Dear Fellow Air Show Irony Miners,
My first Berlin Air Show/ILA,1998, had a theme that hasn’t aged well: Gateway to the East. The idea was that a reunified Germany could connect Western aerospace to the still-extant embers of former Soviet aerospace. It sounds bizarre now, but then Russia still built jetliners and its military equipment was competing with Western platforms in world markets, sometimes with Western components onboard. The German air force still flew MiG-29s. Russia had become a faintly exotic middle power, ruled by Boris Yeltsin, a likable drunk.
Fast forward, as life seems to do, by 28 years: Russia is ruled by desperate kleptocratic thugs and produces no aerospace systems of note that don’t blow up. And this year’s ILA had a very different if less obviously stated theme: Protection from the East. Oh, and From the US, too. My colleagues Klaus Mueller and Kevin Klempner happily walked around the well-attended show and snapped pictures of signs, stands, and chalets promising sovereignty, autonomy, European technology stacks, and home-grown drones. As my mind wandered back to 1998, it all felt strange and dystopian.
The geopolitical drivers behind this shift are clear. The Russian threat to Europe and NATO was one thing; the growing risk of abandonment by the US under the second Trump administration worsened things. But Trump’s territorial threats to Denmark/Greenland and Canada, along with clear risks of surveillance, intelligence, and weapons cutoffs by the US, and even talk of “kill switches” for US weapons used by allies, have led to Europe focusing on creating its own new defense capabilities, particularly with networks, ISR, surveillance, satellite communications and other space systems, and deep strike weapons.
The show did not begin auspiciously for Euro-sovereignty aspirations. The New Generation Fighter (NGF) component of the Franco-German FCAS program finally, finally, died, recalling old Saturday Night Live Weekend Update stories about Generalissimo Francisco Franco still valiantly holding on in his fight to remain dead. In NGF’s wake there was talk about Germany joining GCAP, Germany going it alone, Germany creating something new with Sweden, and Germany buying more off-the-shelf jets (Eurofighters, F-35s). The odds aren’t great for a German-Swedish fighter, but the idea itself is fantastic: German aerospace has everything needed for a fighter except a prime contractor for airframe integration and an engine. Saab is exceptional at design and integration. Assuming MTU’s FCAS engine with Safran dies along with NGF, MTU and GKN (ex Volvo Flygmotor) could co-produce an engine together instead.
Dassault was at the show, although it was a bit early for a reconciliation tour. But a few weeks later, a delightful Aviation Week headline read, “Dassault Aviation CEO Open To Cooperation After NGF Demise.” In other news, Lucy Van Pelt is open to holding the football again for Charlie Brown’s next kick after the last regrettable incident.
Another ILA development which didn’t augur great things for pan-European aero unity: German Chancellor Friedrich Merz urged Airbus to manage the development and design of the company’s Next Generation Single Aisle (NGSA) out of Hamburg (rather than the usual Toulouse). There’s a lot at stake, and given the remarkable A321 production ramp at Hamburg (and German perceptions that France gets a lot of the rewards for what should be equal industrial enterprises) it’s clear that Germany will have a strong argument.
With this very different European defense environment, US companies face a big challenge: comporting themselves as truly multi-domestic, rather than merely as US firms seeking to export platforms and systems. Boeing and RTX had strong presences at ILA, but they stood out as exceptions. Saab, which has long excelled at multi-domesticity, was there in force; hardly surprising given their recent string of fighter, AEW, and other victories.
Next, in our discussions with contractors, one consistent theme emerged – European commercial aerospace was at risk of being crowded out by military work. European defense budgets are booming – Germany’s grew 24% last year. Export demand for European weapons has also been strong. But there’s a limited supply of trained workers, and of production resources of all kinds. Demand for defense equipment (and for space systems too) means higher costs and greater risks for civil contractors, and greater temptation for mixed civil-military contractors to prioritize defense work.
Given the likely long cycle of strong defense demand, this will only worsen. What is unclear is the extent to which this increased defense demand will impair Europe’s long-term commercial aero market competitiveness.
My final ILA observation brings us full circle. Ukrainian companies were present in force, primarily with drones and counter-drone systems, as exporters and as partners and potential partners for other European aero companies. The Ukrainians are extremely well placed, due to their experience fighting off Russian assaults. They’ve proven their ability to rapidly create efficient military equipment despite an occasionally hostile political relationship with the US. That’s exactly what Europe needs to do in a changing geopolitical landscape. So, in a sense ILA was once again a Gateway to the East.
Yours, ‘Til They Resurrect East Germany’s Jetliner For An ILA Display,
Richard Aboulafia