Future Combat Air System (FCAS / SCAF / FSAC) - Speculation and Theories

I remember when I first started reading the FCAS thread, @dark sidius made the prediction that fcas is gonna go nowhere and got laughed at.

A few people on that thread owe him a drink.

Its truly wonderous how shortsighted some politicians continue to be despite how things are now. 12 billion? Somebody needs to be figuratively drawn and quartered. If anything, the piecemeal withdrawl of US forces from europe should start ringing alarm bells, but no ... lets continue to underfund an increasingly underfunded military with a bolder russia and a US uninterested in european defense.

Oh right and the entire UK sub fleet is now in maintenance and repairs.
 
Good luck having enough money to do that, as is I was pretty dubious that they could make fcas with just Germany and France.
Are we seriously arguing how a $3.66 trillion economy can afford a 100 billion program over the next 10 to 15 years? 0.18 to 0.27% of current GDP before taking into account the well known rule of thumb that joint projects cost roughly the square roote of the number of partners more so going it alone would cost about 71 billion hence the French need to get about a 1.5-2 billion more per year
 
Superficially Dassault and Airbus are at a similar point, but upon closer inspection it's evident that Airbus not only has more resources, but also a broader knowledge basis and research history. Thanks to being comprised of several former European aviation companies.
???
so how to explain the troubles in NH90 and A400M developpments ?

The Dassault way of life is "on time, on spec, on budget". It is not the AIrbus case, and specially in the military division.
 
When I bring certain information together, an interesting overall picture emerges for me.
1. France currently has a big problem with his expenses. (Perhaps one of the reasons why FCAS is only supposed to be finished so late?)
2. Saudi Arabia is trying desperately (rightly so) to free itself from its US dependence with the help of its oil-billions by building a national defense industry.
3. The Saudis would like to buy into the GCAP consortium, but Japan has concerns (IMO, a good call)
4. Saudis have a problem with German armaments (keyword “German free”), which is why FCAS was never really an alternative.
5. France and Germany have different ideas about FCAS (always had, but suddenly more extreme)
Edit 6. There has been a connection in the past between Dassault and Saudi Arabia over the Mirage 4000 project (Pointed out by Archibald)

Now we have a country that has a very good aircraft manufacturing history, that could very likely design a stealth fighter on its own, but that has real money problems.
Then we have a country that desperately wants to improve its image in the world, become more independent in defense and wants to produce instead of just buying. In addition, it is owned by one of the richest families ever. (_edited)
Match made in heaven?
Still an option for France?
 
I remember when I first started reading the FCAS thread, @dark sidius made the prediction that fcas is gonna go nowhere and got laughed at.
I mean technicaly speaking its probaly gonna be sold as a restructuring and not total end but yeah at minimum NGF is dead as we know it.
A few people on that thread owe him a drink.
The list of drinks i owe is still long ;)
Its truly wonderous how shortsighted some politicians continue to be despite how things are now. 12 billion? Somebody needs to be figuratively drawn and quartered. If anything, the piecemeal withdrawl of US forces from europe should start ringing alarm bells, but no ... lets continue to underfund an increasingly underfunded military with a bolder russia and a US uninterested in european defense.
Oh right and the entire UK sub fleet is now in maintenance and repairs.


I also love the interrests of companies seem to exceed the importants of the nations defense needs :)
 
It seems the project has been terminated. But this is not surprising, as politicians are not exactly short-sighted. Overall, the project was too difficult, with significant differences in interests, and without a strong and determined will to drive it forward, ending the collaboration is understandable.

However, overall, it is indeed quite disappointing. I had originally hoped that this time they could bring more interesting designs and ideas.
 
Still an option for France?
Why not.
But in this case first is to clinch the recent deal for 48 Rafale, no?

For me the best partner for France for a brand new jet is India : they have a big internal market, they have some company able to built major part of the jet, with a cost reduction due to low manpower cost, they are trustable in term of ToT (the contrary of China for exemple).

Saudi Arabia has nearly no industry. If it is to fill them with pakistanis.... no, no and no.
 
Why not.
But in this case first is to clinch the recent deal for 48 Rafale, no?

For me the best partner for France for a brand new jet is India : they have a big internal market, they have some company able to built major part of the jet, with a cost reduction due to low manpower cost, they are trustable in term of ToT (the contrary of China for exemple).

