German defence woes (latest from The Times)

napier

LE
Moderator
Kit Reviewer
More problems for the germans now that the Tornados are coming home.

Germany fears steeper Tornado costs after the UK ditches its planes
Having read the article, it would seem to me that if true, we should hold all our spares/ air-frames etc in storage and then sell them at a marked up price once we leave the EU. Obviously as we will no longer be members, we can charge them what we want. Whilst I like Germans as individuals, I am not so sure about the "political elite", who seem to want to punish us for leaving the club.
 

Sadurian

LE
Book Reviewer
Germany is the New France, perhaps? I seem to remember de Gaulle could jack on NATO knowing he had West Germany between him and the Sovs...the Huns now have Poland (again) as their buffer...
DeGaulle was leery of NATO because he saw it as dominated by the USA, a country for which he held no love. His position on NATO and Germany altered noticeable. In 1947 he was in favour of the NATO alliance and of dismantling Germany as a nation. However, a lack of NATO support during the Indo-China, Suez and (especially) the Algerian crises convinced him that NATO was a US-led construct that would only involve itself in conflicts that the USA decided were worthy. It didn't help that DeGaulle believed that, in August 1945, Truman had agreed to support France's holding its possession in Africa, the West Indies and the Far East.

When DeGaulle took power as head of the new Fifth Republic in 1958, he saw France's defence being better served by building a stronger European block rather than relying on US help, and thus he moved from a position of dismantling Germany to one of building it up.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
All fine, if you have the luxury of money, which the Germans clearly haven't.
The Germans aren't short of money, they have deep political objections to spending on defence and would rather support their ow economy than defend their country!
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
DeGaulle was leery of NATO because he saw it as dominated by the USA, a country for which he held no love. His position on NATO and Germany altered noticeable. In 1947 he was in favour of the NATO alliance and of dismantling Germany as a nation. However, a lack of NATO support during the Indo-China, Suez and (especially) the Algerian crises convinced him that NATO was a US-led construct that would only involve itself in conflicts that the USA decided were worthy. It didn't help that DeGaulle believed that, in August 1945, Truman had agreed to support France's holding its possession in Africa, the West Indies and the Far East.

When DeGaulle took power as head of the new Fifth Republic in 1958, he saw France's defence being better served by building a stronger European block rather than relying on US help, and thus he moved from a position of dismantling Germany to one of building it up.
Indo China was well outside of any NATO obligation area, in fact the US gave massive aid to the French in indo china which they conveniently forgot about whilst trashing the rest of their possessions.
De Gaulle was bitter about the way the other Allied leaders treated him in the run up to D Day and frankly up until that point it was moot whether another Frenchman would emerge from vichy/exile to lead the French.
No he just didn't like the UK and USA full stop!
 

Sadurian

LE
Book Reviewer
Having read the article, it would seem to me that if true, we should hold all our spares/ air-frames etc in storage and then sell them at a marked up price once we leave the EU. Obviously as we will no longer be members, we can charge them what we want. Whilst I like Germans as individuals, I am not so sure about the "political elite", who seem to want to punish us for leaving the club.
I'm interested in the current Franco-German aircraft proposal, supposedly to produce a (nuclear capable) Typhoon replacement by 2040. France wants it to be a Dassault with some German input, a balance of responsibilities that Germany has always rejected before (wanting to be top dog in these collaborations).

The UK's 'Tempest' design concept is being cold-shouldered, although they say that Britain might be allowed to join the Franco-German project at some future date. That doesn't suggest that the design of a potential future aircraft will owe much to Tempest or any other British ideas, but perhaps they can get Britain to help assemble and buy the aircraft.

At present it is mostly a political flag-waving exercise, but it does reinforce the suggestion that France and Germany will keep hammering away at joint defence projects until one works.
 
The Germans aren't short of money, they have deep political objections to spending on defence and would rather support their ow economy than defend their country!
I can't find the link right now but the Germans have stated that to go to 2 percent of GDP right now would put their economy in deficit. Not setting out to argue, but I'd contend that it's also about supporting their own political agendas and not just supporting their own economy, necessarily. There are distinctions.
 

