The government of the Czech Republic has decided to open negotiations with the U.S. government regarding the procurement of the Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II fighter aircraft.
The F-35 would replace leased Saab Gripen fighters. The Czech Republic has 14 Gripens under a leasing agreement set to expire in 2027.
The Czech Republic wants to acquire 24 F-35s, and expects to conclude negotiations by October 2023.
The Czech Ministry of Defense said that the rationale behind the increase in the fighter fleet from 14 to 24 is “the fact that the present quantity of supersonic fighters no longer meets the current tasking and, given the worsening security situation, the volume of performed missions will continue to grow.”
It added that the F-35 “is a cost-effective solution, because we will share the same equipment with the United States, Poland, and a number of other NATO allies. This will strengthen cooperation, joint training, and capability sharing to the overall effect of strengthening our defense posture.”
Earlier this week, Lockheed Martin and the Pentagon’s F-35 Joint Program Office reached an agreement on low-rate initial production (LRIP) lots 15 through 17 on a basis of 375 F-35 aircraft.
Over the next few months, the two sides will work together to finalise this agreement.
Yes, not quite sure the Czech Republic can afford it, but wanting two squadrons of F-35 to replace their existing squadron is recognizing their lower sortie rate.
Slovakia might make a contribution, the Czechs are covering their QRA most of the time anyway.
Slovakia has ordered F-16 Block 70s for their air defence. They’re not going to bankroll a Czech F-35 buy.
You should do a poll of who drives a Skoda or who has enjoyed the… ‘superb’… engineering of Skoda Engineering on the London Eye 😉
Indeed, how many of us fired the BREN…? (BRno + ENfield).
However, in these summer days, who enjoys a Pilsner or Budweiser?
Who has holidayed in Prague.
There was a day in 1938 when we wrote the Czech Republic off, and yet, what was ops tempo of Czech pilots on 15th September, 1940?
I found Czechs very prudent, financially. And utterly brave.
I’d welcome Czech pilots flying alongside us. We have history together 🙂
Impressive amount, this and Finland’s recent order really goes to show how little investment we are making in frontline equipment. The government need to wake up and start ordering airframes for a battle of attrition, same with typhoon little over 100 combat worthy. People will say we are developing tempest but how many in reality are we going to afford? I’d say between 60-100, probably the lower amount. The price of the F35A when stacked next to typhoon is a no brainer to me
We are purchasing more F35’s. Spending 2.35Bn on Typhoon upgrades and the new Radar 2. New weapons coming online in the next few years. We are spending a lot of money.
I would say we are not spending nearly enough, yes we have a high defence budget compared to others but it’s spread too thin. The typhoon upgrades are welcome however the T1 is being withdrawn, yet another cut. They can’t tell you how many F35s we are getting because of its only over the lifetime of the project so we’re probably about where we are in terms of surge numbers on that, shocking when there is 2 aircraft carriers to fill and RAF deployments to consider.
The U.K F35 purchases over the coming years are available to see.
Other than the United States no other nation can deploy the amount of 4th/5th generation aircraft as the U.K and all the support needed to operated sustained missions.
Would more of everything be welcomed. Ofcourse.
The challenge the UK faces is that it wants to have a relevant army and airforce, while at the same time, a global navy. The Czech Navy is rather small, afterall. This is why I fully agree with the exact phrase you used of being spread too thin. I’m not advocating for it by any means, but if the Navy weren’t a factor (or a significant one), the UK would have a LOT more to spend on its air and ground forces. Thus, I don’t feel it’s fair to compare the UK’s budget relative to many other countries, as its… Read more »
The problem we have is everything we own is gold plated, I’m a strong advocate for a high-low mix. Take typhoon and F35 as perfect example I know they are designed for different roles but they both cost roughly the same give or take, why would you spend £100M+ on a 4.5g fighter when the 5g costs the same and offers way more flexibility. Surely with all the know how and industry we have there is an argument for a light typhoon model which offers pretty much the same performance but at a lesser price, we need to increase our… Read more »
The army has had an equipment mix for years. Example – the Infantry may be mounted in tracked Warrior, Protected Mobility vehicles (wheeled), or soft-skinned TCVs.
Because the Typhoon can deploy a wide array of weapons that we use after a decade of integration.
