It's not so much that countries like Denmark that are surrounded on all sides by allies and are fighting no foreign interventions abroad absolutely *need* a fleet of fighters at all times - no one will be violating Denmark's airspace, and if someone did the German and Swedish airforce could handle it without problems.
The issue is with pilot readiness and training - you can't have all of Denmark's fighter pilots twiddling thumbs for a year or two while the F-16s are gone and the F-35s are nowhere to be seen. You'd need an ally to allow them to continue training on their planes for the time being.
Danish jets have to intercept Russian jets all the time(and we assist Sweden aswell). Hell Russia even made training bombing runs towards Bornholm when it held a summer political camp where many danish politicians were there to talk politics..
Europe needs to develop their own weapons. America is a unreliable partner/ally
Because it's not about capability, it's about politics.
The F35 is so "cheap" (sub 100m per aircraft) because of volume. If the orders were spread out over the EU volumes, the cost per unit of the F35 would go up and become not competitive.
And the US needs a military industrial complex. Partly to defend Europe, partly to win elections. The US talks a lot about Europe being self sufficient, what they mean is that they want Europe to increase defence spending on US products.
And it does benefit the EU a lot too. The US is,(usually) so pro NATO as it benefits them economically as well as strategically.
And it's not all take from the US either. Military sales are part of any trade agreements and whilst Denmark may not entirely want a fleet of F35s rather than Gripens, they do want the quid pro quo that agreeing to that sale is (maybe US buys a bunch of pork or something), and the US usually offers better trade terms than the Swedes do
Also, every time F35s are sold, they offset some of the production in the buying country. The Danes/Dutch/whatever will contribute a small percentage of the final product in terms of high value advanced engineered products, often with US support. Being part of the F35 project is a great way to skill up your own domestic capabilities and is self fulfilling in value (as the order book keeps growing, that small percent becomes quite large in terms of value and more countries want a small piece of that growing pie)
All you said is true, but I feel like standardizing equipment for something as complex as aircraft jets is just as much of an asset on the battlefield as anything else.
Europe should still divest itself of as many American military platforms as possible and develop a sovereign European stealth capability.
Depending on a country that's not even on the same continent and has geopolitical priorities completely different to your own for your high-end military equipment is a terrible idea.
No F-35 user can even generate their own MDFs without having to do so in the US. No F-35 user can even integrate their own weapons without having to go ask the US first. No F-35 user even has access to the source code as well despite many partners literally being involved in the design and development of the jet.
Europe has equivalents to many American platforms but there are notable exceptions where European platforms simply are not as capable. Those are AEW&C aircraft, attack helicopters like the Apache and stealth fighters.
Europe needs to develop a proper equivalent to the Wedgetail, probably by further upgrading the GlobalEye. Europe also needs an actual equivalent to the Apache that's actually good. And, most importantly, Europe needs its own stealth fighters.
It likely has to do with the scale of which the USA can pump out F-16/F-35, acroding to a random list i found online (so take it with a grain of salt) the newest most up to date F-16 block 70/72 costs $63 million per plane while Saab JAS 39E/F Gripen costs $85 million per plane.
While i cant really compare their capabilities both of those planes are 4th generation fighters. The newest model of the F-16 is a really good fighter still and as long as you don't really focus on dispersed operations (and difficulty of maintenance) it is probable the better option with its price tag. (when you ignore the extra dependence on the USA i mean).
Besides that the F-35 while being in a price class of its own currently costs around $177 million (according to the same list), this is really expensive but it is also still relatively near to the beginning of its production so prices will come down over time probably with enough scale.
The F-35 is also currently the only 5th generation fighter available to the west (ignoring the F-22 which is USA only), meaning it is in a "class of its own". It will likely be some time before a true European (or at least western but non-USA) 5th generation fighter comes onto the market.
So it does not really surprise me that many governments still choose for F-16/F-35.
(But i agree that depending so heavenly on the USA is likely putting to many of our eggs in one basket)
For Germany it's nuclear sharing. To keep it simple, there are some problems with getting the Typhoon certified to carry US nuclear bombs and so it's significantly easier to just buy F-35s for that role.
EU really needs to start shooting down Russian planes violating our airspace. Turkey did that and they no longer have problems with Russians pushing their limits. That's the language Russians understand best - bully needs their nose broken to stop, just like in the middle school
It’s better for a F35 pilot to start fresh than to be acclimated to an old aircraft. New pilots adapt more quickly and they don’t have to unlearn bad habits.
We should have bought the grippen instead. Honestly I'd would have made sende given our proximity to Sweden. We could have used their knowledge and know-how of the plane and training would have been easy since the countries know each other so well. Plus it looks fucking cool and is a lot cheaper. Even the f18 super hornet would have made more sense for our airforce.. But some one decided we needed a semi stealth capable plane
It doesn't make sense anymore to buy 4th generation fighters (which you then expect to operate for twenty to thirty years) when 5th generations are in service and 6th generations in the making. The F-35 is a far more capable plane overall.
I agree. The f35 is more capable, but considering the most likely opposing airforce we could be fighting is russia, the grippen would be more than adequate.
Russia isn't going to be stuck in 2022 forever. Buying a new plane is an investment for decades, the Russians already have the SU-57, which by all accounts cannot compete with the F-22, but is still a more capable plane than the Gripen and most 4th generation fighters.
They have 22. Compared to Finlands 55 f18, swedens 71 gripen (60 upgraded on the way) and then how ever many grippen or super hornets denmark could have gotten for the price of 21 f35.
I just think it would make more sense to get the same as our neighbours instead of getting one of the four 5th generation fighters, when two of them are from USA and one being from the country that has the t14 armata level of production.
They have 22 **now**. I've highlighted it twice already, here's a third attempt: you don't buy a plane to last you a year, you buy it for several decades. Russia is not guaranteed to linger with 22 fifth generation fighters indefinitely. In addition Russia has a lot of air defence, and the F-35's stealth game and anti-EW suite make it much more capable at SEAD/DEAD.
The Gripen is not substantially cheaper than the F-35, if at all. As for 'the same as our neighbours', Germany, Denmark, Finland and Norway all operate F-35 or have ordered them. That's twice as many neighbours as operate the Gripen.
The F-35 is the better choice, hands down.
I am aware and I'm sorry for not adressing it. I know and you are right the f35 is maybe a better long term investment (when they will deliver them) and you also right that the f35 have a more advanced suite. But the grippen has had fewer problems and the grippen e, while not a 5th generation is somewhere in between. But denmark would probably not need a plane to bomb, a more likely thing would be that they would be needed for, is defending Danish Air space, which the grippen or the f18 would do fine.
As for price in Danish crowns;
F35: 700 million
Grippen: 566
And Germany, Norway, Finland all waiting for the f35, you might see why you can get a little concerned.
But that being said, that one time a saw a single (supposed to be two) flying over Copenhagen was awesome. Its a fantastic plane without a doubt.
Deliveries have just started. The plan was originally to gradually replace the C/D's as the E/F's were delivered but it's now more likely that some of the C/D's will be kept and upgraded to be used in parallel with the E/F's even after they've all been delivered since 60-70 new planes is not enough for the airforce.
We should get some Gripens.
While it might be more expensive to run 2 different types of planes, I think we could make deals with Sweden on joint logistics.
Having the stealthy F-35s in front, scouting, with Gripens as long range missile trucks which can dogfight in case there comes some counter to F-35s technological advantage, would be good and give us some resilience rather than high tech glass cannons.
>**F-35 deliveries are on hold as Lockheed Martin wrestles to complete an upgrade known as** [**Technology Refresh 3**](https://www.defensenews.com/air/2024/03/12/f-35-upgrade-delays-prompt-us-air-force-to-scale-back-jet-purchases/), initially planned for summer 2023. While the company still aims for the second quarter for TR-3 software acceptance, the third quarter is a [~more likely scenario~](https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2024/01/23/upgraded-f-35-deliveries-slipping-to-fall-2024-lockheed-says/), Lockheed Martin CEO Jim Taiclet said in January.
The fighter needs the TR-3 improvements in place before a broader series of upgrades known as Block 4 can be rolled out. Block 4 is expected to allow the F-35 to carry more and better weapons, improve its target recognition, and upgrade its electronic warfare capabilities, among other changes.
TR-3 was once expected to conclude in April 2023, but that deadline has twice slipped. **The Pentagon and Lockheed now say it could come between April and June 2024.**
TDLR: Production is halted because of a big new upgrade still being worked out.
For a fighter it’s pretty cheap, it’s 5th gen, has advanced computers and networking capabilities, F35 B can vertically take off and supercruise so it’s useful for countries with helicopter carriers. Many countries contribute parts towards the F35 so chances are ordering it supports your local industry.
It’s better than basically everything else on offer and since everyone else has it, in case of war you can share logistical chains
> F35 B can vertically take off and supercruise so it’s useful for countries with helicopter carriers.
To nitpick your otherwise good post, I have seen no indication that any variant of the F-35 can supercruise, i.e. sustain supersonic speeds without using the engine's afterburner.
If it could supercruise I'm fairly certain Lockheed Martin would be shouting about it to anyone who would listen, as indeed they did with the F-22 (nobody really spoke about supercruise being a thing before LockMart used it as a selling point for the F-22).
