F-35B aircraft will head to Cyprus later this year for their first overseas deployment.

The UK currently owns 17 F-35B aircraft with the reformed 617 Sqn having arrived back in the UK last year.

Defence Secretary Gavin Williamson said:

“These formidable fighters are a national statement of our intent to protect ourselves and our allies from intensifying threats across the world.

This deployment marks an important milestone in this game-changing aircraft’s journey to becoming fully operational.”

Chief of the Air Staff Air Chief Marshal Sir Stephen Hillier said:

“It is great to see 617 Squadron, the modern day Dambusters, flying the most advanced and dynamic fighter jet in the UK’s history and about to start their first overseas deployment.

I have no doubt that this short deployment will offer many tests, but likewise I am confident that our highly trained and skilled personnel will rise to the challenge and confirm our ability to deliver truly formidable capability.”

Admiral Sir Philip Jones KCB ADC DL Royal Navy, First Sea Lord and Chief of Naval Staff said:

“This first overseas deployment of these world-beating British F-35B aircraft to RAF Akrotiri, together with their embarkation in HMS Queen Elizabeth for the first time in the Autumn of this year, are important milestones to prove their readiness for deployed operations anywhere in the world in defence of our national interests.”

The Ministry of Defence say that more F-35B jets are due in Britain over the coming years, and there is an overall plan to procure 138 aircraft over the life of the Programme.

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

86 COMMENTS

  1. Excellent news. Looking forward to seeing operational British jets on HMS Queen Elizabeth soon following this visit to Akrotiri, which is a really positive asset for the UK.

  2. These aircraft are enormously restricted for land based op’s, regardless of refuelling tankers…
    Hopefully they are being used as a stop-gap between Carrier readiness and (hopefully) the procurement of the F35A as part of the final order.

    • Should have read, “enormously restricted in comparison to the F35A”. But a very capable aircraft in itself…

      • The F35B is not “Enormously”restricted compared to the F35A. Yes the F35A has more range and can carry more load, but I think you are sensationalising a bit… Also as @Charlie said, the F35A can not operate from the carriers and can not operate from restricted air strips.

      • How is it enormously restricted compared to the F35A? It has slightly less range then the A, which is still a combat radius of 750nm for the B. Or about the same as a Tornado GR4 with tanks.

    • F35A is enormously restricted when it comes to maritime ops, mostly in that it can’t do them at all. You’d have to ask for permission to use them anywhere, even a ‘sovereign’ base like Akrotira would need permission from a foreign government. Carrier ops, on the other hand, are really sovereign.

      Better off with the F35B when all is considered.

    • Agree Ian, I think we will be selling the RAF short if they are given the F-35b variant.

      The F35 is a very capable aircraft, gives us capabilities we don’t have.

      But please will people stop thinking it is on a par with the A variant, it is not, the B variant was designed for the US marines to replace the Harrier. Only the US marines are ordering them in significant numbers other than us. The USAF and US Navy are not having the B variant, because the A and C variants are more capable for their roles.

      The B is less nimble, has a larger profile so produces more drag, it is slower to turn and accelerate, can pull 7g compared to the A’s 9g, less internal fuel so a shorter combat range, the A’s gun is internal, also if we are talking landing strips, the A can carry more weight than the B so the A has a bigger payload.

      Just because the B can land on a restricted airstrip people think it is better? come guys ffs, so on the off chance we are in a world war and all our possible runways have been bombed to bits we can land on a makeshift airstrip then we should choose an inferior aircraft for the RAF, which also happens to be more expensive than the better aircraft.

      • The G force turning is irrelevant if a close range dogfight occurs the F35 will have failed. It’s is supposed to detect, approach then shoot down from short to medium range 3-20+ miles hostile aircraft and not really enter visual range dogfight engagements.

          • Excellent article, some others who use this site should take the time to read such articles. Thanks for sharing.

        • What is significant, is the combined shortfall of G and Acceleration…A loss of 2Gs and a delay of 18 seconds (Yes, 18 long seconds!) in acceleration, combined with reduced aerodynamics, could have a bearing on outrunning AA/SA missiles.
          Also, what’s the point of carrying 3000lb of extra/dead luggage on any deep-strike op’s?.
          Then you have the extra $25million unit costs…reduced JDAM capabilities…extra maintenance…
          It just doesn’t make sense!

          • I would suggest reading the above article on the F35’s performance , and much more.

          • Yes, I’ve read it! It only confirms that the JSF is a very capable package, something I acknowledged above.
            But it does not state anything contra to my criticism.
            I still believe in procuring the A variant over the B for the RAF! So does the RAF itself!

