Page 5 of 16 FirstFirst 1234567891011121314 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 75 of 229

Thread: EU break-up no longer unthinkable

  1. #61
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    15 Dec 06
    Posts
    1,003
    What exactly is the limitation that precludes the Typhoon from being modified to serve in the nuclear strike role? The smaller and lighter Mirage 2000, which was also designed primarily as an air-superiority fighter like the Typhoon, performed the nuclear strike role for the French. What technological limitation would stop the Germans from similarly modifying the Typhoon?

  2. #62
    Regular
    Join Date
    06 Jan 17
    Location
    London
    Posts
    36
    France to take over NATO European leadership?

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017...ritain-brexit/

  3. #63
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    3,937
    Quote Originally Posted by Firestorm View Post
    What technological limitation would stop the Germans from similarly modifying the Typhoon?
    Principally mostly the fact that we'd need to buy additional Eurofighters to keep up the current six-tactical-wings layout without Tornado. In addition there's reservations about handing over Eurofighter blueprints to the USA, which would be a definite requirement for integration.

  4. #64
    Senior Contributor Doktor's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Aug 08
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    13,668
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    Principally mostly the fact that we'd need to buy additional Eurofighters to keep up the current six-tactical-wings layout without Tornado. In addition there's reservations about handing over Eurofighter blueprints to the USA, which would be a definite requirement for integration.
    Meh, they already have them.
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  5. #65
    Senior Contributor Mihais's Avatar
    Join Date
    15 Apr 08
    Location
    Transylvania
    Posts
    5,099
    Not the German version.Is not that's such a huge issue.The Germans don't sell it bc they cannot find clients.So no trade secrets lost.And hopefully the Germans don't plan to fight US,even if the devilish fascist Trump is now the great white father in Washington.
    Those who know don't speak
    He said to them, "But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don't have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one. Luke 22:36

  6. #66
    Senior Contributor Doktor's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Aug 08
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    13,668
    Quote Originally Posted by Mihais View Post
    Not the German version.
    Especially the German version. BND = NSA, remember?
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  7. #67
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    3,937
    Realistically - we prefer to keep two different aircraft models around, not a single fleet of the same type. Been doing it that way since the 50s. Main reason for this is that if you're grounding one type for some technical reason you're not grounding your whole fleet like this.

    Buying additional Eurofighters, or rather setting aside money for them, might have been a possibility fifteen years ago. If we replace Tornado now it'll definitely be with another aircraft different from the Eurofighter. If we wanted to shift over the Tornado roles, integrating them into the Eurofighter, then we'd only do so if we're downsizing our fleet and giving up the two-aircraft model at the same time.

  8. #68
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,252
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    The problem for Germany is that our sole remaining national supplier of combat aircraft - Airbus DS - is pretty miffed with the government over the A400M deal, and that the government in turn is not satisfied with how previous international joint projects (Eurofighter in particular) have run. The consequence of this is mentioned in the PDF a bit earlier on:

    "The central element of this new approach to multinational cooperation is the assumption of a lead role by a single nation for each platform. This lead role is not necessarily linked to a dominant share of the work and may also be justifed by the contribution of one or more key technologies. What is instead crucial in this context is control over a process. For reasons of industrial, economic or Alliance policy, compromises must therefore be reached on other projects. This means, however, that a nation must relinquish a leading role in other felds of technology."

    This is a departure from previous politics in so far as it makes it possible for Germany to e.g. strike a deal with France and let them take the "lead role" having Dassault develop a platform that we'll then buy. In return it could mean that e.g. the French then buy something entirely else from German companies as part of a compromise trade-off; tanks come to mind in particular for the same timeframe, as there's already some cooperation on a possible joint successor to Leopard 2 and Leclerc.
    Eurofighter project definitely seemed to suffer from having too many cooks in the kitchen. The suggested trade off seems reasonable as far as reducing the inevitable scope creep that turns up in projects like this. I assume there will still have to be some level of understanding between the countries footing the bill on what they intend to buy before it is handed off to one member to manage.

