In a recent Defence Committee oral evidence session on aviation procurement held on Wednesday, May 17, 2023, Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton provided updates on the delivery of F-35 fighter jets and the future plans for their procurement.
The committee, chaired by Mr Tobias Ellwood, engaged in a discussion with key witnesses, including Minister for Defence Procurement James Cartlidge MP, Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton KCB, and Vice Admiral Richard Thompson, Director General Air at DE&S.
According to Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton, the UK has successfully delivered 30 F-35 jets to date. By the end of 2025, the total number of F-35s is expected to reach 48, including the replacement for the aircraft lost last year. Additionally, a commitment has been made by the Department and the Government to raise the number to 74. The delivery of these additional aircraft, referred to as “tranche 2,” will commence before the end of the decade, with completion expected in the early 2030s.
The committee sought clarity on the final number of F-35s the UK plans to acquire. Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton confirmed that “all 74 aircraft would be F-35Bs”. When asked if this would be the end of procurement, he explained that a judgment would be made in the middle of the current decade, taking into account progress made and decisions regarding the future combat air system.
Mr Jones, a committee member, expressed concerns about the UK’s initial plan of acquiring 148 aircraft and questioned the need for maintaining the aspiration of reaching that number. He emphasised the importance of honesty and suggested that “acknowledging the necessity of 74 aircraft for NATO commitments, rather than clinging to an unattainable target, would be more beneficial”. In response, Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton clarified that the original plan was for 138 aircraft, but the decision was made in 2010 to reduce it to 48. While it remains plausible to reach 138, it depends on future combat air system decisions.
The discussion then shifted to working with allies and the potential for collaboration. Mr Jones highlighted the value of deploying aircraft carriers with both US and UK assets, considering it a force multiplier. He urged for honesty regarding the total number of aircraft, suggesting that “surpassing the 74 aircraft mark was unlikely”. Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton reiterated that a decision on additional procurement would be made in the mid-2020s, considering various scenarios and the future combat air system’s impact.
Regarding the capability of the F-35s in meeting NATO air policing commitments, Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton confirmed that “the current plan for 74 aircraft would be sufficient”.
He stressed the importance of not just numbers but also capability, emphasising the need for “investment in enhancements to Typhoon and the F-35, as well as advancements in uncrewed capabilities through the Future Combat Air System”.
Addressing the mix between the Navy and the RAF, Mr Jones inquired about pilot training and carrier landings. Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton assured the committee that “every pilot, whether from the Air Force or the Navy, receives carrier qualification training”. This training occurs periodically, allowing all pilots to gain the necessary skills for landing on carriers.
You would think that after a multi-£billion uplift in the defence budget and the ongoing war in Ukraine, with which we are heavily involved, they would be looking to increase our defence capabilities. Not so, it seems. Cartlidge admitted last week that the Hercs were to be scrapped because there is no budget to keep them, rather than strategic need. They are clearly prevaricating over how many F35B will be obtained, which is now likely to be only 74. Once again it seems that we are pouring more money into the MoD and getting reduced capability and less kit. With… Read more »
Considering the size of our defence budget compared to other comparable nations I do wonder where all the money goes . Others seem to get a lot more for their money . If it came to a shooting war quantity comes in to its own
Indeed – the MoD and it’s profligate wasting of taxpayer’s money, it’s inability to manage large defence procurement projects, rank incompetence and the concomitant inability of Tobias Ellwood’s MP Defence Commitee to oversee projects properly mean we are continually pouring more money into the MoD for less capability. As you point out, many other countries spend less but get more bang for their buck
The defence committee cannot actual do anything it’s not responsible for the accountability for assurance, that is the job of the ministers…the committee is a body that reports to parliament allowing parliament to ask questions to the accountable ministers..the executive is the only body that can instruct the MOD ( via its ministers).
Well we do love to shovel money into gold standard bespoke projects were a perfectly acceptable off the shelf solution is available.
We do it over and over again at huge expense…..
And you know what is next….
30 billion plus on the nuclear capability for starters.
Sorry I’m not wanting to cause an argument but only asking an opinion. Would you prefer we lost our nuclear weapons to invest in the rest of our military??
Bob79, No, but what I would like to see is the nuclear deterant cost return to the HM Treasury budget as it used to be. If I remember correctly Osborne when he was Chancellor of the Exchequer said that placing the nuclear deterant within the MoD budget was a temporary situation. I do agree with several posts that question what do we do with our budget. We do not seem to get a very good return on investment. The only two good cost effective returns that I can think of are the carriers and T31s. Possibly it is time for… Read more »
Your financial arithmetic is illiterate.