Saudi Arabia has nearly no industry. If it is to fill them with pakistanis.... no, no and no.
India? mate I dont know how India would even be able to fund this on top of the AMCA and the tejas and the rafale and the tejasmk2 and the su57 deal(if anything comes out of this). On top of any engine deals. This is just for fighter aircraft.
Like I understand that the Indian economy will grow but I think your going to have to wait until at least the 2030s before India actually has a big enough economy to fund all these projects at the same time. Or hope India gets its defence budget upto 2.5% of the GDP which tbf is not impossible considering its a stated goal of the gov.
But I could be abysmally wrong about things so I will keep an open mind.
 
India? mate I dont know how India would even be able to fund this on top of the AMCA and the tejas and the rafale and the tejasmk2 and the su57 deal(if anything comes out of this). On top of any engine deals. This is just for fighter aircraft.
Like I understand that the Indian economy will grow but I think your going to have to wait until at least the 2030s before India actually has a big enough economy to fund all these projects at the same time. Or hope India gets its defence budget upto 2.5% of the GDP which tbf is not impossible considering its a stated goal of the gov.
But I could be abysmally wrong about things so I will keep an open mind.
Only way this works is if atleast AMCA and SU-57 end with the new french/indian NGF. No point in investing into 3 aircraft for more or less the same role and capabilities (with a large margin)
 
Only way this works is if atleast AMCA and SU-57 end with the new french/indian NGF. No point in investing into 3 aircraft for more or less the same role and capabilities (with a large margin)
well i mean the NGF could actually work if the french were also willing to design it with STOBAR carriers in mind. the IN desperately wants a 5th gen but got locked out of the AMCA design because the IAF didnt want to have any furthur delays to the program by making a STOBAR capable jet. A catobar carrier for the IN will almost certainly be nuclear powered and as such will come far only in the 2040s unless they want to get 4 MT30s on a single carrier.

If the NGF fulfills that particular requirement it could technically get funding from both the IAF and the IN budgets which when added over time and accounting for growth would be sufficient but thats hypothetical.

AMCA and su57 have different roles. One is the heavy strike equivalent while the other is designed for A-A. The su57 better compliments the su30. NGF is planned for naval usage as well and India does want a 3 carrier strike force at the minimum with possibly more later on in the late 2040s and 2050s.
 
India? mate I dont know how India would even be able to fund this on top of the AMCA and the tejas and the rafale and the tejasmk2 and the su57 deal(if anything comes out of this). On top of any engine deals. This is just for fighter aircraft.
Like I understand that the Indian economy will grow but I think your going to have to wait until at least the 2030s before India actually has a big enough economy to fund all these projects at the same time. Or hope India gets its defence budget upto 2.5% of the GDP which tbf is not impossible considering its a stated goal of the gov.
But I could be abysmally wrong about things so I will keep an open mind.
Tejas mk2 is only a bigger Tejas. the 2 are in fact one sole program.

Rafale & SU57 : it will be Rafale OR Su57, not the 2. And Su57 is a direct competitor to AMCA (as Gripen and F21 are to Tejas) => NO WAY.

AMCA : on the rails. Just expect some retards as usual.

Then a heavy superiority fighter, with a production ramp up not before 15 years. All is not a so big burden for a 1.5 billions people country, with a raising economy.
 
Let's all be honest here and with ourselves, the point of this project was to just try to look cool globally that you can join the cool kids club and nothing more.

You need a high fuel energy intensive production line to produce a good amount of such aircrafts and with their current economies they simply can't afford that. 100 billion euros is a lot, cost of F-22 program was 67.3 billion dollars, cost of Su-57 program was estimated at 30 billion dollars. They already threw billions of dollars away in Ukraine
They also have no strategic purpose to even use it for anything. Like what will they do with the aircrafts after if Russia was to take everything from the east of the Dnieper River and everything south to build a land connection to Transnistria if the war ended? Moldova and Ukraine would be as useless as Georgia to be used as proxies; Moldova might flip their geopolitics on Russia because a land connection to them means a lot of business for economy. what's left of west Ukraine speaks less Russian than the east so they might get bombed Gaza style if they want to start shit again with Russia.

