As long as the European Union doesnt turn into a Federal State ( very unlikely in the next 40-50 years )
This is the big gap in beliefs between us two. I believe we will face more and more crisis and by 2035-2040 we will reach to some good solutions, more stable than what we agreed in 1992. 30 years separate us from 2050, 30 years ago(1992) a common fiscal policy (that was the break point with the NGEU next generation EU) would have been considered the same way we consider now 2050 scenarios.
or European defence companies start merging into each other, we Will continue to see those " redundanct " programs and nonsense...
But this is already happening, the reason why Tempest is going smoothly is simple because of Leonardo(augusta)-Westland merger, lets not beat around the bush, if we had competing company that could compete with RR we would be bashing our heads with the British the same way Germans and French are doing.
I dont see why talking about a CVN in 2050 ( nonsense? ), Whatever.
So we are going to keep having a STVOL CV in 30 years?
As Europe we will transit into a mutlipolar world with a multitude of mismatched carriers made of PANG, Cavours/Juan Carlos substitutes?
China, India and the US will eat us alive like that.
If the US wasn't there the Russians would have trampled the Ukrainians in a brutal way, we have to step up to be able to be more independent (this is also good for the US, any good relationship is based from mutual independence).
Also I really dont see whats the point in talking of public debt.
Italian debt Is by far the most expensive in terms of interest rates and the most insecure.
But, as I said, what does It have to do with the Tempest program?
I gave you data, our debt is cheaper than Japan one. And since Return equals Risk your second sentence is also false. Please provide other data that disputes this.
3. You're implying that Japan's finances mean it is not a reliable partner for Tempest, because even with the political will it simply can't afford it. My point remains that Japan has little choice but to fund a domestic project to replace the F-2. And rather than buying a foreign weapon platform, a locally developed option will plow money back into the economy.
I never implied that Japan is bad partner, i was just comparing Tempest vs Fcas, and just saying that Germany is the most economically reliable economy out there. It wasn't a judgment of Japan ability to finance per se. Simple comparative advantages of each program.
The reality Is that the two programs are different in everything: requirements, politics, funding, time-span.
For 2022 I agree 100% and what we are gaming on is probably the survival of each other national industry.
But as I wrote in this post our 2050 our interest will be way more in common IMHO.
In 2050 facing Indians and Chinese with just a PANG and something similar to a Cavour or Juan Carlos IMHO is criminal for our sailors regardless of how good and appropriate are the ships right now. And since we cannot finance ourselves a CVN that means buying French/ using french tech.
P.S. for non European readers, Im more than happy of a multi-polar world since I believe it will bring more weights and counterbalances that will translate into more peace.