I was thinking more small NATO nations like Belgium and Netherlands.

QuoteWestmarcher - * on which we have spent an absolute fortune so can't pay the extra for steam catapults (or the modern equivalent, if there is any)

The answer is rail guns, always rail guns.

Well, a linear magnetic accelerator, anyway.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetic_Aircraft_Launch_System

Which will be working properly aaaaaany tiiiime nooooooow...

Finland has 50+ F18's because the Russians are right next door In contrast Ireland's neutrality has always been a bit less robust and has had a serious nod a wink at worst to full on official if somewhat blank faced co-operation; see WW2 and the cold war; they're just carrying on the "we're neutral but on your side, just don't say it out loud" policy they've maintained since WW2. If they were next to the Russians I suspect they'd have a much more robust military but be far more careful about exactly how neutral they were...

The thing with "next gen" aircraft is that they're likely to be incrementally better except in the cases where they're really not and there's a sudden jump in capability that renders last gen obsolete. Is the F-35 that? Raptor was supposed to be (but is a dedicated air superiority craft), Typhoon the same (but multi-role), Rafale was cheap and the sales pitch was "eeeee, never mind the quality, feel the width!". It's the sort of thing you only find out in anger, and good logistics, pilot training and munitions can cover a multitude of sins...

Perhaps ask the Israelis, they seem pleased with F-35 so far...