All the is left is Africa and the middle east. If Russia takes a little more then half of the 2nd biggest country in Europe they will easily get a 200+ million growing population. Logistics for the Russian military is cheaper than most European countries that are further away from the middle east and Africa then Russia. Even if Iran doesn't do shit, Turkey and Israel forming any kind of alliance will barely stop any Russian incursion because NATO has no proxy countries to use or those last 2 potential proxy countries are far too weak to do anything and any NATO military action on Russia results in use of nuclear weapons anyways.

High-cost military projects need to have some kind of a return in investment for any kind of use and I don't see any with the FCAS nor do I see the project having any kind of impact to outsell F-35s or any other 5th gen + / 6th gen projects because the FCAS will remain having the highest price tags as a project coming from countries that have the highest energy demands to produce anything.
 
Tejas mk2 is only a bigger Tejas. the 2 are in fact one sole program.

Rafale & SU57 : it will be Rafale OR Su57, not the 2. And Su57 is a direct competitor to AMCA (as Gripen and F21 are to Tejas) => NO WAY.

AMCA : on the rails. Just expect some retards as usual.

Then a heavy superiority fighter, with a production ramp up not before 15 years. All is not a so big burden for a 1.5 billions people country, with a raising economy.
Its not going to be the rafale or the su57, The su57 fufills vastly different requirements compared to the rafale and is also something the IAF needs desperately. If the PAF gets the j35, the su57 is guarenteed.

The only reason it hasnt yet is because of the 2 seater requirement, the maturity of the su57 itself and geopolitics. 2 of these have been fulfilled and geopolitics can get overridden if its needs to be.

Like I said I could be completely wrong about the economic issues and India could very well afford it especially if it comes not only from the IAF budget but also from the IN budget considering the NGFs naval capabilities.
 
Let's all be honest here and with ourselves, the point of this project was to just try to look cool globally that you can join the cool kids club and nothing more.

You need a high fuel energy intensive production line to produce a good amount of such aircrafts and with their current economies they simply can't afford that. 100 billion euros is a lot, cost of F-22 program was 67.3 billion dollars, cost of Su-57 program was estimated at 30 billion dollars. They already threw billions of dollars away in Ukraine
They also have no strategic purpose to even use it for anything. Like what will they do with the aircrafts after if Russia was to take everything from the east of the Dnieper River and everything south to build a land connection to Transnistria if the war ended? Moldova and Ukraine would be as useless as Georgia to be used as proxies; Moldova might flip their geopolitics on Russia because a land connection to them means a lot of business for economy. what's left of west Ukraine speaks less Russian than the east so they might get bombed Gaza style if they want to start shit again with Russia.

All the is left is Africa and the middle east. If Russia takes a little more then half of the 2nd biggest country in Europe they will easily get a 200+ million growing population. Logistics for the Russian military is cheaper than most European countries that are further away from the middle east and Africa then Russia. Even if Iran doesn't do shit, Turkey and Israel forming any kind of alliance will barely stop any Russian incursion because NATO has no proxy countries to use or those last 2 potential proxy countries are far too weak to do anything and any NATO military action on Russia results in use of nuclear weapons anyways.

High-cost military projects need to have some kind of a return in investment for any kind of use and I don't see any with the FCAS nor do I see the project having any kind of impact to outsell F-35s or any other 5th gen + / 6th gen projects because the FCAS will remain having the highest price tags as a project coming from countries that have the highest energy demands to produce anything.
you assume A LOT about multiple things including the capture of half of ukraine and the 200mn population. If russai does want to get half of ukraine it has to either do whats its doing for another decade or so. or hope the EU gets fed up.
 
HAL and Dassault would truly deserve each other
What makes you assume it would be HAL and dassault lmao. that relationship doesnt exist. its infinetly more likely to be dassault and tata considering the rafale deal for local production would go to tata.
 
What makes you assume it would be HAL and dassault lmao. that relationship doesnt exist. its infinetly more likely to be dassault and tata considering the rafale deal for local production would go to tata.
Because while Tata has acted as a supplier of individual parts and components as part of various joint ventures, HAL has ultimately the more conclusive track tecord in aeronatics within India. Either way, the Indians and the French are a perfect match with regards to development and procurement.
 
Dassault would have problem working with HAL. At the time of the first rafale order, and the whole "Made in India" condition for the deal to go through, Indian gov pushed a deal for HAL to build Rafale components. After throughout review, it took months for Dassault to convince Indian gov HAL wasn't up to the task, and that it would take years for it to catch up. In the end Dassault teamed up with with Reliance, then Tata.
There are certainly opportunity of cooperation with India, but with other actors than HAL.
 
