The Germans are coming!

[loke]

They probably should've just leased/bought F-16s if F-35 was a no-go. Now Germany gets to pay the full price of integration, so they bought US R&D work. They could've bought domestic ECR R&D to Typhoon and FCAS instead with the nuke integration money.

AFAIK there are already plans to integrate nukes for the SH, so most likely Germany will not have to pay for it. The F-16 is less capable than the SH block; furthermore, if they decided that they needed the Growler, it makes more sense to go for SH than F-16 also from a logistics point of view...

[Tiger05]

I wonder why they went for the SH and not for the F-15 Advanced Eagle which had also been offered by Boeing. The F-15E is already certified for the B61 and is arguably a more capable strike aircraft than the SH: has longer legs, can carry more, has a terrain-following radar (F-15QA), etc. It was probably the second best option after the F-35.

[mixelflick]

There were so many more logical, capable and affordable options. But no, a "split buy" was the outcome and with it, the worst possible deal for Germany.

They'll be getting 2 aircraft now, neither of which is capable of the nuclear mission. Ironic the legacy Hornet is qualified to carry the B61, but not the SH. Perhaps they should have followed the Canadian acquisition model, LOL. I'm sure their logistics people will welcome this decision too. I wonder if anybody asked them what they thought about acquiring and maintaining a small number of SH's/Growlers.

I'd say Canada ending up with a similar "split buy" is 50/50. Seems like a fitting end to an acquisition model that was f*#$ed up from the beginning. Gripen + SH's woud be epic. Trudeau and his friends could zip around in their toy Gripens high over Syria, while S-400's blast them out of the sky.

Perhaps then he can come back and tell us why he didn't buy the F-35 in the first place...

[ricnunes]

I wonder why they went for the SH and not for the F-15 Advanced Eagle which had also been offered by Boeing. The F-15E is already certified for the B61 and is arguably a more capable strike aircraft than the SH: has longer legs, can carry more, has a terrain-following radar (F-15QA), etc. It was probably the second best option after the F-35.

Well, here's two reason why IMO the Super Hornet was preferred to the F-15 Advanced Eagle in Germany:
1- The Super Hornet is cheaper.
2- Probably more important than 1-, the Growler purchase. Germany wants an Electronic Warfare aircraft to replace their Tornado ECR's and the Super Hornet presents such option in the form of the EA-18G Growler while the F-15 Advanced Eagle does not.
Actually the intended purchase of 30 Super Hornet and 15 Growlers by Germany seems to support this.

[ricnunes]

Let's see whether Canada manages to do worse. Split buy Gripen/SH?

I'd say Canada ending up with a similar "split buy" is 50/50. Seems like a fitting end to an acquisition model that was f*#$ed up from the beginning. Gripen + SH's woud be epic. Trudeau and his friends could zip around in their toy Gripens high over Syria, while S-400's blast them out of the sky.

Perhaps then he can come back and tell us why he didn't buy the F-35 in the first place...

Hell no!!

However, I wouldn't totally rule out a 50/50 split buy between F-35/Gripen.
This way and in theory the RCAF and all the Canadian companies participating in the F-35 program would be pleased (as well as purchasing the best choice) as well as the Canadian closest allies while at the same time pleasing those who defend a "Canada made" option (whatever that might be).

However (and again) I don't think this will happen because:
1- Canada will always go with a single fleet option.
2- Germany participates in a 5th gen fighter aircraft project which is called FCAS. Canada participates in a 5th gen fighter aircraft project which is called the F-35. So in the end and again I believe that Canada will go with the F-35 (single fleet) option.

[131stfwfan]

I wonder why they went for the SH and not for the F-15 Advanced Eagle which had also been offered by Boeing. The F-15E is already certified for the B61 and is arguably a more capable strike aircraft than the SH: has longer legs, can carry more, has a terrain-following radar (F-15QA), etc. It was probably the second best option after the F-35.