We get great value for money in our Astute SSNs. Just because we rarely see them dosn’t mean they aren’t there! We should probably join with Germany, Italy and Sweden and build a batch of conventional submarines for sea denial and special ops.
Definitely not, I support CASD.
Nukes in core is the biggest elephant in the room, after 2010.
As a matter of interest how do other western nuclear powers (USA & Franch) budget for theirs?.Do they include it in their defence budget as we do?.
Jus ttrying to understand relative budgets and what they get for them -France especially.
I have no idea, it’s a good question for comparison.
The French do . The nuclear deterrent for both on going and development of the next generations is included in the Loi de Programmation Militaire 2024 – 30 . It’s estimated at 413 Billion Euros or around 13% of the annual and projected budgets .
Do we know how that compares to ours..or shouldnt I ask…..
I would say much worse despite all of our misgivings over our budgets . The budgetary figures are more of a political aspiration statement rather than firm figures . On the one hand they specify amounts for the deterrent ( already mentioned) and then make strange comments about the new generation of SSBN entering service in the early 2030’s . To put that in context that’s the same date projected for the Dreadnought class and we’ve cut steel on 3 boats . They haven’t even started! That’s just impossible but that’s France . They’re the masters , par excellence, of… Read more »
I’m not entirely sure of the educated …😉
Lots of studies, lots of proof of concepts, lots of theorising, usually about something that exists already but we are too stubborn to just bloody buy. They prefer to waste money trying to reinvent the wheel only to have it emerge square and not work.
Very good way of putting it! We waste incredible amounts of money on projects when the best is already on the shelf and available for a much lower price! Nimrod AEW and MR4 come to mind, instances where Billions were wasted initially and then we forked out for the best kit off the shelf ie E3D and P8. Plus we only place small orders in case we change our minds and end up paying far more for far less!
The protecting uk industry excuse is frequently rolled out. It doesn’t wash though when that industry isn’t stepping up and delivering what is needed. There needs to be some realism here and accept that defence spending is not a charity, money is limited and we really need to start spending it with the brain not the heart.
Issue is P8 actually uses the kit developed for MRA4, just MRA4 couldn’t get is heavy arse off the Runway, and needed development by Boeing, and rather use a suitable airframe. UKgovs listened to BAEs who didnt understand what it was doing, but took £ms in uk taxpayers cash.
We sneak the military pensions funding artificially into the defence budget. Without it we are like a 1.7% defence spender. we’re not the big spenders we like to think we are
This article highlights an intriguing lack of apparent trust between different factions in the same government, particularly re military procurement matters. Probably the result of previous collective experiences. Somewhat confused by the discernable adversarial roles, when the probable next government could, and very well will, radically revamp the procurement plan, as soon as a new defense strategy is promulgated. Really rather curious…🤔😳
It is curious. We do spend quite a bit on defence R&D here but it never seems to turn into an effective weapon system. Overwhelmingly any strategic defence and security review is designed to save money and they give you a lot of bullshit about capability not being required because of technical advances. “Which we can’t tell you about old boy because it’s a secret…..!”
Like we spent £185m on developing the Taranis drone, and Never turn it into reality!
Really, Ukraine might have something to say about that, I fancy they are finding NLAW, Starstreak, Brimstone, Martlet, Storm Shadow and Challenger very much to their liking.
👍🏻
We don’t seem to actually create many defence products. Historically our industry likes bespoke requirements (and better short term profit margins) rather than looking to create a product that is resellable or exportable. Its only changed recently with some of the latest projects like the T31 and Aeralis.
F35 jets cost nearly $ 42,000 an hour to fly so consume plenty of budget !
What you do not take into account is the impact of Tempest we may need fewer F35s it the newer technology plane steps in. The entire 74 F35s may go to the FAA.
The C130 has been replaced by the Atlas which is a newer larger more capable platform. The reality is that choices have to be made and we cannot run older kit instead of newer kit. It would be good to have an unlimited budget.
Agree, no point in purchasing more F35B beyond what is needed for carrier aviation if we are buying Tempest in the next decade. 74 F35B all able to operate from a carrier will be an amazing capability. In a war time scenario like the F.I. That would see four squadrons embarked which is enough to carry out almost any operation. F35 will always be expensive to run as Lockheed Martin is selling them at a loss so they can price gouge on spare parts and maintenance. The US DOD let LM have proprietary access to all maintenance source code so… Read more »
Yep but I see the lessor has been learnt, NGAD will allow vendors to take over parts to the program and avoid the monopoly scenario LM have with the F35.
https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/avoiding-f-35-acquisition-malpractice-aim-of-next-gen-air-dominance-fighter
Hands up who expects to see Tempest rolling off the production line at any point “in the next decade”?
