The UK’s decision-making regarding the F-35, a fifth-generation multi-role stealth aircraft, has come under sharp scrutiny in a Defence Committee report titled ‘Aviation Procurement: Winging it?’.
The report cites, “The F-35 is a fifth-generation multi-role stealth aircraft capable of conducting air-to surface, electronic warfare, intelligence gathering and air-to-air missions simultaneously.“
Notably, the RAF and the Royal Navy operate the F-35B variant, which boasts short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) capabilities, suitable for both land and sea operations.
However, despite its capabilities, there’s growing criticism regarding its procurement. By 1 May 2023, the UK had only received 31 of the planned 48 F35-Bs from its ‘Tranche 1’ order.
A subsequent ‘Tranche 2’ order will bring an additional 27 aircraft, totalling 74.
The report pointedly notes, “There remains ambiguity about plans for the F-35 fleet in terms of its eventual size, operational deployment, and attribution; and there are ongoing concerns about programme costs and force growth rate.”
Witnesses in the report have raised concerns over the UK’s decision to scale back the F-35 order, which stands in stark contrast to the 2015 Strategic Defence and Security Review’s envisioned fleet size of 138.
The report culminates in a stern call to the MoD, emphasising the need for transparency: “The MoD must be transparent and realistic about the eventual size of the F-35 fleet… and should also make clear whether it is attributed to the Royal Navy or the RAF.” The overarching sentiment is clear: questions abound, and answers are demanded.
Since Block 4 is delayed, isn’t it actually better to delay acquisition of new F-35B cabs until the full-fat version can be ordered, instead of the one that needs topping up later?
I think so.
F-35 is a successful disaster , basically won lots of orders due to no stealth competition and countries wanting USA protection.
But the whole program would have been a giant failure if there was competition.
Competition from whom? Germany, France, the UK? The EU? Russia tried and failed. Further, the US didn’t need partners. It could have financed and manufactured the F-35 on its own. It learned. That’s why, there are no foreign partners in NGAD. Two, maybe three prototypes are flying and a contract for manufacture is planned to be awarded in 2024.
If it did not need partners then why did it bother having them in the first place? Why invite the UK in and give us a 15% workshare for just £2 billion R&D.
Perhaps the reason the US can out build China on stealth jets is the vast supply chain stretching rights across Europe and Asia.
I’ll hold my opinion on NGAD but solo US high end projects like Zumwalt, SeaWolf, F22 and B2 have a habit of spending billion and producing a handful of platforms.
F35 is the only major US project to buck this trend in recent years. Maybe those partners are not so useless after all.
Not sure of your list, B2 and Seawolf produced small numbers because of the “Peace dividend” resulting in Program cuts, so not really the fault of the project just changed political views on defence spending. F22 is arguably the same and also a victim of Iraq 2, Zumwalt on the other hand…
The value for International partnerships for the US is that it makes projects harder to kill off by politicians.
LCS ? 🥴
Does that even rate being called a military procurement?
Well they were bought by the Military but the LCS 1 has been a complete disaster. As for the LCS2 Independence class I actually think they may prove to be a worthwhile purchase,
Big, Fast, decent self defence capability and with shed loads of space and power they may just end up being the ultimate MCM Motherships that can deploy just about anywhere quickly.
Thing is F22 are not able to be updated. The updates done recently in optronique reduce the stealth advantage, the plateform is an aérodynamique brick, that does not respect aera laws (physics), so acceleration is a nightmare, only solved with afterburners. The plane is « great », but need a large fleet of tankers. Besides, it cannot easily communicate with other planes and need very specific runway conditions to fly. Is it really a war machine… In specific conditions, it could be good, in many, many other conditions, it can simply not be used. This as probably to do with the program cancelation, even more than peace dividend.
The F-22 is collateral damage from the F-35 program, that’s well established. However, it is neither Non-upgradeable or an “aerodynamic brick”.
its performance speaks for itself, it is anything BUT a brick.