The F35 cannot, which is the simple and blindingly obvious main reason we dont have more of them at this stage. To integrate the weapons later would cost much more pushing the unit cost per aircraft up to an unknown amount.
We have never had the requirement to fill both carriers at the same time with F35’s. We have two carriers so one is available 365. With only one carrier you have a apart time carrier force like the French. That’s why we have two. F35 is a joint force, the jets will deploy depending on the requirement from top brass. If we need them on the carrier, that’s what they will do, if from a land base, that is what they will do. Its a whole force concept, not RAF deployments at the expense of RN carrier deployments or vice… Read more »
The tempest at the moment is vaporware. Lots of other Air forces are doing a lot better. South Korea Japan and a number of European countries are purchasing more modern fighters than the UK. Having a hundred old typhoons is not war-winning recipe. Augment that with short range F-35Bs that really can’t deploy the weapons that they need to have in this day and age.
That’s the worst comment of the day. What country are you from again?
Yawn! Same old record.
“Issues” clearly.
Lol, just lol.
Japan really, South Korea equally really? I was looking at their air assets only last week I was actually surprised at how dated or relatively unsophisticated they were actually and is why they are trying hard to upgrade but for the most part with planes we already have or equivalent to. Numbers are a separate question. As for European Countries well Germany are still flying Tornadoes and adding more Typhoons that you so weirdly deride. Others fly the very same Typhoons or US 4th Gen equivalents that for the most part less capable, the Gripen good as it is is… Read more »
Indeed more manoeuvrable without the thrust vectoring only the stealth characteristics make the F22 a better interceptor but we know what cost and complexity did to that programme even the US couldn’t sustain it outside of a war scenario and the F15s it was supposed to replace are yep you guessed it being replaced by updated F15s.
The F-22 program was sustainable. At the time Robert Gates, one of the worst SecDefs in US history, cancelled it the unit cost of an F-22 had been reduced to $143 million with a total buy of 186 airplanes. A total buy of 243 aircraft had been planned which would have reduced the unit cost even further. But Gates decided that since the Cold War was over the US didn’t have a near peer adversary so the F-22 could go. Talk about strategic myopia.
Yaaaaaaawn
😂😂😂😂😂😂 dear oh dear scraping the lining of the barrel now …
🏴🇬🇧
You say we have never had the requirement…what you mean is we have never had the ambition. I’ve said it before on here people change their position on F35b numbers and carrier usage to suit…and we bought F35bs because we couldn’t fly anything else from the carriers…we didn’t have any other choice.I’m not saying it was the wrong decision…but that it was the only decision ultimately if we want two carriers fully utilised we need more F35bs if we don’t …we don’t.l
Well, sombody has to pay for that ambition, and aircraft carriers are not cheap. We are not the USA. The QE class with F35B is the best all round bang for our buck. Numbers are growing, we have commitment for the next batch to take us to 74, a desicion will be made in 2025 about further numbers. But it isn’t just the numbers game, the F35 brings a level of capability we haven’t seen before. Even 12 F35’s can achieve I huge amount. From day one, F35 has been a joint force, with the RAF just as invested in… Read more »
I think if we could introduce drone refuelling capability the F35B would lose much of its disadvantage and there might be less gripes on that front but after checking out the latest on US efforts sadly don’t see that happening for ours this decade or indeed drone early warning which is a shame.
Whatever happened to the RAF’s nuclear strike capability which was gapped with the demise of the Tornado. I don’t think Typhoon can carry Strike weapons and certainly not to penetrate deep across the FEBA which really what the F35 was ordered for before the carriers took on so much prominence. I won’t mention the RAF GR9 Harrier replacement for CAS in European weather conditions without air superiority.
The RAF lost it’s nuclear role back in the 1990’s. Typhoon carrys StormShadow. Which is a long range strategic weapon, but it isn’t nuclear capable. Nuclear deterrent is the sole responsibility of the RN submarine fleet.
Add to that the nuclear deterrent eats ~13% of the defence budget – that’s huge! – and is something a lot of people forget.
So when compared to other countries, we are not as ‘well off’ as we might think.
I recall 1SL suggested last year sometime we would have a total fleet of about 80 F-35Bs (rather than the original 138). Is that enough for the 2 carriers?
