Germany and France drop joint fighter jet project (www.reuters.com)

submitted 2 months ago by commander@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

6 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 6 comments

sorted by: hot top new old

[-] Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus 12 points 2 months ago

For his part, Merz has openly questioned whether developing a manned sixth-generation fighter jet still made sense for his country's air force, and said Germany did not need a nuclear-capable jet that could land on an aircraft carrier.

He's pretty right about that. France wants something able to project power, which is not the main interest of Germany. There are two differing objectives, which need two different platforms.

[-] golli@sopuli.xyz 6 points 2 months ago

But the military requirements are only half the issue, the other half is building up and retaining institutional knowledge in building auch planes. Otherwise Germany could probably solve their problem easily by just buying whatever gcap ends up producing.

What I find quite fascinating is that on one hand 100 billion is a fuck ton of money, on the other hand it's like 2 quarters of profit for Google or less than what Meta is planning to spend on data centers in 2026 (they also spend like 70billion on the Meta verse). I guess money wasn't the direct issue right now, but France (a large nation) will have trouble with funding when they decide to do it by themselves

[-] Wildmimic@anarchist.nexus 1 points 2 months ago

I agree on that even if they need two different platforms, they should cooperate regarding infrastructure - The french fighter is not worth much if it isn't supplemented by unmanned support these days. A drone strike force able to support/protect a french nuclear capable fighter that is also able to do it's own thing is probably the way to go.

[-] AllNewTypeFace@leminal.space 9 points 2 months ago

France and Germany seem to have very different use cases for their fighter. If France wants something that can be launched from carriers, can carry nuclear weapons and otherwise serves to support claims to world-power status, the UK may be a more suitable partner. Meanwhile, Germany may do well to talk to Saab (especially now that Sweden is in NATO).

[-] golli@sopuli.xyz 0 points 2 months ago

(all this is just based on what I've read, I have no qualifications on this topic)

My understanding is that french and British aircraft carriers differ in the way they launch planes. France uses a catapult, which requires the frame of the aircraft to be reinforced, the UK does not.

The UK also is already part of a separate program called gcap to develop their next gen fighters together with Japan and Italy. This is already well underway and work share has been decided on.

As I've already mentioned in this thread, the whole thing about the next gen programs is not just about having the aircraft at the end, but also retaining/building up the domestic industry and know-how.

Sweden might be interested to team up (although theyd probably prefer a lighter/cheaper aircraft than Germany), but my understanding is that Germany and Sweden both have similar gaps in their know-how. I think it has to do with some hot parts of the engine, which in Europe France or the UK would be the experts in. You can ofc develop them yourself from scratch, but that is costly and more importantly likely takes too long.

[-] Nautalax@lemmy.world 2 points 2 months ago

What kind of busywork were they doing for almost a decade when they couldn’t even agree on a foundational issue like can we use it on a carrier or not?

this post was submitted on 08 Jun 2026

47 points (100.0% liked)

World News

57792 readers

1053 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF OCTOBER 19 2025
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Ask Historians !askhistorians@lemmy.world

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

lemmyAtom@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world