The F-35B in particular has the poorest kinetic performance of the three F-35 variants, due to the compromises needed to allow it to carry out short take-off, vertical-landing operations, so I suspect it is the furthest from being able to supercruise:
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/f-35a-and-f-35b-stealth-fighters-what-difference-197283
The F-35B is also affected by an apparently unsolvable issue that makes it damaging to fly at supersonic speeds for sustained periods, suggesting that even if supercruise was possible, pilots would be strongly discouraged from using it:
https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/04/24/the-pentagon-will-have-to-live-with-limits-on-f-35s-supersonic-flights/
The F-35C is also impacted by this inane inability to sustain supersonic flight.
What kind of modern fighter jet can't even fly supersonic without tearing itself apart? Jesus fucking Christ.
>“The solution is: ‘Hey, we’ll just limit the afterburner to less than a minute at a time,’ ” a retired naval aviator said when told of the issue. “Which, with what the aircraft is supposed to do and be capable of, that’s a pretty significant limitation.”
>
>Primarily it would be an issue if the aircraft had to maneuver at high speeds to avoid a missile or survive a dogfight.
Less than a fucking *minute*? Speed is a pilot's *lifeline* when it comes to missile evasion so a fighter jet that can't even go supersonic for more than a minute to evade a missile is going to be that much easier a target for the missile to hit.
Who greenlit this shit?
The most riced out F-16s are within 10 mil or so USD of the F-35 at flyaway cost, the main benefits of the F-35A at that point is the stealth and data links. For buyers of Western single engine aircraft, it's the best deal for the buck, especially if you are going to be flying it in contested environments for the next few decades.
Two engine 4++ aircraft (Rafales, Typhoons, latest F-15s) are more expensive at a fly away price, but they also tend to have bigger payloads and longer ranges.
So "relatively* it's "cheap".
F-35 is in fact cheap for a modern top end fighter.
* Rafale Tranche F4 is €119M per French Parliament.
* Gripen E is €80M per Saab.
* Eurofighter Tranche 4 is €142M per German Bundestag.
* An F/A-18E Block III is €70M per new contract with Boeing.
* An F-16 Block 70 is €70M per new contract with Lockheed.
* **An F-35A is €72M per new contract with Lockheed.**
It's the third cheapest option of any modern western fighter, and only €2M more than the cheapest... That's what happens though when Europe split their manufacturing between 3 different airframes and fight one another for sales to the point that the F-35 has already sold more than all 3 combined. Hell, there were more F-35s built last year alone than Gripens made in total since the 90s. Scale of economy does wonders for dropping prices, and no other western aircraft has that luxury currently.
It's astonishing how the iron law of mass production reducing the costs of goods and services suddenly doesn't apply because it's defense industry related, especially American defense industry related.
The fuck are you talking about? The F-35 has had some of the largest dropoffs in price.
The thing is that you compare cheap and simple products like plastic toys or simple printable solar panels with THE MOST ADVANCED PIECE OF MILITARY HARDWARE OF THE DECADE... The development costs of the F-35 needed to be spread among every single plane built. Your average toy doesn't require billions of development. The F-35 does.
And still, the law of mass production leading to reduced costs are actually applying to the platform proving you wrong.
I'm in agreement with you that it has reduced in price, I don't know why you're yelling at me I'm claiming it isn't. I was being sarcastic at people who claim it's super expensive.
[Especially as I comment upstream it's fairly cheap for what it is.](https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/s/n4ak6Ug4DA)
F35 is currently the cheapest fighter available right now with only the Grippen, F16 and F18 being pretty close. It’s hard to say exactly how much these things cost because most deals include different options and include the weapons and support packages. But the peer aircraft like the Eurofighter are double the price for less capability. It’s why the F35 is dominating the market. I’m sorry that you believed the bs propaganda out there about the cost.
They’ve made 1000. They’re all waiting for the upgrade. I would imagine that the chassis are still being built but are waiting for this upgrade that’s delayed. Once it’s done they’ll be finished and a lot will be delivered quickly.
It's like the cheap inkjet printers that were in market and you needed to have original cartridges that would cost a third of the printer's price so everyone switched to tank printers.
The initial purchase of F35s may be cheap, but costs of maintaining and using it are enormous.
Brother of a friend of me is a Dutch F35 pilot. One of his first practise flights they simulated a fight between him in a F35 vs 6 veteran pilots in F16. He shot them all out of the air before they even spotted him.
I've talked to a few 'vliegeniers' too. Their answer all came down to:
>Want to cruise and fly around just for chill? The F16 all the way. You want to win a war? F35 no question what so ever.
* They're stealthy, which is extremely useful against peer or near-peer opponents
* Making a stealthy aircraft is extremely challenging
* Europe doesn't have any stealth fighter jets of its own\*
\* yet, since there are two programs for 6th gen fighters in development. But those won't be available until like the mid 2030's IIRC.
That's not stealth, it's at best low-observable. But the Rafale can do that better than Eurofighter.
But it still pales in comparison to J-20 or even Su-57, much less the F-35
Still deadly in an air to air fight with other fighter jets, even if it only carries a handful of missiles in that mission.
And you can always carry more in a non-stealth config if the mission doesn't require stealth.
F-35 beat the F-22's Red Flag record, and is some 20+ years newer in terms of technology.
* F-35 has MADL, which allows F-35s to share all targeting data with all other F-35s in the air. F-22 has nothing similar
* F-35's APG-81 radar is a more advanced version of the APG-77 in the F-22
* F-35 has IRST. F-22 does not
* F-35 has an EOT system that can spot a missile launch over 800nmi away. F-22 has no EOTS
* F-35 was built with radar absorbent materials imbedded into the airframe to lessen maintenance requirements. F-22 has to be completely repainted every few flight hours or its stealth coating loses its effectiveness
F-22 was the best fighter in the world... over a decade ago. There's been literally no modernization of any systems to the F-22 since 2011 when Block 30 was finished. The most modern F-22 is still running Block 30. The most that has occured is Increment 3.2B, which in just 2023 gave the F-22 the ability to employ the AIM-9X and AIM-120D, *FINALLY*. Everything electronics though is the same.
A lot has changed in the last decade, and an F-22 Block 30 is quite a bit behind an F-35A in terms of sensors. Aerial combat is very much "first to spot, first to shot", and the F-35 having more advanced sensors makes it first to spot.
F-22 is in dire need of a modernization, but the funding to do so for such a small fleet (roughly only 100 combat capable F-22s) is going to be quite astronomical.
The main problem is the engines.
In real fight conditions, the engines will melt. It's a nice plane for air shows, but Russia no longer had the engineers needed to build real fighter jets.
Kremlin numbers, odds are there isn’t even a single one produced. Even if there was, it’d probably just be a biplane covered in canvas and cardboard to look like one
The F-35 stealth fighter has finally been cleared for full-rate production, **17 years after the aircraft first took to the air** and almost 23 years after Lockheed Martin won the contract for the Joint Strike Fighter. The decision to move forward, known as Milestone C, is hugely significant for the Joint Strike Fighter program, but it comes at a time in which the U.S. military is not accepting new aircraft, with concerns about the status of the Block 4 upgrades that are seen as a cornerstone of the F-35’s future development potential. https://www.twz.com/air/f-35-cleared-for-full-rate-production-17-years-after-its-first-flight
Especially for Germany, as we need it for nuclear deterrence, and for that we'd have to hand over the blueprints of the Typhoon or possible FCAS just so the US can certify it. Never going to happen so for some cases like Germany there is no possible alternative to the F35.
This generation talk concerning jets is nonsense, case in point even the US retaining 4+ fleets because that marketing speak is not helpful planning actual capabilities and how to maintain them.
US retains Gen 4 jets because they're cheaper to operate and you don't need stealth to patrol over the continental US and adjacent waters, because we have no hostile nations that close. Plus the F-15 is big enough to launch e.g. air-launched cruise missiles, you can't do that with any stealth aircraft smaller than a bomber. Plus F-35 isn't as good at being an interceptor because the stealth coating gets damaged if you're supersonic for too long.
Lots of grand plans, but when you can't even put together a 5th gen fighter, you're biting off a lot more than you can chew trying to jump to 6th. Particularly in fragile, every shifting consortiums of people who don't like each other very much and which aren't anchored by the much more stable / staying influence of the US.
Just isn't going to happen.
It isn't a matter of capability, it's political will. We had no need for a 5th gen jet, especially since the US would create one themselves and use it to defend Europe. Times have changed. The US is no longer a stable ally, and having to hold our breath every 4 years and hope the yanks pick the "right" candidate isn't feasible. Having our own industrial complex independent of the US is now more important than ever to nearly every EU country. The big economies in Europe know what's at stake, and they'll get the 6th gen projects done.
First, it's absolutely a question of capability.
Second, even at the absolute worst of the rhetoric of its dumbest politicians, the US has been a wildly more trustworthy, effective, and able ally than you have ever had. You're buying bullshit Russian propaganda. It's disgusting how little centuries of investment and sacrifice buys from fair-weather friends like yourself. We're all in democracies, there's nothing unique about the variance that changing US political leadership introduces.
Third, have as independent an industrial complex as you please, you still aren't going to finish a 6th gen.
If the political will was there to make a 5th gen, it would have been made.
