fighter

Spain had a master plan for the European fighter. The problem is that Germany just got a girlfriend with a lot of “money”

by

In 1986, Spain, Germany, Italy and the United Kingdom decided to join forces to build the Eurofighter Typhoon. It took almost two decades to turn it into realitybut that project left a key lesson: in Europe, fighters are not built with engineering alone, but with industrial and political balances that sometimes last longer than the technology itself. The collapse and plan B. It we count last week. He collapse of the Future Combat Air System has not only been the failure of a large European military program of 100,000 million euros, it has also been the moment in which Spain understood that he could not wait for France and Germany to resolve their industrial wars. For years, the FCAS It was sold as the large sixth-generation European fighter, but tensions between Airbus and Dassault Aviation they ended up blocking the distribution of work, leadership and technological architecture. When Berlin withdrew, Madrid lost more than just a partner: it lost the pillar that supported its own bet. FCAS concept The Spanish exit. Spain had been moving in silence for some time. With Indra gaining weight in defense and with growing conversations with Saab, the idea was clear: if FCAS sank, there was room to build an alternative axle with Germany and Sweden around satellite technologies such as sensors, combat cloud, accompanying drones and command systems. It was not yet a “new fighter” as such, but it was a survival platform industrial so as not to be tied to Paris. It was a lateral route to keep the Spanish option alive within the sixth European generation. Italy changes the board. And then Italy has appeared. Leonardo’s new management has made it clear that it would be delighted to open the door of the Global Combat Air Program to Germany. On paper, that is a logical invitation: Berlin brings money, industry and experience accumulated with the Eurofighter Typhoon. But strategically it is a bomb for Spain. Because the centerpiece of your plan B (Germany) could stop looking towards the Swedish axis and turn towards Rome, London and Tokyo. In a matter of weeks, the Spanish escape route could become a dead end. Germany is looking for a leading role. The German movement also has internal logic. Berlin does not want to be a secondary partner. He made it clear within the FCAS and he is repeating it now: if he enters another program, he wants a role proportional to your investment and its industrial weight. That sits poorly with France, where Dassault Aviation never wanted to let go control, but it fits much better with Italian flexibility. Furthermore, BAE Systems and the German branch of Airbus already they cooperated successfully on the Eurofighter. For Berlin, GCAP is starting to look less like an alternative and more like a logical continuation. The Spanish dilemma. And here is the big crack for Spain. If Germany joins GCAP, Madrid stays trapped between two worlds: a mortally wounded FCAS and an alternative plan that loses its most important partner before consolidating. Spain can try to continue punch to France, but that would mean accepting a (much) more subordinate role. You could also look for a direct approach to Italy or even Japan and the United Kingdom, but arriving late to an already structured program reduces a lot the negotiation margin. The risk is brutal: being left out of the table where the next great European air combat ecosystem is decided. Europe repeats its old problem. All this once again reveals the great industrial drama European: too many projects, too many egos and, above all, too much overlap. While the United States and China move forward with centralized programs, Europe continues to fragment its resources between rival blocs. In that sense, Spain believed it had found a safety net after the FCAS. The problem is that this network depended on Germany… and now Germany has a new dance couple. Image | Picryl In Xataka | Spain, France and Germany had joined together to illuminate the “European fighter” of the future: now that path is dead In Xataka | The European fighter has died, but Europe still has one last bullet to avoid the F-35: the alliance of Spain and Sweden

The European fighter may have died, but there is a plan B to avoid the F-35. One with Spain, Germany and an unexpected guest

