Royal Air Force Voyager aircraft have refueled Swedish Gripen and American F-35 jets participating in NATO’s biggest exercise in decades.
The tanker was operating from RAF Lossiemouth in northern Scotland when it rendezvoused with the Swedish jets and United States Marine Corps F-35Bs, over the Arctic Circle.
The Royal Air Force say:
“Normally based at RAF Brize Norton, the Voyager flew sorties from Lossiemouth on Exercise Nordic Response, part of Exercise Steadfast Defender.
The Royal Air Force and Swedish Air Force have been increasing co-operation in recent months. This latest exercise saw dogfighting fighters refuel over Sweden, in the run-up to the country’s NATO accession.
Steadfast Defender is demonstrating NATO’s ability to reinforce the Euro-Atlantic area during a simulated emerging conflict across the maritime, land, air, space and cyber domains.”
A lot of noise about getting the defence budget to 2.5% GDP over the last few days. It would be a big step in the right direction to get a solid commitment to up the budget now from both parties. But, I won’t hold my breath.
5%min is required. One snag though, even if UK Forces were expanded so many bases/airfields have closed over the last 20-30yrs, there would be nowhere to put the equipment and to accommodate all of the lads/lasses/and the either ways
I’m not so sure re basing, as the MoD estate is still extensive. Dozens of runways available for example with no based flying squadron at the station. The 3 HMNBs once had close to 40 escorts.
For me it’s not basing being the greatest issue, but the training system able to process the increase and supply organisation providing for a force expansion of the size your outlining.
Which is why it’s fantasy fleets and sustaining what we have, with modest increases greed and there, should be the aim, in my view.
Hi Daniele. Mate a quick question. Do you know if all 14 Voyager tankers are now all active in the RAF fleet? I do recall 4 or 5 were in the reserve a few years ago.
Mate. I actually asked this very question the other day after the forces strength article based on the MoD figures listed 14 Voyager in service. I think 1 was in a troop transport role with 4 others used by commercial companies.
I took it to mean all 14 were now in use but still unsure as I don’t recall getting any replies.
thanks Daniele -I also took it to mean 14 but was unsure
I believe one of the surge fleet Voyagers is used for the Falklands airbridge.But not 100% sure. And maybe Cyprus too. Whatever the numbers, considerable capacity seems to be available to cover all tasks and more. Two airframes are used to support the Yemen strikes.
Goes with the fast jet numbers mate. 14 seems to be enough as they’re vastly superior to the VC10s and Tristars when our fleets were so much bigger.
P8, RC135 refuelling remains an issue.
Can add the E3 to the list of the aircraft we can’t refuel.
Potential future modification to Voyager fleet to operate boom? Assuming we’re not bothered currently because of the Mildenhall KC-135’s taking on the RC refuelling etc.
Yes if there’s a current solution then they won’t spend the money, given the finances.
And the C-17’s.. The Air Tanker contract is criminal. Needs to be broken up and Brough in house. No more PFI’s.
Not just hitting a GDP target, but actually converting that spending into more troops, more kit, more bang, more capability & hopefully some strength in depth/reserves so we can hope to survive for more than a month.
We all know how HMG has treacherously fiddled the books to be able to claim 2% GDP defence spending while actually reducing our forces to beyond what many of us would consider the minimum for a totally peaceful world.
Their spend goes on industry mate.
If you mean too many greedy snouts in the trough, making themselves rich before delivering good kit for the security & good of the nation, that’s my own fear Daniel.
I do, Frank. And sadly I’m starting to believe it given HMGs glee at giving fat cat contracts to industry while the conventional forces shrivel up year on year.
I favour training, logistics, professionalism and capability over numbers but there must be a balance.
For me it is not a question of what the annual percentage rate should be, but a question of what assets the forces need over say the next ten years and fund it. Foe example the Royal Navy really needs an escort fleet of between thirty two and thirty six. RAF probably three hundred and fifty front line fighters and the British Army expanded to a minimum of one hundred and fifty thousand. Sounds fanciful but we have done it before.
Pulls up chair, Opens the Pop corn Lid, settles back to watch all the replies….. 😁
Me too !
Agreed. HMG has specialised in “saving money” by stripping departments of doing the things we actually need them to do & what our taxes are supposed to pay for. The rich pay less taxes than ever & the rest of us actually pay much more for crippled services & tiny, dysfunctional armed forces.
How’s that for you Frank & Fred?