German Chancellor Olaf Scholz announced that Germany will purchase 20 additional Eurofighter jets amidst heightened tensions following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, according to a press release.

This announcement was made at the opening of the ILA Berlin Air Show.

“We will order 20 more Eurofighters before the end of this legislative session (scheduled for autumn 2025) — in addition to the 38 aircraft currently in the pipeline,” Chancellor Scholz stated, highlighting his strong commitment to maintaining and expanding arms production capacity.

He added that the order would provide certainty to Airbus and its suppliers.

Eurofighter CEO Giancarlo Mezzanatto welcomed the announcement, saying, “Today’s announcement from the German government is great news for the Eurofighter programme and our industry partners. It underlines Germany’s long-term commitment to the Eurofighter. Eurofighter Typhoon will be the backbone of Europe’s defence for decades to come.”

The Eurofighter Typhoon is a twin-engine, canard-delta wing, multirole fighter, manufactured by a consortium of Airbus, BAE Systems, and Leonardo.

The companies involved in the Eurofighter programme manage a supply chain employing more than 100,000 skilled individuals, enriching the technological capabilities of the entire European region, they’re keen to point out.

Avatar photo
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
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

147 Comments
oldest
newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Jim
Jim (@guest_827270)
19 days ago

Now that the S400 has been proven to be a bucket of shite, one wonders if it’s time to look again at the stealthy non stealthy mix of aircraft in NATO. Typhoon is perfect for the roles it performs and the cost of operating LO aircraft like F35 seems to still be stubbornly high. In the entire debate of which aircraft is better F22 or Typhoon I don’t think anyone envisaged in the 90’s that Typhoon would still be in production after F22 was retired but that’s close to where we are in the 2030’s. With large fleets of drones… Read more »

Math
Math (@guest_827331)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Operating costs related facts still remain the key concern. Stand off missiles plus long range missile seam to be a better trade off than structurale stealth… I would like to know more about J20 though, because they are constructed right now.

Jonno
Jonno (@guest_827353)
18 days ago
Reply to  Math

Its not just drones and standoff missiles; sadly for Ukraine; its the winged iron bombs that are proving a very effective low cost high hitting power weapon.
What are we doing about this?

Netking
Netking (@guest_827332)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Or put another way, with regards to aircraft development, does Europe prefer to stand still and rest on its laurels in the short sighted hope that a potential adversary will never improve its anti air warfare capabilities, while the US, China and a host of other countries push forward with their next generation aircraft programs.

Jim
Jim (@guest_827345)
18 days ago
Reply to  Netking

Or is structural stealth an expensive dead end much like Mach 3+ capable aircraft?

It’s not just Europe with reservations over LO. The USN been very reluctant.

Netking
Netking (@guest_827350)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Similar to aircraft carriers, anyone who has the technical know how and can afford their cost is trying to have stealth aircraft. It has become the cost of admission to high end air warfare. If you believe that structural stealth is a technological dead end I would point you to the b-21. I would also point to the general evolution of structural stealthy designs over time. Notice early stealth aircraft were all straight lines which as I’ve read was due to the limitations in computing power in testing and designing stealthy shapes. Now notice that the newer low observable aircraft… Read more »

Jim
Jim (@guest_827385)
18 days ago
Reply to  Netking

I would point you to the fact that every stealth aircraft America has ever developed has been retired early and legacy platforms like B52 and F15 will live out their replacement aircraft like F22 and B2 by decades. I’m sure you will be aware of the interplay of physics and economics that results in this but there are limits to how undetectable and aircraft can be, just like there were limits to how fast they can go in an atmosphere. Ultimately America and everyone else stopped trying to go faster with manned aircraft because it was a dead end. Ultimately… Read more »

SailorBoy
SailorBoy (@guest_827396)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

That, I think, is because if you want to play with stealth the world is finding that you have to go big or go home. For things like the F15 and B52 it doesn’t matter that the airframe itself is not optimal; the role is to carry a whole heap of weapons and, in the F15s case, to spot things a long way away. The important bits (radar, engines, weapons) are upgradeable without changing airframe and aerodynamics hasn’t been revolutionised since they were designed to the extent that they are obsolete. With stealth aircraft the airframe itself is central to… Read more »

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky (@guest_827472)
18 days ago
Reply to  SailorBoy

Totally agree there. They wanted to put an F-35 radar into an F-22 but the cost and complexity esp for an aircraft rapidly running out of useful airframes or are combat ready simply didn’t make sense, restarting of production of even seriously upgrading the aircraft was deemed in two separate studies to be more expensive than a brand new design. There will always be a balance of highly capable aircraft to be at the cutting edge with cheaper less capable aircraft in support, exploit the gaps they generate and make up the numbers required. Easy to forget when one goes… Read more »

Netking
Netking (@guest_827409)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Did you consider that those platforms that were retired early was because technologically and economically the US can afford to keep advancing to something more capable? None of the early stealth platforms have ever been “defeated” as far as we know. Even the F-117 is still flying around in what reportedly as a test target for the US newest generation of radars. And I think you misunderstand the roles of the B52 and F15 in the usaf arsenal. Those are mostly used as bomb trucks and standoff platforms and will never be used as the platforms that will kick the… Read more »