by

While Europe was still trying to convince itself that another great war was impossible, Germany blew up for the first time the Messerschmitt Bf 109 in 1935: the fighter that would become the backbone of the Luftwaffe. Ninety years later, the continent is once again debating the same underlying question: who will build its next air superiority. The death of the great European fighter. The great European dream of building a common sixth generation fighter has crashed. The manned core of the FCAS program, the so-called NGF, had been blocked for years by the industrial war between Airbus and Dassault Aviation, but now it’s official now: the Franco-German formula has collapsed. What was supposed to be the joint heir to the Eurofighter Typhoon and the Rafale has been broken by something very European: distribution of power, money and technological sovereignty. France wanted to lead it, and Germany did not agree to be a secondary partner. The danger of emptiness. When a program like this dies, the risk is not only industrial. It is also strategic. Europe need a substitute for its current fighters between 2040 and 2045, and the clock is ticking. The quickest way out would be to buy more Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning IIs, something that is already on the table in Berlin. But that would mean assuming that European air sovereignty has failed and that dependence on Washington is irreversible. At a time when America looks increasingly towards Asia and less towards Europe, that has much deeper implications than simply buying airplanes. Plan B exists. Here comes the real twist, because the great European fighter has died, but not the idea of ​​building one. Germany and Spain they have made a move with the so-called “Team Gen 6”a new industrial alliance led by Airbus that tries to rescue what is useful from FCAS and turn it into something else: a more agile, less political and more realistic project. It is not a restart from scratch, since the engines, combat networks, guided weapons and accompanying drones are still alive, and what has died is the original political architecture. Spain is no longer secondary. On this new board, there is no doubt, Spain I would gain weight. Until now it was the junior partner in a project dominated by Paris and Berlin, but the collapse has changed circumstances. Companies such as Indra Sistemas, GMV, ITP Aero or Sener become part of the hard core of the new design. For Spain, this is not just a matter of defense, It is also industrytechnology and presence in the value chain of future European air combat. In other words, if the plan succeeds, the Spanish nation will cease to be a companion and become a central actor. Sweden as an unexpected piece. The big problem by Team Gen 6 is the size. Germany and Spain together hardly economically justify a program worth hundreds of billions. That’s why the name that begins to sound strongly It’s Saab AB. Sweden fits better than the United Kingdom or Japan because its needs they are more similar: a more contained, cheaper and less gigantic plane than the Anglo-Japanese GCAP. If Berlin, Madrid and Stockholm converge, there could be a third way European very different from the French and the British. One bullet remains before the F-35. If you want too, that’s what’s really important. He collapse of the NGF It does not mean that Europe has lost its last chance. It means that the old formula has died and another is trying to be born from the rubble. In that sense, Germany, Spain and Airbus know it. That is why the real plan B is not to buy the American F-35, that is el emergency plan. The real plan B is to try to save a European industrial autonomy with another coalition, another logic and another calendar. And although it may seem like a desperate maneuver, it is actually the last attempt to prevent the future of European air combat from being designed (again) in Washington. Image | Robert Sullivan In Xataka | Spain refuses to buy the F-35 from the US, so it has gotten something in exchange: Harrier pieces as LEGO In Xataka | The US opted for the quality of the F-35 rather than quantity. China opted for the opposite and it is already a problem

the impossible fighter “Christmas tree”

by

In the summer of 1955, Nevadans began reporting strange objects flying at impossible heights. Decades later, declassified CIA documents revealed that a large part of those supposed UFOs were actually secret prototypes that were tested at Groom Lake, the facility that would become known worldwide as Area 51. A blurry image and a forgotten idea. It all started a few days ago with a thermal capture taken near Groom Lake, the facility better known as Area 51. The image showed an oddly shaped aircraft, apparently tailless, with large front canards and unconventional wings. The video quality makes it impossible to identify with certainty what exactly it is, but it was enough to trigger a avalanche of theories. The most striking thing is that the silhouette has led several specialists to rescue an idea that seemed buried for more than forty years: an experimental stealth fighter concept designed in 1983 that received the informal nickname from “Christmas Tree Fighter” or Christmas tree hunting. Thermal image appeared near Area 51 The return of the impossible fighter plane. That 1983 design was created by Darold Cummings, one of the engineers who would later participate in the development of the YF-23. At the time, Northrop was looking for radical ways to build a fighter jet with an extremely reduced radar signature. cummings proposed the DP-21an aircraft with such extreme geometry that many considered it impossible to fly. Its configuration sought to achieve a highly coveted feature in stealth design: a structure of only four large main radar reflections, something similar to what was achieved by the B-2 bomber. The problem was that the flight control technology of the 1980s couldn’t safely handle a device so unstable. That’s why the concept was shelved as a technical curiosity rather than a real project. “Christmas tree” fighter project Why has a photo aroused so much interest? The aircraft observed near Area 51 presents some features that vaguely remember to that DP-21. Particularly noteworthy is the shape of the front section, which in certain images seems to draw a kind of double arrowhead. The absence of traditional tail surfaces, the presence of large canards and a general distribution of wings and fuselage that departs from conventional designs also coincide. Nobody claims that it is a direct evolution of the Cummings projectbut the comparison is inevitable because the image seems to recover aerodynamic solutions that for decades were considered too complex or risky to become an operational aircraft. The clues point to the F-47. The dominant theory is that the aircraft could be related to the technological demonstrators of the NGAD program, from which the future F-47 United States. The general shapes match several elements visible in the few official designs published so far: large canards, very set back wings, absence of vertical stabilizers and a configuration optimized for stealth. Furthermore, some researchers have pointed out that the silhouette appears to have been hidden in plain sight for years. An official patch from the office responsible for the F-47 included a stylized figure that, upon closer inspection, striking similarities with the device captured in the thermal image. It wouldn’t be the first time a top-secret program leaves seemingly innocent visual clues. on insignia and emblems internal. Decades of hidden experiments. The possible aircraft also appears to draw influences from other experimental programs developed by Boeing and its predecessors. Among them the X-36 stands outa tailless demonstrator designed to explore new forms of maneuverability, and the Bird of Preyone of the most secret projects of the nineties. Both opted for extremely unconventional configurations and to reduce the radar signature as much as possible. They remembered on TWZ that the technologies tested in those programs never really disappeared, but continued to evolve within classified projects. The catch obtained near Area 51 could be the first public evidence of how far that evolution has come. An unsolved mystery. The reality is that no one outside the most restricted circles of the Pentagon knows what exactly it shows the recording. It could be an F-47 demonstrator, a prototype related to the future F/A-XX naval fighter, a Northrop Grumman project, or even a completely different experimental platform. The only thing evident is that the image has achieved something unusual: bring an idea to the foreground born in 1983 which many considered a footnote in aviation history. Forty years later, the supposed “Christmas tree hunt” is relevant again because a shadow caught in the Nevada desert sky seems to suggest that some of the strangest ideas of the past may have finally found the technology needed to become a reality. Image | X, DAROLD CUMMINGS In Xataka | In September, an unidentified aircraft crashed very close to Area 51. The real mystery began right after In Xataka | The US has just achieved the “holy grail” of air combat: an F-35 not only detects the enemy, but also gets rid of it on its own.