As for range, that’s just what you get when you go for all-out performance and stealth, there are no current exceptions, not one. What’s the range of the Rafale, SU-35, EF or really any other fighter on internal fuel only? Stick a couple drop-tanks on the -22 and range become less of a talking point.
As for not being able to be updated: That’s not only absurd,it’s patently false, as the world will soon see with the next round of updates. Billions of $$$ diverted out of F-22 to F-35, combined with a small fleet size, combined with the fact that unlike the F-35, it is not a NECESSITY that it have all of the same wizbangs that have hampered the F-35 for 2 decades, and you have a platform that has been passed over for upgrades, year after year. Too many people think that because it hasn’t been updated, that it can’t be – For the aforementioned reasons, it was chosen NOT to upgrade. It’s a shame, but it sure makes the case for a brand new , shiny, $300Mil 6th-gen; which in the end, is really what it’s all about.
I agree that with external fuel tanks F22 could go further. Though the architectural constraints for update, be they physical or related to hardware have been a recurring theme of discussion.
Though, french pilotes have great respect for the plane.
Good interesting post Raptor. I believe LM destroyed the production tools/jacks. so no chance of restarting the production line, mores the pity.
“Thing is F22 are not able to be updated.” (sic)
Incorrect
A lot of the US only projects have been utter disasters and it’s only the US profligate defence spending that has not made it a complete disaster…the replacement for the ABs was a serious problem and the US is now stuck with building on a 40 year old hull design that is showing its age and is not really up to high end ASW as well as a handful of hyper expensive white elephant destroyers..when the rest of the world ( apart from Russia) is putting new hull designs into the water. The F22 was an opportunity for western air dominance into the 2050s..nothing has been built that can outperform it..the US went alone and there is now a couple of hundred air frame and a shut down production line…200 air frames is strategically meaningless…a 1000 air frames with Japan, Aus etc using it would have left china with massive problems as is china will be fighting f15s/f16s/f18s and a few Few F22s and F35s….it would not have handled F22s and F35s combined in large numbers….it can handle F15s and F16s etc.
BINGO! Well said
i believe there not actually prototypes of a finished design but test beds for the cutting edge tech and to decide on a finished article
I wonder where the UK will be in the lineup for the new engines and at what cost to us including aircraft costs going forward.
“TR-3 provides the computing backbone to enable a suite of new capabilities known as block 4”
Block 4 is now scheduled to complete in 2029 and that was prior to the notice of the current TR3 delays now happening in 2024. So. at best, Meteor/Spear 3 will reach FOC in 2032/33 if we do not have any more hiccups with the software or the emgines.
“Asked whether the Air Force would be willing to try again on pursuing an adaptive engine if Congress provided more funding, service Secretary Frank Kendall said, “No, we’ve made our decision.”
WASHINGTON — The Pentagon expects that an engine upgrade offered by Pratt & Whitney for the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter will be ready to field in fiscal 2030 and officials hope that all customers — foreign and domestic — who fly the jet will pitch in to fund its development, according to a spokesperson for the F-35 Joint Program Office.
“The projection to complete the engineering and manufacturing development phase and required testing is seven years from the start of the pre-Preliminary Design Review activities, which began in fiscal year 2022. Fielding is expected to begin soon thereafter, tentatively late in the first quarter or early in the second quarter of fiscal year 2030,” JPO spokesperson Chief Petty Officer Matthew Olay told Breaking Defense.”
LINK
Block 4 is the version of F35 that can fight?
Nope… Block 5.3.5.9, that’s the one that will fight! 🙂
Q: what kind of steal would we get if we just went to LM: If you give us good enough VFM, we will order 98? £10bn? the expected order for 26 is expected to be 6bn, so if we can get + 300% value for only 170% of the cost, good deal
LM still expect us to order 138 so I’m not sure they would be in a negotiating mood. Better to leave numbers vague until we figure out drones and Tempest, 74 is plenty for the carriers and SEAD.
