The Ministry of Defence has published its tenth annual summary of the defence equipment plan, the report contains references to the purchase of more A400M transport aircraft.

According to a statement:

“Building on the 2020 summary, it sets out our plans for the next 10 years to deliver and support the equipment our armed forces need to do the jobs we ask of them.”

Part of the document states:

“In later years of the plan, planned equipment investments worth £2.3 billion, including a second tranche of F35 and further A400M aircraft, have not yet been delegated to TLBs and doing so will be dependent on the affordability of the programme as a whole.”

There is mention made multiple times to “Additional A400M Atlas” aircraft, including in the below table.

You can read the report here.

In addition, a National Audit Office report on the Equipment plan shows the following.

Earlier in the year, I reported similar when a table detailing current and future Ministry of Defence expenditure, mentioned that the UK plans to purchase additional A400M Atlas transport aircraft later this decade. An entry in the table under the heading ‘A400m Additional Purchase‘ reads “Additional purchase of A400M planned for the late 2020s”. The increased fleet capacity was also hinted at in the Defence Command Paper, more on that below.

There is no number given however the UK has already ordered 22 A400M aircraft with 20 having been delivered so far. The remaining two are expected this year. It’s worth remembering that the Royal Air Force will lose its entire fleet of C-130 Hercules aircraft by 2023. The Defence Command Paper released last year, titled ‘Defence in a Competitive Age‘, states:

“The Royal Air Force will retire the BAe146 as planned by 2022 and take the C130 Hercules out of service by 2023. The A400M Atlas force will increase its capacity and capability, operating alongside C 17 Globemaster and Voyager transport aircraft and tankers.”

The C-130J variants first entered service with the Royal Air Force in the late 1990s and some of the C-130s have been retired in recent years but the remaining 14 had originally been due to keep flying until the mid-2030s. It is understood that, where possible, their missions will be picked up by the fleet of larger A400M Atlas transport aircraft.

What does Atlas do?

According to the Royal Air Force website, Atlas has the ability to carry a 37-tonne payload over 2,000nm to established and remote civilian and military airfields, and short unprepared or semi-prepared strips. Capable of operating at altitudes up to 40,000ft, Atlas also offers impressive low-level capability.

“It will accommodate as many as 116 fully-equipped troops; vehicles; helicopters, including a Chinook; mixed loads, including nine aircraft pallets and 54 passengers, or combinations of vehicles, pallets and personnel, up to a payload of 37 tonnes.”

George Allison
George Allison
George has a degree in Cyber Security from Glasgow Caledonian University and has a keen interest in naval and cyber security matters and has appeared on national radio and television to discuss current events. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Twitter

RELATED ARTICLESMORE FROM AUTHOR

97 COMMENTS

    • As things stand our military are next to useless against a country like Russia. Dwarfed in numbers and completely outgunned in terms of range and lethality.

        • Because we spend about the same as Russia and have no capability to show for it. We’d last about a week against them, if lucky.

          • They pay their people peanuts and have a rather different attitude to health and safety. Just looking at budgets doesn’t compare like with like.

            Last about a week in which field of conflict? Air and sea, I fancy our chances as they have very little modern force projection ability.

            Land, not so much.

          • Maybe.

            Maybe not.

            It is one thing firing a missile, another thing hitting a target and quite another thing mission killing the target.

            When you assess that offensive value of a missile stockpile the % of mission kill is the critical number.

            Things are a lot more, defensively, sophisticated these days and defensive/offensive EW is something that is hugely underestimated in these pages.

          • Ukraine little forces just gave Russia a Bloody Nose, and you are forgetting most Russian weapons systems are Fake Media delivered BULLSHITE.

          • Land war doesn’t work too well if someone else controls air war.

            WWII lesson that….

            Apache with top cover from F35B/Typhoon.

          • The point is, the carrier doesn’t do much for the billions it costs. A few dozen jdams per day at best. Plus all your eggs are in 1 basket. Good luck going up against hypersonics sat in that tin can.

          • Clearly you don’t know much about the 2 UK carriers. What do they offer other than a few jdams for a couple hundred miles and providing a huge target? Aid relief 😂😂👍🏿

          • I served on RN aircraft carriers for 13 years. And we don’t use JDAMs. We use Enhanced Paveway 4. ASRAAM/AMRAAM, SPEAR 3 is coming. And the wider carrier strike group has a vast range of capabilities above and below the waves. China is desperately trying to build aircraft carriers, and Russia would give its right arm just have one.

