Nein, thanks: Germany snubs F-35, new fighter choice still up in air

[Thüringer]

Buying a weapon and trusting another power to solve all of your security issues are really two very different things.

If Germany really wanted, it could look at some local assembly and part production, and compete on contracts as the come up. This was Japans intention before they got desperate on delivery dates. The F-35 is a global project, under US leadership, there are multiple assembly points and part suppliers, Italy and the UK are two major players in the project. So it isn't exactly accurate to say its not a European plane, there is a global parts supply. There is a difference between the US doing 100% of the fighting in a war to protect another nation, and them selling a weapon system.

Low observable is still relevant. Australia could detect headings and airspeed of B-2 bombers over Continental US airbases since the early 2000's. Doing so from a fighter platform to get a real time targeting solution is a whole different mater, and doing it at tactical distances to give you the upper hand is another level again. Low observable is just one of the "symptoms" of a 5th gen plane, not the core technology.

Going down the Eurofighter hole again, is likely to be more problematic again, with less partners. France and Germany? Are they any closer now than when the original Eurofighter program was started?

If you are in an actual conflict, good luck keeping that supply chain going all euro. How many German Eurofighters are operational today? How deep is the logistics channels for Tiger? At least with US equipment there is likely to be a steady supply if you want it during conflicts. Japan/Korea often makes local versions based on US equipment and pieces, so if in a conflict they need to expand production, many core technologies are available to drop in or replace locally produced components.

Many countries are using the F-35 to augment their forces. So they might have a handful of F-35 squadrons, able to integrate into the US picture, or provide key first strike capabilities, with other fighters like Euro-fighters/F-15/F-18/F-16 etc providing 2nd capability.

It seems instead of being reasonable and looking at it pragmatically, because things have changed, they are ditching anything US. Seems like a hard way to do things. Even China doesn't do that.

For example the Type 052 destroyer - Wikipedia is fitted with US GM2500 engines.

I dont think that german defense corporations would be happy with "local assembly and part" production.

As it seems, Lockheed Martin realized this late in the discussion and brought the offer into the table that the F35 could give Germany the knowledge about constructing its own 5th gen jet.

I belive the core problem was Trump though.

He attacked Germany alot last year. Media pushed and boiled it up.

If you follow recent german defense decissions, they all walk around US equipment. Contracts are written in a way, that US corporations cant fullfill the demands. Same counts for the rifle replacement our army starts now.

Media here wrote down the F35 and started to portray it in a very negative light to the public.

I think the core must be, that Germany at any time is able to construct its own jet. At no time should we fall into the hole to be dependend on a foreign power.

Germany was not a developing partner of the F35. Just getting some assembly lines and spare part production could not match that.

 

[Feanor]

Other areas I would be concerned about is what the likely cost and time to develop a replacement solution would be. An issue I have had with both the Typhoon and Rafale procurement and deployment decisions is that while the fighters are 4+ gen fighters, they came out at basically the tail end of the 4th generation, and therefore are likely expected to serve alongside (and possibly against) 5th gen fighters, all while being a half generation behind. With current US plans suggesting that the F-35 will see front line service into the 2040's possibly until 2050, it seems logical to think that the US would be planning on developing a 6th gen fighter capability of some sort for introduction either in the 2040's or early 2050's. Basically around the time it seems that the proposed Franco-German fighter would be introduced.

What I would be concerned about in that regards is that with France and Germany starting "farther behind" as it were in fighter generation development, as well as likely having a smaller order book, then either the future Franco-Germany fighter is going to be less advanced when it is introduced (i.e. a 5th gen or 5.5 gen design in a 6th gen world) or that the cost to develop and produce the fighter will be significantly higher, or both.