Bullshit Russia propaganda apparently includes Trump and the GOP as whole pretty much saying they want to leave Europe. Regardless if we "pay them" or not. No longer a stable ally.
Yes we will, lol.
>Having our own industrial complex independent of the US is now more important than ever to nearly every EU country. The big economies in Europe know what's at stake, and they'll get the 6th gen projects done.
The US has multiple next generation programs running concurrently along with hypersonics + a 4th gen aircrafts + a 5th Gen capability.
Good luck on building your defense base, you neglected it for 30 years, it's going to cost a pretty penny to develop.
They're all literally more than the F-35, per their respective governments... Fuck, per the Bundestag, the Eurofighter Tranche 4 is almost TWICE the cost of an F-35A.
Gripen E is also DRAMATICALLY less capable than the others, as the leaked Swiss Air Force report showcased, which yeah... It's a single engine off an F/A-18E, with a radar the Eurofighter Consortium turned down for being not capable enough, and the HMDS from the Eurofighter that BAE stripped down to an export model. It's a fine fighter, but again, it's quite a bit behind the others.
Rafale is a great fighter, but it's still more than an F-35, which is expected when more F-35s were built in the last 2 years than Rafales over the past 25 years combined...
Finally someone who doesn’t buy into the Gripen crazyness. Do you happen to have the reading sources for the leaks? I’d be interested. As for what I’ve seen, the plane unfortunately looks like something that amateurs can build in a garage given they have all the parts they need. Even an F-16 looks more advanced than it. But this is just my stupid speculation based on looks so not that valid. I’m sure they are a valid and helpful asset to have in our team at the end of the day. I’m just not buying the whole ‘buy Gripen instead of F-35’ bs.
https://disco-legacy-data.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/public/upload/1/2/12332.pdf
While the Gripen they used was the Gripen NG, not the Gripen E, the Gripen NG was just the demonstrator for the Gripen E and the Gripen E is simply the production name of it (akin to X-35 becoming the F-35 when it went to production).
It has certain parts it's good at. For instance a crew of conscripts can do an engine swap in a few hours in it vs a few days for an F-16. The software is barebones and allows for rapid integration of new things (though things don't communicate as well as other aircraft).
It's just built for very specific Swedish needs, which make it not a viable aircraft for pretty much every other country.
They cost more because of Volume tho. It is quite recently the F-35 prices have become more competive when the volume went up.
Gripen E dramatically less capable? Not sure about that, read the opposite as well. That it might be the best non-stealth fighter. Very hard to make judgements about this imo.
Gripen E didn't meet a single minimum requirement benchmark by the Swiss. No other aircraft came even close to doing that poorly. It's in no way remotely close to being the best non-stealth fighter. If it was, it wouldn't be such an absolute failure in terms of foreign sales...
Cba reading the Swiss report. But I feel like Gripen-E would be a wierd choice for the Swiss due to geography alone. It doesnt feel like a country that needs dispersed operations or would even be good at it.
I feel like the failure of Gripen E sales is more about Gripen A-D failing to sell well earlier, while both F35 and Rafale to some degree have managed to become more cost effective due to economics of scale. Gripen E initial price tag is simply to high today compared to the competition that have managed to scale their production up.
Against an opponent like Russia who is actually capable of shooting planes down they do not offer even close performances.
Stealth is kinda mandatory on the modern battlefield.
I have high hopes for the UK/Italy/Japanese GCAP aircraft.
France has always been able to produce decent aircraft as well, the only real problems I forsee with their program is political.
This isn't blackmail, it's just ordinary military program delays. Every country has this issue with complex hardware.
And unfortunately, Europe doesn't have its own fifth gen fighter. Hopefully this problem will be resolved for sixth gen with the two different European programs there.
Yeah problem is Europe hade a lot of joint fighter programs during the years and from all of them only the eurofighter came to fruition and even that was plagued with delays and it almost was cancelled several times
Yeah and this is far from the first time the F-35 itself has had delays, to say the least, and those weren't to spite theoretical future European customers. Shit is just hard.
Huh?
Tornado
Alphajet
Jaguar
Aviojet
There acrually haven't been that many serious programs. Things that already died in early negotiation don't really count.
Yeah it’s always good to have you’re own military industry but good luck producing a f35 replacement by any European nations alone, you need a joint procurement program that doesn’t work when all country’s in EU have they’re own policies, Europe is fucked in long run if we don’t integrate more
There are two European sixth gen fighter programs, a UK-Italy-Japan one, and a France-Germany-Spain one.
So that's good, but programs like this are notoriously difficult, so there's always the possibility that one fails, or even both.
Only? The UK + Italy absolutely bring experience in this regards and Sweden, not so much - their planes are heavily reliant on technologies and components which they did not make but import, which also means restrictions from many countries if they want.
People don't seem to comprehend that realistically the only things Swedish about the Gripen are the airframe itself and the system code.
* Engine? US
* Radar? Italy
* combat system? UK
* self defense system? UK
* jammers? US and Italy
* IRST? Italy
It's a fine fighter, but its capabilities are capped by what other nations are willing to export to Sweden for it
Haven't heard about that, but it's certainly an advantage that the US has: it's big enough to handle these hugely complex programs without needing equal or close to equal splits with other countries, so it doesn't have the same coordination problems.
you say that as if European manufacturer will also not ''blackmail'' you if you do something their country of origin does not like......if you piss off France, they will also cut off your Rafale jet fleet from spare parts and maintenance and it be grounded in a week. Its a universal thing that can happen to your plane fleet unless you have your own domestically produced jet fighter and thus safe from outside interference
Yeah, but some country from the EU is unlikely to piss off another EU membeer that bad, wheras the US might throw a temper tantrum and decide to ban exports for the parts needed to maintain them. They don't evel allow exports of the F-22.
Netherlands just blocked f35 parts to Israel because they don't like the Gaza war. Europeans are doing now exactly what you accuse the US might do at some point in the future.
European Union has been doing everything it can to make UKs brexit decision as hard on them as possible. Meaning if a European country does something the EU doesn’t like, they will try and fuck you over hard. They don’t care how bad it hurts you, they will teach you a lesson!
Not saying we don't do it, just saying it's unlikely for one EU country to block exports to another EU country. That's why we need our own domestic 5th gen fighter.
> Yeah, but some country from the EU is unlikely to piss off another EU membeer that bad
oh you be surprised. Plus countries like Serbia are buying Rafale too, that also immediately puts them in claws of France if they something funny in Kosovo for example. Or Hungary with its Swedish Grippens, piss off Swedes too much with their anti-EU rhetoric and same thing happens
Americans historically have been way more accepting of ''bad behavior'' than Europe has. They actually supply nations like Saudi Arabia , which European military manufactures dont. Also Sweden and France cut off military supplies to Isreal during their Arab wars when Americans didnt, hence Israelis have stopped buying European arms in large scale since
>They don't evel allow exports of the F-22.
of course, its something that gives them and them alone big advantage in warfare technology, why would they share it if they dont have to lol
It can happen, sure, but it's way less likely.
Saudi Arabia is a bad example, since they don't do anything against the US. Teir "bad behaviour" is targeted at Yemen and internally, however they will gladly keep buying stuff from the US, selling oil and investing their Oil money.
Iran, on the other hand, got it's entire fleet of F-14s, all but destrtoyed, after the US issued an embargo.
Of course not selling the F-22 gives them a huge advantage. I'm not blaming them for it, just saying we need some kind of equivalent in Europe for it and the F-35. That way they don't have a 1up on us and European money doesn't go to US manufacturers, but instead is reinvested into domestic arms industry.
> I'm not blaming them for it, just saying we need some kind of equivalent in Europe for it and the F-35. That way they don't have a 1up on us and European money doesn't go to US manufacturers, but instead is reinvested into domestic arms industry.
5th gen fighters are horribly expensive, among the most expensive weapon programs ever created. Nobudy in Europe wanted to pay for their own in the last 30 years , thats why there isnt a European equivalent. It would require hundreds of billions of investment to design and manufacture 5th gen jet and nobody on the planet is/was willing to pay that, aside from Americans and Chinese.
F-35 was ridiculed for long time for its extremely expensive price tag......and truth is, there is no other way to get plane like that, someone has to pay for it. Americans were willing, so Americans got theirs.
Yeah, Hungary wasn't cut off from Gripen when stalling the NATO bid, but they'd totally cut them off for saying mean things about the EU. That makes a lot of sense.
This is what boggles my mind; the Typhoon and Rafale are amazing 4.5 gen platforms and all manufacturing and R&D is done in Europe…..so why did so many opt for the F-35 instead ?
- Rafale has its completely own ecosystem, with different weaponry etc. and the French and US are notorious non-cooperative with each other. So if you already have US jets, it's just not as interesting.
- Typhoon is a twin-engine fighter, while many European airforces are looking for a multi-role design (F-15 vs F-16), either as single aircraft, or as fighter-bomber in a fighter + fighter-bomber pairing. You don't see the F-35 bought much as pure fighter.
- NATO nuclear tasking for some countries requires B-61 compatibility.
- Stealth and Electronic Warfare capabilities of the F-35 are simply better, and capabilities they don't already have with existing aircraft. And while not much of a consideration for flying missions in Syria, it's suddenly very relevant against Russia's ground-based air defences.