Tempest is imaginary at this point.
Conceptual rather than imaginary. It actually is a design rather than just a drawing or a model.
Not quite.
“The UK Tempest partners, working in close collaboration with the MoD, will now progress the maturity of more than 60 cutting-edge technology demonstrations, digital concepts and new technologies. These are critical to the UK’s sovereign defence capability and will help shape the final requirements – together with the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) partners in Japan and Italy – for the combat air platform, due to enter service with the Royal Air Force by 2035.”
LINK
18 Jul 2022 “The UK Secretary of State for Defence, Ben Wallace MP has confirmed plans for Britain to lead the development of a new flying combat air demonstrator, which will play a critical role in proving the technology and design principles needed to deliver the UK’s Future Combat Air System. Work is being led by UK sovereign combat air industry leader BAE Systems, working with the Ministry of Defence and a number of suppliers across the UK. This pioneering project will deliver the first flying combat air demonstrator in a generation – designed and developed in the UK. The… Read more »
The elephant in the room is a change of government and with it a commitment to move closer to Europe. Theirs a commitment to Tempest ie a next gen fighter but that could mean joining France and Germany. History is littered with international projects being cancelled or reformatted Tempest has to be a candidate, especially if there’s money to be saved,
Its already tied in with Italy and Japan. I dont think we would do a deal with Germany and especially with France on manned ac. again.
Yep until we’re until 2025. Which is the next funding and decision point. Italian Airforce boss has publically said he’s think the programs will merge. Time will tell as they say.
But the more that’s shared the more likely a future government will look to save money. Now evident programs are sharing data.
https://breakingdefense-com.cdn.ampproject.org/c/s/breakingdefense.com/2023/05/short-of-dream-interoperability-rival-european-fighter-programs-share-some-tech/?amp=1
Very similar to your brain….Now hurry with the laundry, 2 PARA needs their pants and socks washed.
Probably never happen. We’ll do what we do best, spend a few billion on development and then pull out..
The 148 F35 was originally meant to replace 300+ operational aircraft including the Jaguars, Tornados (excluding F3) and both GR and F Harrier fleets. …predominantly to be a strike and CAS asset for the RAF with @40 airframes for RN. Yes, Atlas is bigger and very capable but it is not capable of doing everything the Hercs could do. Decades of cuts and budget mismanagement later and the narritive evolution is simply astounding. Value for money and bang for buck within reasonable budgets should be the aim. No one would seriously advocate ‘unlimted’ budgets. Biggest security risk in coming 20… Read more »
Do not get me wrong there has been chronic underinvestment in UK defence from both main political parties. And yes there has the politicians are not going overboard to build up the budget over 3% of GDP, even with Ukraine. This is of course an unwelcome state of affairs. Give that the budget has not been vastly expanded there is no point in playing fantasy ORBATS. We still need to balance what we can afford vs capability. It might be that buying over 100 F35 is the cost effective solution. I am all for more planes. But they must be… Read more »
Don’t disagree needs to be good management. It’s the misdirecting lying narrative that winds me up. The 148 was a near term immediate need in 2001. ‘Life of program’ narrative came later after cost blow outs and mismanagement across the MOD budget. Japan will indeed be a great partner, and they know how to project manage. Ps. It’s not about fantasy fleets. It’s about what is the core and basic defence requirements for the UK in order to defend its interests in the face of enemies who have demonstrated a continued willingness to sacrifice high volumes of human and equipment… Read more »
Here we go again, tempest. What on earth gives anyone confidence it will ever see light of day? Even if it does how many years late? How many can we buy after the inevitable budget overrun? Half a dozen? Can we get into double figures with 10?
Why is everyone obsessed with writing off years and years of having gaping holes in our military and gambling that we won’t need them on something which on past evidence will never exist?
If you are not happy contact your MP and complain…
Rival future fighter programmes talk up interoperability24 MAY 2023 “Programme leaders from the Future Combat Air System/Système de Combat Aérien du Futur (FCAS/SCAF) and Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) have promoted the need for interoperability between their rival efforts. Sharing a stage for the first time, the chief of SCAF in the French Air and Space Force (l’Armée de l’Air et de l’Espace: AAE), Major General Jean-Luc Moritz, and UK Future Combat Air Director at the Ministry of Defence (MoD), Richard Berthon, both highlighted the fundamental importance of interoperability between the New Generation Fighter (NGF) and Tempest combat aircraft that… Read more »
Pensions and CASD…
Remove those from the overall budget totals and you get to see what you have for Kit
In line with convention, the Dreadnought programme will be funded from the MOD’s core equipment budget.