        • If the G-force turn is irrelevant then why did the USAF specifically make sure the A could turn at 9G?

          And the G-force turn is not just for visual range combat, the pilot could be trying to evade a ground launched missile, or a BVR missile from an enemy aircraft, it might have used it’s two internal missiles already and is unable to avoid detection from enemy aircraft IRST, it might encounter top end air superiority fighters and have no choice but to try and evade. When any fighter pings another aircraft with it’s radar it is giving away it’s position as well, the enemy aircraft can put other aircraft to the F-35’s location and if they have IRST the F-35 is easier to track than a Typhoon.

          The F-35 will not tip up and shoot out squadrons of J-20’s and Su-35’s without breaking a sweat, it will incur losses Mr Bell, so the F-35’s survivability, which agility is very much party of is a massive factor.

          • Get a brief off an actual RAF/RN F35 pilot, and you will quickly find you are talking out of your arse Mr Sole.

          • Robert blay
            Can you point me to an RAF/RN pilot who’s flown an F35A? If so, back to back with an F35B?

            Meiron X
            US fighter pilots train at 9G, 15 seconds at four 10second intervals!

            So, who’s really talking through their @sses?

          • The performance difference between the A and B is pretty minimal. Yes, the A can pull 9g and the B 7.5. But in the real world it isn’t a huge difference, you talk like the A model is an F16 and the B is Phantom. An F16 with underwing tanks is limited to 5.5g, which it is always going to carry. the F35B can still pull 7.5 with full internal fuel and weapons, and that is what makes the difference

          • Try any of the UK test pilots assigned to the intergrated test force at pax river that fly A B and C variants

          • I think BAE systems and the RN/RAF Project office in the MOD will have full access to F35A performance data don’t you, especially as we build every rear fuselage of every single F35A in the UK.

          • It’s incredible situational awareness and stealth and excellence performance are its key factors in survivability. He who has the best situational awareness wins the fight, not who has the best turn rate. Tornado F3’s, which was not an agile fighter, had a 12/1 kill ratio against the very best fighters in the world at its last red flag exercise back in 2009. And it did that because it had the best link 16 set up of any western fighter. Having the best situational awareness means you can make the very most of your weapon system, and makes up for any lack in performance. The F35B still has excellent performance, note quite F22 performance, but it wasn’t designed to be. The F35 has a very capable HMS, you would want one of those over thrust vectoring any day.

        • Yeah not really the best debate to say that as Italy are buying double the number of F-35A as B’s and Japan are buying over a Hundred more F-35A’s than they are of the B.

      • Hopefully, that’s the case!
        It beggars belief why an RAF pilot would want to carry a 3000lb fan and drive shaft, together with unnecessary external stores, on a deep-strike mission.
        I have little doubt that the B variant is ideal for the carrier force, and is well tailored/adapted to maritime warfare, as proven in the South Atlantic Conflict.

        • Did stop Harrier GR9 pilots operating over Afghanistan with a 21:000lb fan behind them. Don’t talk nonsense.

          • It initially suited It’s reconnaissance and Intimidation role in Afganistan, and I’m sure the F35B will also suit some land-based Op’s, but in the world of 5th gen fighters…40 x Tranche 3 Typhoons and F35B will limit our future range of capabilities. Why do you think the RAF is pushing for the A Variant?

          • In what way is the Typhoon and F35B limiting our over land capability compared to what we had before with the GR4? Typhoon has storm shadow, Brimstone 2, paveway 4, lightning 3 pod, spear 3 in a few years.

          • I mean it didn’t stop the Harrier operating deep strike missions over Afghan with a single subsonic performing engine, so the F35B will have no problems.

      • They will already know the capabilities of the S400 and S00 series are capable of. I personally do not believe Russian hyperbole. These defensive systems did not shot down a single Tomahawk cruise missile and were probably either turned off to preserve Russian mystique or the Russian’s did not want them to be taken out by electronic warfare aircraft or anti radiation missiles. They need to keep saying to the world these area denial weapons are effective to preserve foreign international arms sales.

  5. I always said this should and would happen…..it’s gota be good real life training on our unsinkable aircraft carrier Cyprus.

  6. Interesting.

    We talked about this months back and I remember I was against it.

    Oh well! There you go.

    • Clarifying that I am not against them using Cyprus to train during their work up but being used on ops when we have Typhoon already there.

      As for tests against Soviet type SAM and Radar I believe that has been done many times already, including in conjunction with RAF RC135 over the Baltic and using USAF F35A’s.

