British Typhoon and F-35 jets fought off simulated attacks by Spanish F-18s; Finnish F-18s and German Typhoons.

The Royal Air Force say here that F-35B Lightning and Typhoon aircraft have been conducting air combat training with NATO and Joint Expeditionary Force partners in the Baltic Sea Region.

“The intensive 3-day exercise was conducted in Estonian and Lithuanian airspace with fighter jets from Belgium, Spain, Finland, France and Germany, demonstrating the collaboration and cohesion of NATO and Joint Expeditionary Force air forces. In the scenario, the UK aircraft conducted a variety of training serials in attacking and defensive roles.  Initially, they operated alongside Belgian F-16s to practice defending the airspace from simulated attacks by Spanish F-18s; Finnish F-18s and German Typhoons.

On the final day of the exercise the UK Lightnings and Typhoons switched roles to become the aggressor aircraft.  Their task was to conduct simulated attacks on a Lithuanian airfield. F-18s from the Spanish Air Force and Mirage 2000s from the French Air Force attempted to defend the airfield.”

The RAF add that their aircraft were supported by a Voyager tanker aircraft from RAF Brize Norton, which provided air-to-air refuelling to extend the duration of the air combat sorties.

The primary objective of the training was to practice protecting the airspace of the Baltic States and to refine communication and management procedures, you can read more about it here.

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. He also works for the NHS. George is on Twitter at @geoallison
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
62 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
David
David
5 days ago

So, who won?

Andy a
Andy a
5 days ago

Would have to be simulated with f35b in U.K. lack of offensive capability

Farouk
Farouk
5 days ago
Reply to  Andy a

Andy a little more infor on the offensive capability of the F35B (Pictures will self delete after 7 days)
comment image

Farouk
Farouk
5 days ago
Reply to  Farouk

Part 2:
comment image

Steve
Steve
5 days ago
Reply to  Farouk

All these are future stuff, none of it is integrated today.

Marked
Marked
5 days ago
Reply to  Steve

Seems to be the way with 99% of uk military capability. So much is promised but sweet FA actually available now if the military is called into action. Considering nearly everything runs late or disappears into a black hole I take promises of what’s coming with less than a pinch of salt.

Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
5 days ago
Reply to  Marked

Agreed. It’s often all about tomorrow.
Meanwhile the cuts are immediate.
Come a new government, the next round of cuts, the previous carrots get reduced ( for more cuts ) or removed completely.
But the gravy train for the MIC continues unabated so some are happy!

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
5 days ago
Reply to  Farouk

Very interesting read. Thank you. New things learned today, KF21 is going to use meteor as it’s long range missile. I will hazard a guess that Japan is also going to adopt it with the new seeker for its future jet. Thinking of further developments for meteor will there be an even longer range version? Perhaps somehow reducing the cost may be another angle. £1million a pop is expensive. But on the other hand how often are air to air missiles actually used. So it’s probably worth it marking the missile the best it can be. Seeker and electronics will… Read more »

Daveyb
Daveyb
5 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

You can easily and simply increase the Meteor’s maximum engagement range, without changing the missile’s internals. In a similar fashion to how Raytheon are looking to give a massive engagement range to their long range engagement weapon (LREW) program, which is by using a two stage missile. By strapping a separate rocket booster to the missile. You will delay when the Meteor fires its own pre-stage rocket motor, that is used to accelerate it past Mach 1, thereby allowing the ramjet to work. Therefore, you delay when Meteor uses its own fuel, thereby extending its range. The extra booster motor… Read more »

Klonkie
Klonkie
5 days ago
Reply to  Farouk

thanks Farouk, interesting read

Andy a
Andy a
5 days ago
Reply to  Farouk

None of this is now or even in the next 8 years I think so what’s the point having a stealth attack plane with no working stand off weapons?

Frank62
Frank62
5 days ago
Reply to  Andy a

Probably throws treasury planners into a hissy fit if we try to develop what’s needed now to make our forces effective. “Gapping” capability sounds so much nicer than leaving our allies, forces & nation vulnerable & toothless so if/when the worse happens many more die etc than is really necessary.

Gapping capabilities & running down the forces really helped Russia feel safe enough to walk into Ukraine, again!

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
5 days ago
Reply to  Andy a

Yeah it would be simulated. They aren’t actually dropping bombs on a Lithuanian airfield. One team do defending while others attack. All practice. No real missiles and bombs. Can’t go shooting allies down just for realism.

Jon
Jon
5 days ago
Reply to  Andy a

Paveways, AASRAMs and AMRAAMs, but of course it’s simulated. Do you think we’re going to take out Baltic runways just to prove a point?

