A video released by Andrew Snowden MP has sparked bemusement after he accused Labour of misunderstanding fighter aircraft while misidentifying one himself in the same video.
The short video, filmed outside BAE Systems’ Warton site, features the Conservative MP asking: “Do you know the difference between a Typhoon and an F-35″ before accusing a former Labour Defence Minister of not knowing.
Do you know the difference between a Typhoon and an F-35? ✈️
Do you know the difference between a Typhoon and an F-35? ✈️
The Typhoon is a British-built fighter jet, supporting 6,000 jobs at Warton and securing the future of UK sovereign defence. The F-35, on the other hand, is largely American, with only a small portion produced here in the UK. 🛠️
We need to keep up the pressure for British aircraft, British skills, and British jobs. Every Typhoon ordered strengthens our local communities and ensures the UK remains a global leader in combat air. 🇬🇧
Posted by Andrew Snowden MP on Friday, September 26, 2025
He goes on to describe Tempest as “the future of global combat air,” while the footage on screen shows an F/A-18… an American fighter unrelated to the UK’s combat air programmes. An amazingly ironic blunder and observers were quick to point out the error.
The Tempest project, led by BAE Systems with Leonardo and Rolls-Royce, is part of the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP), a multinational effort involving the UK, Italy, and Japan to develop a sixth-generation fighter aircraft by the mid-2030s. The F/A-18, built by Boeing, is a decades-old fourth-generation design.
The gaffe came after the UK confirmed plans to acquire 12 F-35A aircraft, instead of more Typhoons, in addition to its existing F-35B fleet. The F-35A, which has greater range and payload capacity, will support NATO’s nuclear-capable aircraft role, while the F-35B continues to operate from the Royal Navy’s Queen Elizabeth-class carriers.
Snowden’s video was intended to highlight British aerospace capability and criticise Labour’s perceived lack of understanding. Instead, it drew attention to how easily politicians of all parties can stumble when discussing complex defence procurement programmes.
The mix-up is a reminder that the details matter, especially when billions of pounds and strategic credibility are involved.
I’m happier that an MP is engaging with the defence debate at all.
Yes, whoever edited the video used the wrong footage.
At least this starts a debate that can be fed into.
The whole argument around buying the ALPHA variant is very suspect when not enough of the BRAVO variant are held for the taskings.
There is also a valid point around why APLHA were bought rather than Typhoon and instead creating make-work to keep skills alive ready for TEMPEST.
Feeds into the fact politicians are a/ defence blind b/ thick as mince and c/ more interested in soundbite than UK defence.
The F35A is for Nato nuclear tactical use, not for sovereign UK use. It cannot refuel from Voyager. As for the rest? Once you accept the UK is totally banjaxed in most areas? You have reached reality. A condition that most seem to deny.
I find that a very strange analysis.
UK CSG is a few short investment steps away from being very, very useful to UK and NATO.
We’ve also sorted the T45 issues so those are superb assets and we have T26 in production – a universally loved design.
Other NATO countries do the freefall bomb thing so I’ve no idea, and nobody else has, any idea why UK getting involved adds anything to anything. It just dilutes focus on one if the things we have invested in very heavily.
Politics, SB! What else did Starmer have to offer in Paris? We are not expanding our military like other nations, just talking and Grandstanding.
12 As made headlines, which was the intent. As you know, they will mostly be used for training.
Starmer should be laughed out of town at NATO, but isn’t, for one simple reason.
We have Trident.
I seem to be the only one on here who thinks buying the A version for N bombing is a sound Idea.
It’s got the all important Stealth where others dont.
It also gives another threat which focuses minds.
Having said that though, We really should buy more Typhoons and B’s, Can’t understand the lack of numbers given the current threats.
Hi mate.
I think it a great idea if:
It did not come at the expense of the B. Which it does, affecting Carrier Strike.
More than 12 were ordered.
We had our own bomb.
We could refuel them ourselves.
Without those, it is gesture politics so typical of HMG.
You sometimes layer the sarcasm on so liberally it’s hard to know what you think without referencing previous postsl the capitalization here was capital.
The two best things to be said for the F-35A announcement was first, that it was just an announcement. Second that it won’t be quite as disasterous as it first seems. It depends on the size of the OCU. How many more planes overall will it need to cope with the fact that an A can’t always train for a B, and that once or twice a year half a dozen Alphas will stop training pilots and go play nuclear with their NATO buddies? If it’s not too many, the damage will be limited.
I suppose the worst thing about the F-35A announcement was also that is was just an announcement. When will MOD order some new fighters?
I suspect you might find a lot of us have reached reality. Some of us just aspire to more, so feel free to criticise us for our rampant hopefulness if you want.
First of I agree with supportive any MP highlighting defence is good and I’m not really bothered about a cut and paste mistake if the message is correct but…
As usual this MP is only focusing on a simplified question and creating a this or that reductionist argument.. F35Bs and Typhoons are vital for UK capacity not one or other and we have about 50 to few of each realistically ( we should have 250 single seat fast jets) … so that should be his point of debate, but he knows his party is as weak on this as labour so will only argue for how the reducing pie is cut not how it will grow…
No news really I bet we can all find mistakes in any video online.
I have an idea that probably sounds stupid and I will probably get a few answers (and will be happy)
What about creating squadrons of let’s say something like tucano as anti drone interception units?
What are the pros and cons??
Thanks everyone and have a good Sunday.
Lack of radar. Speed, endurance, defensive aids, secure comms and datalinks to name just a few. Just because some drones are relatively simple machines. Doesn’t mean they are easy to intercept.
Hi mate.
All true, but some are. Did you see that footage from Ukraine with the ww2 vintage nusiance prop and a passanger with a shotgun or something?
Flew alongside or behind and above, got quite a few if footage to be believed.
Hello, good question really, I just think It’s impossible to know where any Drone attack might happen and You’d need an enormous amount of Tucano’s and pilots dotted around this “Small!” (it’s not actually) Island(s).
Thanks for the good Sunday wishes, I was getting all geared up for an epic ride down to the South Coast but the Wife said She’d prefer if i cleaned the toilets and Shower !
Current thinking is, Why did I get Married and why did I buy a house with Toilets and Showers.
They haven’t decided to order F35A instead of more Typhoons. The just haven’t ordered more Typhoons.
Yes Robert, that whole statement is wrong, F35B’s are not just for Carriers either.
I see the Irony in the Article about the Irony !
It exposes the incompetence of his aids, surely.
If you’re making a military related video, shouldn’t someone have sought professional advice?
I’m a nobody, and Id have told them for £20. Bargin.
As an ex Tory voter, they have not a leg to stand on regards Defence. But the MP will be as clueless on that as any other.
Aides. Please can we get an edit function back.
Thanks everyone, I’ll keep thinking.. 😆
Also interesting that, as usual, the wider plight of the military is lost to MPs over the jobs angle.
So although they represent their constituencies, they are hopeless for wider improvements.