Ultimately, European nations are undone by their small populations, limited defense spending, and competing design priorities relative to air giants like the United States and China.

A handful of European NATO nations—chiefly Germany, France, and Sweden—stand out for sharing a similar paradox. All three nations possess the engineering capabilities that one might expect to be associated with a large fighter jet industry, yet both house relatively humble fighter forces. Sweden produces the JAS 39 Gripen, one of the smartest 4.5-generation aircraft ever built; France builds the Dassault Rafale, a similarly cutting-edge fighter jet; and Germany is the lead nation behind the Eurofighter Typhoon, one of the world’s most capable non-stealth fighters. Yet none of these nations resembles the United States, or even China, as one of the world’s fighter aircraft superpowers. Why not?

The answer is that designing a top-notch aircraft is only part of the puzzle. Air dominance requires enormous orders, sustained research and development spending, engines and sensors, weapons integration, software development, maintenance infrastructure, export customers—and decades of continuous production. The nations of Europe have the engineering chops to build great aircraft—but none of them have the scale or breadth of industry to rival the world’s leaders, at least on their own.

France, Germany, and Sweden Have Humble Yet Capable Air Forces

Sweden offers a unique example; its fighter industry punches far above its weight. Saab has a long lineage of impressive fighters, including the 29 Tunnan, 32 Lansen, 35 Draken, 37 Viggen, and—most recently and famously—the JAS 39 Gripen. Sweden’s overpowered fighter industry stems from the nation’s Cold War neutrality and the fear that a Soviet attack could destroy its conventional air bases. That fear was the backdrop against which the Gripen and its predecessor aircraft were designed; the jet is small, inexpensive, low maintenance, and capable of dispersed operations from road bases, optimized for surviving a war against a nuclear power. 

The Gripen’s latest variant, the Gripen E, is one of the most advanced aircraft in the world, with AESA radar and a GE F414G turbofan engine. But Sweden has only 10.6 million people, and its own air force can’t order fighters at the scale America or China can. The result is that Saab must spread enormous development costs across relatively few aircraft, whereas US manufacturers can produce thousands of F-16s for both domestic and export use.

Germany and France are somewhat larger nations, with the economic scale that Sweden lacks. Both nations also have incredible aerospace expertise, built up over decades. But Germany stopped trying to be a sovereign fighter manufacturer; postwar Germany pursued multinational programs like the Panavia Tornado with the UK and Italy and the Eurofighter with the UK, Italy, and Spain. This allowed for cost sharing and larger combined production runs. But it means Germany doesn’t control the entire aircraft. Every decision must go through a consortium. Conversely, France sought to go it alone—its Rafale fighter emerged after it quit the Eurofighter program—but even though it could make decisions more quickly, its isolation decreased its access to foreign manufacturing, limiting the rate at which planes could be built. Still, France has enjoyed considerable success at marketing the Rafale abroad, helping to offset its large R&D costs and make the plane more affordable for its own air force.

The Bottom Line: European Countries Are Not Global Superpowers

The takeaway, perhaps, is that there is a big difference between designing a first-rate fighter and being a first-rate fighter nation. Sweden punches above its weight from a technological perspective—but it suffers from a tiny domestic market. Germany has economic power, but has pushed its aerospace industry into partnerships with other countries, while France has maintained tighter control over its own program at the cost of a larger industrial base for its aircraft.

These structural realities are exacerbated because modern fighter development has become prohibitively expensive. Technology requirements like stealth, AESA radars, sensor fusion, engines, software only makes the scale problem worse. Ultimately, there is no solution to this problem except a giant aerospace industry with the resources necessary to build thousands of advanced fighter jets along one set design—conditions that exist in America and China, but not Europe.

About the Author: Harrison Kass

Harrison Kass is a writer and attorney focused on national security, technology, and political culture. His work has appeared in Tablet, City Journal, The Hill, The Spectator, and The Cipher Brief. He holds a JD from the University of Oregon and a master’s in Global & Joint Program Studies from NYU. More at harrisonkass.com.

The post European NATO Countries Make Great Aircraft. Why Don’t They Have More of Them? appeared first on The National Interest.