Andy a
Andy a
5 days ago
Reply to  Jon

No my point was it has no weapons that would be any use against a peer enemy or even any one with air defences. Good luck taking out airbases with paveway. The comments aimed more at Lockheed putting U.K. to back of intergration que

Last edited 5 days ago by Andy a
Rob N
Rob N
3 days ago
Reply to  Andy a

Odd I thought the F35 was well up to attacking an airfield… i was under the impression it could use GPS guided bombs, and unguided ones. The F35s take out the air defence and the CAP and then Typhoons/F35s finish the job with
LGBs. You see the F35 and Typhoon can work as a team. F35s can identify air targets for the Typhoon’s Meteors etc.

Andy a
Andy a
3 days ago
Reply to  Rob N

With out modern stand off weapons they would be in extreme danger attacking modern SAM systems at paveway range.

Rob N
Rob N
46 minutes ago
Reply to  Andy a

The Typhoons have storm Shadow. Also I think you are underestimating the stealth capabilities of F35 it has been run up against S300 and it cannot target or kill it. As S30o is used as the basis of many Russian Naval SAMs this is good news for the CSG.

Of course we do need betted long range strike weapons for F35 – we need to buy Stormbreaker and a anti-radiation missiles and use these in combination with stealth to tackle SAM defences.

Also we still need to use terrain etc

Andy a
Andy a
12 minutes ago
Reply to  Rob N

I’m not underestimating anything but if you look into how the US would use the platform against China. I promise you they have no intention of flying anywhere near close enough to drop a paveway, given the cutting edge radar tech they may or may not have they are producing longer and longer range ordinance. I think it’s the height of arrogance to think we know better. Spear at a bare minimum but we should also be working on storm replacement

Supportive Bloke
Supportive Bloke
5 days ago
Reply to  Andy a

It has plenty of offensive capability to deal with Mad Vlad’s scrapheap challenge.

Just having F35B there building a battle space picture is a massive asset for the Typhoons which do have loads of offensive capabilities.

This is a much more valuable use of F35B flying hours than sitting on PoW.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
5 days ago

Oh thank goodness someone has seen the light on the F35 on carriers. Now is the time to work out tactics, operating with typhoon etc etc. This takes time and is well worth it

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
5 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

Please explain how, should the need arise, our 15 available F35’s can be working tactics with the RAF and embarking on our carrier/s. Bear in mind that the POW hasn’t worked up the F35 at all.

Andrew
Andrew
5 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

Geoff,

what practical use would the F35’s based on a queen Elizabeth carrier be in the current situation?
The Ukrainian situation is for just about for all intent and purposes a continental land conflict between Ukraine and Russia.
should we hold the F35’s in the UK in case some other hypothetical situation may arise or do we actually deploy them so that they can be used positively in defence planning of a NATO ally?
i’m sure if the need arose the F35’s could be back in the UK in 24hrs.

Mark Franks
Mark Franks
5 days ago
Reply to  Andrew

To concentrate on the Ukrainian situation is short sighted. The threats are also NATOs northern flank up to the Arctic down to the Mediterranean. The carrier’s with an airwing of F35s will come into their own, after all that’s why we opted for the B version.

Andrew
Andrew
5 days ago
Reply to  Mark Franks

So you suggest we should pull the military assets (F35’s) back to the UK and wait for the Russians attacking NATO countries from the Northern Flank down to the Mediterranean?

Should we have given the Ukraine all those anti tank missiles, and other equipment or kept them for ourselves waiting for the hypothetical all-flanks attack?

Or do you risk assess the situation/intelligence and deploy your assets as to the most likely threat?

Mark franks
Mark franks
5 days ago
Reply to  Andrew

No I’m not saying g that at all. Ukraine needs all the help it can get and we should provide what ever is needed. The perceived threat has been replaced by a clear and present threat that extends from the artic to the Mediterranean, that threat is an aggressive Russia. All this talk on the forums that well if necessary the UK can bring back the F35s in 24 hrs if we need them on the carrier’s is bull. We need a coherent defence strategy that actually works and not what we have at the moment which is irrelevant statements… Read more »

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
5 days ago
Reply to  Mark franks

Halleluyah! A kindred spirit at last. I’ve been banging on about this for two years. M.S. and Andrew are, in my opinion, missing the point. In four years we have managed to acquire 24 F35’s ( one crashed ) and have trained enough pilots to form one squadron of eight aircraft plus an OCU/ trials unit. Three more aircraft this year, seven next and the balance of fourteen by the 2025/early 2026. At the speed we’re moving training enough pilots to allow 47 operational aircraft will take until 2028 at least. Given that we will always need around 15 aircraft… Read more »