And always rely on the good ole USMC until theFAA gets their full Squadron frames
The Japanese seem to have gone for the F-35b and a versions for a mixed (42 b and 115 a ; probably cheaper) force which will eventually reach a fleet strength of around 150 which is really where we ought to be. Eapecially given the higher payload and range of the a version. We have a lousy combination of extremely poor procurement standards and lousy financial interest from successive governments which have left all branches of our forces far too thin on the ground.
Navy lookout website pointes out this week that none of our SSNs were at sea and were all tied up alongside in Faslane or Devonport.
Yes, that was the case or a short while, but a Astute sailed earlier in the week, presumably as part of CSG23?
Be in no doubt that we are in a bit of a jam regarding SSN availability, as 2-3 of our force are awaiting a much needed docking with none currently available. The US is in a worse position, yes they have more SMs, but also have vastly more tasking to contend with. Its not a good look.
Agreed.
“Lets not spend money on building a dry dock or two …’ Until it’s too fcukin’ late!
Hi Barry,
its not that we haven’t got the docks, which we have, its more the point that they are in need of some much needed redevelopment, especially to accommodate the new Dreadnought and SSN(R) classes.
Babcock the owners of Devonport dockyard obviously have the contract (£1.5 billion) to redevelop the site. The site around 5 basin(only part of the redevelopment) which contains 8-15 docks (no 13 as its presumably unlucky) is being upgraded not only for the new SM classes, but also for future new ships – T26, FSSS, MRSS, T83 and a SSN de-fuelling facility for scrapping older SMs to name a few. Its a huge undertaking. which unfortunately will take time and has had a fair share of delays.
On the SSN front, we had to wait for Triumph to finish her refit (2022) before any work on that dock could commence. Not sure if the MOD made a conscious decision to start work after Triumph, knowing that we would have no dock available until its ready? Not sure how long it will take either, but, I imagine its at least a year, as the entire dock needs relining/rebuilding to accommodate the new larger SMs. The other SM dock currently in use is for SSBN refits, and Victorious is about to go in there.
The old North lock (11/12 docks) complex which used to conduct SSN maintenance is now being re developed to accommodate ships I believe.
The only other facility that can accommodate a SM for maintenance is the ship lift in Faslane, which whilst not exclusively used for SSBN work, isnt equipped to conduct long term docking type maintenance as is currently required for the A boats sat alongside in Faslane. Due to the current situation with SSBN availability due to Vanguards issues, SSBN’s take priority in the ship lift. Like I said, a bit of a jam you might say.
Thanks Messers. However, if a decent type like yourself knows this why not the MoD? Forward planning means something, something, … Really, I am a bit lost for words.
It’s a good that the Russians are in an even worst state and the Chinese SSN’s are two oceans away from us.
Better to keep the SSN”s near to home and ready to surge instead of spanking them for a non existent enemy.
Let’s see what Mr Shapps does or does not do in relation to this saga. Methinks, time for the UK to resurrect Harrier ii I think. Might be quicker. Some serious silly buggers going on here. Why weren’t these drama’s forseen?
I think we should have kept our Harriers till F35s were at full strength, although be it a long wait ,sadly in the UK we do have a habbit of getting rid of our capabilities before there time take a look at Hercules .🙄
We just spent a £10 billion creating a stealthy Harrier with numbers in the hundreds and a massive UK export success employing 25,000 in the UK.
Why would we want to do anything else.
Not loosing carrier ops know-how.
I think the accident with F-35 had much to do with that hiatus
I maintain the UK should have 96 A and 48 B models. And get those bloody voyagers equipped with a boom!
Part of the large F35B buy, is that Japan are worried that China would take out the majority of their airfields if things kicked off and China got in first with a first strike. There thinking is that with the B version they can be dispersed to smaller airfields and even roads if need be. They are also looking at converting their “helicopter carrying destroyers (DDH)” Izumo and Kaga. These ships will be reclassed as aircraft carriers that can carry helicopters and F35Bs, although this is in violation of the Japanese Constitution. The Japanse Government responded saying that they needed greater mobility and flexibility in defending our islands!
We dont need F35a we have Typhoon, the entire point of F35 was for the carriers.