Jim
Jim (@guest_827429)
18 days ago
Reply to  Netking

No actually the USAF plan for E3 is very much satellite based constellations combined with distributed sensors on drones. E7 is an interim solution for the USAF. Obviously I’m not an idiot so I do realise stealth does not mean invisible. However think about it, if I am launching a missile at an S400 from an F35 at 20 miles then what’s to stop me firing a larger missies from an F15/Typhhon from 100 miles away. It then becomes a subject of economics. I.e what’s the most cost effective way to take out the target. It’s much easier to upgrade… Read more »

Netking
Netking (@guest_827463)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

“No actually the USAF plan for E3 is very much satellite based constellations combined with distributed sensors on drones. E7 is an interim solution for the USAF.” Hi Jim, I’m fairly certain you’re mixing up aircrafts here. I’m not referring to awacs aircraft but to a dedicated EW aircraft which the EA – 37B is. One of the many reasons I can think of off the top of my head of why you will need a stealthy aircraft compared to a typhoon or F15 is some targets are mobile and a battlefield is often times dynamic and what is considered… Read more »

Jim
Jim (@guest_827477)
18 days ago
Reply to  Netking

My reference to satellites is in counter to your reference stating that LIDAR/SAR constellations have no role in air to air detection but they do in USAF future plans to replace AWACS with LO satellites and distributed drone sensors. For sure contested air space will move and LO is always going to be useful. My point is will it be worth the cost? Going at Mach 3+ is handy but no one does it anymore because it’s not worth the cost. In the end it was better to make the missiles faster not the planes. It always going to be… Read more »

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky (@guest_827474)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

You are right in this respect and it is always a combination of factors that push the line of value one way or the other between the two types (might be more than two of course) and this will change over time and as technology changes. I still say you need both to fulfil all your missions just the balance between them is in question as is the ultimate level of capability you invest in your high end platform and the ability and numbers in your lower end one.

Andrew
Andrew (@guest_827518)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

If you were flying an F15 and firing from 100 miles away, you would have been engaged by several missiles by the time you got within firing range…believe the S400 has about a 250 mile detection/engagement range… much higher chance of the pilot and F35 surviving the same mission…

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky (@guest_827470)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

A lot of what you say here is correct but there are also a few basic errors. Stealth isn’t about not being detected, any airport radar is capable of detecting stealth aircraft to some degree or other it’s more about reduction in detection range esp against other potential ‘targets’ real or perceived and greatly degrading the ability for target radars and missile sensors in particular, to lock on. Remember present air to air missiles tend at range to run out of fuel and are in coast mode affecting their manoeuvrability and ability to hit a manoeuvring target. This is why… Read more »

DaveyB
DaveyB (@guest_828176)
15 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Radar absorbent material (RAM) has come a very long way since the F117. Which used angular displacement predominantly to reflect a radar transmission away from the aircraft. It also used a development of the ferric paint used on the SR71 and U2 to absorb some radar transmissions predominantly in the X-band. Today’s F35 uses embedded RAM (eRAM). This is a composite material that incorporates layers of absorbent particles included as part of the lay up process. When dried, this forms the F35’s outer skin panels. The F22 used a combination of painted RAM and some eRAM. But also used radar… Read more »

Expat
Expat (@guest_828385)
14 days ago
Reply to  DaveyB

RAM is part of the LO build, you can get some way by just design a radar deflecting airframe and burrying some feature inside the airframe (engines, weapons), the mathmatics of this are now very well understood and newer stealth designs aren’t really paying any penalty in manauverabilty or speed through being LO. And of course modern materials which would also be used in non LO airframe like carbon fibre are conincidentally more stealthy than aerospace alloys. Also flight profile can help, if I’m only ever going to be exposed to radar from below then I can limit where I… Read more »

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF (@guest_827400)
18 days ago
Reply to  Netking

Entirely agree in principle that the future of air warfare will be dictated by 5th and 6th gen platforms. However, even USAF has hedged options by procuring a few F-15EX to bridge the transitional period. RAF would be justified in acquiring additional Typhoons, provided there would be no significant tradeoff on future acquisition of F-35B and GCAP. Believe Typhoon would be be perfectly adequate, on an interim basis, for missions against non-peer adversaries. 🤔

Jim
Jim (@guest_827433)
18 days ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

Given the performance of S400 I’m not sure the US and NATO have any peer adversaries anymore in air combat.

If just storm showdow and ATACMS fired by Ukraine can take it out then imagine what a real strike package of US and NATO aircraft would do to it.

S400 is China backbone as well.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky (@guest_827476)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

True though I have read that Su 35s unlike their SU34 brothers which they often escort have been able to out manoeuvre Patriots at distance. At least that’s what it has been said the loss numbers suggest.

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker (@guest_827539)
18 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

All missiles are able to be avoided under certain circumstances. Range, energy left in missile all play a part.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF (@guest_827513)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

At some point in the future, the Orcs and ChiComs may realize that forming a defence research partnership would result in synergies, ala AUKUS. Placeholder name: RUCHI. Between Russian basic research capability and ChiCom technology and capital, defence technology contest could become a sporting proposition. 🤔

DaveyB
DaveyB (@guest_828178)
15 days ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

There could be a case in keeping 4th Gen jets. Where the need for stealth and its associated costs is not required. For example QRA and policing missions.