There has been a longstanding debate over budgetary responsibility for the nuclear deterrent, with frequent calls made for the capital costs of the replacement programme to be taken out of the Ministry of Defence’s budget.
Convention was always that the nuclear deterrent costs were borne by HM Treasury. It was only recently that it was switched to MoD to fund.
👍
As always they want to do it on the cheap. , , politicians are selfish moron , only thinking dam. More aircraft means small mp pay rise
two white elephant, with no aircraft to fly off them..honestly it beggars belief…. And back on planet normal….the air chief marshal was not very good at evasion…he almost got pinned down to saying that they would not be making a total purchase of 138….
They were never going to reach 138 aircraft even over the life of the programme. Not that I mind too much 74 aircraft of the F35b variant able to deploy from 2 QE carriers is still a massively powerful carrier airwing. In reality deploying a single QE carrier with the full fat 36 F35Bs is likely to strain RAF and Fleet air arm squadrons to the max. I’d like to hope Tempest will come along in the early to mid 2030s and MOD commits massively to the programme removing the need for 5th gen aircraft as the RAF would have… Read more »
“In reality deploying a single QE carrier with the full fat 36 F35Bs is likely to strain RAF and Fleet air arm squadrons to the max.” and that assumingit be true would be an absolute joke.
As for Tempest I can’t see it happening at all.
Maybe the RAF should buy 1 squadron only, of cheaper F-35A to be deployed to NATO commitments in Eastern Europe?
But keep the OCU as one type of model common to all, that would be the B model to train both RAF and RN pilots. This would enable RAF and RN pilots to fill in for lost pilots vice-versa.
Except that we don’t have the A2A refueling capability to refuel the F-35A so it’s combat radius would be severely limited. We should have it so we can also refuel the P8 and Wedgetail but currently we don’t. We could refuel the F-35C as it has the same probe as the B and it would make a decent compromise as we could also deploy aircraft with the US and French Carriers for interoperability exercises.
Exactly. That number of F35, with Typhoon, and hopefully UCAS is fine.
Cutting enablers like Hercules, Puma, Wedgetail, and so on are not. They are the glue which binds the rest together.
The RN or RAF can’t really wait until 2035 to have a strike stealth drone capability.
A stealth drone would do CAP, strike, ISR and AEW as well, by integrated AESA radar panels into the surface of the drone.
As Pete said the F-35s were not just for the carriers, so we should not be content with 74.
They were ‘meant to replace 300+ operational aircraft including the Jaguars, Tornados (excluding F3) and both GR and F Harrier fleets. …predominantly to be a strike and CAS asset for the RAF with @40 airframes for RN’.
I’d prefer they weren’t good at evasion as we have enough bloody politicians. That said I don’t think 70 odd air frames are enough. unless they think that they can get 6th gen working from the early 30’s or they plan to supplement with UCAV’s of whatever type.
I just hope, foolishly, that there’s a plan
UCAV are inevitable.
Two white elephants, oh change the tune please. No aircraft? 30 at the moment , with more to come, a solid and capable flight deck able to operate numerous fellow NATO platforms, with a through life of 50 years plus, able to operate as the C2 node for NATO or national tasking. There’s so much more to the carriers, it only takes a bit of research to find out.
Ummmm airborne….you may need a bit of a Kip mate, clearly a bit tired and grumpy….it’s called ironic piss taking.
Yep, not your style at all mate.
I know…It’s the carrier white elephant with no aircraft thing.. I cant help it..it’s like flat earthers, Corbin supporters or Putin apologists…some things need a bit of piss taking to be applied…it allows us all to remain sane without calling them nasty names…OK so Putin apologists need to be called names.
Ok Jonathan, you cross the line at Corbyn, he is a fair, decent, professional politician with a good family name and a history of astute and forward thinking decision making…….
I will complete that statement…….on behalf of the communist parties of the world United.
👍
on my god, do you mean the earth is actually round?
Sorry I know it’s hard and things like this need careful counselling before introduction…but it’s sort of an irregularly shaped ellipsoid, that is dynamically changing shape every day.🤣🤣
Good one Jonathan, made my day!
That is why I always lose things when I put them down, but several years later find them again. They have rolled around the Earth & come back to me.
That’s so weird John. We have exactly the same problem in the Southern Hemisphere here in NZ!
At least try to make it a little ironic then, or even funny, as most career expired ex squaddies are experts at irony, piss taking and sarcasm! So, get online and maybe take a 2 day course in humour and irony…….👍
It was the…and back on planet normal….bit that was my little given it away, plus the fact the whole statement proceeding it was a big old steaming pile. But humour courses are always worth an investment…I will see if I can get one paid for as part of my work development 🤔
Mate, I’d like an explanation from the MOD as to why the QE class carriers are not fitted with 15inch guns? Might this be a case of “fitted for but not equipped with”?