Has HMG actually said they were scaling back the original 138 figure – or are we all speculating?
Who’s to say there won’t be a Tranche 3 or even Tr4?
A decision past 74 F35B’s will be decided in 2025. It largely depends on Tempest. If that project is cancelled or the timeframe shifts significantly, then that increases the chances of more F35’s being purchased. Tempest will replace Typhoon in the long term. So the long term fleet is potentially a Tempest system/F35 mix.
I have a feeling Tempest will get canceled and replaced by a reduced number of manned F35 and some form of UCAV that’s maybe UK built.
Hope I’m wrong but I can’t see the defence budget stretching enough. Japan is full of big talk but it’s defence budget is still smaller than ours and their economy is f**ked. Italy is in much the same boat. Saudi writing cheques it can’t cash all over the ship at the moment.
I hope I’m wrong but then a bigger F35 fleet with a proper UK UCAV would not be the end of the world.
I think we are in a better place now than we have been in recent years, we are working with Italy and Japan on tempest, Canada and Australia with the T26, AUKUS subs with Australia and the US. We are showing ambition and Tempest will be the future for the RAF. The biggest threat to Tempest I see is it being merged with FCAS that France, Germany and Spain are attempting, we need to keep out of that as we will end up with about 30 jets in 2050+.
What cheques are Saudi writing exactly that they cant see through with? Didnt realise the nations bank balance was publicly available.
Thanks Robert.
👍 Cheers Graham
No and they never will because they don’t want LM trying to cancel UK production contracts. If Tempest does not go ahead which is highly likely then we may end up with more than 138 as we buy the A or a future D model to replace Typhoon.
Why might Tempest get cancelled?
There was a very good article on Navy Lookout about the findings of the report into the loss of the aircraft during CSG21.
Basically, the long story short is that the force too small to cover both land based and carrier ops as the personnel are too few to undertake the additional work associated with carrier ops. Also, there is extra training requirments placed on both support staff and aircrew for carrier ops that requires considerable investment in time and money, both of which are in short supply given resources currently available.
Whilst I believe that the RAF and RN have achieved much in regenerating naval fix wing capabilities the force size is clearly way too small if we are to properly support the carrier capability.
It seems to me that we need as force of at least 3 squadrons, preferably 4, with one or two focused on carrier ops and the one or two deticated on land based ops. I wouldstick with the B variant so that in an crisis have the option of exploiting the dual role potential of the F35B and rerole a land ops squadron to carrier ops. I think that would require a force of at least 96, probably a few more when you consider the need for operational training and maintenance pools.
Never happen, sadly, but we can but hope.
Cheers CR
74 will be enough for carrier operations and whilst it’d be great to see 24 embarked for a CSG deployment right now the delay with block 4 software doesn’t support the idea of trying to accelerate the delivery schedule.
Beyond that F35 is complicated and expensive to run and a mix of constraints and compromises.
If additional money was ever on the table better to buy a top up of around 30 tranche 4 Typhoon’s and/or put more into developing Tempest.
I think the problem was the pretty lofty ambition to procure 232 Typhoon’s AND 138 Lightnings back in the 90’s and early 00’s!
Totally agree, Spain just ordered 25 more Typhoon for a very good price.
What a surprise.
Otu
What you say is correct. Defence wins no votes*. However, uncollected tax and reforming uncosted tax benefit reliefs would help cover a lot of our defence spending needs.
*People – historians even overlook that the Munich Agreement was very popular ‘… right left or centre …” – Jessica Mitford.
Just buy B s for the carriers and a few for the RAF.
Then make up numbers with the cheaper A or C variant.
Its what Japan has ordered, a mixed fleet makes more sense.
So 48 F35B that struggle to generate more than a dozen at a time for carrier operations?
The appropriate version for the RAF would be the A, not the C as that is the carrier version for the USN.
If we make up numbers with more A that means no Tempest.
HMG will not make the money available for both.
It is Tempest or F35A. What do you choose?
Tempest Daniele every time, part of its requirement is increased range something a lot of folks overlook.
