Conservative MPs have called on the government to commit to new Typhoon fighter orders for the Royal Air Force, warning that Britain risks undermining its credibility as a leading manufacturer and exporter of military aircraft.
Following the £8 billion agreement for Türkiye to buy 20 British-built Typhoons, Shadow Defence Secretary James Cartlidge asked whether the RAF would receive replacement jets for the 30 tranche 1 aircraft that have been retired. “Does the Minister plan to order any further Typhoons for the RAF to replace those, and if so, when?” he said.
Cartlidge also pressed for clarity on key upgrades for the existing fleet, including the long-delayed E-Scan radar and associated phase 4 enhancement (P4E) package. “E-Scan radar for the RAF’s Typhoons, which is led by Leonardo in Edinburgh, has been successfully developed, but no production orders have been placed,” he told the House.
“When will E-Scan radar be in service for the RAF? The Typhoon needs an associated electronics upgrade known as P4E to fully exploit the capabilities of E-Scan radar, but I understand that no contract for that has been placed yet either.”
Andrew Snowden, the MP for Fylde, whose constituency includes BAE Systems’ Warton plant, said the Turkish deal would sustain thousands of jobs but highlighted the irony of Britain selling aircraft it no longer buys. “We are now the only major partner in the Eurofighter project that is not ordering the aircraft that we are trying to sell to other countries,” he said. “We are trying to sell aircraft abroad that we are not buying ourselves.”
Snowden urged ministers to place a domestic order, arguing it would strengthen export prospects and preserve the UK’s sovereign design and production capability. “It would be a great aid to future export deals… and would continue to boost our sovereign capability in military aircraft and maintain jobs across our country if we placed that order for more Typhoons for the RAF,” he said.
Defence Minister Luke Pollard responded:
“The hon. Gentleman will know that all our spending announcements will be made as part of the defence investment plan towards the end of this year. The radar he mentions is an incredible piece of technology, which is of benefit not only to the RAF, but to other Typhoon nations.
I gently point out to the hon. Gentleman that, since taking office just over a year ago, we have signed 1,000 major deals in the MOD. We continue to procure not just traditional aspects, but cyber, drones and other capabilities for our armed forces.
We will continue to work with our allies because the change we need in our armed forces is not just about renewing the kit and equipment for our forces, but about buying equipment alongside our allies, cutting research and development costs, increasing interoperability, moving towards interchangeability and strengthening our warfighting resilience.”
The debate followed the Prime Minister’s visit to Ankara, where the deal with President Erdoğan was finalised. Ministers have hailed it as “our biggest fighter jet export contract since 2007” and a demonstration that “defence is an engine for growth.”
The government says the contract will sustain 20,000 jobs across 330 British companies, including nearly 6,000 at BAE Systems sites in Lancashire, 1,100 at Rolls-Royce in Bristol, and over 800 at Leonardo in Edinburgh. However, with no current RAF order in place, MPs warned that the UK must match export success with investment in its own frontline capability if it is to retain credibility as a global defence manufacturer.
He didn’t say none will be ordered, but he did dance around the subject, here’s hoping they follow Germany and order more.
Just publish the DIP FFS. “Towards the end of the year” they say, well Um Derr, it is “The end of the year !
Eagle used to say “wait for the SDR.”
It’s just delaying tactics mate, maybe because as usual MoD probably don’t have the foggiest what money they can rely on before HMG/HMT pull the rug.
It keeps happening.
Notice it’s gone from autumn publication to end of the year.
Rachel for accounts is probably holding it up.
They’re not going to ask for even one more, I hope I’m wrong.
When Starmer announced the Increase earlier this year, he looked like he was in pain and about to burst into tears (tiers).
Have you got a bike ?
“The hon. Gentleman will know that all our spending announcements will be made as part of the defence investment plan towards the end of this year. ”
What is this? Some kind of pre-budget purdah, where Ministers refuse to answer questions until a particular report day? It’s not a tough question, lying in the minutiae of the figures. Are you planiing on ordering more Typhoons? It’s a yes, no, we haven’t decided type of question. Why the need to wait on the spreadsheets for that?