Brazil’s secret to becoming the first nation in Latin America with its own supersonic fighter is a number: 40

by

In 1909, Canada celebrated the first powered flight of the history of the British Empire. The curious thing is that that plane, the silver dartwas considered Canadian, but had been designed by an international team, built largely in the United States, and then assembled in Nova Scotia. More than a century later, the aeronautical industry continues to operate in a very similar way. The “Brazilian” fighter. When Brazil presented the first Gripen assembled in Latin Americathe focus was on the historic milestone of becoming the first country in the region capable of assembling a modern supersonic fighter. However, the really interesting news appears when you look at what is behind that achievement. The secret is not that Brazil has created its own aircraft from scratch comparable to the large European or American programs, but in something much more complex and valuable: its capacity to progressively integrate in an international industrial chain and absorb technology until increasing national participation in the program is achieved. In other words, the real leap is not in building the entire plane, but in learning to build a significant part of it. The myth of the national fighter. Modern fighter jets are probably some of the most globalized industrial products on the planet. Although the Gripen It is presented as a Swedish plane, the reality is much more complex. The radar Raven ES-05 It is manufactured in the United Kingdom, F414 engine It comes from the United States, numerous electronic components arrive from different countries and part of the intellectual property belongs to foreign companies. In fact, different studies put the British and American share at such high percentages that, depending on how the calculations are made, Sweden alone represents only a part of the set. The Gripen is Swedish in terms of industrial leadership and design, but its manufacturing is deeply multinational. The magic number: 40. Within this international framework appears the data that explains the Brazilian strategy. Sources linked to the program indicate that the objective is for Brazilian national content to reach approximately 40% in the final deliveries of aircraft destined for the Brazilian Air Force. The figure should be interpreted with caution because there is no universal methodology to calculate these percentages and the analysts themselves warn which cannot be directly compared with the industrial quotas claimed by the United Kingdom or the United States. Even so, the data reflects something fundamental: Brazil has not limited itself to receiving aircraft assembled from Sweden. Its objective has been progressively increase the participation of Brazilian companies, engineers and technicians in the production process until the country becomes a relevant actor within the program. Embraer and the transfer of knowledge. The centerpiece of this strategy is Embraer. Thanks to agreement signed with SaabBrazilian engineers participated for years in development activities in Sweden and gained experience in areas that go far beyond simple assembly. The program includes systems integration, structure manufacturing, software development and knowledge related to the production of advanced fighters. The result is that the Gavião Peixoto facilities do not function as a mere assembly line where imported parts are assembled, but as a center where transferring industrial experience that did not exist before in Latin America. The strategic value of assembly. At first glance it might seem that assembling an aircraft designed by another country has limited value. However, the history of the aviation industry demonstrates exactly opposite. The ability to integrate complex systems, manage logistics chains, certify components and maintain advanced aircraft constitutes one of the most difficult steps to overcome. Brazil had already shown relevant capabilities with programs like Super Tucano or the KC-390but the Gripen introduces the country to a much more sophisticated technological ecosystem. Each assembled aircraft provides experience that can later be applied to future national or international developments. The Swedish fighter that is not entirely Swedish either. The paradox is that Gripen itself helps understand Brazil’s position. The plane is often presented as a Swedish national product, but the reality is that it depends from an extensive network international suppliers and technologies. The United Kingdom provides fundamental systems, the United States supplies the engine and numerous critical components, while other countries participate in different subsystems. There are even export restrictions stemming from British and American technologies integrated into the aircraft. In a way, Brazil is following the same model that the main aviation powers already use: no one makes just one modern fighter. More important than buying airplanes. The decision made by Brazil in 2014 during the FX-2 contest It is not explained solely by the Gripen’s capabilities compared to its rivals. The main attraction was Saab’s willingness to share technology and allow much deeper industrial participation than that offered by other proposals. That choice is beginning to yield visible results more than a decade later. Therefore, the first assembled Gripen on Brazilian soil symbolizes something more important than the arrival of a new fighter plane: it represents Brazil’s entry into the small group of countries capable of actively participating in the production of advanced supersonic fighters. And although much of the aircraft continues to arrive from Sweden and other international suppliers, the real story is in that 40%because that is where the knowledge that Brazil had been trying to acquire for years is found. Image | Embraer In Xataka | We tend to assume that the Wright brothers invented the airplane in the United States. In Brazil they believe they have evidence to the contrary In Xataka | A Brazilian has shown that having Internet in mid-flight is possible with Starlink. It has also shown that it is a real danger