But this is the boat nearly everyone is in. Even Russia and China can't match the US in this area. Realistically if the US can keep going the way it has been, it will end up a generation ahead of practically the entire world. Of course even the US had to make the F-35 an international program to spread out the cost. Realistically I think the US is very optimistic if they think they will retire and replace the F-35 by 2050. That would essentially make for a 30 year career. The current teen series fighters have already seen longer service lives then that. And given the rising costs, it's an open question whether even the US will be able to afford a 2000+ aircraft fleet of 6th gens. And while you can argue that 1 5th gen replaces 2 4th gens, etc. it's not quite that simple. As someone pointed out, one plane can't be in two places at once, no matter how combat effective it is.

I suspect that 1) barring another major war that re-arranges the geopolitical order and 2) given current trends, the US will be in a league of it's own, in terms of air power, for the forseeable future, into the 5th and 6th generation with China slowly catching up and Russia and the Europeans slowly falling behind. This means that for Germany, you either get on board with US programs, developments, and quite likely geopolitics, or be left behind by the US. Which isn't the end of the world, as long as you're not planning to go to war against the US or US allies.

 

[John Fedup]

In theory yes, but as you point out the economic factors are significant. Given the US debt levels and a trending leftish House and a possible change in the WH, the actual number of 5th Gen fighters may not happen. Most of the “teen” fleet is rapidly approaching the “best before date”. This is why the more Western allies buy into the F-35 the better we will be.

Like Canada, the German decision is purely political and the EU future generation fast jet is a path to economic ruin; both from a development point of view and cost of operation. Then there is the weapons integration. That will require Germany and France to carry the load on that as well. Maybe junior will help.

 

[Todjaeger]

But this is the boat nearly everyone is in. Even Russia and China can't match the US in this area. Realistically if the US can keep going the way it has been, it will end up a generation ahead of practically the entire world. Of course even the US had to make the F-35 an international program to spread out the cost. Realistically I think the US is very optimistic if they think they will retire and replace the F-35 by 2050. That would essentially make for a 30 year career. The current teen series fighters have already seen longer service lives then that. And given the rising costs, it's an open question whether even the US will be able to afford a 2000+ aircraft fleet of 6th gens. And while you can argue that 1 5th gen replaces 2 4th gens, etc. it's not quite that simple. As someone pointed out, one plane can't be in two places at once, no matter how combat effective it is.

I suspect that 1) barring another major war that re-arranges the geopolitical order and 2) given current trends, the US will be in a league of it's own, in terms of air power, for the forseeable future, into the 5th and 6th generation with China slowly catching up and Russia and the Europeans slowly falling behind. This means that for Germany, you either get on board with US programs, developments, and quite likely geopolitics, or be left behind by the US. Which isn't the end of the world, as long as you're not planning to go to war against the US or US allies.

As I understand it, the F-35 is expected to be retained in service until ~2070, but starting around ~2050 it is anticipated that a new generation of front line combat aircraft of some type will be entering service. Not unlike how the USAF now operates a mixed 4th/5th gen air superiority fighter fleet.

As a side note, a single plane can be in two places at once. It just is not usually healthy for the pilot...

With respect to Russia and China, those countries currently have programmes to develop their own LO platforms, as well as incorporate datalinks and information sharing like the US, NATO, and major allied countries do. However Russia and I suspect China to a lessor extent also place a much greater emphasis on air defence being ground-based, while Western air defence doctrine is largely centered on air defence being carried out or provided by aerial assets. If Germany (or another Western country for that matter) opts to take a path with less emphasis on maintaining an informational edge over potential adversaries, then those Western forces could find themselves quite vulnerable to Russian or Chinese kit, whether it is used by Russia, China, or another state that was a weapons client.

Come 2035 or 2040, it could very well be that a Russian development of the S-400 radars would be able to easily detect inbound Typhoons while they are still a tactically useful distance away, if they do not already possess this capability. This could then permit an S-400 system to engage the German fighter aircraft, or with improvements to datalinks and information sharing, other assets could be assigned to deal with the Typhoons, possibly even before the Typhoons would know they are about to be engaged.

If Germany ever falls behind the capability curve, then the risk of losses in the event of an actual conflict would rise

 

[Todjaeger]

I dont think that german defense corporations would be happy with "local assembly and part" production.

