote:Standardisation works in both cases to reduce costs and simplify maintainence and support and training.

Of course, but you did not prove me wrong.

GarryB wrote:Of course it doesn't make them best buddies... just because Russia sells them stuff doesn't mean Russia should risk anything for them, but if they want to it would be good if they actually could rather than just possibly could.

That is not an option.

GarryB wrote:You mean Russia should shape its foreign policy to avoid fulfilling the perverted beliefs of those snakes in the grass? Russia should not give them a second thought and should do what suits them when it suits them.

Not a being nation of easily irritated fools would be enough.

GarryB wrote:Why are they vulnerable?  We are not talking about a civilian transport ship filled with helicopters like the British used in the Falklands. These vessels will be military, they will be armed and they will have their own ECM and ESM system to defend themselves....

You were talking about a large ship manufactured according to civilian standards.

GarryB wrote:Most bases there are supported by the military of that country, why should the Russian bases be different?

There are better suited civilian ships available for this task.

Mistral was meant as a transport ship with able to launch/land helicopters. It isnt spaced age tech or anything. Russia was interested in the comm systems and having good relations with France. Instead it got burned. I am glad the mistral deal fell through. And now that Russia got more roubles out of it than before, added that inflation is only 16% (and not in everything but selected items), they should use that towards building their own. Or more landing ships or something.

Huh, mediocre navy like Egypt getting Mistrals.... eh...

sepheronx wrote:Mistral was meant as a transport ship with able to launch/land helicopters. It isnt spaced age tech or anything. Russia was interested in the comm systems and having good relations with France. Instead it got burned. I am glad the mistral deal fell through. And now that Russia got more roubles out of it than before, added that inflation is only 16% (and not in everything but selected items), they should use that towards building their own. Or more landing ships or something.

Interested in French comms yet we installed our own? They were never allowed to export radios based on NATO waveguides. We wanted modular shipbuilding and we got it... for free. Just because we get paid back in more rubles doesn't mean we made a profit... that is called breaking even when your currency collapses. We are spending $8 billion a month to keep it stable, this billion returned will last 3.5 days.