The Strategic Defence Review outlines plans to significantly enhance the UK’s strategic and tactical airlift capabilities, with a focus on relieving pressure on core military assets and increasing flexibility across the air mobility fleet.
Central to the recommendations is a proposal to augment the existing fleet of A400M Atlas aircraft, either by procuring additional airframes or supplementing them through civilian charter and sponsored service options. This approach is intended to reduce routine demand on RAF air transport that does not require military capability, freeing up military platforms for high-end operational and contingency roles.
The review explicitly states:
“Augmenting the existing fleet of A400M with either more A400M, civilian charter, and/or sponsored service options, reducing routine demand on RAF air transport that does not require military capability.”
It goes further to suggest broadening the strategy beyond the A400M, encompassing the RAF’s Voyager and C-17 fleets, and integrating commercially sourced aircraft for both logistical lift and air-to-air refuelling roles in non-contested environments. This dual-track approach aims to improve readiness, offer better value for money, and ensure the RAF retains critical mass and resilience in strategic mobility.
“Augmenting the RAF’s fleet of Voyager, C-17, and A400M aircraft with civilian charter options for transporting people and cargo, and for air-to-air refuelling in non-contested environments would offer greater flexibility, efficiency, and value for money.”
The recommendations reflect broader themes across the review — namely, the adoption of public-private partnerships, improved productivity through better asset utilisation, and a shift toward modular, adaptable logistics models.
This marks a significant step change in UK defence logistics planning. The RAF’s air mobility fleet has long faced scrutiny over availability rates, with the A400M programme in particular subject to persistent delays, low mission-capable rates, and rising maintenance burdens. By expanding capacity through mixed fleets and commercial arrangements, the review positions the RAF to meet a rising tempo of global operations without overextending its core force.
Would making greater use of the 5 Air Tankers we have on the books but seldom seem to use not be the first thing to do here? Don’t get me wrong, I want a bigger military, like most on here but that seems an obvious first action to take?
Chartering civilian planes more often could be a positive, as cuts down the wear on the more expensive military assets but does have the negative of meaning less air hours for crews.
Absolutely the idea of retained aircraft and ferries was a core part of cold war planning.
It was implemented by Treasury soft loans or later by Treasury guarantees as this cost almost nothing and there was a low risk of them being called on.
It also meant that a buy British policy could be enforced for various platforms.
One of the best things the RAF could do is order a squadron of C-295 CASAs to supplement the A400 & C-17 fleets. There are many scenarios where large transport aircraft are overkill, and the smaller CASAs would give us the capability to deliver smaller cargo and personnel loads to areas that aren’t equipped to handle a larger platform. They would be much cheaper to operate, and reduce the strain and flying hours on the other squadrons
Does make the premature disposal of the C130 fleet look a bit silly.
“Augmenting the existing fleet of A400M with either more A400M, civilian charter, and/or sponsored service options, reducing routine demand on RAF air transport that does not require military capability.”
This parapgraph is badly written.
It is a bit…
Yea, I remember reading that one a few times myself. Is the last part an objective in itself? Or is it being touted as a benefit of the prior suggestions?
Either way, I don’t think it makes sense.
If the military adds more capacity that does not ‘reduce routine demand on RAF air transport that does not require a military capability’.
Not sure where we are with operational Voyagers at the moment. I think 12 out of the 14 are in service. The other 2 are still in commercial operation.
If we baseline capacity (when no other operations are in play) with an operational fleet of 12, we have 1 permanently based in Akrotiri and another in MPS for AAR duties. In addition we have another 2-3 Voyagers tied up on the weekly milk runs going between BZN and AKI and BZN and MPS.
This uses 5 of the 12 available fleet. In addition we have another Voyager configured for a VIP role and that reduces the available pool of aircraft to 6. If we than allow for a 60ish% availability of the remaining due to short and long term maintenance that gives us an available fleet of 3-4 aircraft to support tanking operations for the 3 Fastjet airfields we have in the UK.
Throw in an operational deployment to Eastern Europe or a flight to Bahrain and suddenly we have gaps between requirement and capacity.
In a darker world where operational readiness is more desirable we could mitigate this gap by bringing all the Voyagers into service.
In the long term we shouldn’t mix rare, specialised requirements such as AAR with commonly available resources such as passenger transport.
The RAF could easily outsource to commercial operators or lease and operate less complex passenger aircraft to do its milk run routes.
The Voyager contract with AirTanker is expensive and operationally limiting and seems to have been written by either the corrupt or the foolish.
The MOD/RAF have been doing just that for years with the regular trooping flights that demand high turnover of personnel even when we had more airframes together with large cargo loads. We need Tactical airlift a plenty with the right mix as has been said above an A400 is often an over kill for many loads (why o why did we let the C130’s go??????) and of course a rewrite of the tanker agreement which would allow the A400’s to undertake the role also thus releasing the Voyagers to serve where they are needed around NATO (those booms need to be fitted too to both support the large aircraft of the RAF but also NATO). Ah well perhaps one day someone will wake up in the MOD and sort the mess its in………………..!!!!!!!
Apart from Belgium & Luxembourg the UK is the only Atlas operator whose fleet is supplemented by a smaller aircraft: C130, C235 or C295 although the KC390 would be a nice addition.
It’s a shame we to have a Voyager permanently based in the Falklands because if it wasn’t for the Airtanker contract, 2 x Atlas’s could be deployed to the Falklands & used for transport, SAR, MR & refuelling the Typhoons which has got to be cheaper than operating two different aircraft types.
The Voyager in the Falklands is primarily for Refueling duties,which the A400 cannot do,that is why it is there. No Airtanker contract = no Voyager.Your first sentence makes little sense.
Sir Liealot, “When funding is available”…The SDR remains an unachievable dream sheet. Sir Liealot quotes, “War Footing” perhaps a pre-amble Wrng O for tax rises. All froth, no beer…