I think you’ve exposed one of the main issues with European missile manufacturing: the lack of contracts to maintain the assembly line AND subcontractors online. On “L'encyclopédie des sous-marins français. Vol. 6. La construction d'un sous-marin: approche générique et prospective” (Thierry d' Arbonneau ed., SPE-Barthélémy, published Nov 2013 ISBN: 978-2-912838-57-5) there’s an account on how to fulfill the Chilean order of a batch of SM-39 Exocets, MBDA had to find and certify a new paint provider as the original supplier had closed down since the previous order had been fulfilled. The lack of a continuous stream of replenishment/new user contracts can cause important disruptions as subcontractors can close down or abandon the missile/aerospace market. A long-term approach is needed to keep such strategic capability besides the expected surge in missile orders
Thanks for this analysis. I guess it's one thing to say for the EU they're investing 800 billion euro's in defense, however it is unclear where all this money will lead to. What is the defense vision of Europe, it can't be just drones and AI? What army do you want to build? Or in the case of the Taurus, how many do you need for a ranged campaign against Russia? And as the Taurus is quite old already, when are we gonna develop new missiles as Europe?
I've been pondering a question for quite some time now: in your opinion, will we see a shift toward a more 'scalable' version of the scalp-EG (and similar systems), one that effectively focus on mass production and potentially lowers the cost per unit?
Intersting article, but as Scalp and the UK's Storm Shadow are generally quoted as equivalents/identical or variants with great commonality, an overview of Storm Shadow production and how it intersects with Scalp production would have been illuminating.
Assuming money were no object, what are the main hurdles to ramping up production? Is it a supply chain issue, a bureaucratic one, or something else?
Thank you for the explainer. Self-critique is valuable, especially since it seems so rare these days.
I think you’ve exposed one of the main issues with European missile manufacturing: the lack of contracts to maintain the assembly line AND subcontractors online. On “L'encyclopédie des sous-marins français. Vol. 6. La construction d'un sous-marin: approche générique et prospective” (Thierry d' Arbonneau ed., SPE-Barthélémy, published Nov 2013 ISBN: 978-2-912838-57-5) there’s an account on how to fulfill the Chilean order of a batch of SM-39 Exocets, MBDA had to find and certify a new paint provider as the original supplier had closed down since the previous order had been fulfilled. The lack of a continuous stream of replenishment/new user contracts can cause important disruptions as subcontractors can close down or abandon the missile/aerospace market. A long-term approach is needed to keep such strategic capability besides the expected surge in missile orders
Thanks for this analysis. I guess it's one thing to say for the EU they're investing 800 billion euro's in defense, however it is unclear where all this money will lead to. What is the defense vision of Europe, it can't be just drones and AI? What army do you want to build? Or in the case of the Taurus, how many do you need for a ranged campaign against Russia? And as the Taurus is quite old already, when are we gonna develop new missiles as Europe?
I've been pondering a question for quite some time now: in your opinion, will we see a shift toward a more 'scalable' version of the scalp-EG (and similar systems), one that effectively focus on mass production and potentially lowers the cost per unit?
Intersting article, but as Scalp and the UK's Storm Shadow are generally quoted as equivalents/identical or variants with great commonality, an overview of Storm Shadow production and how it intersects with Scalp production would have been illuminating.
There is no Storm Shadow production. It's at 0.0 and has been for years.