The twelve F-35A aircraft ordered by the UK were not purchased to perform the NATO dual-capable aircraft mission, Air Vice-Marshal Jim Beck has said, with the size and shape of the force that will actually deliver the nuclear role still being analysed.
Speaking at the Global Air & Space Chiefs’ Conference in London, Beck, the RAF’s Director Capability and Programmes, moved to correct a widespread assumption that has followed the 2025 Strategic Defence Review’s announcement that Britain would buy the conventional take-off variant and rejoin NATO’s nuclear mission. “For any clarification, or to avoid any doubt, we did not buy those 12 aircraft for dual capable aircraft capability. We bought them for our conversion units,” he told the conference. “At the same time, we stated we would get back into the dual capable aircraft role supporting NATO. The two are separate.”
Reporting since the SDR has frequently described the twelve F-35As, to be based at RAF Marham, as the aircraft that would carry US B61-12 gravity bombs under NATO’s nuclear sharing arrangements. Beck’s remarks make clear that the initial batch is destined for the training and conversion role, while the RAF conducts analysis to determine what force will be required for the nuclear mission itself. “We’re doing the analysis to understand the size and posture of force that we will need,” he said, describing the two functions as separate undertakings that should not be conflated.
The mission itself, he said, is “very, very specific”: to reintegrate the Royal Air Force into the NATO nuclear sharing framework as a supplement to the continuous at-sea deterrent, not a replacement for it. The move ends a hiatus in British air-delivered nuclear capability stretching back to the retirement of the WE.177 free-fall bomb, the last air-launched nuclear weapon in UK service, and Beck noted that when the decision was announced, “social media went wild,” with most of the reaction positive.
Beck also placed the decision in the context of a deteriorating nuclear landscape, arguing that the number of states with strategic nuclear capabilities is growing while those outside any nuclear framework or partnership continue to shrink, a trend he suggested would be an enduring theme of the future.
Nuclear technology is proliferating more widely, he observed, pointing to expanding dialogue and information sharing between nations on civil nuclear capabilities in regions such as the Middle East, developments he said are here to stay.
They have not been ordered and once the king of the north is in highly unlikely to be.
Other priorities over defence
And next month, someone will claim they are to replace the Red Arrows !
All this was stated very clearly at the time that the F35 A purchase of 12 aircraft was for the OCU. Given the maintenance issue in the F35B it makes alot of sense to run the OCU on F35A however this decision makes the most sense in the face of a larger F35A purchase.
It’s also make perfect sense for the UK to join the nuclear sharing role. This is the easiest and quickest way for the UK to gain access to a sub strategic weapon which will deter Russia from using such a weapon against the UK.
The logic seeming to be that Russia may now doubt the USA’s resolve to carry out a nuclear strike against Russia in retaliation for a small nuclear strike on the UK and they may doubt the UK resolve to use a single trident missile with a low yield warhead as a response. A UK F35A carrying a US B61 under NATO command fits inside that gap.
Personally I would like to see us develop our own low yield weapon based on storm shadow but there is no way that’s happening short of a formal removal of the USA from NATO. This is the next best thing.
Along with not purchasing more E7’s, not adding to the UK’s F35 fleet with a large purchase of F35A seems to be the most glaring omissions however from articles today it seems like the door is not closed on either.
F35A remains the best solution for dealing with Russia in any context.
Yep, the OCU role was stated from the beginning.
But the nuclear side is sexier and grabs the headlines, and allowed Starmer to emphasise it in Paris.
I think most assumed, including me, that the 12 would also carry out the nuke role, God knows how with such limited numbers.
I read into this that a second F35A batch might be incoming?
How, with 12 billion on GCAP I’d be interested to see.
I’m crossing my fingers for more F35A’s to be announced. There is no real issue with using the OCU aircraft as part of a nuclear capable squadron but 12 aircraft will not cut it for both roles. Also if we are having a nuclear capable F35A combat squadron it needs to have a bigger role than just B61 employment. It should probably be a UK squadron heavily focused on SEAD/DEAD as well.