FormerUSAF
FormerUSAF (@guest_828181)
15 days ago
Reply to  DaveyB

Exactly. 👍

Expat
Expat (@guest_828386)
14 days ago
Reply to  FormerUSAF

However the F35A is cheaper to fly and buy than the Typhoon.

Simon
Simon (@guest_827645)
17 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Yeah that’s why they opted out of f35

DaveyB
DaveyB (@guest_828160)
15 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Are you asking about aircraft skin that use embedded RAM or a painted in material. Not forgetting the radar trap structure that sits behind the skin. With today’s material and propulsion science, we are in a much better place to design an aircraft that could sustain a cruise speed of Mach 3+. The big question is would such an aircraft provide an advantage over one that is slower? As we are seeing with the KAI KF21, there is a potential market for aircraft with a much reduced RCS over a normal Gen 4 aircraft. As this uses predominantly aircraft shaping… Read more »

Expat
Expat (@guest_828387)
14 days ago
Reply to  DaveyB

I should have read your post first I also called out the KF21 as good option that not full stealth but better than the current 4th gen offerings.

Expat
Expat (@guest_828383)
14 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Structural radar stealth has 2 categories imo, 1st is the airframe shape 2nd is the RAM and coatings. a stealth airframe shape is an easy win, just using shape and embeding things like the engine fan to reduce RCS is an easy win with modern computing. The thing that pushes up the cost of stealth is the coatings and maintenance of these. Of course there other aspects of stealth like IR signature. But there some sense in part of the mix not being a full blown LO airframe. South Korea has gone with the KF21 which is not as good… Read more »

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky (@guest_827464)
18 days ago
Reply to  Netking

Aren’t there 2 5.5/6th Gen programmes in development presently in z Europe?

DaveyB
DaveyB (@guest_828399)
14 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Potentially 4, with FCAS/GCAP (UK, Italy and Japan, SCAF (France, Germany, Spain and possibly Belgium. TAI TF Kaan (Turkey) and Sweden’s Flygsystem 2020. I’ll keep the Russian efforts separate.

Warre
Warre (@guest_827333)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

The French fighter is more versatile ie air craft carrier , so what will the Brits use with your comment re f35?9

Mr Bell
Mr Bell (@guest_827408)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Well there is an F15-EX variant which at circa £115m a copy is close to an F35A but carries a much bigger payload. As a multi role aircraft it’s not bad at all.
I’ve got to agree though the need for tranche 4 Typhoons is becoming more pressing. I can’t believe we as in the government and MOD are prepared to scrap without replacement the tranche 1 typhoons.
Still if Tempest was just around the corner I’d say keep typhoons on hold and push Tempest through to active service much quicker. We have to do one or the other.

Jim
Jim (@guest_827432)
18 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Yes the F15 EX is primarily being procured as it’s cheaper than upgrades of the older F15 models, the USN benefited from having a true 4.5 Gen aircraft in the Super Hornet as did all the European Airforces. The USAF bypassed this generation with the F22 which was ahead of its time but now the USAF lacks a true 4.5 Gen platform. With the benefit of hindsight the USAF would have been better if the F22 had been a true 4.5gen replacement for the F15 and waiting until 5th Gen technology was more mature as with the F35. P.S. I… Read more »

Gareth
Gareth (@guest_828149)
15 days ago
Reply to  Jim

I also mean no disrespect to the F15, the things 50 years old and it’s still one of the most capable aircraft in the world.

Apparently the F15-EX’s are brand new factory built, and not just refurbs. Shows the capability of the design that the US still thinks it’s worth building new copies, albeit with modern upgrades.

Micki
Micki (@guest_827444)
18 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

After the retire of tranche 1 the RAF Will have Less fighters than the spanish air force for example , Britain needs at least 300 fighters not 100. Ridiculous

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827449)
18 days ago
Reply to  Micki

Well have around 180 fighters once the final F35s arrive. But no chance of 300 on our budget.

Micki
Micki (@guest_827442)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

One question, if all russian armament is a disaster, If Russia uses washing machines to attack why sonmuch panic that Russia Will invade Europe ? , for me IS a non sense.
They,re in the border with Ukraine and are not able to penetrate more than a few meters in a day, how do you think Putin Will try NOTHING against all nato. ?
Please explain to me.

Jim
Jim (@guest_827479)
18 days ago
Reply to  Micki

No panic here on Russia invading Europe, Russia would not last long against any real European force much less NATO.

The government clearly feels much the same as defence spending hasn’t moved up.

The USA has cut its own defence budget since Russia invaded Ukraine.