We should just go ahead and buy the planned 138 instead of doing the usual UK bale out leaving us short! Tempest has yet to become anything more than drawings/models and is likely to be delayed by sometime once they get (if they ever get) a flying prototype which will lead to years more development as they try and iron out all the problems that will emerge with sensors, hardware and software, in addition to any structural issues……
Tempest has already seen billions poured in for some pretty detailed and advanced design work.
It’s not just a few drawings and a wooden mockup for industry events and with Italy/Japan (probably Sweden and others) signed up it stands a good chance of controlling costs through collaboration and economies of scale.
I’d read £10 billion is already earmarked in future years expenditure for the next stage.
Paul wrote:
As Challenger elucidates, work has progressed from the drawing and model stages to actual testing of the different parts which make up the aircraft:
https://i.postimg.cc/2ysFqgJf/img371.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/4xbqg173/img372.jpg
The 138 figure was first stated over a decade ago? Everything about the forces has shrunk since then. I expect the 138 figure to no longer be valid, but what should it be now? More than 74?
Russian air force performance in Ukraine does somewhat blunt this report. Rather more pressing I suggest is the Type 23 crisis. It is objectively pointless spending millions on a re-vamp of these ships. These must be scrapped in the next one to two years. All of them. Then what?
I was going to add to the frustration and anger expressed here, but lets be honest, I’d simply be preaching to the choir, instead here is how the subject is expressed in the (military interested) media:
https://i.postimg.cc/wvV9bf1p/img367.jpg
https://i.postimg.cc/mkkWpbxY/img368.jpg
There is a typo in that 2nd page . It should be Type 23 in 2nd column about refits.
Thank you for the post.
https://i.postimg.cc/qMGZhP90/img369.jpg
Honestly we could spend 40% of GDP on defence and if Putin loses his shit it would not make a blind bit of difference. The UK a would be gone in minutes no matter how big our forces were.
Putin already lost all his shit in a conventional war and he managed to get 40 miles into the first country before retreating. Somehow I can’t see T14’s running down Whitehall.
People in the UK rightly want to pay as little tax as possible and enjoy decent public services.
They are happy for the UK to contribute to the western lead global order but we have little need of much bigger forces. We face almost zero conventional threat.
It would have been better if the RAF had the F-35As and the. Royal Navy could have had the F-35Bs. But once again the British government doesn’t see the bigger picture.
Think we definitely could have built our own stealth fighter if governments invested into our Aircraft industry over the year’s.We have the people the Technology and plans .Even with our American friend’s there’s bits of kit on the F35 there well not allowe us to have ,or with out going through lots of red tape .Guess we can laugh now 🤗🤗 🇬🇧
There is no chance. Name another country of Britain’s size that has a stealth programme.
Whatever the outcome.. minimum order the UK 🇬🇧 needs to compliment 2 aircraft carriers is 96. This also includes a training squadron. If the original 47 tranche 1 aircraft are upgraded at a later date the latest Tranche so be it.
Personally losing only 1 aircraft so far goes to show how good the aircraft is.
Once QE and POW are working well and if the Russian and Chinese threat are still there we would need a 3rd carrier and all 138 aircraft.
People have said we should wait and make sure the F35B’s are at the latest Version/tranche. We have the capability to upgrade all aircraft in this country.
So keeping costs down as all aircraft types evolve.
Well stop giving Putin trumpet India, £1.5bn of our hard earned for a kick off.
And it is Putin who is poking the wasps nest by invading Ukraine.
Two aircraft carriers not enough for one, one F35 version splitt between FAA and the RAF even less on carriers. Not the of tax payers money
The UK should avoid big new orders of F-35, until the new radar, improved engine & cooling are available. That won’t happen until 2028-32. For now, we should just order 5 new F-35B, so we have 48 ready for operations, until the new better versions come along. We should keep fast jet numbers up by retaining the tranche 1 Typhoon & giving them the same update as tranche 1 Italian & Spanish Typhoons.
