Commissioned for 6 billion francs, the F-35 combat aircraft intended for the Swiss army should see their invoice increase by 500 million or even a billion. A budgetary drift which is not specific to Switzerland: elsewhere, the American apparatus is accompanied by massive additional costs.
Faced with growing criticism of the cost of the F-35 program, the Federal Council maintains having negotiated a fixed price contract with the United States. An assertion that Washington nuance, evoking what he considers a misunderstanding. According to the American version, inflation would justify the increase in the bill.
But for specialists, other factors are also to be taken into account: personalization of devices, production delays, exchange fluctuations or the evolution of the equipment requested. In all cases, it is common for costs to be strongly evolved between ordering and delivery, a process that spans several years. For the experts interviewed Thursday in the program A whole world, the position of the Federal Council surprises. The principle of a fixed rate is rarely applied in the aeronautical sector.
On the lifespan of the plane, which will be around 30 years, it is almost impossible to budget in advance
“A fixed price contract is very complicated. First of all because the planes will all be a little different depending on what the country wants. There will be developments that will be special. And then there is the part of the equipment, everything related to surveillance or armaments. These are things that we will have to change as the device life progresses. There is also daily maintenance that will add costs. And on the lifespan of the plane, which will be around 30 years old, it is almost impossible to budget in advance, “explains Caroline Bruneau, journalist for aerospace magazine
>> Listen to the media forum on the F-35:
A few years ago, Airbus had tried the experience of the fixed price, a decision fraught with consequences, recalls Frédéric Mauro, associate researcher at IRIS and specialist in European defense. “For the A400M military transport aircraft, Airbus had set a fixed price indexed to various indicators, including GDP. It turned out to be so unfavorable for the aircraft manufacturer that he had to enter negotiations with the consortium of states to renegotiate the indexing of the contract. Because otherwise, as we say vulgarly, they would have dreated the broth.”
The F-35, champion of cost exceeding
Costs are therefore commonplace when a state orders combat aircraft. But with the F-35, the extent of the phenomenon is unprecedented. “We know very well that between the price that is displayed at the start and the price on arrival, there will certainly be a very large margin. With the F-35, this margin is enormous. It is much more important than on other projects of the same type. The F-35, it is the plane that will be the most expensive in the world”, analyzes Caroline Bruneau.
When a country buys military equipment, it also bought protection or alliance with the country that sells it
For Frédéric Mauro, this mechanism is even part of the DNA of the program: “We have always said that the F-35 was a program that had no other use than to pump European defense budgets, because it is so expensive, it has so much additional costs on all sides that after that, you can not pay anything else in the other armies”.
In recent weeks, a new case has illustrated this logic: Canada has announced an increase of almost 50% of the cost of its own F-35 program.
>> Also review the report of 7:30 p.m. on concerns in Bern:
Buy an airplane or an alliance?
The price increases of the F-35 are not explained only by production delays, optional equipment or technical updates. For Caroline Bruneau, another dimension comes into play: that of geopolitics.
The whole combat system means that the data collected by the plane and sent to the plane, the targets in particular, are processed in computers in the United States and are then returned to a fighting plane
“When a country buys military equipment, it also bought protection or alliance with the country that sells it. So when European countries bought F-35, what they paid was their alliance with the United States. And obviously, as long as it was the classic United States governed by President Biden, we said that this additional cost was going to be compensated by the unusual alliance with the United States. said roughly that NATO was not its problem, that this alliance, ultimately, no longer had to be, and well this purchase became extremely expensive since what you were ready to pay to have this alliance with the Americans, all of a sudden, you no longer had it. “
In other words, the price of the F-35 incorporates a form of adherence premium to the American strategic order. As long as the diplomatic guarantee follows, this “additional cost” can be assumed politically. But if the alliance becomes uncertain or unstable, the contract can quickly lose its political justification.
An almost impossible contract to break
But then, should we cancel the purchase of the F-35? Legally, it is possible but economically, it is almost unthinkable. Switzerland has already hired around 700 million francs, which would be irrecoverable in the event of a rupture. To this would be added possible termination allowances, often very high in arms contracts.
However, it would be possible to revise the downward order, as did the Netherlands just over ten years ago. Or to get rid of a little bit about the control of the United States. Italy has for example a production line of F-35 on its own territory.
However, even in this case, once the order has been validated, the buyer binds to its manufacturer over several decades: for maintenance, spare parts, updates and training of pilots. And in the case of the F-35, this dependence is reinforced by the very nature of the aircraft, explains Frédéric Mauro.
“This plane is only of interest if it is connected to the American” cloud fight ‘. It is its great strength. But it is also its very great weakness because the whole combat system means that the data collected by the plane and sent to the plane, the targets in particular, are processed in computers in the United States and are then returned to a fighting plane. If the Americans do not want you to attacked Russian planes that would not steal will not be able to do so.
Radio subject: Mathilde Salamin
Adaptation Web: Tristan Duke
