A recent House of Commons Committee report, titled ‘Aviation Procurement: Winging it?‘, has shed light on the complexities surrounding the Royal Air Force’s (RAF) Atlas A400M programme.
The Defence Committee’s findings have been eagerly anticipated, given the magnitude of its recommendations to the government.
The report observes, “The last of the 22-strong Atlas fleet was delivered to the RAF during the course of our inquiry,” with an added mention of aspirations to “expand the fleet by a further six aircraft towards the end of this decade.”
But it hasn’t been all smooth sailing for the Atlas. The report paints a comprehensive picture, stating, “although a capable aircraft, the multinational A400M programme has a long and difficult history.” The engine, in particular, has seen “significant problems” encompassing issues with the propellor gearbox, combustion chamber, and sensors. This has culminated in “aircraft being delivered late and requiring time-consuming upgrades.”
Facing these challenges head-on, the MoD’s written evidence to the committee remarked that “the availability of Atlas has not yet fully met the expectations from the IR.” Yet, they are not sitting on their laurels, with the situation now “under direct and focused high-level scrutiny with significant improvements demanded before Hercules retires.”
A point of contention highlighted by the report revolves around the Atlas’s underutilised potential. The aircraft, having been designed with air-to-air refuelling (AAR) capabilities, has seen the MoD “chosen not to utilise this capability, instead relying solely on the Voyager.”
This decision traces back to “a contractual undertaking with AirTanker, the company which supplies the Voyager aircraft to the RAF,” resulting in potential financial repercussions if another aircraft is deployed for AAR.
As the “Atlas fleet now complete,” the Defence Committee firmly recommends that the MoD “revisit this issue and bring improved flexibility to the air mobility fleet.” This, if heeded, could pave the way for an enhanced operational capacity for the RAF in the years ahead.
Which is why a voyager and atlas needed to replace one Hercules in the Falklands.
I don’t think that’s the case at least not for a very long time. For many years the refuelling and patrol aircraft at Mount Pleasant have been different fleets. Refuelling is currently Voyager and previously Tristar and before that VC10. I presume you would never want to rely solely on a Hercules. What happens if the Typhoons launch on QRA and the joint patrol/refuelling aircraft is over South Georgia keeping an eye on Toothfish fleets?
The Herc down the Falklands has traditionally had two main roles. Logistic support for the Falklands, South Georgia and the British Antarctic Territories. Secondly it is used for maritime patrol.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I’ pretty sure I read that the PFI contract that the then Labour Government signed regards refueling (officially £10.5 billion cost till 2035 but was upgraded to £12 billion in 2010) had it written in concrete that only Airtanker PLC can refuel RAF aircraft and that if the RAF purchased other means to refuel RAF aircraft, they would have to compensate Airtanker PLC.
Oh here is what Parliament thought of the airtanker deal in 2010
I had understood it only covered refueling of fixed wing aircraft. I haven’t seen the contract but it should be available somewhere as all public contracts are required by law to be published.
Most of it would be ‘commercially confidential’ there is nothing very confidential about: it you couldn’t work out for yourself.
Yeah large parts would redacted under banner of commercially sensitive (aka something not in the national interest) or national defence (someone got a backhander). Luckily we have the national audit office that at least tries to push back on that type of thing.
Commercially sensitive= we don’t want to tell you because you won’t like it and may hold us to account…
Just doing a little digging into airtankers and i came across this from 2021:
Rolls-Royce, Babcock sell stakes in AirTanker defence businessLONDON, Sept 13 (Reuters) – British engineering companies Rolls-Royce (RR.L)and Babcock International Group (BAB.L) are to sell their minority stakes in UK military refuelling jet-owner AirTanker Holdings to Equitix Investment Management as part of efforts to reduce debts.
Rolls-Royce said on Monday it agreed a 189 million pound ($261.39 million) deal with the private infrastructure investor for its 23.1% stake, while Babcock is being paid 126 million pounds for its 15.4% share.
a little further digging reveals the director of Equitix happens to be:
https://i.postimg.cc/5t8mjDHV/Opera-Snapshot-2023-09-10-181558-equitix-com.png
for some very strange reason, I dont think the above has the security of the Uk in mind when it comes to defence. But hey it just goes to show how the Tory gov is more than happy to sell anything and everything in which to line the pockets of their mates. Expecting the son in law of India to bend over backwards with his real masters over the next few days in which to further degrade the Uk, not to worry thou useless in Scotlandistan and khant in Londonstan will also do their fareshare.
ooo you cynic you 🙂
Only where Air Tanker can do the refuelling. If they can’t because of location, kit, clearances that isn’t an issue.
If they can’t deliver then it is open season.
Also there is a carve out for joint operations. So we can take on USAF fuel without penalty if we are working with them.