The future European fighter in which Spain participates has received the worst news. And it comes directly from France

by

Europe wanted to build its great fighter of the future with three countries in the cockpit: France, Germany and Spain. It was not a minor project nor a simple renewal of aircraft, but one of the most ambitious commitments of European defense for the coming decades, with a view to replacing models such as the French Rafale and the Eurofighter used by Germany and Spain by 2040. But this plan, presented for years as a symbol of strategic cooperation, has just collided with a much less epic reality: the companies called to make it possible have not been able to reach an agreement. The blow. According to Reutersthe Elysée confirmed that France and Germany were no longer in a position to continue with the project after the German authorities considered the margin to pressure the companies involved exhausted. French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Friedrich Merz had discussed the matter the previous week in Montenegro, on the sidelines of a summit between the EU and the Western Balkans. The conclusion was difficult to conceal: after months of blocking, the program had been left without a clear exit in its current form. industrial shock. The program was stuck for months between Dassault Aviation, the French company linked to the Rafale, and Airbus, which represents the industrial interests of Germany and Spain. The dispute was not minor: who led the development, what technology was shared and how intellectual property was protected. Dassault would have defended a leading role to avoid losing control over its capabilities, while Airbus defended a more balanced relationship. It wasn’t just a fighter. The FCAS It was always something broader than a substitute for the French Rafale and the Eurofighter used by Germany and Spain. The plan aspired to build a connected combat system, with a manned aircraft at the center, drones, remote carriers and a military cloud, the Combat Cloudto coordinate secure communications between air, naval, land and space platforms. That is why the blow has more depth than the cancellation of a plane: it affects an architecture designed so that Europe would not only buy future capabilities, but could develop them itself. What is at stake in Spain?. The coup also hits Spain hard. Its participation is articulated through Indracalled to reinforce the Spanish role in areas such as connectivity, technological integration and some of the critical technologies of the system. Furthermore, Airbus not only defended German interests, but also Spanish ones within the program. That is why the blockade does not only affect the calendar of the future fighter: it can alter the industrial weight that Spain aspired to consolidate in one of the great European defense bets for the coming decades. Tension in the air. The Guardian points out that Paris and Berlin maintained differences over the type of aircraft they needed, because France was looking for a model capable of operating from aircraft carriers and carrying nuclear weapons, while Germany did not have exactly the same military priorities. Merz had also publicly questioned whether the development of a sixth-generation manned fighter still made sense for the German air force. The discussion, therefore, was not only who manufactured what, but for what specific needs the system should be created. What remains standing. The stopping of the fighter does not necessarily imply that the entire FCAS disappears completely. The program also includes drones and a high-security combat cloud, and European sources cited by Reuters saw it possible for these two elements to continue. A German government source even spoke of continuing the core of FCAS as a European system capable of connecting aircraft, drones and other components into an integrated whole. The big question is whether this architecture can survive without the airplane that was supposed to serve as its centerpiece. The initial plan and the current reality. The FCAS was on its way to being one of the great symbols of European defense for the coming decades. Today, however, it has become a direct test of the limits of that cooperation. We know that France and Germany have considered the current path exhausted, we know that Spain has industrial interests at stake and we also know that some pieces of the system could try to survive. What we don’t know yet is what form the project will take from now on. Images | Airbus In Xataka | Airbus has just made the most autonomous commercial aircraft in the world fly. Your goal: 22 hours straight without a stopover

