[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vm / vmg / vr / vrpg / vst / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / pw / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / vt / wsg / wsr / x / xs] [Settings] [Search] [Mobile] [Home]
Board
Settings Mobile Home
/k/ - Weapons

Name
Options
Comment
Verification
4chan Pass users can bypass this verification. [Learn More] [Login]
File
  • Please read the Rules and FAQ before posting.

08/21/20New boards added: /vrpg/, /vmg/, /vst/ and /vm/
05/04/17New trial board added: /bant/ - International/Random
10/04/16New board for 4chan Pass users: /vip/ - Very Important Posts
[Hide] [Show All]


[Advertise on 4chan]


File: gcap-uk-2246154725.jpg (69 KB, 1500x1000)
69 KB
69 KB JPG
https://www.aeronewsjournal.com/2025/12/uk-open-to-germany-joining-gcap-future.html?m=1
Frenchbros...c'est fini
>>
>>64733086
In light of the recent greenland business, this seems shortsighted. Europe needs an independent carrier plane. France can do that, and giving them some support is reasonable. Germany can still buy GCAP on top.
>>
File: 173639238-612x612.jpg (30 KB, 408x612)
30 KB
30 KB JPG
>>64733167
Hon hon hon. Germany can just fund our carrier plane and then go ahead and buy the plane they actually wanted in the first place from the UK.
>>
>>64733232
But what if Germany built two carriers too?
>>
>>64733232
Set up an EU fond for the french plane.
>>
>>64733167
And isnt the gcap a project already indipendent from us procurement?
>>
>japan
>italy
>germany
>UK
VGH...the gang is back in town..
>>
>>64733167
>In light of the recent greenland business
You won't do shit eurocuck
>>
File: 18794576866.jpg (739 KB, 1200x2400)
739 KB
739 KB JPG
>>64733241
not much of a difference

Also why should the EU pay for that, only the french are looking for a CATOBAR capable plane. Italy and Spain need STOVL, that why they went with the F35 B to replace their Harriers.
>>
>>64733249
Not a carrier plane.
Also the japanese connection is iffy. Japan has no choice but to stay allied to the US. If europe and US break, japan is stuck in the middle with GCAP.
>>64733254
We'll throw you out of europe niggermutt. Maybe ally with china too, for good measure.
>>
>>64733258
>Italy and Spain need STOVL, that why they went with the F35
And that was folly.
>>
File: 1767872207846.png (95 KB, 832x552)
95 KB
95 KB PNG
>>64733261
>we'll become chinese vassals to own you or something
>>
>>64733265
>There are no allies, only vassals and rulers
You have the mind of a zigger. Are you sure you're not john burger from ohio oblast?
>>
>>64733265
Fuck off ziggie
>>
>>64733265
>alliance means vassalization
Literal vatnigger mindset.
>>
>>64733254
Fuck off zigger
>>
>>64733291
Not surprising. If you look at the Warsaw Pact, it looks like everyone's just sending their resources to Moscow.
>>
>>64733086
so its just the fucking eurofighter debacle all over again. what is actually wrong with frogs
>>
>>64733302
Dassault niggers on suicide watch.
>>
>>64733302
They unironically feel like evrope's only hope.
>>
>>64733305
Distrusting america proved to be correct, but can they at least throw germany a bone for funding their plane? Oh non, I have to hoard all le tech, rather not develop our plane at all."
>>
>>64733305
It is, but france needs to pipe down and not try to jew out his neighbours
>>
What happens to all these plans when the UK, France and Germany all soon have pro-Russia pro-Trump populist governments?
>>
File: 1767874852664.png (327 KB, 1200x1005)
327 KB
327 KB PNG
>>64733270
>>64733274
>>64733291
>>64733300
Repeat after me: you won't do shit
>>
>>64733339
Cope.
>>
>>64733339
Attack greenland and find out fatnik.
>>
>>64733261
>Allying with China
Lmao I love how Europe goes from allying with Russia to allying with China, they’re so fucking insecure that they have to run into the arms of thirdies
>>
>>64733355
what do you expect? When you red tape the shit out of your own country's manufacturing and labor laws for good boy points, you need a dirty-as-fuck thirdie factory nation to prop up your house of cards.
>>
what does germany say about it? i've heard about how basically all members (maybe japan not so much) are willing to accept other partners in the project, but so far the only guy in germany who objected in its favour is some random party mouthpiece.
>>
>>64733258
Why are Belgium and Luxemburg such leeches?
>>
>>64733683
a lot of EU jobs
>>
>>64733683
Belgium does all of the EU's administration as the headquarters of the union, the funding for all of that is included in this graph.
>>
>>64733746
the administration is there but the administration is made up out of people from all over Europe
there's a higher proportion of belgians (mainly Flemings) all over the EU's administration and other bodies though. mainly because you can't leave high-school without learing at least 3 languages, but up to 5.
>>
>>64733086
Not gonna happen. Germany, Spain and Sweden will join up and develop their own 6th gen.
>>
>>64733086
Will the F-35 become obsolete by the time the foundations of this project are even set? This sounds like a political clusterfuck that won't get resolved for the next half decade.
>>
>>64733969
No. The F-35 will probably meet Europe's needs, ala seal-clubbing Russian air defense and air force, until the 2060's.
>>
>>64733291
>>64733270
He's not wrong. Chinks have the same mindset that ziggers do, you don't ally with China. You're either a disposable tool or a vassal to them.
>>
>>64733969
>obsolete
>5 years
Fighter aircraft are usually rated for 6000 - 8000 flight hours. Depending on actual usage and fleet size this translates to anything between 25 and 40 years. Newer western fighters like F22 Raptor or Eurofighter Typhoon are planned to be used for around 30 years, depending on their ability to be upgraded.