With Typhoon I’d rather we updated the 67 Tranche 2 as we plan to update the 40 Tranche 3 and use Tranche 1 for spares in the meantime. The upgrades planned for Tranche 3 applied to Tranche 2 will mitigate against both Tempest IOC being much later than currently planned and allow us to go longer until we order more F-35B so as not to spend a fortune updating them later.
As it stands the only Aircraft our carriers can operate is the F35B, there is no Sea Typhoon or Naval Tempest now or planned. So for the next 20 years we have 2 Carriers with too few Aircraft to either defend themselves or project and meaningful force.
Tempest is land orientated and our 2 partners are fully on board with that, and both will operate the F35B for their Naval flat tops.
So the answer is obvious commit to buying more F35B Block 3 now and update to Block 4 as and when. But meanwhile buy 36 plus Tranche 4 Typhoons to tied us over till Tempest comes online.
I actually look at the Tempest project and to me as an engineer (but not Aeronautical) it makes perfect sense.
The UK has its issues but there is one thing we are quite simply World beating at (sorry if that sounds like a Politician). We are great partners to work with and both Japan and Italy know that.
The US is a nightmare to deal with as they literally suck the life out of a project with endless price hikes and delays to furnish advantage to their own home grown products. The exception to that rule is the SSBN / SSN partnership, some of that is Political but mainly it is because we have a habit of bringing things to the playing field that level it (not going into details but some are obvious).
Germany has Political issues that effectively slow progress and limit export opportunities.
France is a bloody self centred, egotistical, bull headed bunch of narcissistic lunatics who don’t like working with anyone even if they are paying the bill (just ask the Aussies).
Mark my words the Franco/German project will never deliver, Germany will back out and buy US,, Germany is already backing out of the MBT project.
As for Tempest we just need Sweden to join and that just works beautifully.
Meanwhile buy some bloody aircraft for the RAF and FAA.
Totally agree, Spain has just ordered 25 new Typhoons for 1.4 billion euro’s……… the RAF needs more aircraft and this sort of purchase would keep BAE lines going prior to Tempest coming on line. F35B will be an amazing bit of kit when the new software comes online and Spear3 etc can be used, it will be a game changer. I just don’t understand why we are not investing more heavily in defence in the current climate.
I guess the question is, how much does it matter? F35 is primarily procured for the purpose of defeating higher end enemy air defence. The chances of us being involved in such a scenario without the Americans is pretty low. The numbers we have are adequate for any smaller country we would fight alone
Problem is we don’t have enough pilots either. In a real world situation these aircraft are too complex to be repaired or piloted by normal people. Really we need a fast jet version of the spitfire so that if anything happens we have enough pilots.
Well at least one carrier may have a full compliment of Aircraft over its 50 year lifespan. Its got to a point now it is embarrassing.
I expect we would usually only deploy one carrier on operations – so does it matter?
As the CEO of Lockheed Martin UK – Paul Livingston – acknowledged back in December of 2022, the UK is refusing to exercise its options and accept delivery of current production lot F-35Bs due to lack of money. They are also delaying procurement of E-7s and A400s for the same reason.
‘“Just to be clear it’s not our deliveries that are slipping, it’s when the MoD are choosing to take their options in those [current] production lots,” he said. “That has been a change.”
Livingston offered no explanation about why the MoD made the decision, but “affordability” has since been clarified as the cause.
…
“At the moment the UK has taken the decision to take its near-term purchases and spread them out further. That is part of the 48 already on contract, so those delivery dates have gone. We were expecting eight, eight and nine [UK aircraft] in the next three [production] lots, but it is nowhere near that,” he said.’ Breaking Defense, Tim Martin, December 2, 2022
I want to see fully combat sized drones of say taranis size operated in trials sooner than later. It’s the future of carrier warfare and the u.k must be at the forefront of development we can and must put faith in projects like the contender argent conversion into the production process. Forget all the fads around mother ships and concentrat om making the navy a viable entity and I not one that highlights the need for the Americans to cover us. The army according to an American general has ceased to be a top level organisation.every time money need finding, the RAF. loses an entire class of aircraft