Why not? As I understand it, that is what the Eurofighter consortium has conducted. There are four assembly plants, one in each partner nation, which assembles the Eurofighters for parts provided by each of the partner nations, with each partner nation having production facilities responsible for manufacturing certain specific parts. Please correct me if I have this wrong, but from what I have come across it seems that none of the Eurofighter partner nations is able to produce a completely domestic Eurofighter.

 

[seaspear]

Certification of the Eurofighter to carry the b61 bomb according to Andrea Shalal of Reuters quoting sources can take up to seven years .,which possibly means the Tornado is kept flying somehow or Germany is not able to meet the N.A.T.O commitment there on its delivery

 

[StingrayOZ]

Its entirely possible that the NATO nuclear sharing agreement could be ended.
US just deploys any weapons off their own platforms from its own bases. Given the availability of the German aircraft that is likely anyway.
How believable is a Tornado flying gravity dropped nuclear weapons in against Russia in 2025 or beyond?

There is a line of argument that the agreement and possibly NATO should have ended when the USSR broke up. Russia, while a threat, isn't the same threat that caused the need for the NATO nuclear sharing agreement. As Trump told South Korea and Japan, if you want nuclear weapons, develop them yourselves. We are seeing the collapse of the INF treaty right now.

US isn't terribly concerned about F-35 secrets in terms of production. Hell, Turkey is making them and parts for them. Italy and the UK and Canada have other aviation programs, it wasn't an issue for them. They are very, very protective of the source code however.

Canada was a partner, but doesn't seem to be buying any F-35's, US would probably be happy if Germany picked up the huge Canadian contracts for the F-35 if they also went and purchased F-35's as well.

Germany isn't unique in the world. They should have a hard look at Japans capabilities. Japan, who also spends ~1% of GDP, but has a lot more capability. But even Japan, couldn't make the numbers work on fighters. Ditched its own indigenous fighters and went F-35.

I think the core must be, that Germany at any time is able to construct its own jet. At no time should we fall into the hole to be dependent on a foreign power.

I look forward to hearing about Germany developing nuclear weapons, launching aircraft carriers, developing SSN's, developing, building hundreds of fighters and launching satellites etc. If your talking about becoming a non-aligned power look at spending 3-5% of GDP and do so with the capabilities that would provide. I expect them to be leading military missions outside of NATO around the globe, sorting out all sorts of issues. If Germany wants to reinvent the military wheel and everything forward, good luck.

Most non-aligned just purchase or develop equipment from multiple partners so they would always have some capability and are able to weather pressure. Germany isn't incapable of making its own supply chain, if Iran can do it, I am pretty sure the whole of western Europe could do it.

Germany seems to be just waking up, and hasn't go a proper strategic direction. For years the German Military was a paradox. First thing they should probably work out is what they want to achieve, then seek capability to get them there. Just randomly going off and not buying US kit is silly, particularly where no alternative exists.

I would look at Japan, Korea, Singapore, Israel. There is a variety of good models, off different sizes, that Germany could find useful in developing a new strategic posture. Singapore is the only non-aligned in that pile, even those with strong US alliances diversify.

 

[Feanor]

With respect to Russia and China, those countries currently have programmes to develop their own LO platforms, as well as incorporate datalinks and information sharing like the US, NATO, and major allied countries do. However Russia and I suspect China to a lessor extent also place a much greater emphasis on air defence being ground-based, while Western air defence doctrine is largely centered on air defence being carried out or provided by aerial assets. If Germany (or another Western country for that matter) opts to take a path with less emphasis on maintaining an informational edge over potential adversaries, then those Western forces could find themselves quite vulnerable to Russian or Chinese kit, whether it is used by Russia, China, or another state that was a weapons client.

I don't think Germany would go it alone, I rather suspect they would bank on pan-European cooperation in defense areas. For example, Germany and France are talking about a joint FMBT project currently. France must know they can't pull a 5th gen alone, they barely got the Rafale project going, and given the timeframe, they're behind the curve on that one, in my opinion. They kind of got lucky with the Cold War ending when it did. And I don't think a joint EU effort would fall behind Russia. Probably behind China, but not quickly and not soon. Though I guess it heavily depends on the politics of it.