Sadurian

LE
Book Reviewer
Indo China was well outside of any NATO obligation area, in fact the US gave massive aid to the French in indo china which they conveniently forgot about whilst trashing the rest of their possessions.
De Gaulle was bitter about the way the other Allied leaders treated him in the run up to D Day and frankly up until that point it was moot whether another Frenchman would emerge from vichy/exile to lead the French.
No he just didn't like the UK and USA full stop!
However other see/saw it, the point is that DeGaulle didn't see it like that. That's why he began his move away from relying on NATO and onto a path more reliant on self-determination and a stronger Europe.
 
I'm interested in the current Franco-German aircraft proposal, supposedly to produce a (nuclear capable) Typhoon replacement by 2040. France wants it to be a Dassault with some German input, a balance of responsibilities that Germany has always rejected before (wanting to be top dog in these collaborations).

The UK's 'Tempest' design concept is being cold-shouldered, although they say that Britain might be allowed to join the Franco-German project at some future date. That doesn't suggest that the design of a potential future aircraft will owe much to Tempest or any other British ideas, but perhaps they can get Britain to help assemble and buy the aircraft.

At present it is mostly a political flag-waving exercise, but it does reinforce the suggestion that France and Germany will keep hammering away at joint defence projects until one works.
France's insistence on an unduly large share of what became Typhoon was what got it hoofed from that project - as you probably well know. The Rafale, the result, isn't as good as what it was invited to leave.

We could have gone it alone on Typhoon. Think back to the EAP, then REPLICA. Tempest is looking farther afield - Sweden and Japan have cropped up. If we end up with a three-way (in Western-aligned countries at least) split for 'Gen 6' I see that as healthy in terms of future growth.
 
However other see/saw it, the point is that DeGaulle didn't see it like that. That's why he began his move away from relying on NATO and onto a path more reliant on self-determination and a stronger Europe.
Yes, but he was a belligerent, pompous oaf with a very narrow personal agenda.

...he'd have been a shoe-in for the Brexit negotiating team. :-D
 
DeGaulle was leery of NATO because he saw it as dominated by the USA, a country for which he held no love. His position on NATO and Germany altered noticeable. In 1947 he was in favour of the NATO alliance and of dismantling Germany as a nation. However, a lack of NATO support during the Indo-China, Suez and (especially) the Algerian crises convinced him that NATO was a US-led construct that would only involve itself in conflicts that the USA decided were worthy. It didn't help that DeGaulle believed that, in August 1945, Truman had agreed to support France's holding its possession in Africa, the West Indies and the Far East.

When DeGaulle took power as head of the new Fifth Republic in 1958, he saw France's defence being better served by building a stronger European block rather than relying on US help, and thus he moved from a position of dismantling Germany to one of building it up.
US refusing to nuke Hanoi during Dien Bien Phu also grated with Chaz DeG
Could Vietnam have been nuked in 1954?
 
Last edited:

jrwlynch

LE
Book Reviewer
He-he-he. Poland is undefendable position. Your base will be vapourized in the first minutes of the hot stage of the war.
"All your base are belong to us! You have no chance to survive, make your time!"
 

Sadurian

LE
Book Reviewer
France's insistence on an unduly large share of what became Typhoon was what got it hoofed from that project - as you probably well know. The Rafale, the result, isn't as good as what it was invited to leave.

We could have gone it alone on Typhoon. Think back to the EAP, then REPLICA. Tempest is looking farther afield - Sweden and Japan have cropped up. If we end up with a three-way (in Western-aligned countries at least) split for 'Gen 6' I see that as healthy in terms of future growth.
Yes, France again wanted Typhoon to essentially be the Dassault Typhoon and took their toys away when this was rejected.