Mark Franks
Mark Franks
5 days ago
Reply to  Geoff Roach

Hi Jeoff, Although a decade and a bit years ago I had to attend the annual Air power conference and I have to say the writing was on the wall then. Guest speakers, the top brass and defence specialists. Talking absolute tosh about future air power. It didn’t sit well with many in the audience including myself and come the Q&A sessions our questions were frequently met with derision, we were old hat, long in the tooth. I asked a senior officer when he last went on frontline deployment a shooting war if you will, I myself had just come… Read more »

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
4 days ago
Reply to  Mark Franks

I know what you mean Mark. This last twenty years seems to have brought logical debate to some sort of precipice and not just on defence and foreign affairs. Everything is knee jerk with little regard to strategy. Any big wig with a brain should have worked out by now that either we have to prioritize very soon or increase the defence budget. This government, like many another, is promising all things to all men and delivering none.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach
5 days ago
Reply to  Andrew

I didn’t say they had to be on the QE’s. I was responding to SB and MS’s views that the carriers can be worried about sometime in the future. It takes at least a year to work up a ship to “punching it’s weight” point and at the moment we are not doing anything co ordinated with any of our F35’s.

Please read my reply to \mark.

Rob N
Rob N
39 minutes ago
Reply to  Andrew

Frankly I would like to see us put all our F35s on QE, drive the CSG to Snake Island and escort grain supplied out of Odessa. Station some Typhoons nearby and feed the world.

Sjb1968
Sjb1968
5 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

Training is important from land and the carriers so your point is precisely what?

Given flying from carriers requires mastery of even more skills than flying from a land base this does mean regular and sustained practice is essential for the U.K. Lightning force.

This 3 day exercise with limited U.K. aircraft is not more important than any other training but is part of the blend we require because we do not want to fund our armed forces sufficiently to maintain the FAA and RAF in a manner they should be.

Marius
Marius
5 days ago

Well said! Some here have no clue as to the application and integration of ultra modern in-use and future-use aviation systems.
Those who bang on about F-35B sitting on a carrier deck for no purpose … 🙄

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
5 days ago

These training exercises are great. Multiple countries using different languages and kit all working together. The F35B and typhoon team work must br dream come true to older pilots say from the tornado. Imagine going from 1970/80s aircraft to F35. Like going from a Commodore 64 to a top of the line PC. Even the limited weapon fit just now still is air to air: ASRAAM, AMRAAM, meteor and air to ground: paveways, storm shadow, brimstone. Fantastic combination, with voyager and nato E3 also helping. Glad those nato aircraft are getting used. There’s 18 of them I think. Plenty to… Read more »

Mark Franks
Mark Franks
5 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

The recognised language is English, even the French much to thier discust is in English whether it be maritime or Air.

Simon
Simon
5 days ago

Interesting how the typhoon f35b partnership can work. MDBA doing clever things with missles, loitering, jamming , secondary targets

eclipse
eclipse
5 days ago

Air defence I think is pertinent in these situations; and things like Sky Sabre or Patriot can help reduce losses and extend our reach. I read that Poland plans to have 400 Narew (CAMM) launcher trucks; does anyone know how many we have and how many we are planning to have?

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker
5 days ago
Reply to  eclipse

400? With 8 missiles on each? 400×8=3200 missiles! Then I would think reloads will be bought as well.
Are they expecting an alien invasion sometime. War with the USA and China?

Jack
Jack
5 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

No and it is refreshing to see a country taking defence seriously instead of empty token gestures.

Last edited 5 days ago by Jack
Stc
Stc
5 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

No Russia. With good reason. And boy do not get into a conversation with a Pole why. Your will suffer verbal cluster bombs !

Mark
Mark
5 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

Just don’t ask how Poland is going to pay for all the hardware they have on their shopping list, at the rate they are going they will have 3+ fleets of MBTs, 6 divisions, Patriots, F35s, and the new frigates. Even some of the Poles I talk to can’t see how the government pays for it.

eclipse
eclipse
5 days ago
Reply to  Mark

I’m assuming a larger defence budget than is reported. Don’t forget the extra 500 HIMARS the government wants on top of the 20 already ordered; they requested Congress approval for the sale last year.

Mark
Mark
5 days ago
Reply to  eclipse

How much more can they increase the defence budget before it starts hurting the Polish economy though? They have a lot of hardware and people planned over the coming years.

eclipse
eclipse
5 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

No they’re on the frontline with Russia, and likely don’t want to endure enormous damage like Ukraine has. Projected costs are near $15bn so I have no idea how they’re going to pay for it.

Jon
Jon
5 days ago
Reply to  eclipse

Poland signed a bill into law increasing defence spending to 3% of GDP, about $19bn a year.