Parliament has to be allowed to hold the government to account and always being told to wait for the next report is not an acceptable response.
Probably waiting to see what’s finally in the budget. But if we are committed to increasing defence spending, the plan should be finalised first on military grounds with the overall budget subsequently tweaked as necessary.
The secrecy of the budget pre announcement is a long tradition. There is no good reason to do the same with defence. Even if the complete plan is yet to be finalised, clear decisions already made should be revealed now.
The RAF doesn’t want them, that’s why. They’d much prefer the shinier Lightnings.
Is waiting for new Lightnings worth it with its limited weapons fit? Isn’t a pragmatic new Typhoon order what’s needed right now? Why not some more radar upgrades? Is the RAF really saying this? Why are Germany, Italy and Spain ordering the latest iterations then? Why can’t there be both Typhoon and Lightning? Why not a few more P8s ams E7s to help track Russia’s new nuclear toys?
Sorry? Lots of questions, you don’t have to answer just a bit of a rant…
It’s about money at the end of the day. If we wanted 24 new Typhoons. That will be 10bn thanks, for that one capability. And we have a lot of projects that need more cash. Other nations don’t have the nuclear commitment that takes up a huge chunk of money. And as other commentators have said.I also think if the MOD did have a spare 10+bn for fast jets, that would go on more F35s. I may be wrong. Well see what the equipment plan reveals.Id like more of both. But the budget only goes so far. And Tempest will need a very large budget.
It not really 10bn when you factor in the tax they will get back from the companies making it and the income tax from the employee’s working on it but it still a big chunk of money. As you say, it should all be revealed soon if there is a commitment for more typhoon and or F35, any new jets would be better than nothing at this point.
They also need the money for 40+ new fast trainers. That won’t be cheap either.
The US red hawk is reportedly $20m each so 40 of those is “only” $800m.
I don’t know what the right answers are here but ref F35 I assume they’re pushing it back as long as possible due to the current hardware not being block 4 compatible and I think that’s the right choice.
It results in a calamitous carrier situation where we are tied to the B variant, have no alternative carrier compatible fixed wing options and are now tabling ideas of bespoke platforms and lightweight catapults in order to fill in AEW and refuel which to me is just another money pit resulting in flawed capability.
Theres something of an argument to be made for 200 red hawks @ $4bn and having them armed to fly alongside eurofighter / f35 for homeland / low threat environments.
Mainly we need a coherent, realistic long term plan that is funded and stops leaving capability gaps and orphaned projects.
We’re getting Sergio value on our spend at the moment as we try to spread the funds too thin and then end up having to lifeex old platforms and then gap capability cut replacement numbers resulting in a cycle repeating.
All other carrier aircraft options are all less capable than F35B. Except F35C. Which is exactly the same capability. Granted, it carries more fuel. Fast jet training will require around 25-30 aircraft. And 12-15 for the Red Arrows.
Not really true, both F18 and rafale can buddy refuel and have less issues with bringing payload back to the carrier. They also have higher availability rates and less maintenance.
Add to that much better weapons integration.
Huge question mark over the decision to have only a very small fleet of F35B’s and to subject them to the corrosion of a maritime environment. It will be extremely interesting to see what state the aircraft deployed on CDG25 come back in and how their availability rates look over the next 12 months.
I personally wouldn’t have put practically the entire serviceable fleet of stealth aircraft out to see for a round the world photo op.
Being dependant on the F35B leaves the QE carriers unable to get their aircraft out far, limited AEW visibility and a lack of stand off / anti shipping weapon combined with the ongoing inability to carrier the UK’s premier BVR air-air weapon leaves the carriers so vulnerable that you would be insane to deploy them without either a French or US carrier group.
The Chinese and Russians can launch on a QE battle group entirely out of range of the F35’s and any defensive weapons a T45 is carrying. Its pretty obvious the UK is holding off ordering more F35 until Block 4 is sorted which I would say is sensible but its also going to mean the carriers will continue to be just for show for many years to come. They’ll probably need a mid life refit by the time they are able to deploy with a significant air wing with a threatening weapons integration.
