Nein, thanks: Germany snubs F-35, new fighter choice still up in air

[Feanor]

"
I have read the the I D.F have turned off their ALIS so as to not share information on their operations even with the U,S
At present there are S400 systems situated in Kalingrad with the ability to track into Eastern Germany ,the F35 is the only aircraft at present able to if required to defeat this system

I have to take issue with this part here. Defeating a theater SAM like the S-400 isn't done with a single-platform solution but by a combined approach of ELINT/SIGINT, stand-off and on-board EW, and stand-off munitions. Germany can combine a variety of options to destroy a single S-400 regiment. I think what you're getting at is that having an F-35 makes it much easier to deal with the kind of IADS that Russia is building in places like Kaliningrad (S-400 regiments, with Pantsyr SHORAD, their own ELINT/SIGINT assets, and EW). And this is perfectly true and, to me, a great argument in favor of the F-35. But it's important not to get bogged down over things like "platform X" and instead look at the systemic problem as a whole.

 

[kato]

A few notes on the actual topic.

The Tornado successor decision in Germany is a political item. The two frames - Eurofighter and F-18 - preselected so far do have definitive qualities in themselves that make them favourable for those groups that push them. And in that they vastly outmaneuver the two frames not chosen - F-15 and F-35. The CDU-led MoD pushes the F-18, the mostly-SPD-supported Parliamentary Defense Committee pushes the Eurofighter.

Points that do work in favour of the two are:

a) Militarily: Germany has committed a future Airborne Electronic Warfare capability to NATO with a defined target date. While all four airframes can be converted to support that, this would take development time and investment; the F-18 provides a off-the-shelf solution to this in the E/A-18G Growler which could be introduced relatively rapidly.

b) Politically: NATO nuclear sharing is somewhat in doubt with the SPD at the moment, in particular more recently due to the row over INF (it's a long term issue currently amplified). Eurofighter presents an opportunity to separate the NATO nuclear sharing question from the airframe succession question by procuring an aircraft and then postponing a decision on certifying the frame to carry US nuclear weapons. Due to the higher hurdles with Eurofighter this is a preferred solution to this conundrum for the SPD.

c) Industrially: From an industry politics viewpoint, the government wishes for a "temporary solution". While this is reminiscent of former "temporary solutions" that way outlasted their stay - like the F-4F - this is relevant in the decision. It means that a fifth-gen airframe that could possibly last in the Luftwaffe for thirty to forty years is not what this procurement is intended to produce. This is further amplified by the stated timescale of cooperation with France.

d) Also industrially: Eurofighter is produced locally. Yes, that is a point, in particular for the SPD. Employment and all that. However, Eurofighter is also produced by Airbus. That is a point against Eurofighter given the row between the government and Airbus in the last 2-3 years. Given the Eurofighter T1 replacement being handed out, it is very possible that this is all Airbus will get.

 

[swerve]

So . . . Germany's promised to replace the capaility of the Tornado ECR. That's interesting. I wonder about Italy & its Tornado ECRs.

 

[MarcH]

ECR is just able to precisely locate emitters and engage them. Jamming is limited to self protection. (just what every jet with a modern self protection suite like spectra or AN/ASQ-239 can do).
The Growler offers a lot more than the ECR's capabilities. Which would be very valuable to have for our legacy fleet.

 

[Feanor]

ECR is just able to precisely locate emitters and engage them. Jamming is limited to self protection. (just what every jet with a modern self protection suite like spectra or AN/ASQ-239 can do).
The Growler offers a lot more than the ECR's capabilities. Which would be very valuable to have for our legacy fleet.

And very difficult and costly to develop from scratch for a Eurofighter variant. Though the cost and technological difficulty could be somewhat mitigated if more then one Eurofighter customer opts for this EuroGrowler. Personally I have my doubts about the willingness of Germany, and other customers, to eat these high development costs. And of course it's going to take much longer.

