What if France had stayed in Eurofighter?

MacCaulay

Banned
In the vein of Melvin Loh's thread...

...in the early 80s, Britain, France, Spain, Italy, and West Germany were part of a design syndicate known as the Future European Fighter Aircraft program. The French really wanted a carrier aircraft out of the FEFA programme, which was something the rest of the countries weren't so sure about.

After some other disagreements, the French left the program and it fell apart. The other countries got back together, and started a new program called Eurofighter. The French, of course, developed the Rafale.

So I ask you (and especially the Europeans of the board)...what would have been the repurcussions for the European militaries and most importantly the European economies if the French had stayed in Eurofighter?
 
A far more impressive programme which would include carrier variants, to the detriment of the JSF.
 

Hecatee

Donor
The Eurofighter would probably have been a more succesfull aircraft with a better air to ground capacity from start even if the plane would not have been ready earlier due to the more protacted negociations and discussions. Carrier borne version would have been developped and might very well have led to the design of larger italian, spanish and british carriers, maybe even a common design with the french, possibly based upon a revised, non nuclear De Gaulle design.

The common plane design would also be stronger for export. Stronger in Europe first, with greek and possibly dutch orders, but also abroad : Saudi Arabia of course, as happened in our reality, but also possibly Australia and, with the lower unit price borne of more important mass production, South Africa (which choose swedish Grippen instead). Brazil might also be interested in the design, both for it's air force and carrier air wing, if the old Foch can launch the plane. Various middle eastern countries like the EAU would also buy it (they are now planning on buying Rafale)

But the main effect would probably be on the JSF F-35 project which would have a smaller export market and less foreign investement, maybe leading to closer US scrutiny and an eventual scraping of the project, especially if Spain, Italy and the UK go for standard aircraft carriers instead of V-STOL plateforms.

This has also an impact on Australia because the Juan Carlos design they bought may well not exist. Thus the australian will probably have to choose between a corean Dodko, a french Mistral or an US Wasp design for it's assault plateform.

Spanish and Italian shipbuilding companies would have slightly less experience with larger ships while british and french one would have a bit more.

European defense integration would be better, with carrier air groups being able to operate indistinctly from any of the 4 to 6 european carrier (1 Spain, 1 Italy, 1 or 2 UK, 1 or 2 France, thanks to the lower building costs) and so many countries using the same planes : maybe some shared training facilities for pilots, both airforce and aeronaval. We already see this with basic flight training of Belgium and France done on a french airbase with planes of both countries used indinstincly for training, here it could be larger.

Dassault plane factory would be a mainly civil company, it's military operations abandonned, or a part of EADS.

The earlier cooperation program may also have revealed design procedures flaws that would thus not happen on the airbus A-380 and other EADS projects, making them appear closer to schedule and planned costs, to the great dismay of Boeing.

Also the program would probably free military money for other projects, especially in the UAV realm.

But the French air force and, particulary it's carrier air groupes, might well be angry at the decision during the late 90's and early 2000 due to the fact there would not be enough Eurofighter to put on the carriers between 1995 and 2003, which probably means that they would not send their carrier group in the indian ocean for the Afghanistan campaign.

The British would probably keep their navalised harrier planes and base them on their new carriers around 2000, thus having more planes availlable for Afghanistan and Irak in 2001 and 2004. The three older Invincible class aircraft carriers would probably be decommissionned earlier and maybe be sold to India or (why not, even if more far fetched ?) Canada.

The spanish Principe de Asturias might also be sold to a second country, maybe Korea or Australia.

Well that could be some of the butterflies coming from a common eurofighter program :)
 

Archibald

Banned
Ok, here's my own take.

December 18 1975 - the Elysée Palace.

A worried Marcel Dassault meet Valery Giscard d'Estaing. 1975 has been a bad year: two importants projects have fallen on the way side.

The "small" Mirage F1E (with M53 engine) has been beaten by the F16 on the deal of the Century.
The "big" ACF (win M53) has been cancelled with the first prototype being 80% complete.

to replace them, Dassault show Giscard two projects

- the "small" Mirage 2000 would be the Mirage III heir for exports markets. The Armée de l'Air, says Dassault, has no interest on it. Indeed they want a BIG, twin engine machine to replace the Mirage IV nuclear bomber.

- that's the second project, the "big" Mirage 4000.

And here the point of divergence. OTL, Giscard, facing a harsh economic crisis, imposed Dassault the following decisions

- scrap the F1E (of which a prototype was flying since december 1973!)
- develop the 2000 instead (and fly it in 1978)
- sell the 4000 to export (Irak !)

Three wrong decisions.

The F1E was already flying, and was cheap, being F1 straightforward development.