I now fear we’re about to spend a whole chunk of money trying to come up with some way of refueling these things and some sort of STO AEW solution which will have exactly one customer worldwide and as such will cost an absolute fortune and probably never work to spec as budgets are blown and contractors realise there is no alternative
Deploy without the French carrier? they only have a part time carrier force. I’ll take F35 any day over Rafale or F18. And so would any frontline fast jet pilot
“I gently point out to the hon. Gentleman that, since taking office just over a year ago, we have signed 1,000 major deals in the MOD.”
And let me say that I await with bated breath the report that details these. Can anyone even hazard a guess at what the Minister for Defence Readiness and Industry is talking about? We all watch Defence pretty closely. Do any of these major deals have anything to do with buying kit for the UK military, and if so what?
Interesting statement.
Stationary? Toilet roll supply? Most will be continuation deals regards equipment support I guess?
I really must start a proper list as I’m struggling, most of what is coming through was ordered before this government came in.
53 Jackal E.
Modini Dart Drones and FPV types.
Unspecified order for small number of “ISTAR aerial platforms” was it 3 or 5?
10 Sky Sabre Launchers or Systems ( uncertainty due to HMGs own duel use of terminology.)
???
Perhaps scrapping all those ships and aircraft needed more deals than we’d thought.
In other words Pollard wants to support sales of the radar ideally without spending money on new RAF Typhoons.
Why not support more RAF radar upgrades too not just part of the fleet? Its like the same thinking only giving 60 of the 148 new CR3s their Trophy active protection kits. Do they not think that the other units may not need the same at some point and at very short notice? All this “Increased lethality” including defensive abilities is very “partial” in many places.
Of course, money to the MIC remember, growth of industry and all that.
If Industrial Strategy doesn’t provide sustained demand that enables investment there won’t be capability and capacity just as USN has found out with efficient shipbuilding aligned to the Peace Dividend delusion.
Further if you want over match capabilities the cost of doing what has never been done before will not be cheap. Cheaper than the alternative of attritional kinetic war, but not cheap.
Openness and transparency sound great governance but capability can’t be public knowledge and still over match the adversaries so has to be secret. Thus public support is at risk because the taxpayer doesn’t know what it can do, and probably won’t understand the value even if they did know. So value for money is inherently in doubt, which isn’t good.
The $500 wrench is a meme, despite taxpayers not being aerospace engineers who understand why equipment must be calibrated before use to ensure the accuracy and safe results everyone expects. The loss of $100mn aircraft and $10mn crew due to maintenance errors puts a different value at risk.
The planes we have retired and sold should be replaced with new Typhoons. We should keep up are aircraft numbers. We should order more F35 too. We are ordering some F35A for nuclear strike, but need more F35A for the FAA and RAF. The early batch of Typhoons ghat have been retired are lost numbers for the RAF and need urgent replacement. This would also cover the gap between now and the next F35 delivery.
Normally I oppose most of what Labour does by default, but I understand why they aren’t ordering more Typhoons.
They want to focus on the next gen fighter the UK, Japan and Italy are working on, plus acquiring the remainder of the F 35
Why waste money on an aging design?
Because Typhoons can do what F-35s can’t, such as fire a proper stand-off missile like Storm Shadow.
Boeing are still building and exporting F15s. The Israeli airforce recently flattened Iran with a force that was 90% non-upgraded 4th gen fighters with no AESA. Typhoon + Meteor / Brimstone / Storm Shadow works. To the best of my knowledge F35 in RAF service has yet to fire anything in anger
Not true, they have be used by the Royal navy to bomb ISIS positions in Syria and Iraq in the past
Operation Shader buddy. Been used loads.
There is no space in the RAF’s Fast Jet Combat Aircraft budget to buy more Typhoons. The budget only runs to 6 or 7 new aircraft a year. The current plan is:
* The remaining 23 F-35Bs to bring the total to 62: 2026-2029
* The upgrading of 40 Tranche 3 Typhoons with the new European Common Radar System: 2028/9-2032
* The 12 F-35As: 2032-2034
* The first Tempest, planned for 2035
That is the budget all spent, the equivalent of 56 new aircraft over 10 years (counting a Typhoon upgrades as half an aircraft, as each is costing around half a new aircraft).