On a serious note, I watched a BBC Hardtalk interview this morning with the secretary general of the ANC in RSA. Apparently, they have invited Putin to South Africa later in the year, a sad state of affairs.
No doubt you heard the rumour that SA is supplying arms to Russia. When asked by Stephen Sacker, they flatly denied this, which I do hope is the case.
SA are hosting a BRIC conference which is why Putin was invited. They even left the ICC so they wouldn’t have to arrest Putin do to the international arrest warrant.
TBH the country is turning into a basket case with many cities not having any electricity for half the day, and this is during the summer when demand is at its lowest. And the cause is corruption which includes ANC government members.
Absolutely spot on Sean re the corruption. No doubt you’ve heard the standing SA emigration joke: “can the last one leaving the country please switch off the lights, ah no don’t bother, no need to.”
Ah I have re-read your post a few times and can now identify the irony, and poss taking of the oft repeated sad white elephant Brigade….it’s weak, needs work but it’s there so my apologies for being grumpy, cup of tea in the making 👍
Poss? FFS piss!!!!!!
No need to apologise for being grumpy at a possible white elephant Brigade infringement..the whole point of my post was after all a pre-emptive strike to piss them off, they make me serious grumpy. Tea is alway good….I’m having one myself. Now the kids have sodded off to bed.
I think we have 2 x Jonathan on here ATM?
Can admin step in and ask @ New Jonathan to use a non conflicted handle?
A non conflicting handle, you can get tablets for that……
John 1 and John 2…..
Sorry – thought we had an interloper there….
But you could take the piss out of army buying anything midsize and armoured recently…?
That would be cruel and unusual treatment..
Ok, we have 30 x F35B with 3 remaining in the states, leaving 27 spilt between the OCU and 617 at the moment. We do have the two carriers, but the FAA lacks the numbers of Merlins it really needs and and we clearly lack sufficient numbers of F35Bs due to a very slow procurement process, that is sadly a fact. We can only hope things get better.
But we have to judge ourselves against our potential peer enemy’s and let’s be honest a best effort of say 24 Fifth generation fighters on an Elizabeth, which is purpose built to maximise sortie numbers pisses all over anything a potential enemy can put to sea and as for the next couple of years we will have the 48 needed to put 30+ on the carrier….
Yeah some people seem to have issues with maths and reading. I read we have 30 planes and soon 48 moving rapidly to 74. Others read two carriers with no planes. 😀
In no way are they white elephants, we’re capable of providing a squadron or more F35Bs for either carrier & another squadron loaned from the USMC when necessary. That is a major carrier strike package in anybodies books. We’re many years on from “no aircraft” claims Jonathan & I’d have thought you’d know better.
Stop with the USMC joke. That is not their job and they are not your Air Force. They do not have the time to f around with your carriers. That is the fantasy that has been propagated on this website for years. That was supposed to be a little step up to help with getting the UK up to speed with carrier aviation since they decided to can it well over a decade ago. You need to provide your own aircraft.
You’re an ignorant idiot.
The QE carriers permanently include a roomful of ‘secret sauce’ equipment the Americans use when the USMC are aboard. It was clearly no one-off and lightly to be more than planned after Bonhomme.
What he said
Actually the USMC are very keen on using The Elizabeth’s, it gives them an extra deck to fly off.You don’t commit the level of resources around joint working…for a one off loan..or a few flights of the deck…the French do that on US carriers for qualifications, its not the same at all.
I bet they are
I’ll make a small bet with you if you like ? Within the next 3 years you will see the USMC F35B deploy onto an Italian ship and a Japanese one. The US is struggling to fund a 1 for 1 replacement for the CVN’s even block buys doesn’t add up. That problem has been made worse by massive money burning projects like the LCS1 and Zunwalt. The move to a more distributed system of deployable assets makes the CVN less attractive. So they keep on talking about a Hi-Lo mix of Carriers and the Lo part isn’t a kick… Read more »
Did the buddies enjoy the beer?
Whether its a joke or not – I agree with your basic premise.
They are our aircraft carriers and we should man them and stock them as we see fit for our requirements.
If we can’t then I fail to see why they are ours.
Yes but we can, clearly we are developing the correct air wing. The simple fact is 5th generation carrier air opps are a new concept and its being developed ( even the US are developing the F35 elements of their air wings). But we clearly have the airframes to but together a carrier air wing of 24 if we needed to…but the point of the F35B carrier air ops is fluidity and adaptability without the need to constantly drag a huge air wing around all the time, nackering your airframes and pilots. The US have to have a complete air… Read more »
Give your self a tea break, wipe the froth and spittle from your mouth and get the laundry done.
