The Ministry of Defence has cancelled the second phase of Project Guardian, a Royal Air Force command and control system developed to protect British and NATO airspace, writing off £9.476 million in a constructive loss recorded in its annual report and accounts, according to a written answer.
Luke Pollard, Minister of State for Defence Readiness and Industry, was responding to Ben Obese-Jecty, the Conservative MP for Huntingdon, who had asked for further information on the loss disclosed in the Ministry of Defence annual report and accounts for 2025 to 2026.
Mr Pollard said: “Project GUARDIAN is a Royal Air Force advanced Command and Control system developed to protect UK and NATO airspace. A strategic decision was taken to cancel the second phase of this system, UKV2.”
Setting out the reasoning, he said: “A number of factors led to the cancellation, including evolving capability requirements, the increased technical complexity in delivering a compliant solution and a wider reprioritisation of capabilities across the portfolio.”
He said: “The constructive loss reflects historical project costs for activities that had been undertaken during the Demonstration and Manufacture phase of the programme.”
A constructive loss
Constructive loss is the term used in government accounting for money spent on something that has produced no usable output, as distinct from a cash loss where funds have gone missing or a fruitless payment where a service was paid for and not received. Departments are required to disclose them in their annual accounts, which is where this figure came to light and why the question was asked.
Guardian
Guardian is the computer system behind the Recognised Air Picture, the real-time depiction of every aircraft in the airspace Britain controls or patrols, with each contact identified as friendly or hostile. It links the radars and radios of the United Kingdom and NATO, allows communication between the ground and aircraft, and enables the Royal Air Force to despatch fighters to identify, intercept and escort aircraft flown aggressively or suspected of being a threat.
The programme replaced the previous UKASACS Command and Control System, with IBM awarded a £60 million contract in April 2018 to develop and install it, carrying a further £20 million of costed options which would have taken the total to £80 million. Announcing it at the time, then Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson said the system would give the Royal Air Force the upper hand in the face of rapidly changing and intensifying global threats.
Initial operating capability was declared at the Control and Reporting Centre at RAF Boulmer in Northumberland, with the system also installed at 78 Squadron at Swanwick in Hampshire. Defence Equipment and Support has said the two centres operate around the clock, with 50 dual workstations at Boulmer and 29 at Swanwick, which when fully manned could be staffed by more than 100 battlespace management personnel.
The original 2018 announcement also covered the replacement of systems at Royal Air Force bases in the Falkland Islands, where 1435 Flight holds quick reaction alert over the islands, South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands.
It sounds like a wise decision?????
sounds like it was removal of gold plate more than anything. The UK has radar coming out of its ears able to track everything from bombers to satellites to ballistic missiles.
what we lack is something to do anything about most of them.
Which radars?
Agreed.
Though you can never have too many Radar for situational awareness, and the RRHs are vulnerable.
The military radars are large, static AD radars, some very old, and I bet not capable against modern targets. Aircraft maybe, but not cruise missiles. Civilian ATC radars won’t help either.
Modernisation of the radar fleet must be high on the list for the UK AD money from the SDR. Some really good mobile systems now.
Unless it’s already changed, the biggest issue ASACS had it’s that its systems had to be able to provide ATC services. That must drive cost as the regulations are stringent. Maybe this indicates that’s changed and they can get a more standard Air system at a much reduced cost.
More cost cutting and less capability. Slipped out quietly …..
So you think spending nearly 10M for a upgrade that hasn’t delivered is a good idea?
The money on the upgrade was already spent on the development work which, to deliver the required upgrade benefit, pointed to likely spiralling costs in the same way as the HS2 rail programme suffered. Look on this as cost avoidance rather than cost cutting, because the cost of achieving a positive result for the £10M investment would have been disproportionate and unaffordable. Not all technology demonstrators make it to market.
The fact is why was £10 mill spent in the first place knowing full well parameters were shifting.
Someone has to get a grip.
The article didn’t seem to be clear about why this has been cancelled, so difficult to judge. Unnecessary, gold plating, didn’t work, present set up works better than expected or perfectly adequate, too costly, just not clear.
The following hardly enlightens us.
“A number of factors led to the cancellation, including evolving capability requirements, the increased technical complexity in delivering a compliant solution and a wider reprioritisation of capabilities across the portfolio.”
“evolving capability requirements”
“the increased technical complexity in delivering a compliant solution”
At some point someone will twig that compliance to the spec isn’t all it’s cracked up to be. They admit that the requirement was changing so why not get something better than nothing rather than exactly what they think they want until they changed their minds again? I keep being reminded of Watson-Watt’s dictum: give them third best, because second best comes too late and the best never arrives at all.
Interesting how they now include the LATCC ( old West Drayton ) capability at Swanwick.
3 CRC ( Buchan, Boulmer, Nearishead ) plus a Standby at Ash, plus the NADOC at Naphill, plus the standby at Bentley Priory were reduced to just Boulmer and another at Scampton in a surface building, which didn’t last long.
So just Boulmer now. Assume Swanwick can also carry out a CRC role if needed as well as it’s ATC role.
Not ideal for resilience, there needs to be more redundancy, which I hope there is, but undisclosed.
Plus of course the NADOC, now NASOC or whatever name it has this week.
Sure that it was previously announced Swanwick was having the system installed to act as the back up site to Boulmer. Makes sense unless you throw an opponent into the mix. I would imagine Swanwick would be a key target anyway….
Not sure you can secure any fixed site now. It sounds like Guardian moved the data flows to IP so why not have multiple small sites or even better bans with a few terminals in the back.
