(all this is just based on what I’ve read, I have no qualifications on this topic)

My understanding is that french and British aircraft carriers differ in the way they launch planes. France uses a catapult, which requires the frame of the aircraft to be reinforced, the UK does not.

The UK also is already part of a separate program called gcap to develop their next gen fighters together with Japan and Italy. This is already well underway and work share has been decided on.

As I’ve already mentioned in this thread, the whole thing about the next gen programs is not just about having the aircraft at the end, but also retaining/building up the domestic industry and know-how.

Sweden might be interested to team up (although theyd probably prefer a lighter/cheaper aircraft than Germany), but my understanding is that Germany and Sweden both have similar gaps in their know-how. I think it has to do with some hot parts of the engine, which in Europe France or the UK would be the experts in. You can ofc develop them yourself from scratch, but that is costly and more importantly likely takes too long.

I think with the German TÜV numbers it is not quite as clear cut.

My understanding is that telsa unlike other manufacturers doesn’t require regular inspections to keep warranties. So it might just be that other brands have just as many faults, but they get caught and fixed during those regular inspections, rather than at the official TÜV. Which wouldn’t show up in that dataset.

I haven’t seen any studies accounting for that discrepancy, but I’d be curious to see whether the higher failure rate persists after accounting for that.

Idk if you can just ignore the acting in a movie, but I’ll also always defend the prequels to some degree. Yes, George Lucas missed in terms of the tone, but as you said at it’s core there is a compelling story. Unlike the sequels that have some great visuals, but completely fail in terms of story.