I think the UK would struggle with a next-generation fighter project on its own so collaboration is pretty much a necessity. Sweden is a good choice of partner, they know a thing or two about building modern aircraft, but I doubt that they would buy many of the finished aircraft. Japan would be a good end user to target but I wonder what it could contribute in terms of design. They may be happy just to be minor part of the design process, of course, which would be great result if they are also contributing funds and manufacturing.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
However other see/saw it, the point is that DeGaulle didn't see it like that. That's why he began his move away from relying on NATO and onto a path more reliant on self-determination and a stronger Europe.
De Gaulle wasn't president until 1959 despite French attempts to recolonise SEA against the agreed and stated wishes of the USA in the UN to end colonialism they funded the Indo China war almost completely. They also funded French and most European Involvement in Korea.
Wiki even clarifies his politics re Nato:
"In the context of the Cold War, De Gaulle initiated his "politics of grandeur" asserting that France as a major power should not rely on other countries, such as the United States, for its national security and prosperity. To this end, he pursued a policy of "national independence" which led him to withdraw from NATO's military integrated command and to launch an independent nuclear development program that made France the fourth nuclear power. He restored cordial Franco-German relations to create a European counterweight between the Anglo-American and Soviet spheres of influence through the signing of the Élysée Treaty on 22 January 1963. However, he opposed any development of a supranational Europe, favouring a Europe of sovereign nations. De Gaulle openly criticised the United States intervention in Vietnam and the "exorbitant privilege" of the United States dollar. In his later years, his support for the slogan "Vive le Québec libre" and his two vetoes of Britain's entry into the European Economic Community generated considerable controversy. "
De Gaulle distrusted the US and by association and tradition the UK from his treatment in WW2.
He actually had the Napoleon complex of France being a great power.
You've got to laugh at that one!
 
I think the UK would struggle with a next-generation fighter project on its own so collaboration is pretty much a necessity. Sweden is a good choice of partner, they know a thing or two about building modern aircraft, but I doubt that they would buy many of the finished aircraft. Japan would be a good end user to target but I wonder what it could contribute in terms of design. They may be happy just to be minor part of the design process, of course, which would be great result if they are also contributing funds and manufacturing.
Tempest would undoubtedly need cooperation. Sweden, aye, but don't dismiss what Japan can bring to the table.

There's this:

Mitsubishi X-2 Shinshin - Wikipedia

...and there's this (also from Wikipedia):
In 17 July 2014, MBDA agreed to jointly research a Meteor-derived missile with Japan. A spokesman from the Japanese Ministry of Defense confirmed on 14 January 2016 that, Japan and the United Kingdom will develop a Joint New Air-to-Air Missile (JNAAM) by "combining the UK's missile-related technologies and Japanese seeker technologies". The AESA seeker of the AAM-4B would be mounted on the Meteor, because the AAM-4B is too large to be carried in the F-35's weapons bay. According to the Japanese Ministry of Defense, the seeker will be made of Gallium Nitride modules to reconcile both miniaturization and performance enhancement and it is planned to carry out the first launch test with a British jet fighter by 2023.
Unsurprisingly, Japan is no slouch on the avionics front, either. When it bought the F-15, it added some upgrades which made its performance better. The Americans asked for access - only to be told that Japan doesn't export military technology (which was true at the time)!

And as has been noted elsewhere, Japan and the UK have analogous defence needs. There's also an ambition on both parts to maintain some form of sovereign independence from the US.
 

Sadurian

LE
Book Reviewer
De Gaulle wasn't president until 1959 despite
The collapse of the Fourth Republic led to De Gaulle being given power as head of the Fifth Republic on June 1958 according to Serge Berstein, De Gaulle and Gaullism in the Fifth Republic, in Gough and Horne, 'De Gaulle and Twentieth Century France'. Because they had to sort out a new Constitution first, he was not actually elected Le President until December 1958 but had been de facto president from June.

I assume that Wiki's 1959 date must be referring to him actually having the ceremonial inauguration.
 

ugly

LE
Moderator
The French withdrew from Indo China in 1954. The collapse of the fourth republic was accelerated by French refusal to accept it was no longer a colonial power let alone a global one. WW1 had put paid to that!
 

Sadurian

LE
Book Reviewer
Unsurprisingly, Japan is no slouch on the avionics front, either. When it bought the F-15, it added some upgrades which made its performance better. The Americans asked for access - only to be told that Japan doesn't export military technology (which was true at the time)!
Oh the irony. The US being told that they can't have access to defence technology from an ally.

It will be interesting to see whether Japan is interested in a coalition, and what they can bring. As you say, their long-range interception needs in the South China Sea are remarkably similar to our own.
 

Similar threads


Latest Threads

Top