[matt4077]

It really doesn't seem like the EU membership of, say, Portugal has anything to do with these problems. That organisational chart may appear overly complicated, but it's no different than any other chart for any other project of this size.

So apart from n=1 always being on the low side to draw vast conclusions, any comparison with similar projects will show that this kind of thing simply happens with complex projects. How's the F-35 these days? Or the 737-MAX?

The Airbus/Boeing comparison may actually be the most informative here, Airbus being the quintessential pan-European technology project. And if you compare them over the decades of their existence, I believe the only conclusion one can be confident in is that then national/international difference in their respective setups just doesn't matter that much.

[biscotte_]

Airbus is NOT a european project, it is a private company, with many entities being in China or the US, while many european countries don’t contribute to it at all.

Galileo on the other hand is a Commission project, with a budget agreed upon by members, with different views on what it should be (Germany wants it business oriented, France wants it military-oriented).

[ClumsyPilot]

"It had been originally formed by a government initiative between France, West Germany and the UK that originated in 1967."

While not an EU project, it's roots come from European integration. It's not a company that sprung up on random private initiative a la Amazon

[bildung]

Technically it is a private company, yes, but it originated as a project created and owned by several European countries, and more than a quarter of Airbus' shares are still owned by these countries.