          • You have very simplistic views, Greg. You sure defence is for you. So what would you spend the money on?

          • Lol, “on a boat” you did try mate. He’s a hit and run, rant a bit and will be off to another website for a moan.

          • Don’t bother eve trying to explain to him Robert. It wall fall on deaf ears. Not to assume your age- but did you serve on Ark Royall R09 – or was that a little before your time? I imagine the bulk of your 13 years was on invincible class ships?

          • Yes mate. I served in the Fleet Air Arm 1999 – 2013. All 3 Invincible class, Ark Royal, Illustrious & Invincible. Ships company and with 800NAS Sea Harrier FA2, and later with the Naval Strike Wing Harrier GR7/9 from RAF Cottesmore. Avionics tech. Did Op Telic (Iraq Ark Royal) and Afghan 2007 from Kandahar. And lot’s of other great trips around the world.

          • Thanks Robert – what a fascinating experience. Bet you have some really cracking stories to tell! Stay safe mate.

          • It seems like another life now. But I did have a great time and was very lucky to have done a lot of great trips along with the operational deployments. 4 weeks in Vegas for a Red Flag was pretty awesome. Watching 60 plus F15’s F16’s F18’s, B1B’s F22’s and German Tornados, and our own Harriers taking off twice a day was a sight and sound to behold.

          • During the Aden withdrawal, Hermes and Victorious did a combined fly past, quite a sight for any opponent to witness I was on Hermes at the time, completed two commissions, with a refit in between. We would not have been able to regain the Falklands without carriers. The difference is today we do not have sufficient escorts to protect them.

          • This is reminding me of the “British nukes are provided and controlled by America” nonsense. The carrier and the submarine are the two foremost naval weapons; the submarine to control the seas and the carrier to take advantage of that control. I believe Robert clearly stated that he served on carriers, not on boats (whether you mean sub or are trying to use it as an insult I don’t know), and hence much better than you knows the use of them. You also keep saying US&A, which is flatly wrong, and I can also insist that British carriers don’t need American approval to drop bombs. Having many allies with whom it would be favourable to cooperate is not the same as having to listen to your allies and being incapable of acting independently.

          • No, but you actually need the American aircraft, pilots and crew to do it for you. The UK can deploy 2 or at best 3 SSN’s to cover the entire globe. At the moment the UK can not deploy a single destroyer. UK defence policy is an absolute mess.

          • Yet more ramblings from the great uninformed who doesn’t understand warship availability or the regeneration of carrier strike with 5th gen capability that only one other country can match. And it’s still very early day’s.

          • Its a warship not a boat, and 13 years on a RN carrier ensures his opinion is one of experience and direct subject matter knowledge. It seems the subject is one you know nothing aout, same as land warfare and the silly goat herder comment.

          • is it a quiet period in McDonald’s drive thru or something or is school and google just real SLOW as its wearing off on you. Grow a pair and man up BUTTERCUP. but i guess you have switched accounts and gone to the sports pages. Disney Channel would be a better option.

          • they offer far more than you. bit like saying what did the Invincible Platform offer. go back to your comic books

          • You need to stop tugging it mate, its not call of duty and realise the old saying. I WILL BRING MY DAD ROUND TO SORT YOURS OUT. IS BULLSHITE. OR MAYBE YOU ARE JUST RUSSIAN and feel the need to spill bullshite and horseshite to satisfy a lack of length

          • The carriers are big tin cans. Big= much better battle damage absorption and redundancy.
            Plus they are protected by the best air defence destroyers in the world and close protection from frigates with the best short range/ point defence missile system in the world.
            CAP provided by F35Bs. Crowsnest providing AEW.
            I think the Russian airforce would find a QE carrier battle group tough to defeat.
            Dont be so down on these ships. I have zero doubt they will save our bacon during the course of their service careers.

        • That is what the Conservative government said before the Falklands, to justify cuts being made. Further cuts were made under the cold war bonus. Now look where we are. A nothing who cannot defend the hugely expensive carriers without help from NATO. Like many cuts the government make without thought or reason, things always come back to bite false ecomonidies that have been made.

