Exchanges in the Westminster Hall debate on Typhoon sovereign capability highlighted cross-party unease over the UK’s long-term combat air posture.
Andy MacNae, Labour MP for Rossendale and Darwen, argued that the UK should aim for a balanced force structure rather than an either-or choice between Typhoon and F-35.
He said that maintaining domestic fast-jet manufacturing aligns with decisions taken by other Eurofighter partners, noting that “Spain ordered an additional 25 Typhoons… Italy ordered 25 to replace its tranche 1s… [and] Germany placed an order for another 20 Typhoons.” MacNae added that those nations had “protected their domestic fast jet manufacturing capability while ensuring they have a mix of capabilities to address the full range of conflict scenarios.”
Mark Francois, Conservative MP for Rayleigh and Wickford, pressed him on the operational implications of relying heavily on US-managed programmes. He argued that the UK remains constrained by American priorities within the F-35 enterprise, telling MPs that the integration of the Meteor missile has been slowed because “American systems have been prioritised.”
MacNae replied that his concerns were validated by an NAO report and said “there is no doubt that sovereign capability means maintaining all the controls to deliver the independence and resilience that a tier 1 nation surely requires.”
MacNae also linked the debate to regional industrial strategy, emphasising the importance of aerospace employment in Lancashire’s skills pipeline. He said “the fact that we can go into schools… and talk about some of the best engineering and technical jobs in the world being just down the road is invaluable” and argued that ordering UK fighters would represent “the ultimate vote of confidence” in the workforce.
Conservative MP Ben Obese-Jecty, who represents Huntingdon, welcomed the Turkish order for 20 Typhoons but pressed Ministers on workshare, delivery sequencing and long term support. He said the programme generates significant economic value, citing “£1.4 billion in export contributions annually and over £30 billion of value to the UK economy” and described Typhoon as a central element of sovereign manufacturing.
Obese-Jecty asked how many of the 154 Eurofighters awaiting delivery across partner nations will be assembled at Warton and what measures will prevent skill fade before Turkish aircraft reach the final assembly phase. He also queried long term support for export users, pointing out that Turkey will still be receiving aircraft as the RAF approaches its current 2040 out-of-service date.
He told MPs that clarity is needed on future upgrades, including radar, defensive aids and weapons integration, and said the phase 4 enhancement package appears unlikely to be fully defined in time for the coming defence investment plan. He argued that “with the best will in the world, we know the Government are not about to pull the trigger on a domestic Typhoon order” but maintained that Typhoon will remain central to UK airpower, quoting the Minister’s previous statement that the aircraft will serve as “the backbone of the UK’s Combat Air Force until at least the 2040s.”
Glad the pressure is growing to order more Typhoons, I feel like the pressure may actually work.
I suspect the decision one way or the other has already been made.
Here’s hope the right decision was made!
Sadly, not a hope in hell. There is little evidence of meaningful progress in new kit for British forces in addition to programmes already commissioned. Even then, how safe are those projects such as Boxer, Ajax family and CH3 and as for the Boxer-mounted 155mm gun…..no one appears to know where the hell that is! The rest of the key European states are demonstrating new procurements, and Germany is looking seriously at mandatory enlistment for over-18s.
The govt would probably prefer more Typhoons – economic growth and UK jobs. Trump and the RAF and would prefer more 5th gen F-35s. Given that we are short of readies it looks like the compromise will be to cap the F-35B order and say order a dozen more of each F-35A’s and Typhoons.
Paul, forgive my vitriol, but I’m irritated by the lack of forward activity in rebuilding the British Army. Some people in power may not care too much about the well-being of our troops, but if called upon in the next few years, a large percentage would be carried into conflict in museum vehicles and that angers me hugely. Imagine if it were their children on the front line and exposed to the latest military technology? A FV432 might be an exciting ‘Drive a tank Day’ experience, but not something you would risk young lives in. Yet, that is the blunt truth FV432 or Bulldog, an equivalent to a Snatch Landrover and we all know what happened to them in battle! In the New Year, I want to see Ajax IFV progressed to the point where an order can be placed and a modern replacement for FV432 family selected. At least our troops can receive the best vehicles to face whatever they are called to do.
Well Maurice, you are entitled to your anger, it’s righteous. That said, I do think there is ‘forward activity’. It’s just that ‘we’ ( govts, MOD, the army, circumstances) got ourselves into such a hole it’s taking a long time to dig ourselves out. FV432 sums up the problem really – introduced in the 1960s. We have a Classic Car mentality. Sad to say but as a nation we have a cultural problem with what the Americans call ‘shorting ourselves’. ‘Intelligent’ motorways, schools built with aerated concrete…the list is endless. We don’t seem to understand that you get what you pay for and that it is cheaper to do things right first time.
On the plus side there have been good decisions: rejoining Boxer program, CR3, Ajax, NMS deal for protected vehicles, the Patria program. Many say we missed the boat with CV90 so Warrior will have to soldier on until the Ajax IFV? Not everyone is happy with the RCH decision – ironic that Ukraine have I think brought 60 of our supposedly unserviceable AS90s into use. I agree your point about vehicles. Patria and Nurol Makina need to deliver as fast as possible.