And have you given up trolling Navy Lookout, after you were caught there bumping your gums and you’ve come back here? Good as the washing needs doing, chop chop….
And interestingly enough you seem to have closed and re-opened your account on here, 15 comments over the last year? mmmm always a sign of a (rubbish) troll with a number of similar/same accounts.
Frank it was sarcastic irony, note the ….and back on planet normal….
With the slow …very slow integration of UK weaponry onto F35B I can fully appreciate the fact that we could have tempest in the timeframe it has taken to integrate items like storm shadow, meteor, spear 3, future advanced anti-ship missile. I think a large order for Tempest really would be a massive shot in the arm for UK aviation production 150-175+ aircraft is the number needed to fully replace typhoon and deliver an uptick in capability and availability. If Japan and Italy are also online and likely to order a few hundred aircraft then the Tempest programme could be… Read more »
We must be careful not to see Tempest as the answer to the numbers problem. It’s likely to be hugely expensive with three countries that will all have their own technical requirements. Unless the politicians are prepared to increase defence spending back up to 3% – or better still 4% – of GDP Tempest may well go the same way as the TSR2. One hopes not of course.
Well said 👍👍
Don’t mention TSR2, I mentioned it once, but I think I got away with it….
I’m putting cones around your comment David, everyone just drove around please, nothing to see here…🤣
ROFL!! tnx 4 that John, very droll lol 🙂
👍
“With the slow …very slow integration of UK weaponry onto F35B” understatement of the year that one … quite simply unbelievable the time that is taking…still why would they hurry – we cant go anywhere else.
Block IV for F35 includes integration of an extra 17 weapons, there’s lot of nations buying it that want specific weapons integrated that the US doesn’t use.
You’d think the the code would be modular so as long as the weapons code was written to the correct standard ‘API’ so to speak that the capabailty to add bespoke weapons would be somethign that a nation could do as necessary. Not that simple I know but in essence I fail to see why that wouldnt be possible and it would increase the potential sales of the weapons delivery platform…or to put it another way..the plane.
You’d think… but after 30 years in software engineering I know it can be tricky to write code that is future proof to be compatible with capabilities you haven’t thought of…
That said, there’s a huge numbers of cowboys in the industry but you’d hope LM would have decent talent on board.
HMG seem to be looking to far in the future ,the likes of tempest and unmand aircraft is all well and good and will come .However wish there would take better direction in what we need now ,war in Ukraine China on the horizon flexing there military muscle .I would say we all knew we would never get the number of F35s for our navy and RAF because our government only seem to know one way sadly 😕
They did exactly the same in 1995. Then it was Tomahawk, Hellfire, StormShadow, Apache, and meant we don’t need as much.
SOP.
Shambolic, embarrassing and laughable. Not a single thing learnt from the War in Ukraine. I think its time for the UK to withdraw all forces from across the globe, back behind the borders of this country. Cease all new/ongoing defence projects, and use the military assets that we have, right up to their sell by date. Then put out to tender to interested ‘parties’, a contract to defend the UK 24/7, 365 days a year. Would probably work out far cheaper, than the current woeful military budget. Any country can apply for this contract, as long as it’s not the… Read more »
Shhhh don’t let the MOD hear that as they may like the idea🤔
😂
Wagner are available, I mean we have a prison system too don’t we?
Oh yeah… I never thunk of that. 😄
We could get china to do it, they tend to be able to out compete on price….just ignore the whole Saxon thing..I’m sure it would not happen like that again.
Hahaha… brings new meaning to the term Made in China.
Other than money why does FCAS have anything to do with F35B? The identification was surely for x STOVL & X carrier capable aircraft?! FCAS has been ruled out as being carrier capable & also therefore likely not STOVL?
It’s a broader reference to the F35 programme in general Simon.
Basically if Tempest fails, then a modified F35A will step into the breach, possibly with UK assembly and more UK content.
Not a bad fallback position for the RAF to be fair, but loosing Tempest would be devastating to the industry.