Last edited:
Would be nice if France kept Spain this time. They almost joined Rafale in 1985-88 before jumping into the Typhoon bandwagon. Of course the CASA slice of Airbus may disagree... still wondering what Spain will do. Also Sweden.
Dassault would have problem working with HAL.
Yup I didn't knew HAL reputation was that atrocious. But it really is.
 
Last edited:
What a mess, really. Spain and Sweden positions are... interesting, to say the least.

-Spain is bound to Airbus & Germany because of CASA and Typhoon legacies.

-But the british slice of Typhoon has taken a life of its own, because no EADS, Brexit, and finally: GCAP, with Italy and... Japan. Okay.

-Meanwhile Sweden SAAB fighter jets legacy may become a hot commodity, to fill the gaps left by team Typhoon being so badly split.

All in all it would make sense for Germany and Spain to piggyback on SAAB and create a Typhoon-Grippen mixed offspring.
 
All in all it would make sense for Germany and Spain to piggyback on SAAB and create a Typhoon-Grippen mixed offspring.
The Airbus DS (Saab) fighter will have to be all new... I honestly can't see what can be reused from those designs.

Even the new avionics probably cannot be reused from Gripen E / Typhoon Quadriga, as they will be 10-20 years old by 2040. (Unlike say the Rafale F5 avionics which will be 2030s technology).

Personally I think Spain would be a big win if the French can keep them on board. That would allow for a lower cost manufacturing base and a larger user base. Next up would be Greece as they may be highly motivated given the Kaan threat. India and the Middle East for exports. As for Sweden, I'm not convinced they will be able to afford or in a rush to buy a large number of 6th gen fighters, with 60-70 Gripen Es still operating with over half their service life remaining...
 
Are we seriously arguing how a $3.66 trillion economy can afford a 100 billion program over the next 10 to 15 years? 0.18 to 0.27% of current GDP before taking into account the well known rule of thumb that joint projects cost roughly the square roote of the number of partners more so going it alone would cost about 71 billion hence the French need to get about a 1.5-2 billion more per year
Not only that, but what other choice does France have than complete the project? No matter how much they upgrade it, eventually the Rafale will be hopelessly obsolete and at that point they'll either have to buy a next generation fighter from someone else, or they'll have to develop it domestically anyway. And buying from another supplier means that they'll be subsidizing someone else's industry. Not to mention that at certain number of aircraft the economy of scale kicks in and the end costs become comparable.

And then, we also have to consider the export potential. The French aviation industry has rich and highly successful export history and they certainly don't want lose potential future customers.

When you add up all of that and consider that they are one of the few nations in Europe (and even in the world) that has everything they need to independently develop a fully indigenous next generation aircraft it becomes a no brainer which is why I still believe that France will develop a next generation fighter (either alone, which in my opinion is preferable, or with another partner). It would be madness to throw away all that domestic capability and know how that they have cultivated over decades.
 
Last edited:
The Airbus DS (Saab) fighter will have to be all new... I honestly can't see what can be reused from those designs.

Even the new avionics probably cannot be reused from Gripen E / Typhoon Quadriga, as they will be 10-20 years old by 2040. (Unlike say the Rafale F5 avionics which will be 2030s technology).
Eurofighter T5 brings new avionics for example. I remember there was also a follow up for gripen too tho tske that with a hand of salt
 
Eurofighter T5 brings new avionics for example. I remember there was also a follow up for gripen too tho tske that with a hand of salt
No doubt. I was making the point that T5 and Gripen E avionics appear to be closer to the newest Rafale F4.2 standard (i.e. mid 2020s) vs the future Rafale F5 standard (2032). Though I imagine there will be continued investments on T5 capabilities over time.
 
No doubt. I was making the point that T5 and Gripen E avionics appear to be closer to the newest Rafale F4.2 standard (i.e. mid 2020s) vs the future Rafale F5 standard (2032). Though I imagine there will be continued investments on T5 capabilities over time.
T5 and F5 come in the same / similiar time frame

Edit:

I mean your point is that rafales systems are besser because F5 is newer but there coming around the same time and have a similiar start
 
Last edited:
Eurofighter T5 brings new avionics for example. I remember there was also a follow up for gripen too tho tske that with a hand of salt
Why discussing of EF and Gripen ?
EF loose against Rafale, and now that Rafale is in the indian fleet it's over for EF.
Gripen is a direct competitor to Tejas & Tejas 2, so no way.
 