There is no chance of getting more fighters unless there is a dollop of new money.for defence.
I think there has been £2bn extra for defence this financial year and £5bn.a year for the next two years. A lot of that has already been committed:
* A good pay rise for service personnel
*.A fairly extensive programme of barracks and family housing refurbishment
* Improvement works at the 3 RN bases
* The creation of.6 (?) new armaments factories
* Raising cadet numbers by 30,000
* One or more new storage depots
* A big UAV/UUV development programme, which looks like.6 or 7 new unmanned systems
*.A further jump in the cost of the nuclear programme
and so on. Basically, the new money looks to be going to sort out the foundations, which is long-overdue, and to get us into the drone age, where we are currently not at the races.
I would think that is the £5bn of new money pretty much accounted for – and that’s without factoring in the current £7-17bn procurement black hole inherited from the last government. So basically there is no spare money lying around for more Typhoons, Challenger 3s, naval escorts etc.
The DIP next month may shed some more light on procurement. What is missing is a clear picture of how short the services are of personnel and kit and what HMG and MOD’s long-term plan is to rectify things. So far, the SDSR is a lot of wuffle. There is no sense of a clear guiding mind setting out a coherent plan for the future. I think the problem.lies with civil servants who now run every aspect of defence policy and procurement and view things through the lens of balancing the books for the current financial year. They do not have the knowledge or military experience to look at the bigger picture and prepare the forces for what could be a shooting war in the next 5 years. The CDS and chiefs of staff should be the ones driving that, but they are not in the driving seat, the senior civil servants and civvy personnel are.
I’d simply scrap / delay the 23 extra F35B. In reality only 1 carrier is in Carrier strike mode at a time. Maintaining RAF combat mass in Europe is more important. In any case F35 Block 4 is not available until the 2030s, and neither are British weapon integration. Why rush out to but them now?
The risk otherwise is no assembly work at Warton in the period 2026-2029, skills will atrophy and you have an Astute-style challenge when ramping up for GCAP
The DIP will be based on 3%.
What’s your source for that Paul? If true, should be very informative, as we get a glimpse of how the MOD proposes to spend a 25% increase.
When I ear budget debates in UK, I almost feel home, it is pretty much like in France.
No Typhoons will be ordered for the RAF, sadly, unless a war starts in the next few months.
Although it’s a bit rich the Tories pressing and acting all concerned on this, given in 14yrs they didn’t order a single Typhoon.
The Peace Dividend delusion is over and we are not safe.
Time to pay the insurance premium for freedom or learn ruzzian according to CDS.
The Peace Dividend delusion has allowed politicians to safeguard their electoral prospects by shifting Defence spending to social provision and even war in Europe hasn’t enabled them to pivot back to Defence.
We bailed out the bankers in 2008 and now its their turn to invest in UK Defence since their business depends on peace and stability. Lower risk means lower cost for Defence Investment Bonds than standard Gilts.
Thus the 3.5% GDP Defence spending target for 2030, and 2.75% GDP for 2026 are affordable without tax increases. A long term investment plan for national security.
Over to Rachel from accounts to make it happen. The other lot failed so she can do better as our freedom depends on it.
Correction: The radar upgrades to the 40 Tranche 3 Typhoons will reach IOC in 2030, not 2032. The new AESA radars.will be constructed by Leonardo by 2028 and fitted by BAE by 2030.
Wouldn’t £10bn be sufficient to develop Taranis into a highly stealthy deep penetrating spear head able to deliver “effects” deep behind enemy territory under control from a Typhoon operating at a safe distance?
Could it get verified to carry tactical nuclear weapons if operating in continuous partnership with a typhoon at distance?
In fact, are stealthy manned fighters still needed if loyal wingmen under AI can be controlled at safe distance from an E-5 or a typhoon for instance?
Just a few thoughts.
Automated kill chains with conventional weapons are horrific enough (Skynet) so automated nuclear detonation is still not acceptable. I suspect that AI will be on board missiles to react and evade countermeasures at the speed of technology but mid flight correction including aborted attacks will still be required.
Logically the loyal wingman only needs to get targets approved by wetware taking into account everything that the sensor network and C2 tells them..