Well, here's two reason why IMO the Super Hornet was preferred to the F-15 Advanced Eagle in Germany:
1- The Super Hornet is cheaper.
2- Probably more important than 1-, the Growler purchase. Germany wants an Electronic Warfare aircraft to replace their Tornado ECR's and the Super Hornet presents such option in the form of the EA-18G Growler while the F-15 Advanced Eagle does not.
Actually the intended purchase of 30 Super Hornet and 15 Growlers by Germany seems to support this.

Boeing's original pitch internally was for a German Eagle, but yes, once EA capability became exportable to Europe (Finland, etc.) the pitch changed. The EX and F-15IA also took the pressure off the line.

To clarify from another post, Boeing has not 'turned down' the Block III work. That quote comes from a Navy office to soften the current gridlock between the Hornet's future post-2021.

Nothing has changed with Kuwait.

[durahawk]

They probably should've just leased/bought F-16s if F-35 was a no-go. Now Germany gets to pay the full price of integration, so they bought US R&D work. They could've bought domestic ECR R&D to Typhoon and FCAS instead with the nuke integration money.

AFAIK there are already plans to integrate nukes for the SH, so most likely Germany will not have to pay for it. The F-16 is less capable than the SH block; furthermore, if they decided that they needed the Growler, it makes more sense to go for SH than F-16 also from a logistics point of view...

Do you have a source for this? I was unable to find anything indicating that NAVAIR is paying for the integration of the B-61 on the Super Hornet, and it really wouldn't make much sense given it's presumptive integration onto the F-35C. So, even if Boeing is currently footing the bill, it will almost certainly pass those costs along to Germany when they price the aircraft.

Honestly, I don't see much use in gravity dropped tactical nuclear weapons on the modern battlefield having much utility on the modern battlefield to begin with. By far the most likely outcome of employment of a tactical nuclear weapon by NATO against Russia has always been the entire Northern Hemisphere turning to glass within the hour. Limited Nuclear strike has been a flawed concept from the moment of conception. In the strategic deterrent sense, there are far reliable and survivable methods of Nuclear delivery.

[spazsinbad]

Typhoon Targets the Future [Six page PDF of article attached below]
May 2020 Jamie Hunter & Jon Lake

"Eurofighter and its industry partners are making significant moves on future capability development. Jamie Hunter and Jon Lake examine what lies ahead for the Typhoon....

...Eurofighter vs F-35
Many believe an advanced Eurofighter variant will afford more useful and complementary elements to the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) now under development with France and Spain. The company has described an advanced Eurofighter as “a stepping stone to a European FCAS programme”. By contrast, procurement of the F-35 would have threatened the continuation of the entire FCAS project and in particular would have put development of the central FCAS element, the NGF (Next Generation Fighter), in jeopardy.

Dirk Hoke, Chief Executive Officer of Airbus Defence and Space said that any decision to buy the F-35 would have killed off this new Franco-German European fighter: “As soon as Germany becomes an F-35 nation, all co-operation with France on combat jet issues will die.” Jon Lake"..."

Source: AirForces Monthly Magazine May 2020 Issue 386

[madrat]

So they want to take that 5% READINESS RATE and add an exponentially more level of complexity to Eurofighter. Otay.

[jessmo112]

They probably should've just leased/bought F-16s if F-35 was a no-go. Now Germany gets to pay the full price of integration, so they bought US R&D work. They could've bought domestic ECR R&D to Typhoon and FCAS instead with the nuke integration money.

AFAIK there are already plans to integrate nukes for the SH, so most likely Germany will not have to pay for it. The F-16 is less capable than the SH block; furthermore, if they decided that they needed the Growler, it makes more sense to go for SH than F-16 also from a logistics point of view...

Do you have a source for this? I was unable to find anything indicating that NAVAIR is paying for the integration of the B-61 on the Super Hornet, and it really wouldn't make much sense given it's presumptive integration onto the F-35C. So, even if Boeing is currently footing the bill, it will almost certainly pass those costs along to Germany when they price the aircraft.

Honestly, I don't see much use in gravity dropped tactical nuclear weapons on the modern battlefield having much utility on the modern battlefield to begin with. By far the most likely outcome of employment of a tactical nuclear weapon by NATO against Russia has always been the entire Northern Hemisphere turning to glass within the hour. Limited Nuclear strike has been a flawed concept from the moment of conception. In the strategic deterrent sense, there are far reliable and survivable methods of Nuclear delivery.