Certainly no panic

Gareth
Gareth (@guest_828127)
15 days ago
Reply to  Micki

The Russian army still heavily outnumbers the land forces of the Baltic States, despite their losses in Ukraine, and if they cement deeper strategic partnerships with North Korea, China, and Iran, such that those countries also act militarily in their own geographic domains then NATO + allies would likely have to divide their resources between Europe and elsewhere. Not impossible also that if Trump wins a second term that he pulls the US out of NATO – he is a wild card and has threatened to do that in the past. All of which Putin would doubtless seek to exploit… Read more »

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky (@guest_827462)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Interesting point, I saw a YouTube channel last week where an experienced ex USAF pilot flies various simulated missions against mostly Russian opponents. Haven’t seen an F-15 one yet but saw his F-16 take on I think it was an SU-27 and geez was he out classed. His AMRAAMS were well out ranged as was his radar and only his AWACS fed him the required information required to know where his adversary was. His only choice was to close while avoiding missiles esp when his AWACS was taken out. All he could do was fly at near tree top height… Read more »

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky (@guest_827478)
18 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Sorry it was an Su-35 not an Su-27 which is more believable considering the compatible vintage.

Jim
Jim (@guest_827481)
18 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

F16 is the cheap and cheery USAF fighter. Su27 would be dead in any engagement against F16 if it has the more modern US radar. Su35 maybe, certainly if it was well flown, Mig 31 can certainly out range F16 with AMRAAM but then almost anything can outrange F16 with AMRAAM. This is why the USAF does not use F16 in the A2A role. It uses F22 and F35 which even with AMRAAM a would destroy any aircraft on planet earth in a BVR engagement. F16 is deadly close in unless fighting something like an F35 or Typhoon with off… Read more »

Dern
Dern (@guest_827483)
18 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

And if the Fighter Plane Mafia had gotten their way, neither the F-16 nor the F-15 would have had a Radar!

Gareth
Gareth (@guest_828128)
15 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

Also worth remembering that despite having all the advantages in numbers/weaponry on the night before the invasion, Russia still after 3-years have not destroyed the much smaller Ukrainian air force. I think even with some advantages such as the longer range missiles and highly manoeuvrable assets like Su-35, the Russian air force is outnumbered by NATO air forces and it’s pilots have considerably fewer flying hours/training than their NATO counterparts.

Steve
Steve (@guest_827473)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Ukraine has been massively saturating then as part of it attack. One last week was 60 odd drones and missiles. I don’t think there is any system in operation that could survive that. Dealing with massive saturation attacks is going to need to be the next big thing in military research

DaveyB
DaveyB (@guest_828152)
15 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Even if they went down the Silent Eagle program. The conformal weapons bays didn’t drop the RCS below a Typhoon’s, primarily due to the two huge open engine air intakes, giving a perfect view of the engine from head on.

The AIM-260 is being developed to mitigate the F15’s huge RCS. Which is necessary when teamed with AEW or an F22/F35.

RDA
RDA (@guest_827271)
19 days ago

This is good news for Germany, they seem to be taking actual steps to rearm. If we are going to increase defence spending to 2.5% we should focus on procuring more of what we already have and know. 20 more typhoon and 6 new p8 are the two big candidates for this, they are both mature and the capability of a new typhoon is light years ahead of the oldest that we have.
However that is wishful thinking and I doubt that it will happen.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827273)
19 days ago

How many will that eventually leave them with?
Retiring tornados obvs, and I’ve heard T1s are also being retired for them.
So 110 T2/3s, 58 T4/5s and 35 F35?

Blue Fuzz
Blue Fuzz (@guest_827281)
19 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

I was wondering the same thing. I see they’re likely to order another 8 F35A, which would take them to a total of 43.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827283)
19 days ago
Reply to  Blue Fuzz

Odd number. There’s also the idea of an additional 15 Electronic warfare Typhoons floating around but they’ve run out of that emergency fund that was granted a few years ago.

Last edited 19 days ago by Hugo
Jim
Jim (@guest_827292)
19 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

Give the capability of the Mk2 CAPTOR E radar and the Praetorian DASS for EW missions I think it’s fair to ask is there is any need for an EW variant. Especially if you also have F35 in fleet.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827295)
19 days ago
Reply to  Jim

There must be because they’re converting 15 of their current typhoon for the role.

Jim
Jim (@guest_827304)
19 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

It’s more to do with the need to replace their existing Tornado ECR’s, than a need for dedicated Electronic attack aircraft. It’s everything to do with institutional bias and preservation rather than a hard headed assessment of modern military needs.

The RAF for a long time has shied away from dedicated electronic attack aircraft.

Now the USAF and USMC are getting rid of their dedicated EA platforms.

This was the main reason the RAF insisted on the Mk2 version of CAPTOR E

Netking
Netking (@guest_827336)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

“Now the USAF and USMC are getting rid of their dedicated EA platforms.“

This is simply not the true. Look up the EA-37B which the US has accelerated its development due to its urgent operational requirements.

Dave Wolfy
Dave Wolfy (@guest_827389)
18 days ago
Reply to  Netking

That aircraft cannot realistically enter contested airspace.
The EA6, F111 and Tornado can/could.

Netking
Netking (@guest_827430)
18 days ago
Reply to  Dave Wolfy

It remains to be seen how this aircraft will be employed as much of the tech associated with it is still classified. The US military do seem to hold it in very high regard based on the procurement decisions so far.

Jim
Jim (@guest_827486)
18 days ago
Reply to  Netking

If the EA37 B could operate in contested airspace then the US probably would be spending 1.5 trillion on the F35 would it?