John – That’s possibly a somewhat slightly positive take. But then if you take it that way then in a way you accept that the F35 programme dictates numbers for GCAP/Tempest?? As 138 would be looked at as the ceiling? When in fact it should be in addition to the original requirement. Don’t forget the cuts were already made when Tornado, Jag GR3 & harrier (in excess of 200 aircraft) were to be replaced by F35 only & not as planned FOAS & F35. So we’re/ he is now seemingly accepting 74 aircraft, that number is unlikely to fulfill both… Read more »
Did he take his shoes and socks off so he could count to how many extra would be purchased …or did he not need to bother
Personally I would like them to wait on the decision and outcome of the 6 generation aircraft development …if it takes 15- 20 years to develop and then another 5 to get high numbers the typhoon fleet will be decrepit..best just not say anything on the 138 order total until the in service date of the 6 generation fighter is nailed down.
I think we need to look again at capabilities like the US is, what’s the point in flying high end aircraft over Syria for example, cheap and cheerful there but China is a different beast. Similar to the navy’s idea with the type 31 frigates Vs type 26.
Will future UK F-35B get the enhanced engine package (EEP). Will they get the new AN/APG-85 radar? Will existing UK F-35B get Technical Refresh 3? Will UK F-35B get drop tanks & a stand off weapon such as JSM?
sooooo many questions – so few answers.
Enhanced engine package. Yes. APG-85. Yes. Tech refresh. Yes. (blk 4 won’t work without it). Drop tanks. Know idea. JSM. No. Spear 3.Yes. 👍
Not having a serious stand off weapon is suicide against Russia/China.
How is that? Each F35B can carry 8 SPEAR 3’s internally. They will be very accurate and very deadly. What has Russia got? Missiles that can target housing blocks, and that’s about it. They are just proving how bad they are and how technologically behind the West they are.
If you go up against a Chinese fleet invading Taiwan, then Spear 3 is too light & using a Paveway IV gets you dangerously close. Japan is buying JSM for its F-35A & Kongsberg have offered to fit JSM under the wings of Japanese F-35B. If that goes ahead, then JSM becomes an “off the shelf” purchase for UK F-35B. Integration costs already done.
I think you are undestimating the capability of Spear 3. It might not have the range of JSM, but 8 of these internally mounted with the all aspect stealth of F35 makes them deadly. Networked together, with the accuracy they will have a flight of F35’s could disable numerous warships in one flight. You don’t have to sink a warship to take it out of the fight. Any damage to the upper deck, the bridge, VLS systems, the flight deck, steering gear, radars, ESM gears would be enough. Plus I believe the plan is to fit FSC/ASW once it’s available… Read more »
You want to go up against a Chinese invasion fleet, armed with Spear 3 as your only F-35B stand off weapon? Good luck with that.
Yes, definitely. Because they have nothing that can match it. Everything they have is totally unproven. Look how bad the Russian tech has proven to be after all propaganda. The Chinese are not much better.
Good luck with that.
The Chinese would need the luck. The US Navy on its own could wipe them out.
Only if the US can fire enough cruise missiles into the Chinese invasion fleet in time. So the US wargames say. They were pinning their hopes on large numbers of LRASM & JASSM-ER.
I just don’t see the Chinese having the real world combat experience and command and control to pull it off.
Lockheed Martin pitched the F35 as an affordable replacement for several older aircraft. UK joined the project in 2004 and contributed @$2.5b to the upfront development costs, @10% of the forecast total. Our carrier design limited us to a single aircraft type the F 35b. As a follow on to joint force Harrier this was a rational and seemingly low risk decision. But LM failed to deliver: years late, massive increase in unit cost, unreliable software, sky high support costs and a glacial pace of weapons integration. The US Air Secretary has vowed that the NGAD fighter must avoid the… Read more »
First of all. Our government have made numerous blunders on the F35 programme. Firstly we should have asked for the F35B to have been built in Britain.. but the indecisive government couldn’t choose between the C or B on the carrier set up. Choosing the B and ski jump to save money. Secondly once chosen we again procrastinated on how many B’s we should have. Firstly 6 squadrons then cut to 4. Soon to 3.. Once we had decided to build ski jump carriers to save money we should have procure 96 aircraft a full 7 squadron set up.. 3… Read more »
Hi Chris – totaling that lot up comes to roughly 25% of GDP. Do we have anything left over for the NHS and the asylum seekers? Its nice to have the NHS in the background in case you break a leg out on a run one day
25% of gdp=circa US$800, the same as the USA defence budget of $877. How did you arrive at that number?
Not that MrGooding’s list is in anyway affordable or viable.