Rafale F5 approach 😉
US air force also dropped the idea of a stealthy loyal wingman. They just want more drones. Game changing weapons days are over.
Mass and Quick adaptability win the day, peace time hobbies are over.
The RAF plans to retire Typhoon jets by 2040, whilst Lightning II aircraft will remain in service until 2069.
The UK would be wasting money buying additional fourth generation Typhoon aircraft to depreciate them over 15 years, when for a comparable unit price it can buy fifth generation Lighting II aircraft and depreciate them over almost three times as long a useful life.
Those same F-35s can currently only use a very limited number of weapons and no British weapons at all.
They’re limited to AMRAAM, Sidewinders and gravity bombs, unless we buy American munitions, that undermines our own weapons industry.
The solution to the problem you raise is to resolve the delays in getting the F35 updated to take a wider range of weaponry.
Choosing to acquire military assets that have the same unit purchase cost but which only last one third as long as their rival before they are written off does not solve the problem.
It creates an additional financial burden for the MoD to bear as the Typhoons depreciate.
That’s not a solution we can achieve, though.
The delay is entirely with Lockheed Martin. And they’re not going accelerate Block IV just for us and our few dozen aircraft.
Why would the Typhoons only last a third of the F-35s? It’s not like 2040 comes around and we immediately retire the Typhoons; 2040 will be when we get our first Tempests, and they’d replace the oldest Typhoons.
Any new Typhoons we get now would be the last to be replaced, probably closer to 2050.
Also, you’re talking of depreciating assets but that ignores one vital thing: they’re weapons for war, which may come sooner than we’d like. We need to expand the RAF combat fleet and can do it for sooner with Typhoons – that we can build ourselves – than with F-35s. If we ordered 30-40 more F-35s we’d be waiting years longer to get them – our order would be added to the already-long list LM has. We’re not getting bumped up the list when they’re already backed up.
With Typhoons, we could order them today and receive the first of the new batch next year – all capable of operating Meteor, Storm Shadow, SPEAR etc.
It is the only solution, Steve.
As you say the delay is with Lockheed Martin.
They are contracted to provide the aircraft. They must be held to what they are contracted to do.
The date of 2040 is chosen by the RAF’s own analysis of when Typhoon will be obsolete. Typhoons are already being retired now, never mind them all being retired in 2040.
If you wish to send UK pilots into combat in obsolete aircraft that is a choice for you to explain. I wish to avoid that eventuality arising.
We do not build Typhoons independently.
We build our agreed share of them within the multi-national coalition that formed to design and build the aircraft, and they are then assembled in the country responsible for arranging the sale.
The depreciation of military equipment reflects its erosion in value with the effluxion of time. The exact same as occurs for non-military equipment.
In essence depreciation reflects military reality. Summed up well in the phrase don’t bring a knife to a gun fight.
You’re advocating a Gloster Gladiator order in 1938. I suggest ordering the Supermarine Spitfire instead.
Typhoons aren’t being retired because they’re obsolete (they’re not): they’re being retired due to budget cuts and the oldest units being knackered from use – because we had fewer than we originally intended.
Why exactly do you think the Typhoon is obsolete? Other countries are buying them still, the US is still making and buying F-15s and F/A-18 Super Hornets.
Because they’re still effective when upgraded, and having an entirely Gen-5 air force is proving to be far too expensive. F-35s would be used on Day 1 of a conflict, Typhoons can easily go in once the worst of GBAD is suppressed or destroyed, along with Gripens, Rafales, Eagles and Super Hornets.
Typhoons are less than 20 years old since entering service, and they’d still absolutely wipe the floor with any Russian aircraft.
The RAF has retired its Tranche 1 Typhoon fighter jets, with the exception of those in the Falkland Islands, because it is choosing to spend its limited budget on its priority assets. Not those it sees as past their sell by date.
Even your advocacy of the Typhoon sees it as fighting a future war by being kept away from enemy fighters and air defences to give it a chance of surviving.
That isn’t equipping the RAF to win, it’s supplying it with a second best aircraft at the same unit price as its modern alternative, which is depreciated three times faster, and needs to be kept away from the fight to let it survive a future conflict.