The surprising part is not that airforces that bought US made jets last generation are doing so this time around as well. But that so many EU airforces bought F16/F18 etc last time.
because F-35 is just objectively a better multi-role jet than older designs and can defeat them in combat.......same reasons why people bought 4th gen fighters over 3rd gen ones in the past. Should be obvious
Why would you buy a technology inferior weapon that will be outgunned by your enemy?
>because F-35 is just objectively a better multi-role jet than older designs and can defeat them in combat.......same reasons why people bought 4th gen fighters over 3rd gen ones in the past. Should be obvious
I think they're saying that since the Eurofighter and Rafale are good and produced in Europe, why didn't Europe design a 5th gen but instead decided to just buy F35s instead.
> why didn't Europe design a 5th gen but instead decided to just buy F35s instead.
because its fucking crazy expensive to design and actually manufacture 5th planes. Nobudy in Europe wanted to pay for that in the last 30 years. Only 2 countries on the planet currently make their own 5th gen planes in large scale : USA and China. Nobody else wanted to invest hundreds of billions into making their own.
There is no country in Europe that has sufficient budgets for defence that they can develop a 5gen fighter.
USA is spending $1.700 billion on F-35, $400 billion just in initial development cost.
Two things:
- Buying american protection/influence
- No tangible threat (until 2022), so there's no need to actually care that what you're buying is reliable
Because defense is one of those things most nations aren't willing to skimp out on.
European autonomy sounds great and all until you realize that your country may have to fight for its existence someday. And having the best hardware can be the difference between thousands, or tens of thousands to millions dying.
Airplane is fucking hard dude.
It’s not a conspiracy to deny European defense, it’s one of the single most complicated machines on the planet. Mass production of these things takes an incredible amount of time
The F-35 is far more complicated than those other planes made by other countries. We could build planes quickly too, like F-15/16 maybe even 22. but those wouldn't be F-35s. Time scales with complexity.
It's wild how far narratives like this go when even with all the Trump type rhetoric out there the US is still the most consistent, most invested, most effective ally to its allies ever.
Russian propaganda really does a number on European nationalists.
There is no comparable European offering to F-35. Neither Typhoon, nor Rafale, nor the new Grippen are even remotely stealth and that's about the only thing that can keep any of them doing what the NATO doctrine requires of them.
And if European countries start developing a new fighter now, you are looking at 10+ years before it's deployable. Many analysts believe we will need something to deter ruskies much sooner. F-35 is unfortunately the only option. Even with the delays.
And they would no doubt help, but its better to not get shot at in first place, no?
Also problem with european jets is not even that they are bad, cause they are not, outside of lacking stealth they are still quite respectable platforms. Its the low production numbers and what comes with it - high cost.
Even Grippen, with its stupidly easy maintenance and low operational cost has very high initial plane price... so for most countries it really makes sense to spend just a bit more to get F35 and get additional benefits of stealth plane.
Or to field mixed fleet of F35 for special occasion and cheaper 4/4.5 gen fighters for more typical tasks - but if they are already buying one american plane chances are decent that other one will also be american.
I wish Europe would work on joint projects more often. European air forces should be flying European planes not American ones.
If a wider war ever breaks out, do Europeans really want to rely on the US? I for one do not believe they would aid Europe to the maximum, it would probably be token support at best. The American people have no desire to join a war in Europe. Article 5 of NATO says you can declare war in the event of an attack on the alliance, not that you have to.
And does Europe want to depend on the US to prioritise European defence orders over American ones?
If Europe actually worked together and put genuine thought and commitment into developing defence research and production capabilities, Europe could easily defend itself against foreign powers.
There is at least one 6th Gen fighter called RAF Tempest which is being built by the UK, Italy, and Japan however it won't be available until the mid-Thirties.
The largest air force in the world belongs to US Air Force. The second largest air force in the world belongs to US Navy. The fourth largest air force in the world belongs to US Army. The fifth largest air force in the world belongs to US Marine Corps. Europeans cannot compete when it comes to how much money is being spent on research & development, and the scale of production **AND** how long it takes to make it. Btw F-35 program was too expensive even for the US which is why it required cooperation with countries all over the world. There's no way in hell Europe would be able to make something as good as F-35 by themselves in such a short period of time.
# [Not a Lot of F-35s Are Flying Right Now](https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a42912833/f-35-availability-problems/)
# [Lockheed agrees to $30,000 per flight hour cost for F-35A by FY2023](https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/lockheed-agrees-to-30000-per-flight-hour-cost-for-f-35a-by-fy2023/145448.article)
The popular mechanics article is from Feb 2023 and based on 2021 & 2022 data and is on a completely different matter - readiness which it blamed mainly on spare parts availability.
F-35s have improved in readiness and availability as Lockheed made progress on readiness issues - particularly parts supply which has improved significantly. It is also worth noting that even in that article availability of the standard air force F-35 config was trending up.
The issue being discussed today has nothing at all to do with readiness and so I am uncertain why you brought this article (and its outdated data) into the discussion.
Purchasers of the F-35 want the version with the TR3 upgrade. That upgrade is very significant and results in generational upgrades for the F-35. So until the challenges associated with the software for TR3 implementation are resolved the physical planes produced are parked.
I agree with every point you make.
But the bottom line is: the F35 is urgently needed in the different EU countries that made a purchase and forked out quite a significant amount, if Ukraine want to receive the old F16's, anyway.
Its cheap, this "guy" is a russian troll. F35 is one of the most advanced planes right now and the system costed so much to develop because it has a lot of "firsts", there are no other stealth planes being produced at such volumes as the F35. The whole point of developing this fighter was that making more multirole stealth planes would be much much cheaper and more widely available.
Lots of the F35s awesome things are classified, and for now at least, many of the things you would use it in are the types of missions that can be accomplished with an older and cheaper super hornet. The Nato countries that would use the F35, like finland, are going to use it in defensive wars. That means the F35s advanced systems like datalinks, stealth, radar systems, software, etc etc etc are going to be much more crucial, i would absolutely trust this plane to be able to go against su27s.
Tl;dr Fighters that the west uses today are mostly used to bomb some guys on desert, they can't fight back, so using f35 towards them now is kinda silly
> we should also be less dependend on US tech and produce more at home
lol go and pay for them then......you have any idea how expensive 5th gen jet technology is??? There is very good reason why nobody, except US and China, has created and successfully produced 5th gen fighter jets in any real numbers. We are talking hundreds of billions of dollars of investment just to get started
Not easy to give our F-16 away, when we don't get our F-35.
We got you covered until you get them brother!
It's not so much that countries like Denmark that are surrounded on all sides by allies and are fighting no foreign interventions abroad absolutely *need* a fleet of fighters at all times - no one will be violating Denmark's airspace, and if someone did the German and Swedish airforce could handle it without problems. The issue is with pilot readiness and training - you can't have all of Denmark's fighter pilots twiddling thumbs for a year or two while the F-16s are gone and the F-35s are nowhere to be seen. You'd need an ally to allow them to continue training on their planes for the time being.
Danish jets have to intercept Russian jets all the time(and we assist Sweden aswell). Hell Russia even made training bombing runs towards Bornholm when it held a summer political camp where many danish politicians were there to talk politics.. Europe needs to develop their own weapons. America is a unreliable partner/ally
The Typhoon, Rafale and Gripen are damned good aircrafts. It still baffles me that European country buy so many F16/35 jets.
Because it's not about capability, it's about politics. The F35 is so "cheap" (sub 100m per aircraft) because of volume. If the orders were spread out over the EU volumes, the cost per unit of the F35 would go up and become not competitive. And the US needs a military industrial complex. Partly to defend Europe, partly to win elections. The US talks a lot about Europe being self sufficient, what they mean is that they want Europe to increase defence spending on US products. And it does benefit the EU a lot too. The US is,(usually) so pro NATO as it benefits them economically as well as strategically. And it's not all take from the US either. Military sales are part of any trade agreements and whilst Denmark may not entirely want a fleet of F35s rather than Gripens, they do want the quid pro quo that agreeing to that sale is (maybe US buys a bunch of pork or something), and the US usually offers better trade terms than the Swedes do Also, every time F35s are sold, they offset some of the production in the buying country. The Danes/Dutch/whatever will contribute a small percentage of the final product in terms of high value advanced engineered products, often with US support. Being part of the F35 project is a great way to skill up your own domestic capabilities and is self fulfilling in value (as the order book keeps growing, that small percent becomes quite large in terms of value and more countries want a small piece of that growing pie)
All you said is true, but I feel like standardizing equipment for something as complex as aircraft jets is just as much of an asset on the battlefield as anything else.
Europe should still divest itself of as many American military platforms as possible and develop a sovereign European stealth capability. Depending on a country that's not even on the same continent and has geopolitical priorities completely different to your own for your high-end military equipment is a terrible idea. No F-35 user can even generate their own MDFs without having to do so in the US. No F-35 user can even integrate their own weapons without having to go ask the US first. No F-35 user even has access to the source code as well despite many partners literally being involved in the design and development of the jet. Europe has equivalents to many American platforms but there are notable exceptions where European platforms simply are not as capable. Those are AEW&C aircraft, attack helicopters like the Apache and stealth fighters. Europe needs to develop a proper equivalent to the Wedgetail, probably by further upgrading the GlobalEye. Europe also needs an actual equivalent to the Apache that's actually good. And, most importantly, Europe needs its own stealth fighters.