China is producing fighter jets beyond its capabilities

by

Washington is facing two dilemmas right now. The first: during the Cold War it produced hundreds of planes of combat per year, with factories capable of maintaining industrial rhythms typical of a war economy. Today, those production levels are the exception rather than the norm. The second dilemma It’s called China. A structural problem. The United States faces a growing challenge in its combat aviation. The reason: its fighter fleet has been reduced more than 60% since the end of the Cold War and many of its aircraft have decades of accumulated service. There is no doubt, although it remains a dominant air power, the combination of aging, operational wear and global demand is leaving to the system to the limitin the red and with a force that no longer has enough margin to respond to multiple simultaneous conflicts. China and another scale. But the real problem is not only internal, but comparative: because Beijing is producing fighters at a rhythm that clearly exceeds current American capability. With massive industrial expansion and projections of up to 300 planes a year Before the decade is out, Beijing is not only closing the gap, it is threatening with overcoming it both in volume and modernization, altering the global balance of air power for the first time in decades. The F-35, insufficient pillar. The F-35 is the centerpiece of American air strategy, and not only as a fighter, but also as an information node capable of coordinating complex operations in real time. However, its importance also exposes the core problem: there are too much dependency of a platform that is not being produced in sufficient quantities, which limits its strategic impact despite its technological superiority. He can’t keep up. Under this scenario, while China doesn’t stop acceleratingthe United States maintains a rather irregular and insufficientwell below the minimum necessary to maintain the size of its fleet. Annual purchases do not compensate for retirements of older aircraft, which progressively reduces operational capacity and generates gaps in key strategic areas, showing that the problem is not technological, but industrial and budgetary. Modern warfare requires more than technology. Recent conflicts have demonstrated that air superiority does not depend solely on having better aircraft, but on have enough. The ability to sustain operations, cover multiple theaters and absorb losses is as important as the quality of the system, and in this area the United States is beginning to fall behind a rival that is betting by the scale. The strategic decision for 10 years. In short, the global air balance is entering a different and critical phase in which the historical advantage of the United States is no longer guaranteed. In fact, if production is not accelerated, the industry stabilized and the fleet reinforced with more F-35s and other systems on the way, the country risks losing its deterrence capacity. against China. In other words, the question is no longer whether the F-35 is sufficient as a platform, but whether there will be enough F-35s to sustain that superiority. Image | US Air Force, LG Images In Xataka | The US has just achieved the “holy grail” of air combat: an F-35 not only detects the enemy, but also gets rid of it on its own. In Xataka | Europe has asked its military experts how to become independent from the US for the next war. The answer is déjà vu: the F-35

The new fighter that Sweden is preparing is a “plane of airplanes”

by

Swedish intelligence is clear: The conflict between Ukraine and Russia will expand across the old continent next year. Given this scenario, Sweden just signed a contract to renew its latest generation fighter for a totally different concept: a key “plane of airplanes” in the first line of defense of a Europe that still He is not very clear how to defend himself. Because Ukraine is not the only front: the threat of United States annexation of Greenland is still in the air. The contract. The Nordic country has hired Saab for 282 million dollars to develop the program Koncept för Framtida Stridsflyg (KFS, Concept for Future Combat Aviation) called to rejuvenate its fleet: KFS will be the basis of the roadmap to rejuvenate its air combat capabilities in the long term. The project started in March 2024 as Vägval Stridsflyg and after financing, it is in the development and first demo phase. Context. Within the old continent, Sweden is a particular case in air defense due to its location: despite be neutral in the Cold Warthe threat of the USSR was just around the corner, in the Baltic. Since then, maintaining strategic sovereignty has been a national priority for the Nordic country. In fact, and although it participated in the Team Tempest program led by the United Kingdom, got off the boat when this evolved into the Global Combat Aviation Program (GCAP) that integrates the United Kingdom, Italy and Japan to go it alone. Because Sweden has been building its own fighters for decades, Draken to the current Gripen E passing through Viggen. After years of service and development behind them, Gripen is already looking for a replacement for 2040. Why is it important. The implications it brings are relevant, both from a technological and geopolitical point of view at the state and continental level: Because it is not a new aircraft, it is a new concept that could redefine the standard of combat aviation. The security context is urgent, as indicated by the information from the Swedish intelligence services and the recent entry of the Nordic country into NATO. For Sweden, it would consolidate its aeronautical defense industry in the long term, reinforcing its commitment to military technological sovereignty. For Europe, if consolidated it would be the continent’s third new generation fighter program along with the FCAS (France-Germany-Spain) and the GCAP (UK-Italy-Japan). Three different projects and the question of interoperability. How this “plane of airplanes” works. What Sweden wants to replace the Gripen is a distributed combat concept. Thus, the fighter’s function is fragmented into different specialized platforms coordinated in real time by artificial intelligence. Although in a simplified and accessible way we have referred to it as “plane of airplanes”, in reality it is sixth generation “system of systems” with a different architecture: This is a manned aircraft that governs a constellation of specialized drones under a centralized AI. Risks and weaknesses. The challenge is enormous for Saab, which has already tried Helsing’s Centaur AI (German) on a real flight with the Gripen E to manage tactical decisions in combat. Of course, the Nordic company has never built a stealth fighter life-size: its background is two small research drones the size of a car, the SHARC and the FILURdating back to the 2000s. On the other hand, although Centaur’s first tests are promising, they are far from validating the use of AI in combat in real conditions. Finally, the project is so ambitious in technical and economic terms and the time window is so long that a medium-sized country like Sweden facing it alone runs the risk of being overwhelmed. In Xataka | “It’s not what we need”: Germany has just put the finishing touches on Spain’s great military dream, the European anti-F-35 is disappearing In Xataka | Europe’s great Achilles heel is not its armies, it is its plugs: NATO’s warning to shield our electrical network Cover | saab