Rob N
Rob N
27 minutes ago
Reply to  Jon

I wish we would do the same. 3% is worth every penny if it stops someone invading you. The problem in the UK is that conflict is never seen as something that could effect the UK. This thinking is just wrong.

eclipse
eclipse
5 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

Don’t forget the 520 HIMARS the polish government wants.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
5 days ago
Reply to  eclipse

Pardon the sarcasm but I think I’ve only seen one Sky Sabre parked on an army base so where and that’s probably been sent to Poland! Hope we can also put CAMM forward for Romania’s SHORAD/VSHORAD requirements.
Hope the MoD takes UK GBAD a bit more seriously and gets the numbers up plus for wheeled/tracked. Wonder if mixed CAMM/CAMM-ER launchers or even separate CAMM-ER/Aster SAMP/T are being explored for the UK? And we’re all still waiting to see how many CAMMs are going onto the T31s. Let’s hope it’s 24!

Quentin D63
Quentin D63
5 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

*so where…somewhere

Frank62
Frank62
5 days ago

Excellent. Shame we’re not deployed to help defend Ukraine where it’s desperately needed right now.

Marius
Marius
5 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

With respect – you need to grasp and understand the implications of a NATO member getting directly involved in Ukraine.

Frank62
Frank62
5 days ago
Reply to  Marius

That I do. However I think Putin is counting on us cravenly cowering in the face of his threats. It seems to me we’ve rolled over & surrendered rather than standing up to them. He’s playing brinkmanship & we’ve folded at the start rather than stating very clearly that any nuclear move by Russia will be met in kind, so checking each threat. After the first month where all Putins promises & denials of aggression to the world became blatently false we should’ve stepped in with measured miltary involvement & secured Ukraine. restraining Ukraine whilst they are brutally invaded &… Read more »

Last edited 5 days ago by Frank62
Andrew
Andrew
5 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

I’m quite happy with how NATO is dealing with things… I’m glad that they are a defensive organisation and not rushing in to start World War 3 in a country that has nothing, legally to do with NATO.

You should be directing your anger to the UN… I’m sure if a motion got passed authorising the expelling of Russian Forces from Ukrainian territory by any means (similar to the Iraqi/kuwait invasion) you might see a bit more action…

Anthony Parker
Anthony Parker
5 days ago
Reply to  Andrew

Unfortunately this couldn’t happen, as you probably know due to the Russian veto on security matters! It’s a shame but the UN is a toothless tiger. All be it a well intentioned tiger

Christopher Allen
Christopher Allen
5 days ago

With Russia practically days away, at most, from capturing Severodonetsk, I start to question the whole point of NATO anymore. We aren’t helping to provide secure zones for Ukraine to export via sea without fear of Russia exploiting the gap in mines to launch amphibious operations, we aren’t helping despite Russia using illegal weapons banned by international law and now they are even threatening to violate the Geneva Convention. What a spectacular message to Putin, practically gives the green light to deploy his troops to slaughter, rape and pillage Georgia and Moldova, who must be crapping themselves now. Though in… Read more »

Heidfirst
Heidfirst
5 days ago

Russia did not sign up to the ban on cluster munitions (nor the treaty against anti-personnel mines).

Stu
Stu
5 days ago

With respect, Ukraine was not/is not a member of NATO. NATO is not the ‘World Police’, it’s a defencive alliance where members will protect & be protected in the event a 3rd country attack one. If you can’t see the point of this, I don’t think anyone can help you. “illegal weapons”- which? International traties only bind those that signed them. Neither Russia nor Ukraine signed the Convention on Cluster Munitions. “Violate Geneva Convention” – Which one? If you’re referring to the Prisoners sentenced to death, this wasn’t Russia. This was the the DPR who are not signatories to any… Read more »

Andrew
Andrew
5 days ago

Can you tell me where it says NATO will provide secure zones to export by sea for the Ukrainians? Or to defend Ukraine, Georgia or Moldova? It doesn’t….

what you are talking about needs to come from a United Nations vote….

As far as I can see NATO is doing what it is supposed to do…. Increasing the military forces available to defend its members if the situation spins out of control….

Jon
Jon
5 days ago

Another off topic comment:
Toady is president Xi’s birthday and the dry dock containing the 100K ton Type 003 CATOBAR carrier has been flooded. Will today be a birthday launch day?

Stu
Stu
5 days ago
Reply to  Jon

Very interesting. Think you might be right there.
Also off topic but; how bonkers is it that we civillians have access to such satellite images?! Just 30 years ago (probably less!), this level of intel would only be available to a small handfull of security services.

Andrew
Andrew
5 days ago
Reply to  Stu

these images are the ones disclosed by the commercial satellite companies for free…. It makes me wonder just how powerful the current generation of spy satellites are?

Last edited 5 days ago by Andrew
Daniele Mandelli
Daniele Mandelli
4 days ago
Reply to  Andrew

Can read a newspaper I believe, or better.