          • Ok. Time for some facts. The QEC class can deploy as a soverign battle group if needed without NATO support. It takes up about 60% of the available RN strength to do so but it is possible. Only the USN and PLAN can deploy a strike carrier with advanced air defence destroyers, ASW frigates and SSNs. So we arent doing badly.
            NATO nations would supplement a QEC carrier battle group for NATO missions, Dutch, norwegian, Danish warships all bring good multi role capabilities. They would be happy to do that knowing that a QEC is one of only 3 European strike carriers and is a prize naval asset able to affect a zone of control over hundreds of miles radius from the ship.
            It helps that they are also the most cost effective carrier ever designed and operate the very best 5th generation stealth fighter currently in existence.
            HMG just need to rebuild the RN around these ships.

      • ….and at virtually no time in our history have we been comfortably equipped to tackle Russia or the Soviets on our own, even at the peak of our powers in the 18th and 19th centuries.

          • There has never ever been a plan to go it alone against Russia, thats what NATO is for. Oh dear, more subject matter issues where you have no idea. Do try to do some research.

        • In the 19th century the better part of the world combined couldn’t have tackled us. Sure, we couldn’t have invaded Russia because their population and territory would be too big, but we could have easily seized St. Petersburg, the capital and major port, as well as all of their other ports and watched their economy shrivel up. That is how USA would fight a war today against Russia, and that is the only way of efficiently beating such a large landmass. Of course, today, it would be quite easy for the Americans, or even a European coalition alone, to take Moscow. Russian military power is far from what it used to be.

        • I’m not military or war expert but was wondering why anyone would compare Western army with Russian forces? As far as I can see putin is a thug in charge of a rabble. They been shown for what they are

      • Well not really. That’s why you have your friends across the pond. 🇺🇸 It’s not like we like Russia so much here in the 🇺🇸 right now.

    • Some of the deferrals is for older equipment which will be replaced. Granted, the track record of slow replacements is more concerning. Not particularly happy with the lack of wedgetails.

      • Do you know what the radar that is being deferred is?
        I also agree, especially if wedgetail is being cost to reduce cost and not for other reasons

      • Wedgetails need to go back upto 7 aircraft. Im hopefully they will with USAF likely to select the aircraft for their future AWACS replacement (50+ aircraft forecast). This should bring the unit price right down.
        Type 26 order needs to go back upto 13
        Type 31s (5) type 32 (at least 5) Type 83, we need to learn from our past lessons and not settle for any less than 12 hulls.
        SSNr or Astute batch 2 whichever option to put our SNN fleet back upto the 10 defined as the minimum requirement for RN.

  2. “…dependant on the affordability…” Those are the key words as they are the future get out clause for weasel politicians, bean counters and snivel servants.

  3. That would be a fantastic uplift in transport capacity for UK forces.

    It will be the ones the Germans don’t want.

    • My guess would be equivalent to the loss of the 13 C130J’s, so 7 or 8 A400’s, any increase over that number would be gravy and very welcome…..

        • GER already decided to keep them before the UKR invasion, though only HUN signed up for a joint squadron at Lechfeld, thus there were discussions to scrap that plan and just keep all aircrafts in one place..
          Now the BW is getting 100 billion extra this year. There is no way in hell GER is going to get rid of these airframes now.
          MAYBE UK and IRE could get GER to continue the plan for a joint suqdron, but that would only mean 2-3 hulls for each of them.

        • Really? Despite their much lauded defence uplift? They still dont want to invest in strategic airlift?
          Says it all really.
          Strategic airlift is an enabler that tells the world you are prepared to move forces and support them over large distances.
          I guess Germany is going to do what Germany always does. Look after number 1. The Ukranians know this. Where are the old Leopard 1s or Marders Germany promised? Still in reserve wharehouses.

    • Very interesting, let’s hope we can use the system for whatever comes out of our various UK UCAV programmes.

      Certainly swarming drones / munitions, it could add a lot of bang for the buck….

      • My thoughts exactly, the A400 just trialed a drone release and the US has successfully launched cruise missiles from transports. These basically have potential to add a lot
        of capability.

      • Can you imagine how much damage a swarm of suicide drones equating to a 35 ton payload could do? Stand off drop from say 100 miles from target then glide into target from high altitude. Could be a devastating concept.