Netking
Netking (@guest_827495)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jim

Unfortunately warfare at the cutting edge is never that simplistic. I personally don’t see how that aircraft can operate in contested airspace and I don’t think that’s what the usaf expects of it but based on their own statements so far it will be right on the perifery of the high intensity stuff and might well be a part of any first day of war strike package.

Jim
Jim (@guest_827484)
18 days ago
Reply to  Netking

Different aircraft with a different mission set to Tornado ECR. The USMC has removed its equivalent in the EA6B. The USAF is removing its F16 equivalent. Both forces will use F35 in the role.

The US has a tonne of aircraft that perform electronic attack missions but only the F18G of the USN will be a dedicated escort jamming aircraft like the ECR.

Graham
Graham (@guest_827329)
18 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

But they will have the Mk.1 AESA radar developed in Germany which doesn’t have the EA capabilities that the UK developed Mk.2 radar

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_827405)
18 days ago
Reply to  Blue Fuzz

In the end the German f35A is all about having a squadron that can deploy and use the 60 odd B61 free fall nuclear bombs stored in Germany.

DB
DB (@guest_827274)
19 days ago

F15s/16s will rock on through incremental upgrades and newer versions, however, will Gripen take more market share as cheaper to buy and should Gripen enter service with the UKRs its performance will be watched closely.

What Britain needs is more tiffies and that is not going to happen.

Henry
Henry (@guest_827311)
18 days ago
Reply to  DB

Where did you find that Gripen was cheaper to buy than an F-16? Cheaper operating cost, sure. But the Gripen is not a cheap purchase. The Gripen costs $80m, compared to the F-16’s starting price of $30m (although it can be optioned up to $70m).

geoff.Roach
geoff.Roach (@guest_827278)
19 days ago

We should join them, not only for “standard” models but the SEAD version as well.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827282)
19 days ago
Reply to  geoff.Roach

I don’t think we’ll be getting any more typhoons in general.

DB
DB (@guest_827284)
19 days ago
Reply to  geoff.Roach

Sadly, never going to happen.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_827340)
18 days ago
Reply to  DB

Hi Hugo and DB. Sadly you’re right. In fact we’ll probably be lucky to keep the ones we’ve got, but a man can dream. 🤗

Monkey spanker
Monkey spanker (@guest_827542)
18 days ago
Reply to  geoff.Roach

A purchase of 40 typhoons would be a great idea for the U.K. for transfer to Ukraine or Ukraine gets the T2 with the RAF taking the new ones. It keeps the production line going until tempest is ready.
If the plan was purely to get aircraft for ukraine the money might be better spent purchasing gripen for them. The french are moving in so rafale will be offered soon I think.

Geoff Roach
Geoff Roach (@guest_827650)
17 days ago
Reply to  Monkey spanker

No argument from me but It’s probably a pipe dream. I don’t know where we are going now. Tories by 2030 for 2.5 per cent; Labour “creating a pathway”for discussion, once the defence review prioitises in two years, subject to the economy. I’m not holding my breath.

Peter S
Peter S (@guest_827279)
19 days ago

Something we should do too. Far more useful for current operations than the F35B in its current state of development.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827280)
19 days ago
Reply to  Peter S

Not without a raise in funding. Everything that isn’t going to F35s is going into GCAP

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_827285)
19 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

What’s happening to the RAF’s T1s, weren’t they looking at costings for upgrading these to T4 while GCAP is still a while away?

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827287)
19 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Maybe they were looking at 1 point. But done of them have already been salvaged for spares. All barring the ones at the Falklands I think will be out of service by next year.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_827293)
19 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

There must be terrible amount of wastage with the T1s frames if being used for spare parts already. If upgraded new parts could be made. And with all the new orders by Germany, Italy and Spain it seems a bit silly not to take some
(cost?) advantage of this and order a top batch up for the RAF now? Why wait for later when the lead time already is what it is? Will the next F35Bs come any sooner?

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827297)
19 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Date is still 2031 for the last 27 F35s.
Unconfirmed obviously but plan seems like just to wait for Gcap. If its delayed or cancelled they’ll probably order more F35s.

Jim
Jim (@guest_827305)
19 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

The MOD has never asked BAE for a price to upgrade T1 to T4 standard.

Original plan was to use T1 in an aggressor squadron role.

DaveyB
DaveyB (@guest_828403)
14 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

I don’t think so. BAe have stated they can refurbish the RAF’s Tranche 1s to a later standard. But they haven’t publicly given a cost. Both Italy and Spain have done this with their Tranche 1s. Although Spain are also buying some additional new Tranche 4s.

Michael Hannah
Michael Hannah (@guest_827288)
19 days ago

I think it would be very wise to order more. Certainly we need more F35s and on a far shorter time scale than the current dribs and drabs.
If they are hell bent on retiring the T1,typhoon they should be replaced with newer models. They can be obtained at a sensible price now.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827289)
19 days ago
Reply to  Michael Hannah

Even if they’re at a good price there’s still no money to spend on them. We’ve still to order the next 27 F35s and the rest is for GCAP

Also T1s are already essentially retired.