Come 2035 or 2040, it could very well be that a Russian development of the S-400 radars would be able to easily detect inbound Typhoons while they are still a tactically useful distance away, if they do not already possess this capability. This could then permit an S-400 system to engage the German fighter aircraft, or with improvements to datalinks and information sharing, other assets could be assigned to deal with the Typhoons, possibly even before the Typhoons would know they are about to be engaged.

Perhaps I'm missing something... what about the Typhoons currently would prevent the S-400 or even an advanced S-300 variant from detecting them at a tactically useful distance? I understand that with EW, stand-off munitions, etc. there are ways to keep them out of the engagement envelope, especially the stand-off munitions. But unless you're suggesting a radical gains in OTH radars, or significant gains in Russian AEW integration with GBAD (implying they currently can't) I don't see how this will change. Prior to this conversation I was of the opinion that Typhoons, and other 4th gens, are already extremely unlikely to successfully drop nuclear bombs over something like the Moscow region air defense grid without a weeks or months long SEAD/DEAD campaign. On the subject of other assets, with Russia having flying LO in LRIP, this also isn't a future scenario. As far as I can tell if Russia was pressured they could push for an in-service early variant of the PAK-FA now. It would be pricey, and would have some issues, but they felt confident enough to deploy a pair to Syria for a live weapons test. So it's not like something would radically change 10 or 20 years down the road...

If Germany ever falls behind the capability curve, then the risk of losses in the event of an actual conflict would rise

I mean.... I strongly suspect that the growing rift between the US and the EU is behind decisions like this one. During the Cold War the US was the de-facto leader of NATO. With the Soviet threat gone, many European nations don't see why they should follow the US lead in areas where it doesn't suit their interests. And as those areas multiple, the world no longer being divided into red and not, there will be a continued push for decreasing dependence on the US.

 

[seaspear]

More recently Spain was asked to be involved in the Franco- German plans for future fighter aircraft ,they could ignore Brexit and involve the U.K which spoke of the Tempest aircraft as a demonstrator ,Japan although it has has gone for the F35 a and b is still looking at its Mitsubishi fighter as a base for a future aircraft
There has been testing of conformal tanks on the Eurofighter for several years perhaps such an aircraft modified could substitute some of the Tornado roles .
A brand new aircraft though would easily take more than a decade , considering the history of the Eurofighter .
Personally I believe Germany should put the funding in to get the present Eurofighters up to scratch except tier one
Order the F35a
Form a partner ship for a new aircraft that meets the identified needs of the partners or is able to be adopted to those partners needs

 

[John Fedup]

It will be interesting to see what the British aerospace industry does should Brexit come a hard exit. RR has already moved their regulatory team to Berlin but moving manufacturing out the UK would create a real brawl domestically. If the EU bans British involvement then partnerships with the US and Japan are options that should be viable to all three countries.

 

[John Fedup]

The economic benefits of a EU program are a given but then you have the political baggage of where stuff gets built(workshare) and where stuff can be sold. The link below illustrates the problems with the latter.

German Veto on Meteor Missile Sale to Saudi Hampers Cooperation

 

[seaspear]

WORLD NEWS
FEBRUARY 6, 2019 / 9:42 AM / UPDATED 5 HOURS AGO
France and Germany to launch first contracts on future combat jets


3 MIN READ


PARIS (Reuters) - France and Germany will on Wednesday announce a 65 million euros ($74 million) contract financed equally by both countries over two years as the first act of the joint program to design a next-generation combat jet, a French army source said.

Dassault Aviation and Airbus, which will build the jet that is expected to replace Dassault’s Rafale and Germany’s Eurofighters by 2024, will start work on the concept and architectures of the program, the source said.

The companies are expected to launch demonstrators of aircraft and engine by mid-2019.

