Jump to content

Germany to buy FA-18s – or will we?

Rainer Hoffmann
 Share

Recommended Posts

Starfighter

Starfighter

Posted
Posted

Nothing has been confirmed, though. Although the defense minister seems to have sent an official request to the US government, she is facing huge opposition right now as she seemingly did all that without contacting their governmental partner... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rainer Hoffmann

Rainer Hoffmann

Posted
  • Author
Posted
2 minutes ago, Starfighter said:

Nothing has been confirmed, though. Although the defense minister seems to have sent an official request to the US government, she is facing huge opposition right now as she seemingly did all that without contacting their governmental partner... 

 

Yes, indeed.

 

As much as I like the Hornet/Growler, I'm not at all convinced that we will ever see them in Luftwaffe camo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
  • 3 weeks later...
bushande

bushande

Posted
Posted (edited)

Hmmmmm .... please don't get his the wrong way, I have in no way any right to sound off like a smart @$$ who would know more about the matter than any other one but the whole issue is, as I would think, a lot more complex than what some comments here might imply. If I may, here are my two cents:

 

(ACHTUNG / BEWARE - terribly loooooong post to follow!)

 

The likelyhood of our Luftwaffe eventually getting those Growlers and Super Hornets is in my eyes quite high, depsite what many nay-sayers in Germany might say at the moment noting the expenses due to the Covid-19 crisis and the sadly rather typical tendency of German polictics to postpone decisions and commitments in order to reach overal concensus.

The simple reason is quite frankly: we just wont have any other choice!

 

You have to understand the mindset of German defence politics. It is not so much pointed at being able to defend the country by itself but rather at providing a viable contribution to NATO and (maybe at some time far in the future if that ever should take on a coherent form) the European defence community.

 

Despite the aversion for investing more into it's own military, Germany's defence budget IS actually increasing, however certainly not at the rate desired by NATO. Nonetheless Germany's contribution to NATO itself has now reached 16.5 percent of the overal budget and with that equals the contribution of the United States, if not in absolute numbers, at least in percentage of the NATO household. One of the main commitments towards NATO was to be one of the dedicated providers of ECR, EA and SEAD services in Europe for the community. That commitment won't be met without the Tornado (or the more advanced Growler).

 

Many might not reckon it, but along with the Italian brethren, the German ECR Tornados are not that old with most of the (sadly rather few acquisitioned) airframes being produced in the 90s. If it were not for the excellent Growlers, the Italian and german ECR Tornados are actually some of the best dedicated ECR platforms around in the West and many of the airframes are still durable enough to hold out for at least another decade.

 

So why a replacement at all in the first place?

There have been many regrettable decisions made in the past by politicians long out of office now that eventually fall on our feet. The culling of the fleet began in the early 2000s pivoting between 2011 and 2013. Originally it was intented to basically strike off older IDS airframes. The late foreign minister Westerwelle tried to move Germany out of the treaty on nuclear assistance and rather favor Germany's ECR and EA contribution but that move was eventually thwarted. In fact the ASSTA upgrade program laid increased focus on improving the EA and precision strike capabilities of the IDS airframes rather than the younger ECR airframes, eventually leading to the irony that some newer ECR airframes were culled in favor of older IDS airframes. Another negative side effect was the neglect to further develop and bolster the already existing know-how on Electronic Attac and SEAD as it existed within the industry in Europe and Germany in general leading to a tending fall back in that field. On the other hand the search for a proper replacement or rather the necessary investment into that undertaking were constantly postponed simply because in the past years such proposals would not exactly lead to an increase of a politicians popularity in Germany. Due to the times being what they are at the moment the German society's stance on all things military slowly seems to change and become more adult but in the past years supporting any greater investments in anything military was a good way of not getting re-elected. And another reason was simply - and many British and Italian members here might concurr - the Tornado simply was JUST THAT GOOD a platform!!! Another decision that would prove fatal for the fleet was to basically cancel all major delivery contracts with providers of spare parts and wear parts that need regular replacement. You have to understand, the actual cause of the Luftwaffe's problem with servicability and operability rates of the Tornado and for that matter also the Typhoon fleet is not poor maintenance or ill-ability of the Luftwaffe. It is even less that the actual airframes itself would be in poor condition. Heck, Italian and British Tornadoes had/have a lot of more rigid combat hours on their backs than the German airframes that basically saw field time only beginning end of the nineties above Kosovo. No, if it were only for the airframes, the German Tornadoes would well last into the 2030s. It is simply the gross lack of wear- and regular replacement parts due to delivery contracts being cancelled prematurely once Tornado production seized. There was the calculus to simply share into British and Italian stocks once these countrie's airforces would retire their fleet but Britain understandably used up most of its stock due to Britains huge international commitment in recent years and what is left after retirement is going to Saudi Arabia. Italy faired in a similar route. Hence, Germany simply has a problem with availability of spare parts rather than poor maintenance. Regarding the Typhoon fleet some politicans being consulted by certain business consulting companies that proved to have absolutely no idea about defence economics (I'm not calling out names here!) found it a great idea to sign contracts for just-in-time provision of MILITARY spare parts can you imagine!!! Plus major overhaul is solely done by the industry at the Airbus military facilities in Manching now. Henceforth, if a bird needs replacement parts you sometimes have provison and turnaround times of up to four months in extreme cases according to the Luftwaffe inspector general himself. Germany has no problem with providing enough fully operational birds to meet its commitments towards NATO i.e. QRA and  general air policing but beyond that it kind of gets tricky.

