It has emerged that, despite speculation to the contrary, the UK has not discussed transferring Typhoon jets to Poland to allow Poland to transfer more MiG-29s to Ukraine.
Poland is hoping its NATO allies, including the UK, will pass on surplus aircraft to take the place of the MiG-29s it will transfer to Ukraine.
The information came to light thanks to a Parliamentary written question posed by Kevan Jones, the Labour MP for North Durham.
“To ask the Secretary of State for Defence, whether his Department had discussions with the Polish Government on the potential transfer of RAF Tranche 1 Typhoons to the Polish Air Force.”
James Heappey, Minister of State for the Ministry of Defence, responded:
“The UK welcomes Poland’s announcement that it will provide MiG-29 aircraft to Ukraine and we are looking at how best we can support them in this. However, there have been no discussions with the Polish Government on the transfer of RAF Tranche 1 Typhoons to Poland.”
Defence Secretary Ben Wallace previously suggested he is willing to send Typhoons to eastern European countries, backfilling their contributions to Ukraine’s fighter jet fleet.
Wallace told Times Radio:
“The other quick way that Ukraine can benefit from fighter jets is for those countries in Europe that have Russian Soviet fighter jets – MiG 29s or Su-24s – if they wish to donate we can use our fighter jets to backfill and provide security for them as a result. They are already configured to fight in a Nato way, where of course Ukraine isn’t.”
The UK has around 30 ‘Tranche 1’ Typhoon jets which are due to be withdrawn from service in 2025.
Think it maybe best to hang on to our Typhoon Tranche 1s for now 🙏
Yes, I think that it would be very hard financially to build new Typhoons
Not to criticise Ben Wallace but if his government is unwilling to spend on defence he should not be looking to give away perfectly good aircraft. The MOD needs to end its habit of junking anything that’s not the absolute latest model because as we have seen producing new aircraft is a non starter. The Tranche 1 typhoons should be retained in some form of reserve even if the aircraft are not flying. These planes could still be flying in decades from now with the right organisation and they will remain a potent interceptor aircraft cable of defending the UK… Read more »
This is absolutely typical of the crap that you post here. The reason that the MoD are in a position to retire the first 30 Eurofighters that came into RAF service is because those aircraft have got the very first versions of the mission computers, wiring and hardware. The later batches of Eurofighter have developed far beyond what the first airframes were capable of. Tranche 1 Eurofighters no longer have spares manufactured and to keep them flying would require the remaining airframes to be cannibalised. I imagine that is technically feasible to bring a Tranche 1 aircraft up to the… Read more »
Those Mission computers still work with AMRAAM right? and AMRAAM will be in service for at-least two more decades right? and an aircraft with CAPTOR M and AMRAAM will be able to provide UK airspace policing in an emergency right? The MOD needs to get out of the mindset it’s been in since 1991 which is small numbers of the very latest variant and start preserving operational reserves. Even aircraft not in active duty serve a purpose and as you point out with so many Tranche 1’s being scraped by others there is plenty of spares kicking around even if… Read more »
Well said.
I agree too. If the Tranch 1’s are capable of lopping a bomb then we should retain the airframes as a reserve regardless of the outdated software. One issue that is currently relevant is the need for war reserves. Thankfully, a number of our allies believe in retention hence the ability in some cases to supply more equipment to Ukraine than ourselves. The availability of AS90 is a good example with some vehicles in need of restoration before they can be handed over. The blasted Tranch 1 Typhoon’s have been doomed for some time now and one can’t help but… Read more »
keeping some Army vehicles in storage is one think, keeping very complex Eurofighter Typhoons in storage is another ball game altogether. The engineering package to get them airworthy again would be massive. Let alone the spares, logistics, maintenance contracts, engine maintenance contracts and trained pilots and engineers for a bespoke tranche 1 fleet of Typhoons. With our defence budget. It’s just not feasible, or good value for money.
