F-35 til Belgia - Ikke helt uten trouble med Dassault - AW&ST

Belgium’s F-35 Decision Ruffles European Defense Industry Tony Osborne Belgium’s decision to choose the Lockheed Martin F-35 Joint Strike Fighter seemed to be more of an inevitability than a surprise when ministers announced it Oct. 25. The country’s defense minister, Steven Vandeput, said the U.S. fighter had won “financially, operationally and industrially” and would allow Belgium to be a “reliable and united partner” of the European Union (EU) and NATO. But not everyone sees it that way. The European defense industry believes a country so synonymous with being at the center of Europe should have perhaps looked closer to home for its Air Combat Capability Program to replace the F-16. Brussels will buy 34 F-35As for €3.8 billion and take delivery in 2023 Belgium is the 13th customer for the Joint Strike Fighter The F-35 beat competition from the Eurofighter Typhoon after others pulled out of race Airbus called it a “lost opportunity” for European defense, while Dassault Aviation said it represented a “bad signal” for the construction of a European defense capability. The EU has been pressing member states for closer defense cooperation to boost capability and avoid reliance on other countries such as the U.S. “Once again, we can see an American preference prevailing in Europe,” said Dassault officials.

Belgium’s F-35As will be built to Block 4 standard, and the first is due to be delivered in 2023. Credit: Tony Osborne/AW&ST

The French newspaper La Tribune even described Belgium’s decision as a betrayal, saying it was “planting a dagger in Europe’s defense.” BAE Systems, which led the sales campaign for the Eurofighter Typhoon in Belgium along with the British government, has yet to comment but will still benefit from the decision, thanks to significant workshare on the F-35 program. Both Airbus and Dassault suggest that choosing a European aircraft such as the Rafale or Typhoon could have enabled Belgium to join the Franco-German Future Combat Air System and other joint aerospace programs. But it seems the European offer was weak. The French had not even formally entered the tender. Instead of replying to the official request for proposals, it put forward the offer of a strategic partnership to build a closer defense relationship with France. It was ignored by Brussels. Behind the French decision was a belief that the F-35 had already clinched the competition that was skewed in its favor. Belgian media reports suggest some officials had stated a preference for the Joint Strike Fighter as far back as 2013. Similar concerns troubled Boeing, offering the Super Hornet, and Saab, bidding its Gripen NG. Indeed, both Airbus and Dassault said the F-35 decision was hardly a surprise. The British-led Typhoon campaign stuck it out, putting forth an ambitious offset offer and the promise of a closer defense relationship with the UK. However, it could be argued that Belgium would have difficulty working with a nation that blames Brussels for many of its political ills and that doing so would complicate the UK’s separation from the European Union. A €520 million ($590 million) life-extension program for the F-16 was also discounted, as it would merely push the need for new fighter to the right.

Vandeput argues that Belgium did consider the European defense industry. The F-35 represents just part of a €7 billion modernization of defense equipment, which also includes the purchase of more than 400 French-made armored vehicles and the selection of U.S. Sky Guardian unmanned air systems. Vandeput says the F-35 was “the most advanced plane for the best price” that has a strong European dimension, as several countries have joined the program, and about 30% of the aircraft’s components are produced in Europe. He also notes that the production center is in Italy, but it is unclear if the Belgian aircraft will be built there. “Soon [the F-35] will be the platform that will offer the most possibilities for military cooperation in Europe, as was the case for the F-16,” says Vandeput. “This is of crucial importance for a small country such as Belgium,” he adds. All four of the European Participating Air Forces that purchased the F-16s during the late 1970s—including Denmark, the Netherlands and Norway—have now chosen the F-35 as a replacement. Belgium will be the fourth to purchase the aircraft through the Foreign Military Sales program, after Israel, Japan and South Korea, and it will be the 13th F-35 customer overall. Brussels will pay €3.8 billion for its 34 F-35As, built to Block 4 standard, although 5% provisions have been made for exchange-rate fluctuations. Included in the figures are engines, flight simulators and ground equipment. Payment will be made over 12 years. The program competition helped reduce the cost by €650 million, and through-life costs will be lower than planned, around €12.4 billion rather than the €15 billion over the 40-year life of the program, Vandeput says. Choosing the F-35 will provide €3.7 billion in industrial benefits for Belgium, as opposed to €2.6 billion for the Eurofighter. Lockheed Martin said it is looking forward to extending its relationship with the Belgian government and industry participants. The company tells Aviation Week it has identified 45 projects across Belgian industry that would benefit as a result of the country’s F-35 selection. SABCA, Sabena, FN Herstal and Thales are likely suppliers, and academic institutions also will be involved. Unmentioned by Brussels, but perhaps most important, is that the F-35 selection will enable Belgium to continue its nuclear mission through NATO sharing arrangements. An estimated 10-20 dual-key B61 nuclear weapons are stored for potential mounting on Belgian combat aircraft in time of war. The F-35 will be able to take on the role in the early 2020s. Belgium is scheduled to receive its first F-35s in 2023.