Pairing the F-35 with a tactical weapon is a game changer. It is an excellent 1st strike option. The F-18 would fail in this mission. Knowing that the 1st nuclear strikes could take out the Russian leadership without them even knowing a jet was overhead SHOULD be a deterrent.

[milosh]

Pairing the F-35 with a tactical weapon is a game changer. It is an excellent 1st strike option. The F-18 would fail in this mission. Knowing that the 1st nuclear strikes could take out the Russian leadership without them even knowing a jet was overhead SHOULD be a deterrent.

They developed systems which can launch nukes if Kremlin is wipe out. First such system became operational in 1967, named "Signal".

[Corsair1963]

Typhoon Targets the Future [Six page PDF of article attached below]
May 2020 Jamie Hunter & Jon Lake

"Eurofighter and its industry partners are making significant moves on future capability development. Jamie Hunter and Jon Lake examine what lies ahead for the Typhoon....

...Eurofighter vs F-35
Many believe an advanced Eurofighter variant will afford more useful and complementary elements to the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) now under development with France and Spain. The company has described an advanced Eurofighter as “a stepping stone to a European FCAS programme”. By contrast, procurement of the F-35 would have threatened the continuation of the entire FCAS project and in particular would have put development of the central FCAS element, the NGF (Next Generation Fighter), in jeopardy.

Dirk Hoke, Chief Executive Officer of Airbus Defence and Space said that any decision to buy the F-35 would have killed off this new Franco-German European fighter: “As soon as Germany becomes an F-35 nation, all co-operation with France on combat jet issues will die.” Jon Lake"..."

Source: AirForces Monthly Magazine May 2020 Issue 386

Honestly, weak argument in my opinion. As the FCAS (and Tempest) won't arrive for a good twenty years. Even then it would take another decade or two to replace all of the Typhoons and/or Rafales.

Which, is why I think it would be nothing short of foolhardy. For Germany to replace her Tornados with Super Hornets.

[Corsair1963]

Pairing the F-35 with a tactical weapon is a game changer. It is an excellent 1st strike option. The F-18 would fail in this mission. Knowing that the 1st nuclear strikes could take out the Russian leadership without them even knowing a jet was overhead SHOULD be a deterrent.

No way the Super Hornet could remotely come close to the F-35. In the Tactical Nuclear Strike Mission. That is plain fact...

[Corsair1963]

They probably should've just leased/bought F-16s if F-35 was a no-go. Now Germany gets to pay the full price of integration, so they bought US R&D work. They could've bought domestic ECR R&D to Typhoon and FCAS instead with the nuke integration money.

AFAIK there are already plans to integrate nukes for the SH, so most likely Germany will not have to pay for it. The F-16 is less capable than the SH block; furthermore, if they decided that they needed the Growler, it makes more sense to go for SH than F-16 also from a logistics point of view...

They have no such plans........

[spazsinbad]

This news was posted first on another part of this forum - I guess I should find it... why 'tbarlow' put it there I dunno….

viewtopic.php?f=36&t=56897

Germany to Order 45 Fighter Jets From Boeing, Report Says
20 Apr 2020 Iain Rogers

"(Bloomberg) -- Germany will order 45 fighter aircraft from Boeing Co. to replace the Luftwaffe’s aging Tornado jets, Der Spiegel magazine reported on Sunday.

Defense Minister Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer emailed her U.S. counterpart Mark Esper on Thursday to inform him of the decision, the magazine said, without identifying the source of its information. Germany will order 30 F/A-18 Super Hornets and 15 EA-18G Growlers, the report added.

The German ministry couldn’t immediately be reached outside regular business hours. The Pentagon in Washington declined to comment.

“While we continue to await an official announcement, we remain committed to working in support of both the German and U.S. governments on this important procurement,” a spokesman for Chicago-based Boeing wrote in an email. A combination of Hornets and Growlers “is ideally suited to meet Germany’s strike fighter and electronic warfare aircraft requirements.”..."

Source: https://news.yahoo.com/germany-order-45 ... 46385.html