The AdA never wanted the "small" 2000. They wanted the 4000.

Exports markets didn't wanted the too expensive 4000 (compare sales of the F-15 with those of F-16!)

so the point of divergence is "Dassault was more persuasive and explained Giscard all the above".

More exactly, Dassault told Giscard that the F1E was already flying, so the 2000 was not very interesting.
Instead, Dassault made an outstanding proposal.

Standardize the whole AdA and Aeronavale fleets around a single machine: the F1E.

In others words: say goodbye to
- 473 Mirage III/V
- "Atar" Mirage F1C
- Jaguars
- Crusaders
- Etendard IV

Giscard proved enthusiast. The idea of a "single plane for everyone" was attractive.

Over the next three following years, the F1E was quickly developped into naval, ground attack, and air defence variants. at the same time, the Armée de l'air sold its Jaguars to India, the Mirage III&V to South america, the French Navy Crusader went to the Philippines, the Mirage F1 "Atar" going to various countries.

But the F1E was nothing new for Dassault. The 4000, however, was.
The money spared with the very large F1E order made the 4000 funding feasible. Thus in 1982, the AdA ammounced it would buy a small batch of these machines, first to replace the Mirage IV, and later to boost air defence Mirage F1Es.

In parallel with these efforts discussions started in 1978 over a future european combat aircraft. Were involved France, Spain, Germany, GB, and Italy.
The discussions languished until 1985, when the moment of decision came.
Although Dassault proposals of basing the EFA on the 4000 were not really followed, France nowadays decided to stay on the project. Indeed the "naval" and "nuclear" roles (typically french, no other european country having air-launched nukes nor aircraft carriers) were fulfilled by the F1E and 4000 respectively.
Thus they were dropped from the EFA requirements, making negociations easier.
SNECMA, deeply involved in the M53 production, but worried about its future, was forced into the EJ-200 program. After very difficult negociations, a compromise was found in 1986 on a join successor to the RB-199 and M53.

At the time Mirage 4000 sales to Irak failed to materialized. However Saudi Arabia, frustrated by the Tornado ADV, and constrained by Israel to have 60 F-15 only, bought 48 Mirage 4000s in 1987. In fact the country helped funding the air defence Mirage 4000C at a time te french governement fought with increasing cost of the program.
Saudis and French Mirage 4000s ironically patrolled Irakis skies in 1991, although no kills were registered.
After lengthy delays due to the end of Cold War, the Typhoon entered service in 2005.
 
A far more impressive programme which would include carrier variants, to the detriment of the JSF.
For this outcome only, I wish France had stayed in.

For all intents and purposes the F-16 was the "NATO fighter" and the Europeans were looking for a replacement. Most nations were. The Eurofighter if France stayed in would have finished sooner, not have been the money pit it was for as long as it was, and would most likely be a better aircraft overall, not saying the OTL Eurofighter isn't a good plane, it is, but still.

The F5 went to the F16, and if France stayed with the Eurofighter, you may see a full transit to the Eurofighter, and almost no real European interest for the F-35. This could end the JSK program, or just make it a American-Canadian-Japan-Korea-Australia program, or just a pure US project, sold to our allies. Who knows, interesting though.
 

perfectgeneral

Donor
Monthly Donor
Originally Posted by Riain
A far more impressive programme which would include carrier variants, to the detriment of the JSF.
For this outcome only, I wish France had stayed in.

For all intents and purposes the F-16 was the "NATO fighter" and the Europeans were looking for a replacement. Most nations were. The Eurofighter if France stayed in would have finished sooner, not have been the money pit it was for as long as it was, and would most likely be a better aircraft overall, not saying the OTL Eurofighter isn't a good plane, it is, but still.

The F5 went to the F16, and if France stayed with the Eurofighter, you may see a full transit to the Eurofighter, and almost no real European interest for the F-35. This could end the JSK program, or just make it a American-Canadian-Japan-Korea-Australia program, or just a pure US project, sold to our allies. Who knows, interesting though.

I'm sorry, but the French wanted to make the Eurofighter smaller (like Rafale) and have a disproportionate work share (hence the tie in contracts). That is why they left the Eurofighter project. Before they did they delayed development. A more interesting what if is, what if the French had gone their own way from the very start? What sort of Eurofighter might have emerged and when?
 
I think the UK would remain interested in some form of JSF, as it loves it's Harriers and they require some sort of replacement. I doubt even a slightly different Eurofighter would come to replace all the UK's fighter / attack craft.

I think something is required to change French opinion on what the Eurofighter should be, since I'm fairly certain their design proposal was essentially a prototype Rafale.
 
Top