Last edited 19 days ago by Hugo
Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_827294)
19 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

If they’re retiring the T1s there’ll be saved money there, use that plus gap to purchase new.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827298)
19 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

Not that much saved from the running costs of 30 aircraft in comparison to buying even a handful new. Don’t forget the MOD budget shrank this year by like 3 billion. There’s no spare change.

Jim
Jim (@guest_827306)
19 days ago
Reply to  Quentin D63

The savings from retiring T1 are going into the second tranche buy of F35B.

Michael Hannah
Michael Hannah (@guest_827300)
19 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

Hopefully the new defence review and increased spending will rectify that. Even ordering them now , it will be several years before they role off the line.

Mark
Mark (@guest_827317)
18 days ago
Reply to  Michael Hannah

Bold of you to think there’s going to be a huge uplift in spending…

Michael Hannah
Michael Hannah (@guest_827364)
18 days ago
Reply to  Mark

Then the next government will fail its first duty to the country. Protection of its citizens.
You don’t need a SDR to know our armed forces are not up to the job.

Mr Bell
Mr Bell (@guest_827413)
18 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

There is money. Just depends what the government want to spend it on. The UK could easily afford to arm and equip our armed forces properly. They just choose not too.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827416)
18 days ago
Reply to  Mr Bell

Id argue against easily, what other department are you cutting to add to defence?

Frank62
Frank62 (@guest_827695)
17 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

If we don’t spend enough on defence we enevitably lose all the other depts. But then HMG has been doing a marvelous job of destroying most things people in this country rely on.

Andrew D
Andrew D (@guest_827299)
19 days ago
Reply to  Michael Hannah

Spot on 👍

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_827302)
19 days ago
Reply to  Michael Hannah

No such thing as a lsensible price. Typhoon is still very expensive to purchase.

Michael Hannah
Michael Hannah (@guest_827362)
18 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

It is still one of the most capable fighter aircraft on the planet, offering swing capabilities.
What do you suggest they buy if they were in the market for more jets?

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827365)
18 days ago
Reply to  Michael Hannah

Typhoons are pretty good. But it seems more F35s are more likely if any purchases are made.

Michael Hannah
Michael Hannah (@guest_827378)
18 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

Typhoon is better than pretty good especially with the new ESA radar.
The F35 does not excel at air defence or mud moving . Plus we are far short of the 70 promised.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827384)
18 days ago
Reply to  Michael Hannah

The 2nd Tranche of 27 to bring the total to 74ish will happen this year.
But that’s well short of the original 138 that were envisioned.

Michael Hannah
Michael Hannah (@guest_827386)
18 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

Same old story. Promise to buy enough but in reality buy barely enough,

Paul42
Paul42 (@guest_827401)
18 days ago
Reply to  Michael Hannah

Standard UK Government practice i’m afraid. We don’t need to worry about Defence, that doesn’t get us votes, just blow millions on anything we think might be a headliner and just pay lip service to anyone who queries the dire state of our armed forces.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_827424)
18 days ago
Reply to  Michael Hannah

The only aircraft that comes close to matching F35 in air defence is the F22. The F35s combination of all aspect stealth, sensor fusion and situational awareness, its APG-81 radar, IRST and defenceive aids, weapons and performance all add up to deadly air dominace fighter. Typhoon is superb. But its lack of stealth puts it at a disadvantage straight away. Luckily for us. Both aircraft are on our side.

Michael Hannah
Michael Hannah (@guest_827445)
18 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

The F35 has limited fuel and speed. When it comes to intercepting the bad guys in the North Sea you need an aircraft capable of rapid QRA. The ability to launch meteor at high speed and altitude.
The F35 is an excellent aircraft but when it comes to hauling ass to west of the Hebrides . You need the Typhoon

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_827422)
18 days ago
Reply to  Michael Hannah

I’m not questioning its capabilities. I’m just saying it isn’t cheap to buy or operate. A force mix of Typhoon and F35 offers a deadly combination.

Simon
Simon (@guest_827496)
18 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Unfortunate the cost is the issue. Without a large increase in funding it is very difficult to see how we could afford another batch of Typhoons ( and pilots, infrastructure, support etc )

klonkie
klonkie (@guest_828257)
15 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Hi Robert how are things? I’m keen to understand if these 20 Tranche 4 (and the other 38 on order) are simply replacements for the Luftwaffe Tranche 1? Might you have any insights on this?

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_828345)
15 days ago
Reply to  klonkie

Hi Klonkie. Yes, all good my end thanks. Yes. These new aircraft will replace T1 jet’s. Italy is also retiring T1 jets. Spain has carried out a limited upgrade on its T1 aircraft.

Klonkie
Klonkie (@guest_828454)
14 days ago
Reply to  Robert Blay

Much obliged for clarifying Robert, stay well.