    A Leopard II/Leclerc replacement seems like a fair tradeoff. I assume the French HK-416 selection isn't a big enough order to offset a project like the Tornado replacement.

  9. #69
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    3,937
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    I assume the French HK-416 selection isn't a big enough order to offset a project like the Tornado replacement.
    Yeah, the HK-416F deal is rumoured to be around 300-350 million worth, a new combat aircraft would likely come with a full bill of around thirty times that - at minimum. Plus of course such trade-offs would have to be agreed after the above policy came into effect - and the idea is about having a project in which both sides procure the product, but one side manages the development of this product within this procurement process while the other only buys it or only contributes in certain, previously agreed, tightly defined technologies to the overall project

    This instead of previous affairs where you basically even had to divide physical work based on how much each side was worth - as in previously "we're buying 40% of it, we want 40% of the aircraft - ...each component maybe even... - to be produced here too". Hence why e.g. Eurofighter has parallel production lines in Germany, the UK and Italy. That is pretty much what is being abandoned.

    There are medium-sized joint projects - bilateral between Germany and France mostly - that have been successful with a similar style of operations that came from original separate procurement. One such example is the joint military satellite reconnaissance network, in which Germany fields radar imaging satellites and France fields electro-optic imaging satellites; the two systems are connected and both capabilities available to either nation to complement each other. Both nations have the lead role for their respective field and under their own auspices upgrade and renew their existing part without "intruding" on the other's side of the system. Both countries have supplemental other systems that the other doesn't have access to, and which they keep outside this project, integrating the data yielded only on their side; this in particular includes ELINT satellites on the French side.

    There's of course always one other fall-back idea for FCAS. Simply integrate the Dutch and Belgian F-35 into the German Air Force - gonna happen at some point in the next two decades - switch some Eurofighters and F-35 around between wings and then copy whatever the British and Italians have been doing. As a fall-back option that'd be a pretty nice, clean one.
    Last edited by kato; 12 Jan 17, at 17:24.

  10. #70
    Senior Contributor SteveDaPirate's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Aug 13
    Location
    Kansas City, United States
    Posts
    1,252
    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    There are medium-sized joint projects - bilateral between Germany and France mostly - that have been successful with a similar style of operations that came from original separate procurement. One such example is the joint military satellite reconnaissance network, in which Germany fields radar imaging satellites and France fields electro-optic imaging satellites; the two systems are connected and both capabilities available to either nation to complement each other. Both nations have the lead role for their respective field and under their own auspices upgrade and renew their existing part without "intruding" on the other's side of the system. Both countries have supplemental other systems that the other doesn't have access to, and which they keep outside this project, integrating the data yielded only on their side; this in particular includes ELINT satellites on the French side.
    That's an interesting way of doing things. Seems like it could leave both sides hamstrung in the event of a political spat that had someone turn off the sharing.

    Personally I'd think the way to go would be for each member to contribute their area of expertise towards a common ELINT sat, then share intel across the constellations for better coverage. Of course that approach requires more trust, since you are showing the other party the goods.

    Quote Originally Posted by kato View Post
    There's of course always one other fall-back idea for FCAS. Simply integrate the Dutch and Belgian F-35 into the German Air Force - gonna happen at some point in the next two decades - switch some Eurofighters and F-35 around between wings and then copy whatever the British and Italians have been doing. As a fall-back option that'd be a pretty nice, clean one.
    I don't know about plans to integrate Dutch and Belgian F-35s with the German Air Force, would there be enough planes to go around? I believe the two of them are each procuring ~35 fighters. That doesn't leave much wiggle room for them, even if Eurofighters help fill the gaps.

    If for some reason the FCAS program went down in flames, I'm sure the US would be more than happy to sell later block F-35s to any NATO members that want them. Still, as nice as additional F-35 sales might be for our domestic procurement prices, I'd actually rather see a solid European 5th gen competitor emerge to keep the US defense primes honest. It also prevents a potential unknown flaw with the F-35 or FCAS from dooming alliance airpower altogether.
    Last edited by SteveDaPirate; 12 Jan 17, at 20:31.