Ideally we would be seeing a much larger F35A force as a tornado replacement but that’s not going to happen on top of £12 billion for GCAP.
This seems to be primarily about saving money. The A model is less expensive than the B model and can be used by the OCU, though it is obviously not carrier-capable. … the rest is likely an afterthought and there is in reality, no money for a restoration of a tactical nuclear role.
The development of a serious tactical nuclear capability would require the investment of time, money and attention, for which the UK has no energy.
Jim, I was one of many who got the message that the 12 F-35As would be both for the OCU (in peacetime) and to have a nuclear strike role in General War – the phrase dual-capable was used extensively.
Why has it taken so long to correct the impression that most of us had. Anyway, how does ‘F35A remain the best solution for dealing with Russia in any context?’
I presume you suppose that we would buy a further tranche of A models for the nuclear strike role?
Me too, I read It on here and read most of the comments.
Most people were deffo not positive about this although It Is Stated above In the article that “Social media went wild” with most of the reaction positive. Not sure which segment of “Social Media” he was referring to 🤔
So we have stated the Intention to buy 12 Training Aircraft but not any actual Combat aircraft ?
Something here just does not add up.
“Were not purchased.”
Nothing is being ordered until the 2030s now on current plans.
I think they are looking at delivery in the 2030’s rather than ordering. If you order F35 in the next production lot you are looking at delivery in 2030 or later. I suspect the reason we don’t have more detail is ongoing negotiations with LM.
Hi Jim,
I read somewhere recently that we are in discussions with the JPO but the issues and delays around the technology upgrade 3 and version 4 of the software were the big hurdles.
LM really need to get a grip on these issues.
Out of our 48 F35B aircraft;
1 lost at sea,
3 are with the trials units in the US,
12 have the technology 3 upgrade, which has proved so unreliable that these aircraft apparently spend of the time looking impressive in the hangar! 2 of these 12 are stuck in the Azores as these developed faults in flight and have been there for months was the last I read.
That leaves 32 aircraft routinely available for the OCU and frontline squadrons… goodness only knows what the availability of those 32 aircraft is like, great I bet.
It is a miracle that we ever mange to generate any kind of air wing for the carriers..!
Cheers CR
The 24 on the Carrier were literally scraped together, or so I recall reading on various sites.
Of coarse, there was a lot of Spin attached.
So… how many of the things does he think we are going to get?
We can build our own cruise missiles, so why don’t we duel role them? They can arm all our fast air, maritime strike & land strike as nuclear capable!
All RAF bullshit. Operating a tiny fleet of a different type is totally uneconomic. After all, that’s the reason the RAF chopped the Sea Harriers.
Standard then…..
Forgive my ignorance, but if you had a c50 fleet of Bs, wouldn’t you by Bs to train people on?
Meanwhile the carriers run on with a pathetically low number of F35B’s. Which means that in anything more than a minor conflict, they will be pretty much useless. Oh dear I forgot, they will be full of amazing drones. Doing everything, EW. ASW, inflight refueling, anti shp, combat air, The capabiliities of these mythical machines will be something to behold. We are seeing the demise of the FAA before our very eyes. Accelerated by the machinations of a perfidious RAF.
.
Haha…. It just so happens I’m once again in Portland and currently watching two MCM Autonomous boats (each with 3 crew on board) being followed closely by 3 RIBS (each with 3 crew on board) and a fast raider. They are at the entrance of the Harbour doing very slow manoeuvres not far from the Mounts Bay (and a Tide).
Uncrewed Drones are certainly the future !!!
So what’s the point in them then? Might as well have bought additional F35b for carrier ops optionality.
If you ask me, the whole idea made no sense from the start. Even with the nuclear role, it made no sense.
If the UK is serious about increasing it’s nuclear punch, it ought to increase it’s resilience against US interference and domesticate the weapons & their servicing as much as possible.
If we want more layers, then Tempest plus nuclear tipped Tratus is the obvious modern solution with actual real world utility.
12 x F35A with a nuclear dumb bomb never made sense.