 

Long story short: We failed to move on on any of the options we had when we should have about ten to fifteen years ago. We did not manage to commit to other European initiatives to develop a replacement for the Tornado when other countries asked because it was not politically opportune on the one hand and we failed to properly invest in a coherent infrastructure for the Tornado on the other, in fact we even put the axe on the existing infrastructure as it were. We also failed on properly investing into our Typhoon fleet while countries such as Britain showed what magic a Typhoon can work if it is properly cared for.

 

Even increasing on the already existing trouble was the ominous case of the burning of the "Staudinger" facilities, a large complex of Airbus owned stores in Ingolstandt in 2018, where many spare parts for military equipment were stored centrally by the Industry which led to the destruction of around 23,000 regular replacement parts mainly for the PC-3 Orion but also in considerable quantities for the Tornado fleet. Many in German politics claimed that would not have a huge impact on the servicabilty of the fleet but shortly after the retirement date for the Luftwaffe Tornado formerly boasted being not before the mid 2030s was drastically brought forward to the mid-2020s the latest. What has been / is being done by the ASSTA programe is simply too little too late and just doesn't address the core problems as mentioned above.

 

So no Tornado replacement on the horizon and no properly upgraded Typhoon available but many promisses and commitments towards NATO and the EU. In German I guess we would say. "Jetzt haben wir den Salat", roughly translated to "Now we have the salad" which loosely interpeted would mean something like "Now we are stuck with the mess".

 

We will get a replacement simply because we just have no other choice, period!!! many claim, we will end up with keeping the Tornado alive by drastically reducing the fleet to a minimal core and yet again postpone a firm decision to a future government that can deal with the mess but the simple reality is that we have around 30 percent of our 85 Tonis working at any moment and our fleet of dedicated ECR airframes was small in the first place and got further culled even. There is no realistic way to keep our commitments with a drastically decreased fleet, it is that simple.

One of above posts stated that AKK the current defence minister would not come through because it was not discussed with the coalition partner (a funny detail I will address a bit further down alaborating on: why not the F-35). That is wrong. That ominous email to the US defence secretary and Lockheed stating the firm intent to buy the Super Hornet was discussed with the German foreign minister and the German finance minister ( both leading members of the coalition partner). Did she handle it yet again in her typical undiplomatic clumsy way? Yes! Was the coalition partner uninformed? No!

 

So why the F-18, or better why not another airframe?

First off, as many Italians and British would certainly agree, it simply would need more than just one aircraft to fully replace the Tornado. It simply was just that good. There is no single aircraft that would provide the same range of capabilities plus the low level high speed ability of the Tonka. You can have faster jets, but  they would not provide the same level of EA and ECR ability as the "Toni". You could have jets that provide that level of ECR ability or even above that but would lack the low level high speed and range.

 

Well, what were all the options on the table:

The most obvious one would of course be an upgraded / improved Typhoon, another possibility would have been the formidable French Rafale, there is of course the F-35, and we would have the F-15E/X and eventually the F/A-18 F/G.

 

So why not the Tiffy ECR or better the Tiffy as a stand alone replecement? Well, the Typhoon could do anything a Tornado could do and that even better but let's face it, that Typhoon just doesn't exist (yet?!). You simply have to develop that Typhoon that can fully replace the Tornado and well, that simply costs money and time. Money and time that should have been taken into the hand about ten years ago. Simple matter of fact, IF that Typhoon will see he light of day it will be too late to not create a serious capability gab between the retirement of the Toni and that new ECR/ multi-bulti-whatnot-Tiffi. Well, that super-duper Tiffy btw. is NOT the currently ordered Tranche-4 Quadriga project. That basically comprises just the replacement of our old Tranche 1 Tiffies and some add on but that is it. That super-duper ECR-Tiffy simply still needs to be developed.