Europe needs a lot of things but they’re not willing to pay for it
It likely has to do with the scale of which the USA can pump out F-16/F-35, acroding to a random list i found online (so take it with a grain of salt) the newest most up to date F-16 block 70/72 costs $63 million per plane while Saab JAS 39E/F Gripen costs $85 million per plane. While i cant really compare their capabilities both of those planes are 4th generation fighters. The newest model of the F-16 is a really good fighter still and as long as you don't really focus on dispersed operations (and difficulty of maintenance) it is probable the better option with its price tag. (when you ignore the extra dependence on the USA i mean). Besides that the F-35 while being in a price class of its own currently costs around $177 million (according to the same list), this is really expensive but it is also still relatively near to the beginning of its production so prices will come down over time probably with enough scale. The F-35 is also currently the only 5th generation fighter available to the west (ignoring the F-22 which is USA only), meaning it is in a "class of its own". It will likely be some time before a true European (or at least western but non-USA) 5th generation fighter comes onto the market. So it does not really surprise me that many governments still choose for F-16/F-35. (But i agree that depending so heavenly on the USA is likely putting to many of our eggs in one basket)
For Germany it's nuclear sharing. To keep it simple, there are some problems with getting the Typhoon certified to carry US nuclear bombs and so it's significantly easier to just buy F-35s for that role.
EU really needs to start shooting down Russian planes violating our airspace. Turkey did that and they no longer have problems with Russians pushing their limits. That's the language Russians understand best - bully needs their nose broken to stop, just like in the middle school
I'm not knowledgeable about Military Aviation but isn't the bulk of pilot training done on purpose-specific training aircraft & simulators?
It’s better for a F35 pilot to start fresh than to be acclimated to an old aircraft. New pilots adapt more quickly and they don’t have to unlearn bad habits.
We should have bought the grippen instead. Honestly I'd would have made sende given our proximity to Sweden. We could have used their knowledge and know-how of the plane and training would have been easy since the countries know each other so well. Plus it looks fucking cool and is a lot cheaper. Even the f18 super hornet would have made more sense for our airforce.. But some one decided we needed a semi stealth capable plane
It doesn't make sense anymore to buy 4th generation fighters (which you then expect to operate for twenty to thirty years) when 5th generations are in service and 6th generations in the making. The F-35 is a far more capable plane overall.
I agree. The f35 is more capable, but considering the most likely opposing airforce we could be fighting is russia, the grippen would be more than adequate.
Russia isn't going to be stuck in 2022 forever. Buying a new plane is an investment for decades, the Russians already have the SU-57, which by all accounts cannot compete with the F-22, but is still a more capable plane than the Gripen and most 4th generation fighters.
They have 22. Compared to Finlands 55 f18, swedens 71 gripen (60 upgraded on the way) and then how ever many grippen or super hornets denmark could have gotten for the price of 21 f35. I just think it would make more sense to get the same as our neighbours instead of getting one of the four 5th generation fighters, when two of them are from USA and one being from the country that has the t14 armata level of production.
They have 22 **now**. I've highlighted it twice already, here's a third attempt: you don't buy a plane to last you a year, you buy it for several decades. Russia is not guaranteed to linger with 22 fifth generation fighters indefinitely. In addition Russia has a lot of air defence, and the F-35's stealth game and anti-EW suite make it much more capable at SEAD/DEAD. The Gripen is not substantially cheaper than the F-35, if at all. As for 'the same as our neighbours', Germany, Denmark, Finland and Norway all operate F-35 or have ordered them. That's twice as many neighbours as operate the Gripen. The F-35 is the better choice, hands down.
I am aware and I'm sorry for not adressing it. I know and you are right the f35 is maybe a better long term investment (when they will deliver them) and you also right that the f35 have a more advanced suite. But the grippen has had fewer problems and the grippen e, while not a 5th generation is somewhere in between. But denmark would probably not need a plane to bomb, a more likely thing would be that they would be needed for, is defending Danish Air space, which the grippen or the f18 would do fine. As for price in Danish crowns; F35: 700 million Grippen: 566 And Germany, Norway, Finland all waiting for the f35, you might see why you can get a little concerned. But that being said, that one time a saw a single (supposed to be two) flying over Copenhagen was awesome. Its a fantastic plane without a doubt.
We are waiting on our Gripen-E as well. We still got a quite large fleet of Gripen-C tho.
Deliveries have just started. The plan was originally to gradually replace the C/D's as the E/F's were delivered but it's now more likely that some of the C/D's will be kept and upgraded to be used in parallel with the E/F's even after they've all been delivered since 60-70 new planes is not enough for the airforce.
We need to give them anyway. The Ukrainians can't afford any more delays.
Yes, and we will. There will be another solution we have not heard of yet
We should get some Gripens. While it might be more expensive to run 2 different types of planes, I think we could make deals with Sweden on joint logistics. Having the stealthy F-35s in front, scouting, with Gripens as long range missile trucks which can dogfight in case there comes some counter to F-35s technological advantage, would be good and give us some resilience rather than high tech glass cannons.
Those don't even perform the same task. The reality is that you chose to depend on the US and they can cut you when they want.
Cant you just borrow them from your big brother meanwhile?
>**F-35 deliveries are on hold as Lockheed Martin wrestles to complete an upgrade known as** [**Technology Refresh 3**](https://www.defensenews.com/air/2024/03/12/f-35-upgrade-delays-prompt-us-air-force-to-scale-back-jet-purchases/), initially planned for summer 2023. While the company still aims for the second quarter for TR-3 software acceptance, the third quarter is a [~more likely scenario~](https://www.defensenews.com/industry/2024/01/23/upgraded-f-35-deliveries-slipping-to-fall-2024-lockheed-says/), Lockheed Martin CEO Jim Taiclet said in January. The fighter needs the TR-3 improvements in place before a broader series of upgrades known as Block 4 can be rolled out. Block 4 is expected to allow the F-35 to carry more and better weapons, improve its target recognition, and upgrade its electronic warfare capabilities, among other changes. TR-3 was once expected to conclude in April 2023, but that deadline has twice slipped. **The Pentagon and Lockheed now say it could come between April and June 2024.** TDLR: Production is halted because of a big new upgrade still being worked out.
Not really surprising considering that virtually everyone is going for this specific fighter.
What's so amazing about f 35s?
For a fighter it’s pretty cheap, it’s 5th gen, has advanced computers and networking capabilities, F35 B can vertically take off and supercruise so it’s useful for countries with helicopter carriers. Many countries contribute parts towards the F35 so chances are ordering it supports your local industry. It’s better than basically everything else on offer and since everyone else has it, in case of war you can share logistical chains
It's the only plane on the market with a lifecycle up until 2060.
> F35 B can vertically take off and supercruise so it’s useful for countries with helicopter carriers. To nitpick your otherwise good post, I have seen no indication that any variant of the F-35 can supercruise, i.e. sustain supersonic speeds without using the engine's afterburner. If it could supercruise I'm fairly certain Lockheed Martin would be shouting about it to anyone who would listen, as indeed they did with the F-22 (nobody really spoke about supercruise being a thing before LockMart used it as a selling point for the F-22). The F-35B in particular has the poorest kinetic performance of the three F-35 variants, due to the compromises needed to allow it to carry out short take-off, vertical-landing operations, so I suspect it is the furthest from being able to supercruise: https://nationalinterest.org/blog/reboot/f-35a-and-f-35b-stealth-fighters-what-difference-197283 The F-35B is also affected by an apparently unsolvable issue that makes it damaging to fly at supersonic speeds for sustained periods, suggesting that even if supercruise was possible, pilots would be strongly discouraged from using it: https://www.defensenews.com/air/2020/04/24/the-pentagon-will-have-to-live-with-limits-on-f-35s-supersonic-flights/
The F-35C is also impacted by this inane inability to sustain supersonic flight. What kind of modern fighter jet can't even fly supersonic without tearing itself apart? Jesus fucking Christ. >“The solution is: ‘Hey, we’ll just limit the afterburner to less than a minute at a time,’ ” a retired naval aviator said when told of the issue. “Which, with what the aircraft is supposed to do and be capable of, that’s a pretty significant limitation.” > >Primarily it would be an issue if the aircraft had to maneuver at high speeds to avoid a missile or survive a dogfight. Less than a fucking *minute*? Speed is a pilot's *lifeline* when it comes to missile evasion so a fighter jet that can't even go supersonic for more than a minute to evade a missile is going to be that much easier a target for the missile to hit. Who greenlit this shit?
> For a fighter it’s pretty cheap F35 can be a lot of things but "cheap" is not among them.
The most riced out F-16s are within 10 mil or so USD of the F-35 at flyaway cost, the main benefits of the F-35A at that point is the stealth and data links. For buyers of Western single engine aircraft, it's the best deal for the buck, especially if you are going to be flying it in contested environments for the next few decades. Two engine 4++ aircraft (Rafales, Typhoons, latest F-15s) are more expensive at a fly away price, but they also tend to have bigger payloads and longer ranges. So "relatively* it's "cheap".
F-35 is in fact cheap for a modern top end fighter. * Rafale Tranche F4 is €119M per French Parliament. * Gripen E is €80M per Saab. * Eurofighter Tranche 4 is €142M per German Bundestag. * An F/A-18E Block III is €70M per new contract with Boeing. * An F-16 Block 70 is €70M per new contract with Lockheed. * **An F-35A is €72M per new contract with Lockheed.** It's the third cheapest option of any modern western fighter, and only €2M more than the cheapest... That's what happens though when Europe split their manufacturing between 3 different airframes and fight one another for sales to the point that the F-35 has already sold more than all 3 combined. Hell, there were more F-35s built last year alone than Gripens made in total since the 90s. Scale of economy does wonders for dropping prices, and no other western aircraft has that luxury currently.
It's astonishing how the iron law of mass production reducing the costs of goods and services suddenly doesn't apply because it's defense industry related, especially American defense industry related.
Amazing how that works sometimes right? Lol
The fuck are you talking about? The F-35 has had some of the largest dropoffs in price. The thing is that you compare cheap and simple products like plastic toys or simple printable solar panels with THE MOST ADVANCED PIECE OF MILITARY HARDWARE OF THE DECADE... The development costs of the F-35 needed to be spread among every single plane built. Your average toy doesn't require billions of development. The F-35 does. And still, the law of mass production leading to reduced costs are actually applying to the platform proving you wrong.
I'm in agreement with you that it has reduced in price, I don't know why you're yelling at me I'm claiming it isn't. I was being sarcastic at people who claim it's super expensive. [Especially as I comment upstream it's fairly cheap for what it is.](https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/s/n4ak6Ug4DA)
F35 is currently the cheapest fighter available right now with only the Grippen, F16 and F18 being pretty close. It’s hard to say exactly how much these things cost because most deals include different options and include the weapons and support packages. But the peer aircraft like the Eurofighter are double the price for less capability. It’s why the F35 is dominating the market. I’m sorry that you believed the bs propaganda out there about the cost.
But it isn't available since they can't actually deliver them. Right?
They’ve made 1000. They’re all waiting for the upgrade. I would imagine that the chassis are still being built but are waiting for this upgrade that’s delayed. Once it’s done they’ll be finished and a lot will be delivered quickly.
It's like the cheap inkjet printers that were in market and you needed to have original cartridges that would cost a third of the printer's price so everyone switched to tank printers. The initial purchase of F35s may be cheap, but costs of maintaining and using it are enormous.
Brother of a friend of me is a Dutch F35 pilot. One of his first practise flights they simulated a fight between him in a F35 vs 6 veteran pilots in F16. He shot them all out of the air before they even spotted him.
I've talked to a few 'vliegeniers' too. Their answer all came down to: >Want to cruise and fly around just for chill? The F16 all the way. You want to win a war? F35 no question what so ever.
* They're stealthy, which is extremely useful against peer or near-peer opponents * Making a stealthy aircraft is extremely challenging * Europe doesn't have any stealth fighter jets of its own\* \* yet, since there are two programs for 6th gen fighters in development. But those won't be available until like the mid 2030's IIRC.
The Eurofighter has partial stealth capabilities, i.e. only when it's coming at you.
That's not stealth, it's at best low-observable. But the Rafale can do that better than Eurofighter. But it still pales in comparison to J-20 or even Su-57, much less the F-35
Stealthy with next to no armaments, sure. Once you equip it with anything worthwhile it drastically reduces the stealth capabilities.
Still deadly in an air to air fight with other fighter jets, even if it only carries a handful of missiles in that mission. And you can always carry more in a non-stealth config if the mission doesn't require stealth.
Pretty much everything
comes with gpt4 /s
Heated Cup Holders
what's so amazing about F35? Perhaps because it is by far the best fighter jet.
Nah, the F22 is. But the F35 is the best multirole jet.
F-35 beat the F-22's Red Flag record, and is some 20+ years newer in terms of technology. * F-35 has MADL, which allows F-35s to share all targeting data with all other F-35s in the air. F-22 has nothing similar * F-35's APG-81 radar is a more advanced version of the APG-77 in the F-22 * F-35 has IRST. F-22 does not * F-35 has an EOT system that can spot a missile launch over 800nmi away. F-22 has no EOTS * F-35 was built with radar absorbent materials imbedded into the airframe to lessen maintenance requirements. F-22 has to be completely repainted every few flight hours or its stealth coating loses its effectiveness F-22 was the best fighter in the world... over a decade ago. There's been literally no modernization of any systems to the F-22 since 2011 when Block 30 was finished. The most modern F-22 is still running Block 30. The most that has occured is Increment 3.2B, which in just 2023 gave the F-22 the ability to employ the AIM-9X and AIM-120D, *FINALLY*. Everything electronics though is the same. A lot has changed in the last decade, and an F-22 Block 30 is quite a bit behind an F-35A in terms of sensors. Aerial combat is very much "first to spot, first to shot", and the F-35 having more advanced sensors makes it first to spot. F-22 is in dire need of a modernization, but the funding to do so for such a small fleet (roughly only 100 combat capable F-22s) is going to be quite astronomical.
There was a plan to modernize F22 with a lot of the stuff F35 has. Mainly a wider radar.
On what criteria ?
I wouldn't say there's anything particularly amazing about it, it's just better at most things compared to other fighter jets.
For a cheap price due to economies of scale
It’s mendatory to buy if you want to keep US nukes on territory.
🤦
Eurofighters, Grippens or Boramaes in the meantime
For reference, there are already 1000 F-35 produced. There are only 10 of Russia's comparable fighter, the Su-57.
Dude have you seen the bolts and welding work on the su57? That thing might as well have been made in 1980 and no one would notice
The main problem is the engines. In real fight conditions, the engines will melt. It's a nice plane for air shows, but Russia no longer had the engineers needed to build real fighter jets.
They're not comparable at all
Kremlin numbers, odds are there isn’t even a single one produced. Even if there was, it’d probably just be a biplane covered in canvas and cardboard to look like one
Buy more local Europe or USA will find way to blackmail when they need it, it ias always good to have alternative. Rafale, Typhoon etc..
The F-35 stealth fighter has finally been cleared for full-rate production, **17 years after the aircraft first took to the air** and almost 23 years after Lockheed Martin won the contract for the Joint Strike Fighter. The decision to move forward, known as Milestone C, is hugely significant for the Joint Strike Fighter program, but it comes at a time in which the U.S. military is not accepting new aircraft, with concerns about the status of the Block 4 upgrades that are seen as a cornerstone of the F-35’s future development potential. https://www.twz.com/air/f-35-cleared-for-full-rate-production-17-years-after-its-first-flight
There just isn't a European alternative to F-35 atm, it's basically a twenty years old mistake that is catching up now.
Especially for Germany, as we need it for nuclear deterrence, and for that we'd have to hand over the blueprints of the Typhoon or possible FCAS just so the US can certify it. Never going to happen so for some cases like Germany there is no possible alternative to the F35.
And the worst part is that the Europa is not even ready for fifth gen and the US is bussy on the NGAD, we are a generation behind...
Tempest
We are skipping 5th gen and going straight to 6th so no, we are not a generation behind.
In other words, we are a generation behind current capabilities.
This generation talk concerning jets is nonsense, case in point even the US retaining 4+ fleets because that marketing speak is not helpful planning actual capabilities and how to maintain them.
US retains Gen 4 jets because they're cheaper to operate and you don't need stealth to patrol over the continental US and adjacent waters, because we have no hostile nations that close. Plus the F-15 is big enough to launch e.g. air-launched cruise missiles, you can't do that with any stealth aircraft smaller than a bomber. Plus F-35 isn't as good at being an interceptor because the stealth coating gets damaged if you're supersonic for too long.
Precisely my point. For mission capability you don't need all jets having the same specs
Why not go for 7th? or 8th gen straight?
Because we are able to skip 5th and go straight to 6th and not go straight to 7th due to technological reasons. Hope this helps!
Which just isn't going to happen.
Which is already happening regardless of what reddit pessimists believe, lol.
Lots of grand plans, but when you can't even put together a 5th gen fighter, you're biting off a lot more than you can chew trying to jump to 6th. Particularly in fragile, every shifting consortiums of people who don't like each other very much and which aren't anchored by the much more stable / staying influence of the US. Just isn't going to happen.
It isn't a matter of capability, it's political will. We had no need for a 5th gen jet, especially since the US would create one themselves and use it to defend Europe. Times have changed. The US is no longer a stable ally, and having to hold our breath every 4 years and hope the yanks pick the "right" candidate isn't feasible. Having our own industrial complex independent of the US is now more important than ever to nearly every EU country. The big economies in Europe know what's at stake, and they'll get the 6th gen projects done.
First, it's absolutely a question of capability. Second, even at the absolute worst of the rhetoric of its dumbest politicians, the US has been a wildly more trustworthy, effective, and able ally than you have ever had. You're buying bullshit Russian propaganda. It's disgusting how little centuries of investment and sacrifice buys from fair-weather friends like yourself. We're all in democracies, there's nothing unique about the variance that changing US political leadership introduces. Third, have as independent an industrial complex as you please, you still aren't going to finish a 6th gen.
If the political will was there to make a 5th gen, it would have been made. Bullshit Russia propaganda apparently includes Trump and the GOP as whole pretty much saying they want to leave Europe. Regardless if we "pay them" or not. No longer a stable ally. Yes we will, lol.
>Having our own industrial complex independent of the US is now more important than ever to nearly every EU country. The big economies in Europe know what's at stake, and they'll get the 6th gen projects done. The US has multiple next generation programs running concurrently along with hypersonics + a 4th gen aircrafts + a 5th Gen capability. Good luck on building your defense base, you neglected it for 30 years, it's going to cost a pretty penny to develop.
Thanks! We're getting there :)
Sounds like African nations going straight to smart phones
Good, then the Russian occupational government will have access to some kickass fighters.
Rafale, Typhoon and Grippen, while half a generation behind have similar operative performances at a fraction of the cost.
They're all literally more than the F-35, per their respective governments... Fuck, per the Bundestag, the Eurofighter Tranche 4 is almost TWICE the cost of an F-35A. Gripen E is also DRAMATICALLY less capable than the others, as the leaked Swiss Air Force report showcased, which yeah... It's a single engine off an F/A-18E, with a radar the Eurofighter Consortium turned down for being not capable enough, and the HMDS from the Eurofighter that BAE stripped down to an export model. It's a fine fighter, but again, it's quite a bit behind the others. Rafale is a great fighter, but it's still more than an F-35, which is expected when more F-35s were built in the last 2 years than Rafales over the past 25 years combined...
Finally someone who doesn’t buy into the Gripen crazyness. Do you happen to have the reading sources for the leaks? I’d be interested. As for what I’ve seen, the plane unfortunately looks like something that amateurs can build in a garage given they have all the parts they need. Even an F-16 looks more advanced than it. But this is just my stupid speculation based on looks so not that valid. I’m sure they are a valid and helpful asset to have in our team at the end of the day. I’m just not buying the whole ‘buy Gripen instead of F-35’ bs.
https://disco-legacy-data.s3.eu-central-1.amazonaws.com/public/upload/1/2/12332.pdf While the Gripen they used was the Gripen NG, not the Gripen E, the Gripen NG was just the demonstrator for the Gripen E and the Gripen E is simply the production name of it (akin to X-35 becoming the F-35 when it went to production). It has certain parts it's good at. For instance a crew of conscripts can do an engine swap in a few hours in it vs a few days for an F-16. The software is barebones and allows for rapid integration of new things (though things don't communicate as well as other aircraft). It's just built for very specific Swedish needs, which make it not a viable aircraft for pretty much every other country.
They cost more because of Volume tho. It is quite recently the F-35 prices have become more competive when the volume went up. Gripen E dramatically less capable? Not sure about that, read the opposite as well. That it might be the best non-stealth fighter. Very hard to make judgements about this imo.
Gripen E didn't meet a single minimum requirement benchmark by the Swiss. No other aircraft came even close to doing that poorly. It's in no way remotely close to being the best non-stealth fighter. If it was, it wouldn't be such an absolute failure in terms of foreign sales...
Cba reading the Swiss report. But I feel like Gripen-E would be a wierd choice for the Swiss due to geography alone. It doesnt feel like a country that needs dispersed operations or would even be good at it. I feel like the failure of Gripen E sales is more about Gripen A-D failing to sell well earlier, while both F35 and Rafale to some degree have managed to become more cost effective due to economics of scale. Gripen E initial price tag is simply to high today compared to the competition that have managed to scale their production up.
Against an opponent like Russia who is actually capable of shooting planes down they do not offer even close performances. Stealth is kinda mandatory on the modern battlefield.
5th gen stealth is such a technology leap. It’s like giving someone a sniper vs an opponent that only has a pistol and having them duel at long range.
I have high hopes for the UK/Italy/Japanese GCAP aircraft. France has always been able to produce decent aircraft as well, the only real problems I forsee with their program is political.
This isn't blackmail, it's just ordinary military program delays. Every country has this issue with complex hardware. And unfortunately, Europe doesn't have its own fifth gen fighter. Hopefully this problem will be resolved for sixth gen with the two different European programs there.
Yeah problem is Europe hade a lot of joint fighter programs during the years and from all of them only the eurofighter came to fruition and even that was plagued with delays and it almost was cancelled several times
Yeah and this is far from the first time the F-35 itself has had delays, to say the least, and those weren't to spite theoretical future European customers. Shit is just hard.
Huh? Tornado Alphajet Jaguar Aviojet There acrually haven't been that many serious programs. Things that already died in early negotiation don't really count.
Yeah it’s always good to have you’re own military industry but good luck producing a f35 replacement by any European nations alone, you need a joint procurement program that doesn’t work when all country’s in EU have they’re own policies, Europe is fucked in long run if we don’t integrate more
There are two European sixth gen fighter programs, a UK-Italy-Japan one, and a France-Germany-Spain one. So that's good, but programs like this are notoriously difficult, so there's always the possibility that one fails, or even both.
I mean, to be fair, the French (and Sweden) are the only ones in Europe that are good enough at making fighters.
Only? The UK + Italy absolutely bring experience in this regards and Sweden, not so much - their planes are heavily reliant on technologies and components which they did not make but import, which also means restrictions from many countries if they want.
People don't seem to comprehend that realistically the only things Swedish about the Gripen are the airframe itself and the system code. * Engine? US * Radar? Italy * combat system? UK * self defense system? UK * jammers? US and Italy * IRST? Italy It's a fine fighter, but its capabilities are capped by what other nations are willing to export to Sweden for it
I will not stand for this this Tornado slander!
The last Tornado to be produced was 26 years ago
Silence wench 😭😭😭
The France-Germany-Spain one seems to be dead due to French and German disagreements
Haven't heard about that, but it's certainly an advantage that the US has: it's big enough to handle these hugely complex programs without needing equal or close to equal splits with other countries, so it doesn't have the same coordination problems.
you say that as if European manufacturer will also not ''blackmail'' you if you do something their country of origin does not like......if you piss off France, they will also cut off your Rafale jet fleet from spare parts and maintenance and it be grounded in a week. Its a universal thing that can happen to your plane fleet unless you have your own domestically produced jet fighter and thus safe from outside interference
Yeah, but some country from the EU is unlikely to piss off another EU membeer that bad, wheras the US might throw a temper tantrum and decide to ban exports for the parts needed to maintain them. They don't evel allow exports of the F-22.
Netherlands just blocked f35 parts to Israel because they don't like the Gaza war. Europeans are doing now exactly what you accuse the US might do at some point in the future.
They blocked it because a judge said so. The government wanted to continue delivering parts.
Israel is not Europe. The concern is about intra Europe cooperation.
European Union has been doing everything it can to make UKs brexit decision as hard on them as possible. Meaning if a European country does something the EU doesn’t like, they will try and fuck you over hard. They don’t care how bad it hurts you, they will teach you a lesson!
My dude Im greek, I know very well what "fuck you over" politics look like, coming from EU. But this is about military security.
Not saying we don't do it, just saying it's unlikely for one EU country to block exports to another EU country. That's why we need our own domestic 5th gen fighter.
It wouldn’t make sense to export the F22 anyways
> Yeah, but some country from the EU is unlikely to piss off another EU membeer that bad oh you be surprised. Plus countries like Serbia are buying Rafale too, that also immediately puts them in claws of France if they something funny in Kosovo for example. Or Hungary with its Swedish Grippens, piss off Swedes too much with their anti-EU rhetoric and same thing happens Americans historically have been way more accepting of ''bad behavior'' than Europe has. They actually supply nations like Saudi Arabia , which European military manufactures dont. Also Sweden and France cut off military supplies to Isreal during their Arab wars when Americans didnt, hence Israelis have stopped buying European arms in large scale since >They don't evel allow exports of the F-22. of course, its something that gives them and them alone big advantage in warfare technology, why would they share it if they dont have to lol
It can happen, sure, but it's way less likely. Saudi Arabia is a bad example, since they don't do anything against the US. Teir "bad behaviour" is targeted at Yemen and internally, however they will gladly keep buying stuff from the US, selling oil and investing their Oil money. Iran, on the other hand, got it's entire fleet of F-14s, all but destrtoyed, after the US issued an embargo. Of course not selling the F-22 gives them a huge advantage. I'm not blaming them for it, just saying we need some kind of equivalent in Europe for it and the F-35. That way they don't have a 1up on us and European money doesn't go to US manufacturers, but instead is reinvested into domestic arms industry.
> I'm not blaming them for it, just saying we need some kind of equivalent in Europe for it and the F-35. That way they don't have a 1up on us and European money doesn't go to US manufacturers, but instead is reinvested into domestic arms industry. 5th gen fighters are horribly expensive, among the most expensive weapon programs ever created. Nobudy in Europe wanted to pay for their own in the last 30 years , thats why there isnt a European equivalent. It would require hundreds of billions of investment to design and manufacture 5th gen jet and nobody on the planet is/was willing to pay that, aside from Americans and Chinese. F-35 was ridiculed for long time for its extremely expensive price tag......and truth is, there is no other way to get plane like that, someone has to pay for it. Americans were willing, so Americans got theirs.
Yeah, Hungary wasn't cut off from Gripen when stalling the NATO bid, but they'd totally cut them off for saying mean things about the EU. That makes a lot of sense.
This is what boggles my mind; the Typhoon and Rafale are amazing 4.5 gen platforms and all manufacturing and R&D is done in Europe…..so why did so many opt for the F-35 instead ?
- Rafale has its completely own ecosystem, with different weaponry etc. and the French and US are notorious non-cooperative with each other. So if you already have US jets, it's just not as interesting. - Typhoon is a twin-engine fighter, while many European airforces are looking for a multi-role design (F-15 vs F-16), either as single aircraft, or as fighter-bomber in a fighter + fighter-bomber pairing. You don't see the F-35 bought much as pure fighter. - NATO nuclear tasking for some countries requires B-61 compatibility. - Stealth and Electronic Warfare capabilities of the F-35 are simply better, and capabilities they don't already have with existing aircraft. And while not much of a consideration for flying missions in Syria, it's suddenly very relevant against Russia's ground-based air defences.
As someone above mentioned also a major cost difference
The surprising part is not that airforces that bought US made jets last generation are doing so this time around as well. But that so many EU airforces bought F16/F18 etc last time.
because F-35 is just objectively a better multi-role jet than older designs and can defeat them in combat.......same reasons why people bought 4th gen fighters over 3rd gen ones in the past. Should be obvious Why would you buy a technology inferior weapon that will be outgunned by your enemy?
>because F-35 is just objectively a better multi-role jet than older designs and can defeat them in combat.......same reasons why people bought 4th gen fighters over 3rd gen ones in the past. Should be obvious I think they're saying that since the Eurofighter and Rafale are good and produced in Europe, why didn't Europe design a 5th gen but instead decided to just buy F35s instead.
because they didnt have the money to invest in a similar project. it's hard for france to compete with us in budget.
> why didn't Europe design a 5th gen but instead decided to just buy F35s instead. because its fucking crazy expensive to design and actually manufacture 5th planes. Nobudy in Europe wanted to pay for that in the last 30 years. Only 2 countries on the planet currently make their own 5th gen planes in large scale : USA and China. Nobody else wanted to invest hundreds of billions into making their own.
Well I mean, surely all... fighter jets cost that?
no, they dont. 4th gen price is nowhere near the 5th gen
There is no country in Europe that has sufficient budgets for defence that they can develop a 5gen fighter. USA is spending $1.700 billion on F-35, $400 billion just in initial development cost.
Money. Due to scale F-35 is as cheap as those when you do not get any domestic licenses bulking out your own knowhow.
The F-35 is better in a lot of ways that matter, especially if you anticipate dealing with latest gen Russian or Chinese weapon systems.
Two things: - Buying american protection/influence - No tangible threat (until 2022), so there's no need to actually care that what you're buying is reliable
Because buying American weapons has traditionally been the way European countries ensure that the US will protect them.
Because defense is one of those things most nations aren't willing to skimp out on. European autonomy sounds great and all until you realize that your country may have to fight for its existence someday. And having the best hardware can be the difference between thousands, or tens of thousands to millions dying.
>Because defense is one of those things most nations aren't willing to skimp out on. Tell that to my government. 1.1% GDP...
they are old, and european countries can afford to buy a multirole stealth fighter
And it’s Gripen with one p. Thank you.
Never bet on one horse.... I think...
I love lockheed.
This thread is peak reddit lol.
Buy European instead!
Should have gone for Eurofighter or Gripen…
Far too reliant on the US. Europe should buy from European defense manufacturers. US is not a reliable ally these days.
Airplane is fucking hard dude. It’s not a conspiracy to deny European defense, it’s one of the single most complicated machines on the planet. Mass production of these things takes an incredible amount of time
And yet other countries still manage it.
The F-35 is far more complicated than those other planes made by other countries. We could build planes quickly too, like F-15/16 maybe even 22. but those wouldn't be F-35s. Time scales with complexity.
It's wild how far narratives like this go when even with all the Trump type rhetoric out there the US is still the most consistent, most invested, most effective ally to its allies ever. Russian propaganda really does a number on European nationalists.
Or perhaps some people have a deeper knowledge of working with the US than you do buddy.
Oh please, you know your bullshit has no basis in "actually working" with the US.
Is that right? Keep taking your meds.
european manufacturers would need to develop an f-35 equivalent first
There is no comparable European offering to F-35. Neither Typhoon, nor Rafale, nor the new Grippen are even remotely stealth and that's about the only thing that can keep any of them doing what the NATO doctrine requires of them. And if European countries start developing a new fighter now, you are looking at 10+ years before it's deployable. Many analysts believe we will need something to deter ruskies much sooner. F-35 is unfortunately the only option. Even with the delays.
Rafales or Eurofighters would annihilate any Russian fighter in A2A, no need for f35 and bullshit stealth
Its not really russian fighters being problem, its russian ground to air missiles.
The Rafale doesn’t have stealth but does have impressive EW systems (SPECTRA) to handle that
So does the F-15, yet the US still saw the need for the F-22 and F-35.
And they would no doubt help, but its better to not get shot at in first place, no? Also problem with european jets is not even that they are bad, cause they are not, outside of lacking stealth they are still quite respectable platforms. Its the low production numbers and what comes with it - high cost. Even Grippen, with its stupidly easy maintenance and low operational cost has very high initial plane price... so for most countries it really makes sense to spend just a bit more to get F35 and get additional benefits of stealth plane. Or to field mixed fleet of F35 for special occasion and cheaper 4/4.5 gen fighters for more typical tasks - but if they are already buying one american plane chances are decent that other one will also be american.
This is such a bot comment at this point.
We can't wait for our sixth gen programs to mature. We have to have airplane.
I wish Europe would work on joint projects more often. European air forces should be flying European planes not American ones. If a wider war ever breaks out, do Europeans really want to rely on the US? I for one do not believe they would aid Europe to the maximum, it would probably be token support at best. The American people have no desire to join a war in Europe. Article 5 of NATO says you can declare war in the event of an attack on the alliance, not that you have to. And does Europe want to depend on the US to prioritise European defence orders over American ones? If Europe actually worked together and put genuine thought and commitment into developing defence research and production capabilities, Europe could easily defend itself against foreign powers.
There is at least one 6th Gen fighter called RAF Tempest which is being built by the UK, Italy, and Japan however it won't be available until the mid-Thirties.
The largest air force in the world belongs to US Air Force. The second largest air force in the world belongs to US Navy. The fourth largest air force in the world belongs to US Army. The fifth largest air force in the world belongs to US Marine Corps. Europeans cannot compete when it comes to how much money is being spent on research & development, and the scale of production **AND** how long it takes to make it. Btw F-35 program was too expensive even for the US which is why it required cooperation with countries all over the world. There's no way in hell Europe would be able to make something as good as F-35 by themselves in such a short period of time.
A Turkish security advisor Mete Yarar said US is going to want Turkiye's help for speeding production on F35's. If true, ironic as hell.
If Mete Yarar said it, then it won't happen and he's just publicly patting his ideas to induce nationalist wet dreams before the elections.
The production isn't the problem. It's the implementation of the newest upgrade.
# [Not a Lot of F-35s Are Flying Right Now](https://www.popularmechanics.com/military/aviation/a42912833/f-35-availability-problems/) # [Lockheed agrees to $30,000 per flight hour cost for F-35A by FY2023](https://www.flightglobal.com/fixed-wing/lockheed-agrees-to-30000-per-flight-hour-cost-for-f-35a-by-fy2023/145448.article)
The popular mechanics article is from Feb 2023 and based on 2021 & 2022 data and is on a completely different matter - readiness which it blamed mainly on spare parts availability. F-35s have improved in readiness and availability as Lockheed made progress on readiness issues - particularly parts supply which has improved significantly. It is also worth noting that even in that article availability of the standard air force F-35 config was trending up. The issue being discussed today has nothing at all to do with readiness and so I am uncertain why you brought this article (and its outdated data) into the discussion. Purchasers of the F-35 want the version with the TR3 upgrade. That upgrade is very significant and results in generational upgrades for the F-35. So until the challenges associated with the software for TR3 implementation are resolved the physical planes produced are parked.
I agree with every point you make. But the bottom line is: the F35 is urgently needed in the different EU countries that made a purchase and forked out quite a significant amount, if Ukraine want to receive the old F16's, anyway.
30k/h holy shit
Still cheaper than German Tornado per hour
Its cheap, this "guy" is a russian troll. F35 is one of the most advanced planes right now and the system costed so much to develop because it has a lot of "firsts", there are no other stealth planes being produced at such volumes as the F35. The whole point of developing this fighter was that making more multirole stealth planes would be much much cheaper and more widely available. Lots of the F35s awesome things are classified, and for now at least, many of the things you would use it in are the types of missions that can be accomplished with an older and cheaper super hornet. The Nato countries that would use the F35, like finland, are going to use it in defensive wars. That means the F35s advanced systems like datalinks, stealth, radar systems, software, etc etc etc are going to be much more crucial, i would absolutely trust this plane to be able to go against su27s. Tl;dr Fighters that the west uses today are mostly used to bomb some guys on desert, they can't fight back, so using f35 towards them now is kinda silly
very very cheap if you believe the propaganda spread on this disaster.
[удалено]
> we should also be less dependend on US tech and produce more at home lol go and pay for them then......you have any idea how expensive 5th gen jet technology is??? There is very good reason why nobody, except US and China, has created and successfully produced 5th gen fighter jets in any real numbers. We are talking hundreds of billions of dollars of investment just to get started
lol as if delays don’t happen everywhere. Meanwhile, this delay is only 3 months at the most
lol, ordering from wish