    • Yeah u were lol, but you did have some gd reasons as to why m8 ?, I can’t see them sending more than a handful though, that’s right we don’t have many more than that…. Is it true we aren’t getting any F35s delivered this year? I thought I read that on here sometime ago

  7. The reason the F35b’s will be going Cyprus is that there are clearer and less crowded skies there, ideal for training purposes.
    Which is why the Red Arrows have traditionally trained at RAF Akrotiri in winter.

  9. Florida and adjoining waters are also very nice in the summer and fall, maybe the QE Battlegroup will take advantage of that as well? Especially since it’s close to USMC F35B bases for fly on and off training on later deployment.

    Cheers!

  10. This move surprises me – is it part of the plan we keep seeing to achieve FOC? If its not, I think its a pointless move. We are subjecting a tiny number of aircraft to unnecessary risk and for no obvious reason since the caliphate is now finished. How much longer will we be flying over Syria and for what purposes? I wouldn’t mind so much if the MoD had accelerated delivery but sine it hasn’t, we should leave any presence to Typhoon and its new capabilities and squadrons. Does anyone know when the next batch of F35B arrive since we need 12 aircraft for 617 and we have 207 training squadron forming in coming months. More aircraft please and quickly.

    • I’m pretty sure the RAF/RN knows abit more than you when I comes to deploying it’s aircraft. I think this will be a overseas deployment, to test the aircraft and maintenance away from the comfort of Marham. All new aircraft do this, this nothing to get to excited about.

      • I’m sure you’re right, but the same could be achieved by sending them to culdrose for instance. but as you say, I’m sure they have a better idea

        • It’s much more realistic to test the supply chain when the aircraft is overseas, rather then just a few hours down the road, plus it’s a test for the aircraft when operating in a hot climate. And it’s a good political statement that we can send our aircraft overseas as and when we want.

  11. No, Daniele. It wasn’t a slip up on my part! I’m fully aware that it carries an RAF prefix.

    However, it’s just a bit of tongue in cheek humour by my part – and a reference to some old discussions on here and on other sites. As Akrotiri is an unsinkable aircraft carrier, I just awarded it the HMS distinction!

  12. Absolutely love Cyprus, nothing nicer than sipping Ouso on the roof Terrace listening to the sound of Goat Bells and Jet engines.

    • Yup, Just thought I’d chuck that in !

      I have Visions of a TS, Chasing said Goats in an attempt to Copulate.

      I ain’t Kidding.

    • Agreed, my very first overseas deployment with the RN was to Akrotiri with 899 sqn Sea Harriers, 4 week detachment, 21 years old, perfect. And got to watch the Red Arrows practice 3 times a day just to top it off. Winner ?

  13. Sole#
    A pilot will have blacked out by 7g anyway!!
    How do you know the capabilities of J-20 and SU-35? Do you work for Sukhoi? I think it is the case of, you think you know it all, by making some bull up along the way!
    It is your propose to undermine on any subject!

    • Every Russian fighter has been over hyped by both Russia bigging them up for obvious reasons and US interests from politicians to plane makers with the agenda to increase defence spending. As for the J-20 nothing concrete has really come to light as yet about its abilities though there have been rumblings about its apparent limitations though one should be open minded till we know more. However a first attempt at a truly advanced aircraft rarely goes particularly well, no matter how talented the team or how good the espionage.

  14. We are a lucky lucky nation in that we have two 70,000 aircraft carriers, why o why would we not purchase the aircraft we need to fill them. The reality is in extremism we could cram 40-50 F35bs on each…..that means any split purchase is just a huge opportunity cost that pisses away what our 6billion pound carriers could be.

    • You have to think though, in the event of us having to surge the two carriers to 40/50 aircraft, that situation would almost certainly mean US support, so the carriers could be surged with US marine F-35b.

      Also the Typhoon Sqns are in 10’s, pretty sure the US Hornets are in 10’s now, could we honestly not have enough F-35b to have 6 squadrons of 10, three for each carrier, and then the rest F-35a for the RAF, 2 squadrons for overseas deep strike along with the Typhoon FGR4’s.

      • soleTroll#
        Wrong!
        USN squadron Grim Reapers has 15 new F-35C’s.
        USN squadron’s have historically had more aircraft!

      • Don’t forget to take into account the “Forward” fleet and “Depth” fleet. That requirement would need the full amount of 100 plus F35 to meet 6 front line squadrons, when attrition reserves, depth maintenance, and such are taken into account. And on top off that the OEU and OCU aircraft.

        I think I read somewhere the French had reduced their squadron aircraft complement?

  15. A few thoughts to reflect on for those commenting on split buy of F35A and F35B, and even if we stick with F35B why not buy them faster.