 

Last but not least: Airbus would have to disclose proprietary data to Boeing for the B-61-12 integration. While the Germans may not have had too much against that if the price was right, the French side of Airbus .... well not so much! Plus Boeings interest in certifying the competition is understandably fairly low thus stating that Eurofighter certification would take at least twice as long as the certification of a US product. Henceforth you would have a huge hole in the provision of the Nuclear assistance.

 

Why not the Rafale: The Rafale may not boast those explicit ECR capabilies but abilities that are excellent enough to make do certainly and most importantly it is a fully fletched multirole platform that is available just now. However, remember, originally there was supposed to be ONE single Eurofighter platform and France  stepped out because there could not be reached an agreement regarding the regular integration of a carrier suitability and other components that the French industry could provide predominantly. Imagine the outcry if Germany would choose the very "derivative" of the Eurofighter project thus neglecting Airbus. People don't understand the concept of "availability just now"; the outcry would be horrendous. And none the bit less improtant. An essential requirement is to maintain the nuclear assistance. France would never allow anyone else to carry French nukes and disclosing proprietary data to the US for integration of their B-61 eggs? Nyaaaaaa come on!

 

You may ask, why maintain the membership of Nuclear Assiatnce? After all large parts of German society would rather like to see that go, i.e. see US nukes vanish from German soil and it is not for nothing that the leftis parties all together including the coaltion partner of the current government advocate for leaving the Nuclear Assistance. Thank god at least so far cooler and more prudent minds still seem to prevail. I seriously doubt that Germany would ever actively drop any nuclear bomb. The reason we opt to maintain the ability for nuclear asistance is as simple as important and strangely many in Germany including the ideoligically drugged leftist party leaderships don't seem to recognize that. Germany providing carriers for US nukes is the only thing that keeps the country at the table of the NATO nuclear decision board. THAT and only that, i.e. having that minimal influence on NATO's nuclear posture and not staying out once nukes would (god forbid!!!) ever fly over and on our heads and not so much as being a real help in the case of all cases by actually dropping one of these eggs is the only and vital reason for us to still insist on remaining in the club of nuclear assistance.

 

Why not the F-35: After all many European countries went jsut that very obvious routee. The F-35 would certainly have been the "best" overal replacement of the Tornado providing most of the abilities in question including an extremely formidable ECM and EA suite and of course B-61-12 certification. An above comment stated falsely that it would have been too expensive. That is wrong altogether! The F-35 was a favorite of the Luftwaffe it is just not politically opportune for various reasons. First: Remember, in Germany even interims solutions tend to become longterm options (remember the legendary Phantom - procured in the early 70s to not last any longer than 10 years with the last ones flying into retirement in 2013!) Germany is lucky enough now to find a capable partner in France developing a replacement for the Typhoon and Rafale at some point MAYBE in the 2040s with the FCAS project and now luckily Spain partnering in. At least for the moment for once Germany did not sleep over a proper date to initiate a miltary replacement programe. Let's see if we really follow through this time???! The deal is basically that France/Dassault will lead in the develoment of FCAS, while Germany will lead in the development of a new common battle tank. I wonder if and how that turns out. If we procured the F-35 it would not be the desired interims solution but be a long term acqusition that would stay with the forces well into the 2040s or even longer and thus would effectively endanger the FCAS cooperation with France and the political fire comming from all kind of sides was massive. Take into account that this program along others is politically supposed to be one of the founding stones of that envisaged utopia of a coherent European military. The former Luftwaffe general Muellner lost his job over publically advocating for the F-35! Another aspect is the still strong influence of the left-side member of our current government coalition, the social-democratic party of Germany "SPD". THey could be described as a junior partner to the conservative Cristian Democratic Union CDU (Merkels party) in the governing coalition but their influence is huge because if they broke up the coalition, there would not be an alternative big enough for the CDU to save the government legislature. The SPD has become increasingly indeological in its policy in the latter years constanly changing its party leadership personell and the shift towards leftist views in order to regain voters is iminent (but fortunately largely proves unsuccessful at the moment). However this party is hugely devided in its core. You have some highly influencial fraction leaders and the CURRENT party leadership that advocate a very stiff anti US, anti NATO and of course anti-Trump view to the point that elder party members publically take a stand against their own party. Its not just that Germany is none of the early JSF-program members thus not having some influence on the programe itself but the circumstance that the F-35 is a jet that is in a constant SIGINT mode reporting "home" and depending on regular software upgrades coming from Virginia, which might be a problem if your don't have your folks sitting in the service center there as the original program partners such as Britain and Italy have. That jet would simply increase German dependency on the US and be in the way of further European independence as some politicians for whatever good or bad reason envisage. The F-35 is not a matter of money but of politics alone!