Iran is going to need much more from China and Russia. The US has landed its fighter planes loaded with a weapon that changes everything: angry kittens

by

For most of the 20th century, air superiority has been decided by who flew higher, faster, or with more missiles. Today, the decisive factor does not have to be seen or heard, and sometimes even fits in a container under the fuselage. In modern conflicts, confuse the enemy for a few seconds it can be worth more than destroying it, and those seconds are usually start much earlier for the first plane to appear on the radar. Therefore, Iran may need much more than “aid” and agreements with China either Russia. A deployment that anticipates. While Washington and Tehran keep the diplomatic channel open, we have been counting that the Pentagon has been strengthening its presence in the Middle East for weeks with a movement of forces that includes fighters, bombers, submarines, aircraft carriers and land systems. The transfer of F-16CJ fighters specialized in air defense suppression is not a symbolic gesture. It is an operational signal that, if the negotiation ends up failing, the United States wants have the key ready to open the Iranian sky from the first minute. Wild Weasel: Enter first, shoot later. The F-16CJ are designed to an uncomfortable mission and certainly dangerous– Locate enemy radars, force them to turn on, and neutralize them before they can guide missiles against the attacking force. These aircraft are equipped with the system AN/ASQ-213 and anti-radiation missiles AGM-88 HARMand can physically destroy detection and command nodes. That said, its true advantage isn’t always in explosion. It is in the ability to disorganize the entire anti-aircraft architecture before it understands what is happening through a secret weapon. The “angry kittens”. Yes, because under the fuselage of these fighters travels the Angry Kitten podan advanced electronic warfare system that began as a tool to simulate threats in exercises and ended up evolving into a real operational capability. Let it be known, at least since 2017 It has been tested on multiple platforms and has become a test bed for cognitive electronic warfare, approaching the ideal of systems capable of quickly adapting to changing threat environments. Turning radar into a mirage. Thanks to technology from radio frequency digital memorythe Angry Kitten can detect, capture and manipulate enemy radar emissions to return altered signals. In other words, they don’t just block. What it does is create false targetsdistorts trajectories and sows doubts on the operator’s screen, thus reducing thereliability of information that supports the launch of interceptor missiles. Additionally, it can update jamming techniques very quickly and even adjust them during the mission, while the pilot concentrates on flying and fighting. They will face the invisible challenge. Tehran has reinforced its anti-aircraft batteries and seeks external support, trusting in missiles of chinese origin and in strategic alliances with Russia as a deterrent. However, that network relies on radars, data links and command centers that can be confused before a single interceptor leaves the launcher. Hence, Iran is going to need much more than Beijing’s missiles and the Moscow submarines. Because Washington has just landed in the East with fighter planes loaded with those angry kittens capable of disorganizing the defense from within and converting the apparent solidity of the shield into an electronic illusion. The war before the first impact. In short, everything indicates that, if a prolonged air campaignthe breakdown of the Iranian defensive overlap will not fall solely on stealth platforms. Most likely it will require methodical work of these F-16CJ opening corridors, degrading sensors and keeping pressure on the anti-aircraft network. In that scenario, the first phase would not be so much a rain of bombs. It would be more of an invisible battle for control of the spectrum, one where whoever dominates the signal dominates the sky. Image | John QuineUSAF In Xataka | As the US approached, the satellites have captured a shadow: Iran has resurrected a Russian Frankenstein for what is to come In Xataka | To sink a US aircraft carrier required a weapon that Iran did not have. The arrival of China has just changed everything

