They made a political purchase at a time when they didn't expect to have any real use for those planes, so the actual capability price ratio didn't really matter.
In that case, would Gripen have been a wise order either? Germany already has Typhoon. There is a history of Typhoon equipped countries ordering f35 because it’s a generation ahead. But Gripen is same generation as Typhoon.
Probably not, you're right, the logical choice, from a capability perspective, would have been a modernization of the Eurofighter and/or and the pursuite of a Next Generation European Fighter program. (Which could have been much less expensive than the f-35 program if given less exotic requirements).
FWIW I think the US should be more willing to buy euro fighters, because the number of US suppliers is getting smaller and they have too much leverage over US government.
The Eurofighter was not a logical choice because Germany couldn't afford to get it certified for participation in the NATO nuclear sharing program. That would have driven the cost way higher than the F-35A.
The ability to deploy US nukes has been useless since the end of the cold war, and now that it's starting to get relevant again, it's not reliable anymore.
And how is Germany supposed to integrate French nukes on the F-35 if Scholz wants to pursue “strategic independence” now?
Also, it was likely not a matter of cost, as the US has nothing to gain from allowing Germany to use a European plane to carry their nukes in the first place when they can sell them US planes instead.
Cost was absolutely a factor. The Panavia Tornado was previously certified to carry US nuclear bombs. The same could have been done with the Eurofighter but Germany would have had to pay 100% of the program cost because no other NATO member was interested.
I can't see any scenario where France would agree to share nuclear weapons with Germany. The only approach that might work would be to forward deploy French nuclear forces on German territory, with Germany picking up the cost.
The Panavia Tornado was previously certified to carry US nuclear bombs
During the cold war. That's a very important bit.
The only approach that might work would be to forward deploy French nuclear forces on German territor
Are you sure you know how the current program works? Because that's how it does. The US aren't sharing nukes right now (that would violate NPT), the plan would be to hand off the weapons to its allies in the event of an invasion.
Comments
They made a political purchase at a time when they didn't expect to have any real use for those planes, so the actual capability price ratio didn't really matter.
In that case, would Gripen have been a wise order either? Germany already has Typhoon. There is a history of Typhoon equipped countries ordering f35 because it’s a generation ahead. But Gripen is same generation as Typhoon.
Probably not, you're right, the logical choice, from a capability perspective, would have been a modernization of the Eurofighter and/or and the pursuite of a Next Generation European Fighter program. (Which could have been much less expensive than the f-35 program if given less exotic requirements).
Ah interesting, I didn’t know about the next generation, link for anyone else interested -
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Future_Combat_Air_System
FWIW I think the US should be more willing to buy euro fighters, because the number of US suppliers is getting smaller and they have too much leverage over US government.
The Eurofighter was not a logical choice because Germany couldn't afford to get it certified for participation in the NATO nuclear sharing program. That would have driven the cost way higher than the F-35A.
The ability to deploy US nukes has been useless since the end of the cold war, and now that it's starting to get relevant again, it's not reliable anymore.
And how is Germany supposed to integrate French nukes on the F-35 if Scholz wants to pursue “strategic independence” now?
Also, it was likely not a matter of cost, as the US has nothing to gain from allowing Germany to use a European plane to carry their nukes in the first place when they can sell them US planes instead.
Cost was absolutely a factor. The Panavia Tornado was previously certified to carry US nuclear bombs. The same could have been done with the Eurofighter but Germany would have had to pay 100% of the program cost because no other NATO member was interested.
I can't see any scenario where France would agree to share nuclear weapons with Germany. The only approach that might work would be to forward deploy French nuclear forces on German territory, with Germany picking up the cost.
During the cold war. That's a very important bit.
Are you sure you know how the current program works? Because that's how it does. The US aren't sharing nukes right now (that would violate NPT), the plan would be to hand off the weapons to its allies in the event of an invasion.