European Military News, Reports, Data, etc.

Equation said:

Yeah all NATO has to concern about it Russia. Even 15 years into the future with a lower defense budget NATO has enough to handle the threat of Russia. Russia is still under economic sanctions and that alone had a major on their economy and defense spending. Russia just can't keep up with NATO at this time or into the next few decades. That's why 6th gen aircraft programs are a good way for the Europeans to keep their high tech aero space industries competitive.

Click to expand...

No one wants war, particularly not Russia. Europe is Russia's biggest client on Natural Gas and Oil imports. Russia invading Europe is like shooting itself in the foot. Not gonna happen at all. At least Russia isn't the one looking to invade Europe.

Since WW2, there hasn't been a single war between two nuclear countries. Nor has there been a war against a country that has the ability to respond to the aggressor. When it comes to Russia and China, you can be sure that the response will be befitting and devastating.

As I said before, no one wants war, and I don't think human race has lost memory of the tens of millions of lives lost in the first and second world wars.

Besides other color "revolutions", the particular event that lead to the seemingly confrontation between Europe and Russia was Ukraine. And the bottom of it is Oil and Gas transit from Russia to Europe. That is the whole reason. Now, who want to cut off that pipe line? Who want to supplement that source of gas? Who is trying to sell the supplement? After answering these question, one would know very well who want all these confrontations. We know at least Germany and Italy are reluctant to that idea. We also know the ones who like the idea have most of their gas from the north sea. It is crystal clear that everything here is about money. And someone want to block some European countries' access to Russian gas, not Russia want to force them to buy.

As @Dizasta1 has said, Russia would be shooting itself on the foot if it invade Europe. The whole mess is about putting a wedge between Europe and any possible partners.

However, one thing is clear, for Europe to be able to determine its own future, decide on its own will about from whom to buy what, Europe must have a strong and independent military industry and defense force. I wish the Franco-German cooperation does go well. Only when these two have set a good example, will other wall-sitters follow.

Pmichael said:

I'm getting the impression that you are arguing from an emotional position regarding to the F-35. Aircraft are designed for specific mission profiles and requirements.

This is also off-topic and I'm interested in arguing about alternative facts regarding the F-35.

Click to expand...

Modern fighters are designed for a range of mission types, this is the reasoning why fighter designations like the JAS and F/A exist that is multirole. F35 was designed as to do strikes but also air defence. That is not out of the norm of late 4th gens either. This is not an alternative fact it's cold hard truth.
F35 may not have the supermanover of F22 but it few modern fighters do. The aim was a fighter that could turn and perform in the same range as the F18.

Your posts regarding the F-35 are absurd. We also don't need to discuss about it but just look what happens in the real world.

Facts are facts there are only a hand full of supercruise capable fighters in active service in the world (Rafale, Typhoon, Grippen NG, Mig31, Su35 and F22) and an even smaller number of fighters that are classified as Air superiority fighters (F22, Flanker, F15, Typhoon, and at a stretch the old F14s still flying in Iran ). I am not counting J20 Or SU57 in either due to current status of those programs.
It's true F35 is not an air superiority fighter but that doesn't mean it is not a fighter. You argue it's subsonic, yet the X35 broke the sonic barrier a number times in evaluation and the F35 has also done so. Again I point out that the majority of modern fighters don't supercruise. They break the sound barrier by afterburner just like F35.
All modern fighter aircraft are intended to perform more than one mission the days of single mission machines ended in the forth generation of fighters. F22 for example has been doing air strikes in the middle East not killing fighters. Russian Flankers have been dropping bombs in Syria, Typoons used by the UK are comparable with Brimstone missiles a system designed to bust tanks.
Fighters like the Hornet and Super Hornet, Rafale, Gripen, Falcon and Fulcrum are all classed as multi role. Today they bomb tomorrow morning they might have air to air missiles, by the afternoon Jamming pods. Or perhaps recon pods.
F35 fits in this to it's not one mission it's flexible by design. A Jack of all trades. A good radar and sensors for air to air, or electro optics for ground attack with a 25mm gun. Stealth for denied air space operations but able to mount external stores for more conventional missions.

You are repeating just your nonsense. An air superiority fighter is designed around the EM theory. Something the F-35 isn't.

Also the fact that you misunderstood the concept of multi role is telling enough. A multi role aircraft is designed with multiple roles in mind not all. The F-35 is mainly designed around the strike role, the Eurofighter is mainly designed around the air defence/superiority role.

It isn't really that complicated.
The F-35 is also the only modern western aircraft which doesn't have any supercruise capabilities.

Sorry buddy but you are wrong.
Air Superiority is a mission set, the concept being to employ a aircraft design that can penetrate enemy airspace and sweep it clear of any air power. To do so it is a fighter designed to operate in both BVR and WVR air to air combat as well as provide interception.
EM theory? I think you are confusing either stealth or Electric warfare.
All modern fighters have radar capable of long range missile lock this is not unique.

Multirole is just that and it's up to the designers to pick the roles. All modern fighters are multirole. Able to switch between air to air and air to ground missions based on weapon load.
Lightning is not an Airsuperiority machine but it can be used for defence and interdiction with a mix of missiles.

Bogus on supercruise to only a hand full of machines can do that. It's the ability of a fighter to break the sonic barrier with our use of a afterburner and with a useful combat load. This requirement only became a factor in late 4th gens. It does require special engines but has limitations of its own in altitudes. F35 doesn't do it but then again one of the aircraft it is replacing do either.

Again, we don't need to discuss about the F-35 aren't replacing the air superiority fighters in any air force with specific fighters for that role.

and again supercruie is a capability which is standard in western aircraft design in the past two decades. And also a crucial feature for Russia and China with the most recent developments.

F-35 doing many things differently is not a result of Lockheed getting it right or wrong (or the rest of the world), but aircraft are designed for specific roles... crazy I know.

TerraN_EmpirE said:

... F22 for example has been doing air strikes in the middle East not killing fighters. ...

Click to expand...

... something which has been controversial:
Jun 1, 2018

Jura said:

recalled Nov 20, 2017

Jura said:

cross-posting from
F-22 Raptor Thread
about Raptors bombing poppy fields:
U.S. F-22 Stealth Jets Perform Raptor’s First Ever Air Strike In Afghanistan Employing Small Diameter Bombs
Read more at

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

after I had read
Wilson: Leave High-End Fighters Out of Low-End Fights
May 30, 2018

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

Jul 18, 2018

Jura said:

kinda typical
European Military News, Reports, Data, etc.
these days:
Oops! The Spanish Navy Is Constructing New Submarines That Are Too Big For Their Pens

July 18, 2018

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Click to expand...

and DefenseNews noticed
What’s the problem with Spain’s new submarine?

3 hours ago

Please, Log in or Register to view URLs content!

Spain’s new submarine model has grown in both physical size and price to solve engineering problems, but the solutions have also now created a new problem: it won’t fit inside the docking area of the naval base.

The S-80 Plus was extended by 10 meters to increase buoyancy after the original model of the sub appeared unable to resurface, as first reported by the Spanish newspaper El País. However, the additions will also require much larger docking infrastructure to be built at Cartagena naval base to accommodate the sub.

The total price of the contract for the four Spanish subs, even without the expenses for new docking, has nearly doubled after the unexpected challenges to reach €3.9 billion ($4.5 billion).

Spain’s Minister of Defense Margarita Robles stated on Spanish radio that while “there have been deficiencies in the project," the problems “are already corrected and the project is absolutely viable."

Click to expand...