      • explains why it was a mess as your a idiot anyone looks back on our last 20 years can point a finger UP AT YOU and say, THATS THE REASON ITS A MESS, happy to take the money and never say anything at the Time. yet FULL BLOWN GOBSHITE living on a stolen pension.

      • All good I think. Janes reported in May this year that the A400 is cleared for low level parachute drop. It dropped some 90 troops in the September celebration of Arnhem.

  6. I think 12 is probably pie in the sky. They aren’t going to seek anything like a 1 for 1 replacement of the smaller and cheaper C130J. Reckon the RAF would be lucky to get another 8 but more likely 4 or 6.

    Still a decent uptick in numbers and capability if it is a lower number. Shame it took the shambles in Afghanistan to reassert the importance of heavy lift. Bit like Libya kicking off months after Ark Royal and the Harriers had been scrapped….

  7. What is the Lewis BMD radar? Does ‘Land Ground Based Air Defence’ refer to Sky Sabre or a new missile defence system such as Patriot or SAMP/T?

    • “LEWIS” is the name for the Ballistic Missile Defence radar first promised back in 2015 SDSR! Pushed to the right again.

      LGBAD should be Sky Sabre. I’d like to see numbers at least double given Russia’s missile tech and importance of increasing AD coverage but sadly that seems to be fantasy.

      • Does PAVE PAWS not already provide BMD radar coverage? Do you know what the requirement is for LEWIS? Tactical/strategic deployment? Anti-TBM/ICBM?

        I think a LGBAD system similar to Skyshield, made up of Patriot/SAMP/T, Sky Sabre, and an anti-aircraft cannon (Bofors 40mm/MANTIS/Phalanx) would sell well. If Sky Sabre has good Iron Dome-like C-RAM capability, I can see the Arab states in particular being very interested in this combination of air defence systems to counter Houthi attacks.

        • We have Fylingdales, yes, though I believe that SSPAR is not Pave Paws but a newer development. It provides both a missile warning and satellite tracking device.

          I know nothing more on LEWIS, sorry.

  9. I disagree with the reduction of the E7 Wedgetails. There is a need for more rather than less, maybe the number for both E7 and P8’s should be 12, so that there would be coverage while aircraft are going through maintenance.

    • Completely agree with you Anthony. As an ex Air Force Ops officer, I can tell you3 E7s will not cut the mustard (5 is likely to be sufficient). I think your call on 12 P8 is spot on

      • Hi Klonkie, what about an E7 for NZ too? One would cover the whole country? Probably not needed? Is NZ looking at getting any uav drones to work with their P8s at all?

        BTW, go NZ, getting 🏅🏅, a touch more than uk🇭🇲🇬🇧…lol 😁

        • Hi QD, how are tricks? Mate, I’d be thrilled just to see our 4 P8’s enter service. There was some talk on drones , but as for funding, well that’s a problem. We definitely won’t see the likes of MQ4 Triton like the RAAF are doing- mores the pity !

      • 12-13 P8 might be one real as it is the cheapest and fastest way of boosting ASW capabilities.

        P8 is relatively cheap and we already have a fleet so the extra add on costs of running them won’t be ruinous.

        Also the production line is active.

        • sorry for the late reply SM – that is a sharp idea. In NZ, we have 4 planned which seems a little light, given Auss invested in 14. I’d settle on a one for one replacement of the P3c , at 6.

    • E7s there is real study going on with the US concerning future needs of Awacs platforms. as it was highlighted by the emergence of the F35s and there Radar capacity, that made the need for a Awacs limited, to airforces without a 5th gen fighter. Tranche 1 typhoons and hawk T1s needed awacs support to engage F35s. 3 E7s is seen as a basic number, and once the US completes is Awacs replacement study. The UK may tag onto this order,

  12. Good Evening from a former ‘RAF-MTD’ will this aircraft be able to land at RAF Ascension/St Helena ???considering the wind sheer experienced on these remote islands (p.s )I spent most of my tour refueling the ‘Herc’s /V.C10/Tri Stars/Victors/Wessex(hot refueling)🛩🇬🇧🍻

  13. Adding a few C-27s for special forces would be handy. The Italians have already developed a suitable variant so they would be off the shelf. Able to use smaller landing strips than the A400, also cheaper.

  15. As I understand it, Germany intended selling off part of their A400M Fleet; (13 out of 53 aircraft). Would it be possible for the UK to purchase some if not all of these aircraft?

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here