French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel first announced plans in July 2017 for the new Future Combat Air System (FCAS), which will include a fighter jet and a range of associated weapons, including drones.


After nearly two years of preparatory work by the companies involved, Wednesday’s agreements and contract signing will pave the way for the program to begin in earnest.

Airbus and Dassault have been waiting for initial contracts to be signed to start work on the new project.

France’s Safran and Germany’s MTU Aero Engines are expected to join forces to develop the engine for the new warplane, while French electronics firm Thales and European missile maker MBDA would also participate.


French Armed Forces Minister Florence Parly and German Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen will preside over the signing ceremony at a Safran site in northeastern Paris on Wednesday.

Germany removed a key obstacle to progress on the project last week when it bowed to French demands and excluded Lockheed Martin’s F-35 stealth fighter from a multibillion-euro tender to replace ageing Tornado fighter jets that are fitted to carry U.S. nuclear weapons.

Paris, Germany’s closest European partner, had warned that buying the F-35 in particular would derail plans to develop the new Franco-German fighter by 2040 since it would constitute a potential competitor to that project.

France and Germany will add Spain as a full partner in the program this summer, sources told Reuters in December.


Russia rebuffs U.S., plans new missiles by 2021
Britain, which is due to exit the European Union in March, unveiled its own rival aircraft development program, dubbed Tempest, at the Farnborough Air Show in July.

European military and industry executives say they believe the two programmes could and should eventually be merged given the need to compete internationally and the many billions of euros needed to develop a new combat aircraft.

The French army source said France and Germany were open to more European partners joining the program.

Reporting by Julie Carriat, Andrea Shalal, John Irish and Sophie Louet; writing by Bate Felix; Editing by Phil Berlowitz

Our Standards:The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles.

@seaspear Cutting and pasting without commentary is against the rules. You have been around here long enough to know that.

Ngatimozart

 

[seaspear]

The article states that Germany bowed to French demands on the F35 lol

@seaspear Why is this comment not in the article above? I presume that it is referring to that article. You've been around here long enough to know the rules.

Ngatimozart

 

[SteveR]

I dont think that german defense corporations would be happy with "local assembly and part" production.

I belive the core problem was Trump though.

He attacked Germany alot last year. Media pushed and boiled it up.

If you follow recent german defense decissions, they all walk around US equipment. Contracts are written in a way, that US corporations cant fullfill the demands. Same counts for the rifle replacement our army starts now.

I think the core must be, that Germany at any time is able to construct its own jet. At no time should we fall into the hole to be dependend on a foreign power.

Germany was not a developing partner of the F35. Just getting some assembly lines and spare part production could not match that.

But all these arguments apply equally to the F-18E which Germany has selected as one of the two candidates!!

This is all about European (particularly French) jealousy that the F-35 has taken so much of the future fighter market.

 

[the concerned]

The French and Germans are on dream street if they think they are going to develop a fighter to compete with the F-35. Technically yes they have the ability but to be able to produce a aircraft that could be viable on international market no chance. The Rafale and typhoon are already more expensive than the F-35 Now let alone a replacement fighter. As for Spain can the harriers and hornets last that long.

 

[seaspear]

Since the plan is to develop the aircraft by 2040 ,thats another twenty years for all of these air forces aircraft?

 

[the concerned]

The problem is both France and Spain require naval aircraft asweĺl.

 

[John Fedup]

...and in Spain’s case, STOVL are required assuming they are not interested in a future French designed CATOBAR carrier. There is no way this future fast jet program will offer a STOVL version.

 

[ngatimozart]

How about a bit more input than just one line posts. One line posts aren't really allowed.

 

[swerve]

...and in Spain’s case, STOVL are required assuming they are not interested in a future French designed CATOBAR carrier. There is no way this future fast jet program will offer a STOVL version.

The timescale doesn't fit anyway.

I doubt that any thought has been given to anything other than F-35B as a replacement for Spanish Harriers, & some will be bought as soon as money is allocated - if it is.