I understand that, but as a Swede I hope as long as The Labour Party is in power UK becoming weaker. Cuz I don’t want your Muslim state to have any military power.
Well, I’m not sure whether you’ll like anyone but one of the two blue parties… Cos the Lib Dems are useless, Greens, worse than Labour… Labour, well, they somehow won by losing, so there’s that.
A new order of about 20 T4’s will reduce airframe hour usage.
Airframe hour usage will go up once all the 53 Tranche 1’s are retired, and removed from operational use. The Typhoon fleet would increase to 127 with a new order, relieving airframe hour usage.
I do believe that ship has sailed on more orders for Typhoons for the RAF. We should have ordered 24 5 years ago. Now the RAF has F35 capability experience. It know were it would put its money given the choice. And its just a simple fact the pot isn’t big enough to do everything we want. Buy more Typhoons. Upgrade the 107 we have currently got. Fund more F35s, plus blk4 and new weapons. And start proper funding for Tempest. All set against a backdrop of a struggling economy and lots of other very important defence projects that need funding.
The big problem, is that for the F35 to be of any real practicable use in a peer vs peer conflict, it needs weapons. Which unless we buy off the shelf US ones, it won’t have until the TR4 update is rolled out. Even then there will still be a delay due to the pecking order and priorities. At the moment our F35s are acting as very good sensor platforms, has a decent air to air capability. But is hamstrung in its lack of ability to conduct SEAD/DEAD, anti-ship attacks, or stand-off air to ground strikes.
Anyway you dress it, our F35s are not fulfilling the role that either Harrier GR7/9 or Tornado GR4 undertook in close air support or interdiction. Typhoon on the other hand has been doing both of these roles due to the integration of Brimstone and Storm Shadow. You could argue that with Paveway, the F35 can provide close air support, but do we really want to put a very expensive jet in such a risky environment. When really if it was required, it should be launching a stand-off weapon. But as Typhoon being part of Eurofighter consortium, means we have a lot more say on what and how weapons are integrated.
The downside, is that Typhoon is nowhere near matching the F35’s radar cross section. Meaning it faces significant risks when flying against a modern integrated air defence network. If we had a dedicated SEAD/DEAD aircraft, then Typhoon would stand a much better chance.
New close air support role, Korean F-50?
At this moment in time, it seems that the current government cares even less about the Armed Forces, than the last bunch.
This is all well and good but has anyone been reading the reasons the USAF is cutting its orders for F35A ? To put it simply they have far to many that can’t be economically upgraded to Block 4, in service costs to operate are through the roof, spares shortages and LM seems to be incapable of delivering just about anything to rectify any of these issues.
Meanwhile the RAF is trying to buy more of these very expensive shiny new toys rather than Aircraft using any thin excuse they can think of (Nuclear Iron bomb with dual key !). And they want more of these rather a proven Aircraft that we can add keep updated and know can actually carry out their intended missions !
Unfortunately unless we buy US weapons or convert the Carriers to either STOBAR or CATOBAR we are saddled with the worst of both worlds Stealthy Aircraft with no stand off weaponry and far too few UK Aircraft that can carry them !
I do find the observations of the Ukrainian Armed forces about western kit quite interesting they just say some of it is very good but so complicated to operate, support or fix they prefer simpler more robust systems. Hence they don’t much like the Abram’s, Leopards or PZH2000 but do like the Bradley, Gepard, AS90, CV90 and oddly enough our old CVRTs. Sometimes things that work reliably and do the job adequately are better than the newest, shiny, hi tech bit of kit.
IMHO I’d reverse the decision to buy the F35A and buy the full 25 F35B, buy sufficient US weapons for them and put them under the FAA. Then buy a new Tranche of 24/36 Typhoons and update as many of the others as we can, I’d also start singing “suicide is dangerous” regarding a new Nuclear Iron Bomb and talk to France about integrating their improved ASMPA-R on Typhoons with a UK warhead and a joint targeting plan.
Unfortunately HMG still seems to believe that F35A to join the Shared Nuclear Agreement to carry B61-12 is a really great deal within the projected 5% GDP Defence spending agreement that #47 likes.
That doesn’t make much sense because there are many members of that Agreement with suitable aircraft to carry B61-12 already. So no kind of game changer, more RAF looking a bit desperate.
Since RAF Lakenheath already has USAF squadrons able to carry B61-12, it’s of negligible added value that the US B61-12 is carried by RAF F35A rather than a USAF F35A.
Whereas new modern Typhoon would be of real use, not just hypothetical. Safeguarding sovereign capabilities is also important.
The purpose is to deter RF from using their tactical nuclear weapons because many NATO members will throw some back.
“We’d love to buy new Typhoons. Unfortunately we have the world’s population to support financially. Giving away our territory isn’t cheap you know, and we’re slowly paving the way to paying billions in reparations because half our Cabinet has an agenda” – Labour
Some facts for the virtue signalling happy clappers that think 3-4 “world class” weapons can win a war.
Just think what we could do with Starmers Chagos money.
Or the foreign aid budget,or the illegal invaders hotel bills.
Correct. 100%.