Among the global military aviation field, the development of sixth-generation fighter aircraft has become a focal point of competition among major powers. China is advancing multiple sixth-generation fighter projects at an astonishing speed, including Chengdu's sixth-generation, Shenyang's sixth-generation, and the so-called Northwestern Polytechnical University's sixth-generation fighter. This multi-pronged approach not only reflects China's strong capabilities in funding investment, technological accumulation, and supply chain integration, but also benefits from a highly centralized decision-making mechanism and defense industry system. In contrast, although the United States is a leader in aviation, its next-generation air superiority program currently focuses on only one Air Force main sixth-generation fighter, and due to budget constraints and congressional approval, its progress is relatively cautious. Meanwhile, Europe's "Future Combat Air System" (FCAS) project faces the risk of collapse.

Although Europe's "Typhoon" and "Rafale" fighters are advanced, they still remain at the 3.5 generation level, lacking core technologies such as stealth coatings, super cruise, and sensor fusion. The FCAS project was launched in 2017 with the intention of leapfrogging to develop sixth-generation fighters, integrating manned aircraft, unmanned僚机, and the "combat cloud" network to achieve multi-domain operations. However, directly launching such a complex project, Europe faces three major challenges:

The first is financial pressure. The R&D cost of sixth-generation fighters is high, and it is estimated that the total investment in FCAS may exceed 100 billion euros, which becomes a burden when distributed among countries. France, as the leading party, has already invested hundreds of billions, while Germany and Spain, despite their larger economies, are unwilling to simply "pour money" into it.

The second is technical difficulties. Europe lacks a complete stealth aircraft supply chain, from advanced materials (such as stealth coatings and composite materials) to AI algorithms and aerodynamic design, all need to be started from scratch. Dassault, although having experience in developing the "Rafale", its demonstrator scheme emphasizes that France will take the lead in 80% of the technical work, revealing the bottleneck of technological integration - Airbus Germany is good at system integration and unmanned僚机, if marginalized, the entire project's technical collaboration will collapse.

Worse still, the supply chain depends on external sources, and many key components may need to be imported from the United States or Asia, which contradicts Europe's original goal of "strategic autonomy," and due to internal disunity, it is difficult to achieve self-sufficiency. In reality, companies such as Dassault in France, Airbus in Germany, and Indra in Spain are each acting independently in areas such as sensors, electronic warfare, and radar stealth; after Belgium joined as an observer, it bought F-35s while trying to share the benefits of FCAS, further increasing the fragmentation of the supply chain.

The final core issue of the FCAS project is the struggle for project leadership. Dassault in France insists on requiring more influence, proposing to take the lead in 80% of the work on the manned aircraft demonstrator and control the intellectual property, which Germany and Spain see as "France taking everything," breaking the original principle of one-third shares.

Germany has already purchased F-35s as a transitional measure and may turn to the GCAP project of Britain, Japan, and Italy to connect subsystems. This reflects Germany's pursuit of defense autonomy and also means that if FCAS fails, Germany can independently maintain its air force strength rather than being "held hostage" by France.

Spain's situation is even more passive. Its Air Force F-18s are about to be retired, and if FCAS is delayed, it can only rely on outdated aircraft, but the country has already invested over 1 billion euros and is unwilling to withdraw easily. Belgium is more like a "wallflower," investing in FCAS while being deeply involved in the F-35 supply chain. Facing French accusations, it has stated that it will reassess its participation.

Currently, FCAS may face three possible outcomes: first, France goes alone, and the project is downgraded to an upgraded version of the "Rafale," losing the advantages of joint efforts and technological superiority; second, Germany and Spain exit and find their own ways, with Germany purchasing more F-35s and Spain struggling to maintain its position; third, re-signing the agreement and dividing tasks according to the principle of "strongest module leadership," but if there is no progress, the service time will be postponed to after 2045, facing the situation of being obsolete upon deployment.

China can simultaneously advance three sixth-generation fighters, thanks to unified command and efficient execution; the United States, although focusing on only one, can focus on resource integration; Europe's FCAS, however, is stuck due to multilateral博弈. This is not just a technical problem, but also a manifestation of political trust deficit. The fate of FCAS warns Europe: unity is not just a slogan, but a consensus that needs to be implemented through actions.



Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/7542821310297063974/

Statement: The article represents the views of the author, and we welcome you to express your opinion by clicking on the [top/like] button below.