Why discussing of EF and Gripen ?
Because we talked about reusing avionics and H_K made the argument that F5's can be reused while EFs or Gripens not because there too old which doesn't seem to be the Case.


It has nothing to do with the india discussion!
 
France can do a brand new aircraft carrier on their own Cjc so why not a brand new 6th gen fighter? Never say Never.
What makes you think I don't also think that carrier is a pipe dream, doing both is laughable.
 
Well, I'm banned from the original SCAF thread (not sure why exactly, I've been a god boy lately... but never mind).
So I'm posting this here , from Les Échos, yesterday :

“Dassault and Saab respect each other”: France turns to Sweden for its future fighter jet.

The bilateral defence relationship between Paris and Stockholm – the first capital to have responded to France’s proposal for an advanced deterrent – has reached a new level, the French ambassador to Sweden told *Les Echos*. However, Airbus is also said to be courting the country.

Goodbye Berlin. Spotlight on the North. In the rankings of the best potential partners for the future SCAF with a French flavour following the Franco-German split, Stockholm tops the list in Paris. “Our alliance is moving to a new level,” Thierry Carlier, France’s ambassador to the country and deputy head of the Directorate General for Armaments (DGA) until spring 2025, told Les Echos. “Sweden is a major partner in Northern Europe. We share synergies, an independent defence industry and the same geostrategic vision.”
Stockholm is the first capital to have responded to the French proposal for advanced nuclear deterrence, with the Rafale forming the air component. On 23 April in Paris, France and Sweden convened their first nuclear steering group, co-chaired by the Elysée Palace and the Swedish Prime Minister’s Office.
Mutual respect between Saab and Dassault
Sweden and France also share the same lessons learnt from the two XXL projects for future fighter aircraft. Berlin has confirmed the demise of the Franco-German SCAF, and Stockholm, for its part, has withdrawn from the British Tempest project in 2023. While disagreements between Dassault and Airbus precipitated the collapse of the Franco-German alliance, a very different relationship has developed over the decades between the French aircraft manufacturer and the Swedish flagship Saab.

“There has long been a strong mutual respect between Dassault and Saab,” notes the ambassador. Although their histories differ, Saab, like Dassault in France, was born out of a country’s desire to defend its neutrality. They are the only two manufacturers in Europe capable of developing a fighter aircraft. Furthermore, “the Rafale and the Gripen are two complementary aircraft; they are not in competition with one another,” notes the former head of international development at the DGA. The two aircraft have, however, already competed against one another in international tenders.
“This creates a shared DNA, a strong sense of respect and a shared expertise. We can explore areas of convergence together towards a shared vision of the fighter aircraft of the future,” adds Thierry Carlier, although no formal discussions are currently underway.
The Swedes are people with whom we get on very well.
Eric Trappier, CEO of Dassault Aviation
Saab took part in the Neuron combat drone demonstrator programme led by Dassault, which was responsible for the design of the main fuselage, landing gear doors, avionics and fuel system.

Eric Trappier, who is not exactly known for lavishing praise on anyone, is full of praise. “We have the utmost respect for Saab, which designs, builds and manufactures aircraft. We’ve had excellent cooperation,” said the head of Dassault in 2024. “If we need to work with them, we’ll do so with great pleasure,” he had indicated during cooperation projects for the replacement of American AWACS. “This holds true for any other matter; the Swedes are people with whom we get on very well.”
As recently as three weeks ago, when tensions with Airbus were at their height, Eric Trappier cited the prominent Wallenberg family, shareholders in Saab, with whom relations were very good, as intermediaries on the SCAF, according to SLDInfo.
Airbus is also looking towards Stockholm
At the end of May, Stockholm’s historic order for four frigates worth nearly €4 billion from Naval Group, aimed at strengthening its defences in the Baltic Sea and the North Sea in the face of the Russian threat, cemented the ties. Following Sweden’s purchase of MBDA’s Akeron missiles, the NLAW anti-tank missiles co-produced by Saab and Thales, as well as Saab’s AT4s and the GlobalEye aircraft purchased by the French army, these cross-purchases are further strengthening ties right down to the units themselves.

