• Foni@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    5 days ago

    They may be able to, but they shouldn’t. We need a European army and that requires a military industry that stops thinking about old borders.

    • varnia@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      5 days ago

      But we all remember the desaster with the Eurofighter. Outdated and unusable for real scenarios other than reconnaissance missions since release.

      • Quittenbrot@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        11
        ·
        5 days ago

        Not sure if /s

        The EF Typhoon is in service with four large European airforces, among others, and has seen a wide range of deployments in its operational history.

      • Foni@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        I do not arise enough to value the Eurofightter in particular, but that there are things to improve does not mean that we should give up improving them, breaking with everything and continuing each one by their side

  • theolodis@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    5 days ago

    Well, Airbus could also build it alone, I think the idea was to have multiple companies involved for having the profits distributed.

      • Quittenbrot@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 days ago

        Exactly. There never was a doubt that a company like Dassault could build such a plane alone, but that, given the Rafale experience, it is financially unviable to do so.

  • jenesaisquoi@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    5 days ago

    Of course they can. But just because they can doesn’t mean they should. They are already in a public debt crisis, why add hundreds of billions more to that.

      • tavostator@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        5 days ago

        Not sure if /s, but just in case: The Gripen engine (the „power plant“) is built under license and derived from the General Electric F404 engine, which means that the US basically has a veto vote on who SAAB can sell the Gripen to. Replacing that engine with a european-built (be it Dassault or Airbus or whatever) alternative would make the Gripen a much better plane given the current state of affairs.

      • xxce2AAb@feddit.dk
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        Essentially yes. The reason why the engine in a fighter jet is referred to as a power plant is that it does more than merely provide propulsion - it also generates the energy required to drive all the other systems of the plane, some of which can be pretty power hungry. Radar in particular.

        • Defectus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          5 days ago

          That makes sense. I thought they didn’t have enough power to produce the planes. Which would be strange XD

          • xxce2AAb@feddit.dk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 days ago

            It’s pretty field-specific terminology, and I can certainly see how it could be confusing for anyone who doesn’t know about the reason for it.

  • Melchior@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 days ago

    Just merge with some German firms and then Dassault can built it in Germany. Something like Hensoldt would be a good target.