call the US or be the last with an endangered fighter jet

by

There was a time when Spain decided that it did not need the large aircraft carriers of the superpowers to have combat aviation at sea. So he opted for a bold solutionalmost experimental, that fit its geography, its naval ambition and its resources, and that would end up becoming a sign of identity for decades. Since then, that unique aircraft has been linked to the Navy in such a profound way that it is difficult to understand its history separately. And now you are faced with a dilemma. Pioneer in stoppage time. Yes, for approximately half a century, the Spanish Navy built a singular identity in Europe by operating fixed-wing fighters from the sea without the need for large aircraft carriers, relying on the Harrier as a central tool of deterrence, projection and expeditionary support. That strategic advantage, which made Spain an international reference since the seventies and allowed it to operate in real scenarios like the Balkansnow comes to a critical point: the aircraft that made it possible enters its final phase of useful life just when the rest of the operators leave the platform and the technological and doctrinal environment of naval air combat has completely changed. The isolation of the Spanish Harrier. To understand it, two facts are fundamental: the imminent withdrawal of the AV-8B Harrier of the United States Marine Corps and the italian transition towards the F-35B, movements that leave Spain on track to become the last world operator of the model. This scenario is not only symbolic, but deeply practical: it means being left alone with a logistics chain that is shutting down, with production stopped for more than two decades and with a growing dependence on one-off agreements, cannibalization of cells and increasingly scarce spare parts. Extra ball. Although the Navy hopes to extend operations until 2032 through agreements with the United States and management extremely careful of the fleet, the truth is that with each passing year reduces safety marginsincreases risks and increases the cost of a capacity that no longer has a medium-term future. Harrier of the Spanish Navy The technological abyss in front of the network. Beyond sustainment, the dilemma is operational. Of course, the Harrier is still a valid aircraft for certain missions, but it belongs to another era of air combatone where information was concentrated in the cockpit and survival depended largely on the pilot and limited sensors. In front of him we have to talk again about an “old acquaintance”, because the F-35B represents a qualitative leap that does not allow comparisons gradual: it is not just a fighter, but an intelligence node capable of detecting, merging and distributing information in real time to ships, aircraft and allies. For a ship like the Juan Carlos Ithis difference marks the border between conditioning the adversary or limiting oneself to reacting with increasingly exposed means. The problem, in this case, is already we have commented: Spain, a priori, does not seem willing to do so. FCAS and the lack of enthusiasm. Also it we count last week. The FCAS program often appears in the debate as a lifeline industrial and European politics, but it does not solve the problem embarked Spanish not even in its most optimistic scenarios. If we ignore that at this moment the project is more outside than insideit is a system designed for air superiority from land bases, without STOVL design nor compatibility with ships like the Juan Carlos I. In fact, turning it into a naval solution would require building a conventional aircraft carrier, redesign doctrines, assume colossal investments and wait decades. In real terms, FCAS does not replace the Harrier or avoid the vacuum that will open if decisions are not made in the short term. The F-35B and realism. In 2026, the F-35B is not a perfect or cheap option, but it does aim to be the only existing platform capable of directly replacing the Harrier and keeping the Spanish embarked fixed wing alive. With more than a thousand operational units and a growing community of naval operators, it offers continuity, interoperability and a military relevance that the Harrier can no longer guarantee alone. From that prism and although Spain it doesn’t seem For the work, giving up this fighter does not mean saving so much as accepting a decade or perhaps more without an embarked combat aircraft, which in the long run could degrade the Juan Carlos I to a helicopter and drone ship with limited capabilities in the face of an increasingly disputed environment. Maybe not, but that idea flies over if there is no replacement for the Harrier. A strategic dilemma. Thus, the underlying or “nuclear” problem is not choosing between airplanes, but rather deciding What role do you want to play? Spain in the naval and expeditionary field. Keeping the Harriers to the limit without a clear relief leads to a loss of capacity hardly reversible, while recovering that aptitude in the future would require much higher costs and efforts. Meanwhile, the clock is ticking, partners are moving forward, and the Navy is faced with a decision that will define its relevance operational for decades: that of continuing to be an actor with an embarked fixed wing or accepting, through inaction, the silent end of one of its most emblematic capabilities. Image | sagesolar, David Fierro Iglesias In Xataka | France and Germany have agreed to give Spain the worst news: one in which the F-35 and its “button” are the winners In Xataka | Spain agreed with Germany and France to bypass the US. And it will end with a fleet of F-35s because of a French name

Ukraine has returned from Europe with 250 fighter jets under its arm. The problem is that only Spain has told him the truth