European allies just started buying F35 variants a few years ago. I think Italy and the UK were first in 2012, but most european nation bought them in the late 2010 and early 2020ies. The bulk of these airframes have not even been delivered yet. The F35 will keep flying in the EU until 2055, while being upgraded continously.
>>
>>64733969
GCAP WILL meet the 2035 deadline or Japan will behead all the partner nations.
>>
>>64734077
>>obsolete
>>5 years
>Fighter aircraft are usually rated for 6000 - 8000 flight hours. Depending on actual usage and fleet size this translates to anything between 25 and 40 years. Newer western fighters like F22 Raptor or Eurofighter Typhoon are planned to be used for around 30 years, depending on their ability to be upgraded.
I think he meant in technology
but the F-35 is built to be upgraded so I don't think it'll be obsolete technologically for a while, especially since it already has stealth
>>
>>64733258
>Italy
we started funding for initial research on a nuclear CATOBAR carrier, but our politicians are so corrupted by the US that they are already hinting at procuring F-35Cs to keep our F-35 FACO running.
>>
>>64734298
Maybe France should buy F-35Cs for their new carrier
>>
>>64734298
I mean..... what else would you be flying off of it? GCAP isn't intended for carrier ops so far as i'm aware
>>
>>64736601
No idea, we should've maybe joined the FCAS instead, as anything that distances us from the US is good in the long run.
>>
File: do nothing lose.png (1.47 MB, 1024x1024)
1.47 MB
1.47 MB PNG
>>64733183
pretty embarrassing how hard you keep trying to force this meme LMAO.
>>
>>64737546
Ditching GCAP to join FCAS would definitely be a decision, given that it is very up on the air if FCAS will survive as a program. For all their faults, all of the participants in GCAP seem extremely committed to making GCAP happen quickly and efficiently, while the germans and french are fucking around like there's no rush whatsoever.
>>
>>64737704
imho Europe should push all their money into ICBM and nuke research/production. We'll never have the capabilities of the US in terms of force projection, meanwhile if we had a fuckton of nukes we would achieve the same goal with less money, as no nuclear capable country ever had their land seized or their head of state snatched.
>>
>>64737818
Greenland is dubiously europe to begin with, and I doubt any european would start throwing nukes over it
The threat is not american invasion of mainland europe (french nukes prevent that already) but a blockade of trade for raw materials, like from greenland, or canada, or south america.
>>
>>64737853
>Greenland is dubiously europe to begin with
Shalom.
>but a blockade of trade for raw materials, like from greenland, or canada, or south america.
That is why nukes are the solution, we can't oppose the US if they want to conquer SA, but if we decide to stop pussying around and conquer Africa once again our resources needs are already met, and if we have nukes nobody would risk using them unless we were about to invade your actual territories.
It's pretty clear in the future the US aims to hunker down in the americas, de facto owning them, and us europeans if we want to survive need to do the same to Africa. What is left is Asia under either China or Russia (or I hope, Japan lmao) since they will never be allies.
>>
File: hahaha.jpg (47 KB, 700x394)
47 KB
47 KB JPG
>>64733183
Or...
Do nothing.
Lose.
>>
>>64737853
>Greenland is dubiously europe to begin with
It's been inhabited and under European rule since 985 AD by the vikings. And after they died off Danish/Norwegian rule since the early 1700s, before the US even existed.
>>
>>64738119
>>64738130
Sorry, but
-greenland is not geologically part of europe
-greenland is not populated by ethnic europeans
-greenland is (of yet) economically worthless
I know international law says different, and I agree it's an asset we should not give to america, but it's the truth. And I repeat, I doubt anyone would want to nuke, say, an american carrier group, to defend greenland.
>>
>>64738138
Doesn't matter. Greenland doesn't belong to Miggers.
>>
>>64738138
>greenland is not geologically part of europe
It doesn't matter, we discovered it and inhabited it for more than a millenium. When we discovered it there were no natives, which only came afterward from the canadian territories since an economy started to grow.
>greenland is not populated by ethnic europeans
70%+ of those who self identify as "greenlandic" in Greenland are literally danish people ethnically, with actual Greenlandic inuit being under 1.9%
>greenland is (of yet) economically worthless
Not every single speck of land needs to be stripped bare to make some rich jew guy in California even more rich.
>I doubt anyone would want to nuke, say, an american carrier group, to defend greenland.
That's obvious, but its due to our politicians being both spineless and having been made so on purpose by the US. If our politicians actually cared about the future of Europe and had the means, then they should and would be right in using a nuke to protect even a remote european country like Greenland.
>>
File: 1767957684734908.png (418 KB, 640x671)
418 KB
418 KB PNG
>>64733254
a single brigate of our gypsies can defeat your whole military in a night.
>>
>>64738138
You could say all of the same about the Falklands, but the Brits went to war over it.
>>
>>64738253
The brits fought a war they could win. That's a difference.
>>
>flood of magatards
Into the same trashcan as ziggers
>>
>>64738284
The US cant muster its entire force against us at once. They need to have forces in the pacific. Europe can field 5 aircraft carriers, 200 frigates and 1000+ modern planes. Thats at least a challenge to the US. On the ground, US would actually be outnumbered. Conventional land forces in EU + GB number over 1.5 million, with a relatively comparable amount of MBT and rotary wing aircraft to US inventory. What we dont have is strategic assets like ICBMs, sattelites and recon assets and AWACs in sufficient numbers.