Interesting, I’d missed that. Nice vulnerable surface building so hope there’s a back up.
Bans assume you mean vans, then 90 SU should be able to sort that, or Boulmers own Signal /Support Sqn.
Swanwick has a separate OPS Room for Air Defence if you read between the lines.
RAF West Drayton had the ADDC plus LATCC Civil and Military. Both sites could view each others radars , although the AD ones had the range restricted in the LATCC Civil Ops Room.
It was thought that some of the Controllers may have been Russian/ Communist Sympathisers. So they limited the viewing out to about 120NM.
Thanks. Fascinating, didn’t know that.
I was in for 22 years as a TG12 ASOP.
West Drayton, Neatishead x2, Benny ,Staxton X2
Fylingdales, Cyprus,4 x FI detachments -Kent , Byron X2,COC MPA/ Kent.
It shows in your posts.
Respect. 👍
Many thanks, a lot of Armchair Wing Commanders on here know bugger all about Aircraft Defence!
I have lived worked and operated the dream 🙂
Any Questions, please ask.
Great info Richard, thanks! I think most of us don’t have a clue about the command and operation of our air defence picture, certainly I don’t, I’m struggling to see the big picture.
I assume that long-range radar Is the starting point, with the info going to a high-level command centre for assessment and decisions on action. Is that broadly right?
We used to have a comprehensive set of RAF radar bases, six or seven, down the east coast, I remember Saxa Vord, Buchan, Boulmer, etc., plus Fyligdales. Boulmer’s command and ops was deep underground, assume the others were too. Then they went remote controlled. Do we still have that radar network or are we down to a couple of stations? Are the radars modern and up to scratch or getting past their sell-by date?
The command centres and ATC would be obvious primary targets in a shooting war, the idea of command being carried out by mobile trucks sounds a good un.
I wonder why we were getting IBM to scope some new command system. Surely the USAF has some advanced system we could buy into, as the air defence system has to protect US bases and assets in the UK, as well as Fylingdales, Menwith Hill and other key centres.
I never thought that we might have Commies sitting in our ATC control rooms, but I suppose the FSB has got that on its grey zone hit list!
Forgive my ignorance on the subject…
All the original AD Radar sites from the 70s to the 90s still exist. Most are Remote Radar Heads feeding the data to RAF Boulmer, with a back up at Swanwick, previously at Scampton.
High Wycombe would also get a feed of data but as a Recognised Air Picture.
The Gap fillers are the NATS ATC Radars as they are required to have primary radar detection capability, although ATC heavily uses Secondary Radar in most aspects.
Mode A ,B,C etc.
The ATC Radars have limited detection range capability, probably about 120 nm., but better than nothing.
I think the RAF has an assortment of AD radars like the BAe T101 ,a Spanish one and a couple of American ones as well.
Cripes mate.
East Coast radars are:
Buchan.
Boulmer ( actually the RRH is at Brizlee wood, further inland.)
Staxton Wold.
Trimingham ( now moved inland back to Neatishead.)
You mention they went remote controlled, yes, the term used is RRH, Remote Radar Head.
Fylingdales is BMEWS and space tracking, I don’t think it supplies data to the UKADR but might be wrong, Richard will know. I assume there’s a bunker beneath it, again, OSA I don’t know for sure.
Yes, there’s a big command centre, at Naphill site 3 at High Wycombe, the bunker was built in 1985 to replace the older bomber command bunkers I think.
This houses the NADOC, which I often mention, National Air Defence Operations Centre. It also houses the NASOC, national Air and Space Operations Centre, which seems to have merged with the NADOC, these things are rebranded all the time.
This organisation liaise with London, and link to Fylingdales insofar as the 4 minute warning of the Cold War originated from there, then passed on to a Duty Controller at Naphill who, again Richard will know more than me, sits next to a home office liaison officer to set off the warning sirens, now mobile text warnings of incoming.
You mentiined underground, another of my interests. 😉 Yes, Boulmer has a CRC, Control Reporting Centre which sits under the NADOC. The NADOC monitors all from above, including the RAP, Recognised Air Picture.
The CRC beneath oversees the QRA and interceptions.
There were once 3, but Labour cut the CRC at Buchan and Neatishead, both in R3 bunkers.
Another reserve was at Ash, now a data centre, and the reserve ADOC was at Bentley Priory, now demolished. Redundancy is another of my concerns, no doubt there are backup comms deeply buried in the fibre optic network, but standby centres, no idea assume no longer after the priory was cut.
Other ASCS infrastructure is at Weybourne, some locations in Cornwall, and other places, regards UHF data links and SSSB buffers that link locations.
Other RRH elsewhere are at Portreath in Cornwall ( with a standby bunker )
Benbecula in the western Isles of Scotland, and at Saxa Vord, not long reopened.
The CRC and of course NADOC liase with Swanwick ( which Richard provided more data on here ) and of course swap data with NATO, such as in the early 90s when a Triangular UFO departed UK airspace and went towards Belgium, tracked by both nations who pass the data up to NATO.
I hope that Richard sees this, and either adds or corrects, as this subject is one of my main interests.
Dan.
Hope it works better than the civilian ATC
The RAF alone has been the biggest waster of money since the war. It’s attempts at air defense and detection networks fail more often than they succeed.
Its 100 year experiment mandate should have never been renewed.
We need a single marine corps type structure with single unified structure and command.
Where did the RAF ADGE, UKADR, ASCS, fail?
What examples can you think of?
I thought it only the Carriers you hated, you have the RAF on the list as well. 😏
Daniele, I am frequently amazed at your depth of knowledge on all things military! Good stuff!
Thank you mate.