Create a free starter account, or log in.

Get access to four free articles per month, as well as our Decisive Edge Newsletters and Daily News Bulletin.

Email Address

Password

Forgot your password? Reset by clicking here

Create a Password

[[ req.met ? '✓' : '•' ]] [[ req.text ]]

Re-enter Password

Passwords do not match

First Name

Last Name

Country

Confirm your account

Please enter the four-digit pin below that has been emailed to you.

Didn't receive the pin yet?

This pin expires in 20 minutes.

[[ error ]]

By creating an account, you agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy.

Stay informed with Shephard's award-winning journalism. Unlock unlimited access and in-depth analysis with a corporate or individual subscription.

Explore your options here

Industrial benefit or political distraction? Navigating the final assembly line

24th December 2024 - 10:58 GMT | by Edward Hunt

RSS

The F-35 is a popular combat jet with several different countries as customers around the world, including Italy. (Photo: Lockheed Martin)

Using the example of the F-35, does rolling out a domestic final assembly line make economic or industrial sense for countries wanting to purchase new aircraft?

The offer of a domestic final assembly line, alongside industrial offsets, is an often-used bargaining chip in the complex ecosystem of securing combat aircraft export contracts. But does rolling out its own aircraft from an in-country plant really make economic or industrial sense for the customer nation?

In the world of defence procurement, politics often trumps logic. However, political decisions regarding major investments, such as ordering a fleet of fast jets, usually need strong justification. These may surface as local economic benefits (especially jobs), which might also be rather nonsensical within the framework of a wider national industrial policy. Add

Already have an account? Log in