Any would be better than none, the USN assault carriers typically sail with around 6 or so that would form a minimum CAP around a landing zone to allow the troops to disembark safety. People keep saying we won’t be using both at the same time but wasn’t it last month that they were both out during NATO excercises. Also when they were planned wasn’t it stated that during emergencies both would be out with F35 hense the minimum requirement for 138, then the cuts came along and people trying to justify it by saying they can’t be out together… Read more »
“People keep saying we won’t be using both at the same time” Who? Not Robert. Not the MoD. Not HMG. Not since before 2015. The 2nd allows flexibility when the 1st is unavailable. “then the cuts came along and people trying to justify it by saying they can’t be out together and it’ll be up to 138 over the lifetime of the program?” Yet they are out together, but a traditional air group for both is another matter, at present. Back in 2010 the plan was 1 in service, 1 in reserve. Then the rumour was 1 might be mothballed,… Read more »
And the Tempest.
The miserable number of UK airframes bothers me, but so too does the lack of geninely resilient dispersible operational ability. It’s my understanding that the complex support needed for the F35 (ironically, even the F35B) ties the aircraft to vulnerable fixed bases like no other platforms before it. We need to take serious lessons from people who’ve had to take their defence seriously, most notably the Finnish and the Ukrainians. It’s very impressive that Ukraine is still able to operate fixed-wing aircraft 5 months into a war with Russia. I wonder what we’d have left after a week given our… Read more »
It’s a concern isn’t it, considering you can count our frontline airbases on one hand you’d expect said bases to have some form of AA defence. But unfortunately the MOD seem to not recognise this aspect in warfare, we need to draw lessons from the Israeli’s if anything.
As you say it’s impressive the Ukrainian air force is still able to fight. On our side even a combat capable hawk trainer would be useful, but no the RAF are doing away with them as well.
We would have AA cover if be believed there was a genuine threat to these shores that would be part of our air defence system. But Hordes of Russian bombers are not coming over the North sea. Ukraine has highlighted the complexity of warfare, even with its (on paper) large airforce Russia still couldn’t invade or gain air superiority over its neighbour.
However they could send a fair amount of cruise missiles ( esp before they expended so many in Ukraine) and it’s good to see how successful Ukraine has been at eliminating so many even with ancient equipment for the most part and little in sophisticated means of detecting them on a large scale. I fear we would be able to watch those missiles all the way to their targets in Britain and unless you have 2 or 3 of our (appropriate) ships in the North Sea little chance of intercepting any as they seek out our precious assets.
Which is why I now support the establishment of a UK GBAD system. What type is beyond my knowledge.
Agree. A uk based GBAD network using Land Ceptor mobile launchers and possible fixed location Aster 30 NTs (or mobile truck mounted container fitter if thats possible??) Would be a prudent idea. I’d like the uk military to develop a much improved air defence capability for the UK.
Aster 30NT especially offering a useful BMD capability as well.
this is the 39 steps narrative, the navy plans for deployment in time of war get into German hands. how the RAF deploys we hope they have a good plan of dispersing the fighters. we are quick to dispatch small numbers of aircraft to the Baltics currently during high tension.
But where are they to disperse too? I get the MOD estate still own a lot of airbases but most of those will be turned into housing estates by there own infrastructure program. Its a dangerous gamble if you ask me, it might work in Scandinavia but they are set up for that if there’s a major war the civilian airports are gonna be rammed look at Afghanistan plus are themselves a major target look at Ukraine. The only logical and probably cheaper in the long run is to invest more in GBAD, the air force and army could join… Read more »
“I get the MOD estate still own a lot of airbases but most of those will be turned into housing estates by there own infrastructure program.”
Most? Not at all? Which current RAF Stations with active runways are being turned into housing estates?
Never mind just RAF stations. MoD sites too. With runways.
Never said active it’s pretty much every former base since the 90s, the mod need to save money somewhere so have sold the estates to developers.
There is this fantasy that we can disperse the air force around the country when the cruse missiles rain down, but as Ive said where too?
You said “MoD estate still own a lot of airbase but MOST of those will be turned into housing estates”
So I ask, which?
Active, because inactive lack the most basic facilities like fuel and ATC.
Where to you ask?