 

Why not chiming in to the F-15E/X: Well that is a question I have been pondering about as well without finding a satisfactory answer I confess. It would have been a BOEING jet just as the Super Hornet, we could chime in with others including the USAF, it would bring pretty much all of the desired abilities to the table; i.e. speed, range, massive multi role punch and at least a quite decent ECM / EA suite along that may not be equal to the Growler but at least good enough to replace the Tornado in a more than sufficient way plus the B-61-12 integration wouldn't have been a problem at all!!! And most of the development costs would already have been borne by Saudi Arabia and South Korea. Quite frankly, I don't get the move of ruling out the Eagle in favor of the Bug other that for the Hornet's dedicated ECR capabilities. The only reason I could imagine implies a somewhat provocative insinuation, namely that if we had a carrier plane for the B-61-12 that was (opposite to the Bug) actually be able to go real stinkin' fast we might be forced to actually come forward in the case of all cases, which, lets be honest, is not in the German interest.

 

There is only one option left that at least roughly covers the loss of abilities that would come with the retirement of the Toni, that is available in time and that provides for us to keep our commitments to the aliance esspecially the Nuclear Assistance and that a "little less deadly" and thus better publically communicatable ECR capability and that is the Super Bug. And that is that.

 

It may have some goodies coming with it after all: It might prove to be a really cool recruiting tool; hey it's the TOP GUN MAVERICK movie jet! How cool is that?!!! And as it stands now, the Foxtrotts may go solely to Buechel i.e. our nuke station but the Growlers might very well go to Schleswig/Jagel and that might as well mean maybe .... juuuuuuust maybe not just a grey in grey but hey TIGER SUPER HORNETS!!!!! If there's anything in that whole thing that I am hoping for, it is that!!!

 

Sorry for the looooooooooooooooooooooooooooong novel. Anyone made till here at all? I am the last one to be in the know but I just wanted to illustrate that the whole matter is not that easy, is all.

 

Edited by bushande
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rainer Hoffmann

Rainer Hoffmann

Posted
  • Author
Posted
36 minutes ago, bushande said:

So no Tornado replacement on the horizon and no properly upgraded Typhoon available but many promisses and commitments towards NATO and the EU. In German I guess we would say. "Jetzt haben wir den Salat", roughly translated to "Now we have the salad" which loosely interpeted would mean something like "Now we are stuck with the mess".

 

Yes, that's a proper "salad" indeed.

 

Interesting analysis (I guess, it's part of your dissertation, is it not? :P ). Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing Super Hornets and Growlers in German camo. 

 

40 minutes ago, bushande said:

but the Growlers might very well go to Schleswig/Jagel and that might as well mean maybe .... juuuuuuust maybe not just a grey in grey but hey TIGER SUPER HORNETS!!!!! If there's anything in that whole thing that I am hoping for, it is that!!!

 

Don't hope for too much ... But Jagel would be close enough to home for a short photo trip, so yes, let's hope :beer:

 

Cheers

Rainer

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DonH

DonH

Posted
Posted
14 hours ago, Rainer Hoffmann said:

Actually, I wouldn't mind seeing Super Hornets and Growlers in German camo. 

 

Cheers

Rainer

 

Go for it - buy the kit and paint it in a whiffer scheme. Everyone will go "that looks fantastic, but it will never happen". Then it will happen and people will think you had prior knowledge and come to you for advice on the next 1/32 Tamiya release.

 

Perhaps it's not worth it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kagemusha

Kagemusha

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, blackbetty said:

this is a very interesting read and is very conclusive,

but whatever happened to no politcs, does that mean only no US politics?

 

Does that mean I've got to read it all!? 

 

I did skim through it, interesting that we'll, the UK, be sending all the spares, once the fleet's retired, to Saudi, considering they have the Strike Eagle also, I guess it's testament to the quality of the aircraft. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tony T

Tony T

Posted
Posted
On 20 April 2020 at 3:12 PM, RNoAF said:

I hope so. I would love to see the F/A-18 in the old german Marine colors!

 

Yes, the Marinefleiger slate grey uppers and off-white pearly light grey lowers, with that dramatic straight mid-fuselage demarcation line. So slick. 

 

The US Navy/Marines Blue Angels are currently receiving their Super Hornets, and at least one has had the blue and golden yellow paint job. Will look especially nice on an F.

 

Tony 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...