by

The new European trip of the president of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelensky, has finished in Spain and has crystallized into a military agenda that aims to reconfigure the Ukrainian air force over the next decade, based on political agreements of enormous symbolic scope. If nothing goes wrong, the Ukrainian nation has nothing less than 250 European fighters under his arm along with a huge aid package and arsenal. The problem is that the financing is very uncertain and its execution is very distant. Aerial reconstruction as a continental ambition. In Paris, the Ukrainian president signed a letter of intent to acquire up to one hundred Rafale fightersdevices that France presents as the heart of the future defense of Ukraine, complemented by Samp/T systemsnew generation drones, guided munitions and incipient industrial cooperation to manufacture interceptors on Ukrainian territory. The French bet aims to elevate Ukraine to European technological standardintegrating it into a long-term security architecture and relying on a financing framework yet to be defined, where the European Union and frozen Russian assets appear as the great promise, although deeply controversial. The political gesture, celebrated as historic in parisresponds to the French ambition to lead the regeneration of Ukrainian air power and to reinforce the role of its defense industry in a continent that is rapidly rearming. Doubts about the bet. Diplomatic enthusiasm contrasts with operational uncertainties. They remembered TWZ analysts either The Wall Street Journal that Ukraine does not have of the financial margin to pay for neither the acquisition nor the maintenance of a hundred Rafale, and France is going through a period of budget fragility which makes sustained long-term commitments difficult. The idea that Europe could finance the purchase through new joint debt mechanisms or from income generated by frozen Russian assets divides the states members and poses enormous legal risks, especially for Belgium, which holds most of those funds. Added to this is the industrial reality: the Dassault production chain is saturatedwith deliveries committed for years, and the manufacturing of 100 additional devices would require extraordinary efforts. The perspective of a parallel program, with 150 Swedish Gripen also agreed in the preliminary phase, increases doubts about whether Ukraine could sustain, train and maintain such a vast fleet of 4/5th generation aircraft. For many, the initiative reflects more a political movement to keep France at the center of the Ukrainian equation and to boost European industry in the face of a United States more distantthan a realistic military acquisition plan in the short or medium term. A Gripen fighter The military horizon. Zelensky’s trip has also highlighted the arrival of a winter that anticipates a new Russian campaign focused in energy infrastructure and strategic cities. France insists that Samp/T systems are demonstrating remarkable effectiveness against Russian missiles with a complex trajectory, even higher, some French commanders claim, than the performance of the Patriot in certain scenarios. In parallel, Paris reinforces its role as a provider of interim air capabilities, including Mirage fighters and precision ammunition, while promoting a future coalition of countries Europeans willing to guarantee the security of Ukraine after an eventual ceasefire, a project still impossible as long as Moscow rejects any negotiation. This strategy, which attempts to combine immediate support with an architecture of long term securityreveals both French determination and the continent’s real limitations in simultaneously sustaining the current war and future rearmament. Among others, Spanish military aid to Ukraine will consist of 40 IRIS-T missiles Spain and the contrast with the promises. The final stop of the trip, in Madrid, has revealed a very marked contrast between the declarative exuberance of some allies and the measured (and often austere) approach of the Spanish Government. Spain announced a package of 817 million of euros, which includes 300 million in nationally produced weapons, 215 million channeled through European programs and additional 100 million to acquire US missiles through PURL initiative of NATO. It is a significant effort in political and logistical terms, but modest in comparison with the great European powers and especially small in the face of the air ambitions presented in France or Sweden. In practice, it is a calibrated support for immediate needs from the Ukrainian winter: anti-aircraft missiles to repel drones and protect critical infrastructures, plus a commitment to accelerate joint industrial capabilities in areas where Spanish companies (with Indra at the head) can offer practical solutions such as deployable radars or anti-drone systems. Spain and realism. If you also want, the Spanish case reflects a much more realistic line than that of other countries visited by Zelensky. Since the beginning of the war, Spain has contributed with useful materialsbut in many cases coming from surplus (Leopard 2A4 retired, M113 obsolete, Hawk batteries aging) and has prioritized its participation in European programs where the direct cost to its budget is lower. In comparative terms, and especially measured as a percentage of GDP, Spain is far behind of the hard core of military support for Ukraine. However, what it offers now is probably more sincere and sustainable: an acceptable package, focused on urgent and realistic needs, that does not promise fighter fleets, perhaps impossible to finance, or industrial projects that exceed national capacity. Spanish extra ball. Furthermore, Spain stands out where other countries they can’t: in the reception of refugees, in the medical rehabilitation of Ukrainian soldiers and in light but reliable industrial cooperation. So, on that journey that began with spectacular advertisements in Paris and Stockholm, the Spanish stop has served to balance in a way the expectations. In that sense, Spain appears as one of the few allies that gauges its support by looking ahead. the budget figuresavoiding promising what it will be difficult to fulfill and remaining firm in what it can offer: a modest but operational contribution. Image | Ronnie MacdonaldTuomo Salonen, Air and Space Army Ministry of Defense Spain In Xataka | Europe already knows the arsenal it needs for rearmament. Now the most difficult thing remains: how to make it arrive in time if Russia attacks … Read more

Log In

Forgot password?

Forgot password?

Enter your account data and we will send you a link to reset your password.

Your password reset link appears to be invalid or expired.

Log in

Privacy Policy

Add to Collection

No Collections

Here you'll find all collections you've created before.