Granted it is a silly contract but at least the capability exists and is substantial.
Correct, but it only covers the Probe and Basket, and the PFI is currently well under the red line as the contract is a worse case cost. so not allowing Rivert/P8/C17/E7 is a bonus,
This makes zero sense. They talk about difficulties with atlas and yet have just retired the c13. Either issues are over and all is golden or they aren’t and the c13 fleet is needed, both can’t be true.
How much do you think giant A400 is employed?
It is about time the 1977 Unfair Contracts Act, was updated to include PFI & giant multinational tech companies.
Spot on John …
The trouble with that is, how on earth would future ministers involved get their golden handshake (non executive directorship), without such a clause….🤔
Unfair Contracts Act doesn’t apply to commercial contracts.
Businesses are deemed to know what they are doing.
The main issue is with SME’s being ripped off by BigCo.
The unfair contracts act created the precedent that unfair contracts can be challenged. It was for unfair renting contracts. No reason why it could not go back to Parliament to include other things, such as PFI & tech giants.
If COVID hadn’t happened, it would be interesting to see what we could have afforded. The timing was truly diabolical. Just as we had cash again after the recession, away it went!
Nothing more for defence anyway. Perhaps debt would be smaller. The government would of spaffed any cash on other things.
Let’s just get the “aspired for” 6 contracted and delivered quickly and get those equipped with the ASR capabilities! Come on you bean counters, cuts save money, war costs a hell of a lot more!
agreed Airborne- just get it done!
ASR bloody hell, AAR!
If the rumours about the contract really do limit air refuelling to only using their aircraft or pay £££££’s, then so what ? Just outfit the A400m with the plumbing required and buy the kit for a dozen or so and train on just one airframe.
Because to be perfectly the contract goes straight out the nearest window if War breaks out or we are heading that way.
Inter arma silent leges
I think this is just another example of the MOD/RAF hiding behind an unpopular agreement signed by someone else as an excuse. Same as with the FSSS contract going international “because of the EU” when it had nothing to do with that.
My understanding of the Air Tanker contract is that there is no charge if they are unable to fulfil the task. So, for example, rotary wing aircraft, any fancy special ops low level stuff, anything that needs a boom (because we chose to save money and not tick that option), or if the tankers are out of position.
A400 would theoretically tick every single one of those boxes, and so there’s no reason to hide behind the Air Tanker contract as a reason for not kitting it for refuelling. Just admit you were trying to save money.
Agreed. I believe the RC135s get refueled by tankers from Mildenhall once airborne, as an example.
The German A400m are on refuelling missions daily over Poland for NATO Air Policing and over Jordan for Anti ISIS. However, they only refuel with the drogue system and so they cannot be used for the boom operated F16 and F35.
Nevertheless, it should be a rather cheap addition to add this capability for the UK fleet, too.
I once saw a photo of an F-16 with an underwing drop tank that had a probe sticking out the front, so it could air refuel with the hose & drogue system.
I’m very late but I can’t resist pointing out that the UK’s Voyager fleet HAS NO BOOMS INSTALLED!!!!
Literally, UK’s MRTT’s are all drogue only, I fricking lost it when I learned this tidbit myself… They’re probably the only MRTT’s in in service that don’t have the boom too…
Germany is defo using A400 for refueling a lot, then again they’re building a fleet of 45 aircraft so they might as well use them too.
But germany does also own 4 MRTT’s as well, with boom of course lol, they form part of a multinational tankerfleet, to maximise efficiencies and flexibility.
But the P-8s and the small F-35A force to cover nuke-sharing are already covered. I think that’s the only platforms that require boom refueling,
We should be thinking about adding a boom to the existing AAR fleet, before equipping the A400 fleet for AAR, in my view. Plans exist for a boom to be fitted, do they not? Current tasking probably means our Rivet Joint and Poseidon fleets can meet sorties on ‘one tank’ or use a US refueller but is it not another capability gap because these planes can’t be refueled mid-air by our own?
RAF asked if the booms could be added, to a fleet it doesn’t own. ????? RAF top brass desire a back hander and a case of whisky. Air tanker crews can be pulled from anywhere and reserves with little to no training, FLYING A BOOM none in RAF existence
Easy Tongue in Cheek solution if its refuelling RAF aircraft Transfer the Rotary wing Chinooks to the Army stop the sale of the C-130Js bring them back into service with the Feet Air Arm akin to USN to refuel the RNs Merlins and Army Chinooks RAF then kept out the loop
doesn’t work, Transport falls under RAF pop why the navy wouldn’t but Osprey.
With one A400, l’armée de l’air is able to deploy 3 Rafale + equipment at 2800km from starting point in One flight.