The Swedish Defence Minister, Pal Jonson, made no secret of the fact that the purchase of frigates would enable the country to “forge closer long-term ties with France and pave the way for collaboration in many areas”.
As for fighter aircraft, “like us, Sweden is entering the era of connected combat. By 2040, they intend to move to the sixth generation,” the ambassador emphasised. Upon withdrawing from the British programme, Stockholm has set itself a new roadmap, but without committing to a fixed timetable and keeping as many options open as possible. Saab is said to be positioning itself to have a demonstrator flying as early as 2027.
And if the British project were to falter
This potential partner has not escaped the attention of Airbus either, nor of German politicians who were enthusiastic on Tuesday about finding new European allies, from the Swedes to the British. In the wake of the French contract signed for the frigates, Michael Schöllhorn, the head of Airbus Defence & Space, told “Dagens Industri” that Germany and Sweden had begun discussions on a future fighter aircraft. “These are productive but confidential discussions,” he added.

A partnership with Saab has been launched in the field of drones, although no concrete demonstrations appear to have been highlighted at this stage. Saab, for its part, has stated that any cooperation would be subject to a political decision. “That said […], we are open to collaborating with many players in the defence industry,” added a spokesperson.
In Paris, too, the future of the UK’s GCAP project is being closely monitored. Japanese Prime Minister Sanae Takaichi and her British counterpart, Keir Starmer, are due to meet in London on Sunday. Rome, which is also involved, is closely watching the new tectonic shifts that are taking shape.
 
I know this wont happen but it would be funny if sweden is involved with both.

Then it was involved (one way or the other) with all 6 Gen fighter development in (western) europe.

I guess all 6. Gen fighter development lead to sweden xD
 
If the French can scoop up Saab as an NGF partner and GCAP collapses, the Germans will be completely screwed.
We have more and more weapons in common with sweden : GlobalEye, FDI frigates, anti tank missiles.

The neuron stealth UCAV was made with them (not only them)... So why not a SAAB - DASSAULT team for 6th gen...

Even with 2 different fighters, a single engine for Sweden and a twin engine (and some single ?) for France with the same engine, same tadar technology (different antenna size), same weapons, same UCAV, same cloud....
 
A team compromising both SAAB and Dassault would benefit both countries instead of both of them going it alone instead.
SAAB is great... BUT the problem is the Swedish MoD's replacement timeline.

With 60-70 brand-new Gripen Es not even delivered yet, are they ready to commit to a 6th generation jet for a ~2040 delivery? With all that entails, the extra cost of supporting 2 fleets etc. If Saab can't guarantee a large order from their own MoD, their role may end up being limited to a small risk-sharing partner to help in specific areas where they have expertise (similar to the role they played designing the T-7's aft fuselage for Boeing).

That goes whether the combination is Saab+Dassault or Saab+Airbus for Germany.
 
Dassault + SAAB, that plane would have heck of ancestry and DNA, kinda 6000 fighter jets reaching back to Tunnan and Ouragan.
 
Last edited:
A team compromising both SAAB and Dassault would benefit both countries instead of both of them going it alone instead.
While Dassault by themselves could come up with a fairly advanced aircraft, even though it would most likely fall way short of true next generation fighters from China or the US, Saab couldn't develop an advanced, low observable, manned fighter on their own. So that was never a possibility to begin with.

Saab has the choice of Dassault, Airbus or some sort of minor participation in GCAP as a supplier or license production of components, but they never had the choice of doing anything significant by themselves. The resources and the money simply aren't there.
 
While Dassault by themselves could come up with a fairly advanced aircraft, even though it would most likely fall way short of true next generation fighters from China or the US
Why necessarily?
Historically, "falling way short" comes from either an insurmountable difference in industry level or conceptual downfalls. This admittedly happened twice with European programs, but in both cases the shift wasn't obvious, and happened simultaneously.
Chinese jets are out in the open, and F-47 will be flying long before newborn European programs.
Saab couldn't develop an advanced, low observable, manned fighter on their own.
Saab never developed fighters "on their own" either; it isn't something a country with a population of a big city can do.
With some sensible input from abroad, they still produce up-to-date fighters anyway.
 
Back
Top Bottom