  11. #71
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    05 Sep 06
    Posts
    3,937
    Quote Originally Posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    Personally I'd think the way to go would be for each member to contribute their area of expertise towards a common ELINT sat, then share intel across the constellations for better coverage.
    We do that for civilian recon sats, i.e. letting the EU as an organization run those constellations (about 20 satellites ultimately - Sentinel network). There's also currently plans for dual-use joint GEO communications satellites at EU level (GovSatCom).

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    would there be enough planes to go around? I believe the two of them are each procuring ~35 fighters. That doesn't leave much wiggle room for them, even if Eurofighters help fill the gaps.
    Two tactical wings, the same number as we currently have in Tornados.

    Quote Originally Posted by SteveDaPirate View Post
    I'd actually rather see a solid European 5th gen competitor emerge
    France decided to skip 5th gen and go directly to 6th gen with their next combat aircraft.
    Last edited by kato; 13 Jan 17, at 06:00.

  12. #72
    Senior Contributor Toby's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 16
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    1,100
    Fully appreciate that technology and the threat changes. Just find the German position hard to understand. Why abandon a platform that you already own for a French one...Also Clearly the F35 is a great aircraft. But it's not German and is hardly a replacement for the tornado.....A little work on the typhoon and the Germans have their updated more modern replacement.
    Worth while noting that US strategy is moving away from current 4th 5th 6th gen language...and is moving more toward air superiority

  13. #73
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    13 Nov 07
    Posts
    3,546
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    Fully appreciate that technology and the threat changes. Just find the German position hard to understand. Why abandon a platform that you already own for a French one...Also Clearly the F35 is a great aircraft. But it's not German and is hardly a replacement for the tornado.....A little work on the typhoon and the Germans have their updated more modern replacement.
    Worth while noting that US strategy is moving away from current 4th 5th 6th gen language...and is moving more toward air superiority
    How would a typhoon of any sort survive next gen Russian air defenses? Something with the capabilities of an f35 is the baseline for a new penetrating bomber in the 2030s. Typhoon is a dead end.

  14. #74
    Senior Contributor Doktor's Avatar
    Join Date
    25 Aug 08
    Location
    Skopje, Macedonia
    Posts
    13,668
    Quote Originally Posted by citanon View Post
    How would a typhoon of any sort survive next gen Russian air defenses? Something with the capabilities of an f35 is the baseline for a new penetrating bomber in the 2030s. Typhoon is a dead end.
    Wouldn't they be wiped out before the birds reach them?

    I mean, I've been watching GW1, GW2, Serbia, Libya... tomahawks and other cruise missiles go in first, the fancy birds come later. The retro birds come much later.
    No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

    To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

  15. #75
    Senior Contributor Toby's Avatar
    Join Date
    06 Nov 16
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    1,100
    Quote Originally Posted by citanon View Post
    How would a typhoon of any sort survive next gen Russian air defenses? Something with the capabilities of an f35 is the baseline for a new penetrating bomber in the 2030s. Typhoon is a dead end.
    The last thing I would be worried about is a near banqrupt state developing a F35 type aircraft. None of their copies were much to swagger about.....Given the limitations of the German defence budget. The Typhoon would fit quite nicely

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Y-12 break in
    By Double Edge in forum International Defense and Terrorism Topics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05 Nov 14,, 05:40
  2. The Unthinkable - Iran Nuclear strike against Israel
    By SirSydneySmith in forum The Iranian Question
    Replies: 112
    Last Post: 28 Jan 09,, 18:53
  3. Replies: 10
    Last Post: 01 Jan 07,, 02:57
  4. I'm no longer sure we're going to win. Or even survive.
    By Bluesman in forum International Economy
    Replies: 62
    Last Post: 06 Oct 06,, 13:41
  5. How much longer is this war?
    By EPA in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 96
    Last Post: 19 Mar 05,, 22:19

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •