2 ms·
On the F-35 program, ability to perform local support isn't so much based on being a "founding member" but rather program partnership level. The only other Leve
by nradov 2y ago
On the F-35 program, ability to perform local support isn't so much based on being a "founding member" but rather program partnership level. The only other Level 1 partner is the UK. As Level 2 we have Italy and the Netherlands. All other countries are down at Level 3 (most heavily dependent on US support), except for Israel which is sort of a special case with a unique variant and special rules about local control. Ultimately though, you're correct that the F-35 will quickly turn into a brick for every export customer without active US support.
The other factor is the NATO nuclear sharing arrangement. The F-35A is the only new aircraft certified to carry the US nuclear weapons under that arrangement, so that impacts Belgium, Germany, Italy, and Netherlands. Germany looked into certifying the Eurofighter Typhoon for the nuclear strike mission but decided that they couldn't afford it, and bought the F-35A instead. Of course, if the US pulls back from NATO and ends nuclear sharing then that concern would become moot and some of those countries would be likely to develop their own nuclear weapons.
- lukan 2y ago"Germany looked into certifying the Eurofighter Typhoon for the nuclear strike mission but decided that they couldn't afford it, and bought the F-35A instead" I remember the story rather like this: US: "you want to certify your fighter for nuclear devices" Germany: "yes" US: "ooh, that will be expensive and takes a loooong time. Don't you want to just buy our F35 instead?" And germany basically did. With the implicit understanding, to buy a piece of nuclear protection with that. Well, all gone ... so there are really only some voices left, wanting to keep buying the expensive, potentially useless bricks.
- nradov 2y agoYes, that's basically accurate. Since the end of the Cold War, Germany has always taken the cheapest possible military option in order to fund their precious social programs and treated the military as just another government jobs program. While I think the current US administration's moves to cut off our allies are deeply stupid and the moral equivalent of treason, Germany has only itself to blame for creating such a dependency. Alliances are always temporary and now Germany will have to face reality.
- lukan 2y ago"Germany has always taken the cheapest possible military option " Not in my understanding. Rather germany always went for the specialized and therefore expensive version (Goldrandlösung) of anything. But sure, parliament says, we are in peace, we don't need so many of those expensive toys. So they rather buyed only limited numbers and created another buerocratic controll gremium. France could afford a nuclear programm and an aircraft carrier with an equal budget. So yeah, there are many factors to blame, but I don't think it was because of too little money. Rather too much money with no one sane checking, if it serves really the purpose of defending the country.
- rich_sasha 2y agoCould the UK thus be Europe's Trojan horse of support? If the US can't switch them off (allegedly), can they use their supply chains to support the rest of Europe? They may lack the scale, but perhaps that can be built up.
- nradov 2y agoThe UK doesn't have the supply chains to support the rest of Europe. There are lots of parts on an F-35 that the UK can't make; despite being a Level 1 partner I don't think they have the full technical data package for everything. But neither does the US have the supply chains to support ourselves without the UK, especially for the F-35B model. That's why this whole dispute is so stupid, and hopefully cooler heads will prevail. https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/how-much-of-the-f-35-is-british-built/ https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/how-much-of-the-f-35-is-brit...