    Tempest. If the UK is successful in getting international support for this program then the resultant air-frame would provide the RAF with a multi-role air superiority biased Gen 5/6 platform in the 15-20 year time-frame, possibly earlier if the project is very tightly managed while significantly leveraging spiral development from Typhoon. Having F35A as well would be too much functional overlap IMV, not to mention the extra logistics issues and costs. Given the backlog and relatively slow rate of F35 builds of any variant may mean the F35As wouldn’t be turning up until a decade plus anyway, given the demand and existing orders from all the other customers, not least the US. Until the Tempest program becomes more clearly defined in the next couple of years at least, the MoD is unlikely to want to commit beyond the first 48 F35B, just in case they do want a different mix. IMV, the UK is also very early still in understanding F35B capabilities/limitations and developing strategies and tactics in the context of the RAF’s own assets, the assets of allies, and against adversary air and ground defence systems. Particularly in regard to leveraging sensor fusion. So many of the perceived disadvantages of F35B versus F35A may not be relevant when considered in the context of a complete system. Oh and if Tempest does deliver for the RAF, then F35B may become a dedicated FAA asset to simplify logistics, although I suspect it will remain in service with both if the UK takes the full 138 over the F35 platform life.

    So if just F35B why not more of the current 48 on order earlier? Aside from not being able to just jump the production queue there is also the issue of the different block builds and especially software support for the UK’s weapons of choice such as Meteor and Spear3, which IIRC won’t be supported until block 4 around early to mid-2020’s. IMV it doesn’t make much sense taking more aircraft early at a higher price, only to have to pay even more to upgrade them later, while having to build up inventory in the interim on non-preferred US weapons already qualified on the platform, in order for the F35B to actually be effective.

    What really makes all of this possible is the hosting of USMC F35B on the carriers that ensures the QEC can make the full contribution to NATO if called for, while enabling greater flexibility and options for the longer term future.

  16. With all the negativity of the f35b and weapon load (internal+external), how do they compare to the Tornado and the Harrier? I assume weapon wise, significantly reduced but what about range

        • Very nice. BTW you might want to also update your copyright date at the bottom of the web page from 2017 to 2019.

    • It can carry 6 x paveway 4s, plus 4 x air:air missiles, 2 Meteors internal, and 2 x ASRAAM under the wings. Plus it has an internal laser designator, so no need from dragging external pods. With that load it had a combat radius of about 550 nm on internal fuel. way more than a Harrier GR9, slightly less than a GR4 with large external tanks. A GR4 could carry 5 paveway 4’s max under its belly, and the Harrier could carry 4. So overall I’d say it’s pretty good. Plus when we get the spear 3 missile, the F35B can carry 8 of those internally. Hope that helps.

  17. From many of the comments here it seems that people are getting hung up on which variant is better and why the F35 B is not as good as the others. Possibly if people looked at each variant to see what each variant is would be useful.
    Would anyone say that the Harrier was a bad aircraft, it had its flaws but was they were accepted then the aircraft did everything it was asked to and more. Was the Harrier better than the Tornado, you could not really compare them. Is the F35B an improvement on the Harrier sure it is I just wish it had the same maneuverability as the Harrier. That is what the F35B is a Harrier replacement.
    The F35A is a replacement for the F16 and F15 whilst the F35C is to replace the F14 and F18. They are in many ways three distinct aircraft types that have tried to work in as much as possible common components thereby reducing costs. For the US this makes sense, God the USMC alone have 320 combat aircraft (does not include support/rotary/electronic/transport/tanker aircraft) bring its strength to over 1,000 aircraft, that is more then many NATO countries. I suppose the F35A would replace the Tornado ADV F3 in the RAF.
    The real problem is numbers and future possibilities. With two carriers with surge numbers 100 F35s are needed, leaving about 40 for the RAF that is the complete airframe orders used up leaving non for training or repair. Possibly the numbers should be increased for example to 200 aircraft, then 60 could be the A variant. This could give a two to one ratio of Typhoons to F35A’s. This would also give the second possibility of a split in responsibilities, the RAF for home defence, mainland Europe, Falklands as initial defence, Cyprus and Gib whilst the FAA for Falklands reinforcement, and world wide operations.
    Although personally I question the logic of the A variant for the UK as I think that there will be a future requirement for the C variant as it is very likely that the carriers in 20 years time will be converted to cat and trap as more air-frames such as Tanaris become operational. There is also the issue that the F35A replacement is already being worked on with the F35D. Tanaris in its developed form could be used for air-air refueling, deep penetration strikes, anti radar strikes and recon in high threat environments.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here