Fab shopping list…And to act as back up World Policeman to Uncle Sam and secure UK overseas dependencies/annoy China we would need all of it…But it runs into hundreds of billions…UK gets terrible value for money because of the way we buy.We end up buying off the shelf anyway when push comes to shove.We have defence review after refreshed defence review…We send kit to Ukraine and cut our forces simultaneously.I suppose the only way to fix it is to get all the UK political parties to agree a 20 year plan for all 3 services.To set out what the UK… Read more »
Yes it was a shopping list. But if we procured sensibly and had the proactive attitude we wouldn’t be discussing it now would we. We look at what we need to do the job to the best of our ability across our armed forces. Say this is what it will take .. then go nah we will do it half measures. Question do you look at how our armed services are too stretched or don’t give a dam. Spend it on better things. I want us to be better equipped of course but I also know it comes at an… Read more »
It’s not just procurement (CAPEX) costs, it’s operating costs (OPEX) too.
Your fantasy fleets would greatly increase those, even assuming they were attainable; eg manpower.
22 nuclear submarines is just not possible for us to build so we would have to build a new submarine pen elsewhere or massively expand Barrow.
Now factor in the cash UKPLC gets from a 15% build share on EVERY F35 built of any model, A, B or C and recalculate. Its going to work out that the UK got a great BOGOFF deal.
Go against Putin? Where exactly are we going to do that?
The war in Ukr is not the wider world.
As for the figures of units you gave …PMSL…and who is going to operate them?
👍🏻
I can’t foresee an uplift in the defence budget beyond that already announced. And there are worrying hints of further cuts on the way. My suggestion was a practical one which makes more sense when you look at the problems with Fort Victoria and the limits this might impose on carrier operations.
Pathetic number…..we should be looking to get much closer to 138 than 48 surely.
74 is fine for the carriers if the RAF get sufficient numbers of FCAS. If they don’t then 74 seems too few for carrier and RAF tasking he.
Carriers with a 24 F35B air wing + drones is more than adequate.
There are two schools of thought on the carriers and their F-35s. The optimistic view is that our two carriers make us an important global player, able to project power worldwide, and additionally making the RN NATO Europe’s pre-eminent navy. The more sanguine view is that our one operational carrier – the other will always be in reserve – would, in anything approaching a hot war, have an inadequate air group, able maybe to defend the CSG but without the numbers or capability to do much in the way of attack/interdiction. By removing nearly half of our fast jet aircraft… Read more »
IT’S a shame were we stand ,but at the moment it looks like we’re always going to be in a stand still with MOD budget been what it is .And those at the top making bad decisions .🙄
Totally agree. It’s not a question of whether our carriers are useful assets but whether the resources devoted to them could have been better spent on other assets. Our overall air capability has been dramatically reduced since 2010.
What happened to the RAF Nuclear Strike role performed by the Tornado? F35B unrefuelled wouldnt have the range that Tornado had and Typhoon is really an airdefender with LGBs (for use in uncontested airspace). Maybe we plan is to sail our carriers into the Baltic to get the F35B’ s closer – good luck!.
Its not enough. We have c2 carriers, we need enough to carry out a wartime deployment on both simultaneous to deploying a worthwhile number on ground based operations. Taking out airframes used for training, those undergoing servicing etc we clearly will not have enough. End of.
The first UK F35b was delivered to 17 squadron RAF for trial purposes in 2012. The article says the last of the intended purchase will be delivered in the early 2030’s. So 20 or so years for us to acquire 74 aircraft. Criminal.
It would be interesting to validate the statement “Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton clarified that the original plan was for 138 aircraft, but the decision was made in 2010 to reduce it to 48”
That’s a very small number, so what are the options?
1) By 2030 the F35 is just an RN asset . And ??order additional Typhoons for the RAF?
2) Enter a marinised Gripen as a cheap alternative so 12 Gripens and 12 F35s per carrier
3) Bite the bullet and order more F35s
4) sell both carriers
5) Share one carrier with France
6) convert to cats and traps
This means there won’t be enough planes for 2 carriers ??
There are a number of awkward questions for our glorious leaders.
Why are there so few indigenous defence equipment manufacturers left in the UK? Why are the ones that are, owned by the French. Fifty years ago we built aircraft, tanks, missiles and so on. British built was the norm not the exception. And don’t give me that “it’s so expensive we need partners” crap. The fourth largest defense expenditure and the tenth most powerful military, someone needs a very large (probably French built) rocket up their arse..
“NATO Air Policing duties” to me means Air Defence and intercept capability which is the role of the Typhoon. F35s are primary a stealth interdiction aircraft designed for taking out enemy GBAD and C2 systems to allow convential strike aircraft to follow up. That is not Air Policing. Granted the F35 will be able to perform other duties with different weapons fit but it is not an airfcaft you would want to waste holding Cap for any prolonged period radiating its radar searching for inbound threats when you have invested so much in its stealth capability.. Rich Knighton got away… Read more »
Issue that is ignored RAF well under recruitment levels, more interested in delivering vegan food than pilots,