DeeBee
DeeBee (@guest_827321)
18 days ago

It’s amazing that other countries with a far smaller defence budget than ours are purchasing more Typhoons while we are scrapping about 30 of them, reducing the main aircraft strike capability to just over 100 aircraft, as I’ve repeatedly said on here before, something not right about all this, especially with a war raging in Europe involving a serious military power which could easily spiral out of control, utter madness.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827335)
18 days ago
Reply to  DeeBee

Germany has a slightly larger budget than us and was given something like 100 Billion to spend as an emergency fund when the Ukraine war broke out, which has now run out. But that’s why they’ve been able to make purchases like these.
Us meanwhile have had no such fund, and are trying to finish our F35 order and fund GCAP

Moonstone
Moonstone (@guest_827375)
18 days ago
Reply to  DeeBee

Playing ‘Devil’s Advocate’ here while the RAF may be much reduced from what it once was, from a wider perspective NATO Air Forces overall maintain a significant numerical and qualative fast jet superiority over the Russia AF – a force demonstrably incapable of mastering Ukraine’s relatively outdated AF and GBAD. So it seems reasonable to conclude that NATO airpower would very probably rapidly gain a measure of air superiorly Vis a Vis Russia should it ever come down to that – and lets all hope it doesn’t given the lethality of both side’s conventional and nuclear arsenals. So while I’m… Read more »

Michael Hannah
Michael Hannah (@guest_827379)
18 days ago
Reply to  DeeBee

I have also said this. We do not seem to get good value for our buck

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_827425)
18 days ago
Reply to  DeeBee

Because Germany doesn’t have many capabilities that we provide. It’s not just about fast jet numbers.

Robert Blay
Robert Blay (@guest_828344)
15 days ago
Reply to  DeeBee

What we are doing. Is spending £2.34bn. Yes, billion. On upgrading the T2/3 fleet. Currently, 40 T3 jets will get the new ECRS Mk2 radar. Plus many other capability enhancements. This is what we are doing instead of purchasing new airframes.

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst (@guest_827349)
18 days ago

If this were 1937 rather than 2024, would the UK be scrapping 30x Spitfire MkI’s or would it be keeping them and ordering, at the very least, another batch of 20x Mk II’s? Also standing up as many squadrons and pilots ….just saying for a comparison. ….history repeating itself and all that…the fools.. I say keep the UK should keep/upgrade all the Tiffys and order another batch of 60 pronto, and quickly start training/recalling as many pilots as possible. Start grabbing back a few UK aerodromes from developers for active squadron use too, rather than putting everything in a small… Read more »

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827352)
18 days ago

Don’t know what you mean by Beyond money? But currently there is no money or political will for any of that.

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst (@guest_827361)
18 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

…try defence of the Realm for starters, or in simpler terms, Nazi/Putin hoardes raping your mum and sister.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827366)
18 days ago

Not saying you’re wrong. Just stating that unfortunately very few care.

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst (@guest_827370)
18 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

True. Agreed. I’m just making my point regardless.

Dern
Dern (@guest_827487)
18 days ago

I’d be shocked since the Spitfire MkI didn’t enter service until 1938 XD

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst (@guest_827533)
18 days ago
Reply to  Dern

Yes. My bad.1938. But tell me, you do still get my basic analogy and we are not getting lost in pedantic weeds here?

Dern
Dern (@guest_828211)
15 days ago

Hi, sorry have we met? Pedantic weeds is my natural habitat XD

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky (@guest_827493)
18 days ago

Mind you so many mischievous acts were taking place back then even when things were bad it does bear comparison. Napier and Hawker could get ROTOL 4 blade props for the Sabre powered Typhoons because ROTAL was a joint Bristol RR venture, Bristol would transfer its sled valve expertise to solve Sabre reliability and RR doing everything to obstruct non Merlin engine use because if plans had proceeded RR would have had no single engined planes to power. Obviously events went very much in their favour as time passed. But that was very much helped by them totally stitching up… Read more »

AlbertStarburst
AlbertStarburst (@guest_827536)
18 days ago
Reply to  Spyinthesky

My reading of the situation then also was that it depended very much on the individuals’ attitude to the coming war. A lot of “privateer” effort and vision from the likes of RJ Mitchell, and the tenacity of de Havilland to come up with the Mosquito helped get war-winning aircraft in place. The country was running out of time and I suspect people like Chamberlain deliberately stalled for peace to give extra time for British industry to ramp up, and the air defence system to be put in place. My point is that the pre-war period is very similar to… Read more »

Dave Wolfy
Dave Wolfy (@guest_827398)
18 days ago

There will come a point where, because the RAF did not order more Tiffies that we will have to order the new aircraft. Gamesmanship I think.

As a matter of interest, as the Russian air effort (flying and SAM), how much might be because they are keeping their powder dry for some bigger conflict?
NATO or China would need that extra ability that is usually reserved.

Spyinthesky
Spyinthesky (@guest_827482)
18 days ago
Reply to  Dave Wolfy

Yes esp as the choice will be high end or higher end so numbers will always be a problem.

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_827407)
18 days ago

We really should be ordering a new batch to replace the tranche 1s that are being retired. It would support ensuring we had the airframe hours to keep up squadron numbers if the 6 gen offering is delayed.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827415)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

If GCAP is delayed its more likely theyd look at more F35s or even A models. Doesnt appear to be any indication of intrest in more Typhoons

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_827451)
18 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

to be honest if they are looking for cost effective ways to increase mass then the typhoon is the way to go..we have a far better infrastructure to support typhoon numbers than we do for F35b.. I honestly think going for f35A would be a big mistake…although it has commonality with F35B it would still be a completely separate fast jet fleet that would require separate infrastructure…training pipelines, spares as well as its own OCS… Im not against increased F35 but it has to be F35b for both cost effectiveness and maximising the vast investment in carriers. Personally I think… Read more »

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827454)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Typhoon being cheaper than F35 is questionable. And while there is a benefit to consolidated fleets they’re clearly driving towards stealth aircraft, why would they get more typhoons when they’re trying to replace them with Gcap.