Well a rough count off my head 18 MoD Installations, probably more, they could choose.
Plus any number of regional or major airports.
We don’t lack runways.
Interestingly many ex RAF airfields that have become surplus to the RAF are now army installations or user by other MoD organisations.
Your not getting my original point, active or held at reduced capacity it doesn’t matter when the runway has a crater in it. We totally lack the support structures to disperse the air force in the style of Scandinavia or Ukraine which have had decades to prepare rudimentary airstrips away from prying eyes. My whole point is why bother sinking billions in that fantasy and changing our entire defence posture when surely a little more GBAD is the way to do it, better for UK industry and knock on effect supports the army. The reason I suggest that is unlike… Read more »
I get your original point entirely, I’d read your conversation above. You said where to disperse to to Simon and I gave you examples where we could that have the infrastructure in place already. You said most of the MoD airfield estate is going to be built on and I challenged you that that is not the case, we have dozens of choices. Some bases on the disposal lost are in shit state and places like Henlow have grass runways. Any location, be it an international airport or a stretch of the A1(M), which would have been used in the… Read more »
A conflict with Russia. We would definitely last more than a week. The Russian airforce judging by its poss poor performance in Ukraine would suffer badly against the RAF. Typhoon would cut them to shreds in air to air and dont even begin to think what an F35B force could deliver.
Good news. More F35 manufacturing and maintenance jobs for the UK and strengthens the Eastern flank.
Totally agree..
The cost of the aircraft alone let alone support packages, training and maintenance is a very high percentage of their $3.5Bil defence budget. Just shows the capital investment by even smaller NATO members in equipment.
Yup but they don’t have to pay for ISTAR, AAR, Heavy Lift, Heavy Rotory, Apache….
We already have more F35B than they will eventually have F35? And 100+ Typhoon….??
Yeah I wasn’t comparing to the UK, our Defence budget is around 12 times the size. I was thinking more along the lines of Denmark or even the Netherlands both of whom have significantly larger budgets, this purchase is huge investment for the Czech Republic.
They are buying KC-390s and investing in UH-1Y and AH-1Z (albeit pitifully small numbers so far).
Probably another positive consequence of Putins rabid Nazi action in Ukraine. He certainly has pulled NATO together hasn’t he! Not what he planned but he is a bit of a chubby fuckwit!!
😂 chubby.
Flabby then and a bit rotund?
Let’s be honest if his excuse for this war was truly that he fears NATO invasion was remotely true then he wouldn’t be willing to go on losing the great numbers of his better equipment and indeed armed forces in Ukraine. It was only ever a cover for recreating former Imperial and Soviet glories for the benefit of his own Kremlin memorial and he expected to achieve it on the cheap accept the laurel leaves and show China that Russia could be a worthwhile if junior partner while selling it in glorious terms to his increasingly misled people. Any threat… Read more »
He’s a total joke. Today we have missiles hitting Odessa. Less than 24 hours after signing up to not hitting Odessa to allow grain exports.
I hope the counter attack works out well for Ukraine. Just getting enough kit for the troops is the biggest task. 1 million land forces versus Russia’s 100k in Ukraine. I also imagine most of the residents also don’t support Russia in most regions.
Good for UK PLC and securing MATOs eastern border. Despite naysayers the F35 is turning into a success story for us.
MATOs has a nice ring to it and probably is more relevant than its actual name, that or you have just come up with the Antipodean equivalent.
That’s OTAM mate.
That’s the first time I’ve seen a photo of the F-35 from this specific angle (head-on, looking slightly down), and by God, it looks magnificent!
Agreed it’s only really the blending of the cockpit rear into the fuselage necessary as it is, where it starts to look a little iffy from some angles sort of how the Malcolm hood looked not quite right on anything but a Spitfire. But from most angles where it isn’t obvious it does look very attractive and aggressive.
The failed JSF offering looked like a dogs breakfast. Boeing was it?
Excellent, strengthened NATO allies can only be a good thing in the current climate
I suspect Hungary will want in on the F-35 game too. Their JAS-39s have roughly same lease expiry. Hungarians are expanding their training capabilities which means they want more pilots which may mean they might be planning an expansion from 1 x JAS-39 squadron to 2+ new fighter squadrons.