Its a fight that would absolutely not be worth it.
>>
>>64738311
>no logistics
whoops
>>
>>64738311
You don't understand what you're talking about. Europe does not have the power projection to defend greenland. Europe cannot bring our entire carrier forces to fight a battle in the atlantic either. If they even still work, what with the F35 killswitch. Europe does not have the global navy to blockade america the way america can blockade us. Europe doesn't have stealth bombers that can basically attack us at will - government buildings, crucial industry, the likes. And most importantly, the mutt fascists are right about that, we don't have the will to fight an all out war over greenland.
>Its a fight that would absolutely not be worth it.
The mere rethoric Trump is throwing out there is already not worth it. He's doing it anyway. Don't put your trust in america to stay reasonable when actually challenged.
>>
What the fuck are SAAB are going to build for the Germans instead of FCAP
>>
>>64738358
Canards for the GCAP?
>>
>>64738362
Airbus and SAAB Collab on new fighter rumors
>>
>>64738377
Does Airbus have experience making fighter jet engines?
>>
>>64738383
Don't think so, SAAB have some
>>
>>64738138
Ok then, when are you going to leave Hawaii?
>>
>>64738397
>SAAB have some
Do they make the F404/F414 in Sweden, or do they import them ready-made from the US?
>>
>>64738397
SAAB doesn't make engines lol. They've licensed everything.
>>
>>64738403
If you'd read the entirety of my post you would have realized I'm european.
>>
File: 20260109_120531.jpg (110 KB, 720x544)
110 KB
110 KB JPG
>>64733167
>greenland business
Preparations for the Final Solution to the Greenland Question are already well underway, Froguette.

>>64733254
They won't even have to.
It will be a perfect checkmate.
Trump will Maduro an entire continent next time...
that continent's name?
Greenland.
>>
>>64738138
More European than it is Israeli. Fuck off kike.
>>
>>64738405
They assembled them in sweden, the hot section has always been produced by GE in the US.
>>
That begs the question, what the fuck do they plan on building for the Germans
>>
>>64738646
What do you think germany needs that GCAP doesn't provide?



[Advertise on 4chan]

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.