Jonathan
Jonathan (@guest_827465)
18 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

Hi Hugo.. the issue is not so much individual cost, it’s also about infrastructure and maturity..the reality is we have only managed to stand up a single operational squadron of F35Bs and the reality is the pipeline for supplying the airframes, time frame to maturity as well as pipelines for training pilots and ground crews mean even if we wanted to get to 4 f35b squadrons its more than a decade away. Gcap is great but let’s be really honest with ourselves we are not going to have an operational squadron until the 2040s and like the f35 we will… Read more »

Last edited 18 days ago by Jonathan
Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827467)
18 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Our industry may well collapse. Its been done before and it’ll be done again. Without a funding increase we won’t have more than the planned 107 Typhoons and 74 F35s
As another post mentioned the retirement of the T1s savings are what’s being put into getting the 2nd tranche of 27 F35s, so clearly we’re having to scrape funds from other programs and active assets.

Last edited 18 days ago by Hugo
klonkie
klonkie (@guest_828260)
15 days ago
Reply to  Jonathan

I agree with your analysis on 12 front line fast jet squadrons ( 4 f35b and 8 typhoon). For me , that strikes a good balance.

Kevin D
Kevin D (@guest_827427)
18 days ago

Let the Germans rearm. They owe Russia a hiding

Frank62
Frank62 (@guest_827696)
17 days ago
Reply to  Kevin D

“Owe”? Only from a Nazi perspective.

Coll
Coll (@guest_827428)
18 days ago

I wonder what we will hear at FIA24

Martin
Martin (@guest_827441)
18 days ago

And we scrapping 30 of ours, umm, that says it all.

Hugo
Hugo (@guest_827450)
18 days ago
Reply to  Martin

The MOD wasn’t given 100 Billion in emergency funds to buy whatever they want.

Last edited 18 days ago by Hugo
Martin
Martin (@guest_827456)
18 days ago
Reply to  Hugo

VERY TRUE, but still a waste of aircraft, but those run the Armed forces must know best.

Frank62
Frank62 (@guest_827697)
17 days ago
Reply to  Martin

More like those who run down the armed forces, i.e. HMG.

Martin
Martin (@guest_827701)
17 days ago
Reply to  Frank62

True but you have to admit the recent loss of C130’s and the fact we have no AWACs and are scraping 30 Typhons does show as sign of inept top people in the RAF,

jack
jack (@guest_827490)
18 days ago

Is the supply chain for Eurofighter still intact?

Paul T
Paul T (@guest_827524)
18 days ago
Reply to  jack

Definitely.

Frank62
Frank62 (@guest_827698)
17 days ago
Reply to  jack

But we’ll probably keep burning our assets rather than wisely buying a few more. Then when the SHTF & everybody else wants combat jets asap we’ll be in a queue.

Bazza
Bazza (@guest_827497)
18 days ago

It really feels like Germany doesn’t have high hopes for their 6th gen fighter project with France.

JJ Smallpiece
JJ Smallpiece (@guest_827499)
18 days ago

Pity the RAF can’t bang in an order for 50 additional Typhoons. Spare the argument that they are 90s jets. We only have to be better than the likely enemy capability.

Quentin D63
Quentin D63 (@guest_827502)
18 days ago
Reply to  JJ Smallpiece

I wonder if any “MOD” persons ever read this ukdj website? There’s some really good sense mentioned here and plenty of spirit, aspiration and frustration too! 🚀 🇬🇧!

Ron
Ron (@guest_827517)
18 days ago

The issue is in to my thinking what the Germans are doing compared to the UK. Germany has 38 T4 Typhoons on order, now a further 20 T5s thats 58 new Typhoons of the latest designs. A further 35 F35As and 15 Typhoon electronic warfare aircraft on order. That is almost if not more than the complete front line strength of the RAF. I also do not think that the Germans will dispose of the 134 Typoons that they have. That gives Germany 200+ combat aircraft. Question, why can the Germans have this type of airpower and the UK has… Read more »

Toan
Toan (@guest_828140)
15 days ago

British Typhoon fleet may soon become the smallest one of the four nations for developing the Eurofighter. GAF:143 eurofighters today, 38 T4 for replacing 33 T1 and 20 additional T4+ or T5. SpAF:68 eurofighters today, 20 T4 and 25 T4+ for replacing F-18. ItAF:94 eurofighters today, considering to buy 24 T4+ or T5 this year. RAF:107 T2 + T3 eurofighters today, retiring the whole T1 without buying any new tranche of Typhoon. German:Typhoon is a silly name for Eurofighter, and why should we let the country with the smallest Eurofighter fleet have the right to name it? We should rename… Read more »

Mark
Mark (@guest_829820)
9 days ago

They are also buying over 3000 Brimstone 3’s.

Last edited 9 days ago by Mark