 

[hauritz]

One thing that kind of surprises me is that Germany isn't considering the Rafale, as it possibly has the edge over the Eurofighter in terms of ground attack capability.

Germany is also looking towards France as a partner for its next generation of fighter so purchasing the Rafale could be an opportunity for both countries to work together on this project first. Let's face it ... the French don't have a good history of co-operating on these sorts of projects so it is probably best to see if this partnership works before embarking on a new generation fighter.

 

[John Fedup]

Question, if Germany decides on new Typhoons and second jets, and the requirement for nukes is to be continued, could a Growler also perform this mission or would SHs also be required. From a cost perspective it would be nice if the Growler could do both missions, carry nukes and perform ECM/EA. I believe a few F-35s will eventually be able to do this with the NGJ.

 

[John Fedup]

One thing that kind of surprises me is that Germany isn't considering the Rafale, as it possibly has the edge over the Eurofighter in terms of ground attack capability.

Germany is also looking towards France as a partner for its next generation of fighter so purchasing the Rafale could be an opportunity for both countries to work together on this project first. Let's face it ... the French don't have a good history of co-operating on these sorts of projects so it is probably best to see if this partnership works before embarking on a new generation fighter.

Not a bad idea. Given France’s huge win on the Australian sub deal, it could be a way for Germany to contribute on that project. Should Canada renew its sub capability, it would narrow the field to two potential vendors, Japan and a Euro-OZ team. Could be interesting for both projects.

 

[kato]

One thing that kind of surprises me is that Germany isn't considering the Rafale, as it possibly has the edge over the Eurofighter in terms of ground attack capability.

The nuclear option of the Tornados can not be fulfilled with Rafales without completely realigning strategic concepts. If a switch over to a German-French nuclear weapons cooperation was viable the Rafale F4 would likely have been the chosen airframe given its current place in the pipeline with Dassault and planned introduction.

Question, if Germany decides on new Typhoons and second jets, and the requirement for nukes is to be continued, could a Growler also perform this mission or would SHs also be required.

Any chosen air frame will have to go through the full certification for current mods of B61 anyway. The two wings concerned (TaktLwG 33 and 51) currently operate all four extant German variants of Tornado plus Heron TP, so it's not like operating two variants of Super Hornets would be any more complicated.

believe a few F-35s will eventually be able to do this with the NGJ.

Conceptually the US will run E/A-18G as support systems (escort jamming with NGJ) for F-35 insertion. This kind of coop could be identically run with e.g. German Growlers and Dutch F-35 given the close cooperation of the two.

 

[MarcH]

One thing that kind of surprises me is that Germany isn't considering the Rafale, as it possibly has the edge over the Eurofighter in terms of ground attack capability.

Germany is also looking towards France as a partner for its next generation of fighter so purchasing the Rafale could be an opportunity for both countries to work together on this project first. Let's face it ... the French don't have a good history of co-operating on these sorts of projects so it is probably best to see if this partnership works before embarking on a new generation fighter.

This was my first thought, too. But the issue here is different. It's not just getting a good strike fighter as Tornado replacement. As long as Belgium, Italy and the Netherlands participate in nuclear sharing we would have a problem. The B61's are tactical nukes, they are designed to whipe out massive troop concentrations. Which means they are not dropped deep in the east.
Withdrawing from nuclear sharing would just mean two neighboring nations equipped for tactical nuking without any option to influence the when and where.

The Super Hornet is now the ideal competitor. The Growler option for all it's benefits and then the current lack of B61-12 integration. May help getting a better deal for B61 integration if the final choice is a pure Typhoon fleet.

 

[barney41]

Isn't this just a case of the politicians telling the generals how best to a compliance their mission?

 

[seaspear]

Perhaps the Advanced super Hornet block 3 ,being a stealthier development and having the extra fuel tanks with a longer range could be considered also having the built in E.W package meets requirements