RAF Shawbury does a great job in storing aircraft, so the dedicated facility is there and the know-how to back up maintenance, so why can’t Typhoons be stored there? That said, my suggestion to station Tranch 1 Typhoons at RAF Valley would enable the fleet to remain in reserve and give advanced trainees the oportunity to fly a two-engine aircraft and one similar in basic flying craft to the frontline type. Once qualified the pilots go to OTUs and transition to Typhoon anyway, so why not include this element at Valley using Tranch 1s?
This is bullshit too – we cannot train fast jet pilots now because the Hawk trainer fleet has been grounded due to engine problems. All of them. The RAF has no plan to get them airborne and foreign training establishments are too chocker to take any of our guys on. The availability of trained pilots is becoming a huge issue and if Wigston can’t sort it out PDQ he should resign
the t2 hawks are still flying, I’ve had 5 fly over today, then onto the machloop, in wales
The hawk fleet is no longer grounded. That’s unless the blue jets flying over me in the Conwy valley today are something new I’ve not heard of yet.
Hi David, did you ever get around to explaining what a field army was. I remember asking after your comment but can’t remember seeing a response.
I have noticed your pretty quick with the insults but quite slow with any answers.
You might want to get the checked out 😀
jim wrote:
“”and an aircraft with CAPTOR M and AMRAAM will be able to provide UK airspace policing in an emergency right? “”
Tranche 1 aircraft are fitted with CAPTOR C, CAPTOR-M is a later version fitted to Tranche 2 jets onwards. The two standards differ in both hardware and software.
CAPTOR C was on tranche 1 and CAPTOR D was on tranche 2. Both were CAPTOR M (M for mechanically scanned) verses CAPTOR E ( electronically scanned AESA) CAPTOR D on the tranche 2 came with the same back end as CAPTOR E which meant it could be upgraded to CAPTOR E.
However both CAPTOR C and CAPTOR D are highly capable radars every bit as good as first generation AESA radars and both can support AMRAAM AIM 120 D.
As long as AIM 120 D is an effective air to air weapon tranche 1 typhoons have combat value.
https://www.key.aero/article/depth-look-eurofighters-next-gen-radar
BAE Systems told the UK Defence Select Committee in January that there is no technical reason why the Royal Air Force could not upgrade and retain its fleet of Tranche 1 Eurofighter Typhoons. In a written response to the committee on 23 January, BAE said it would be “technically feasible” to bring the RAF’s remaining 30 Tranche 1 jets up to a standard where they could be retained in service rather than retired in 2025, as currently planned. “It is technically feasible to bring a Tranche 1 aircraft to the standard of a Tranche 2 or Tranche 3 aircraft. BAE… Read more »
Well said. We have bugger all fast jets without giving these away, and I’m sure that Tranche 1 Typhoons are still very capable in Air to Air roles.
Cannot disagree with that these are perfectly good airframes for running the QRA flights as well as getting battered in the south Atlantic….we may as well burn up the airframe hours on this fleet than burn airframe hours on the tranche 2 fleet. Personal I also. Think we should then be replacing these with a tranche 4 buy…for delivery over the next decade….
I don’t see there being any new funding for a new tranche of Typhoons; in fact (and if I may be so bold), I suspect that the RAF is prepared to spend whatever money it does get on procuring more of the scintillating F-35Bs, and ensuring that the funding streams for GCAP are kept safe.
I wonder if we are beginning to see the end of the road for the Typhoon in RAF service, with the prospect of the aircraft being fully retired by 2040 (and remembering of course that the RAF retired its Tornados before Germany and Italy).
I’ll go one further and say looking at 1991 the aircraft we had then are at best on par with the ‘modern’ russian air force, at it’s worst (for Russia) potential superior to the russian air force.
Your absolutely right there is value in keeping around legacy assets.
Hi Jim, being in a relatively unique position of certifying parts of military aircraft, including Typhoon HUD and FCC the issue is obsolescence and its a killer you cannot hide from. The TRANCHE 1 aircraft cannot be easily upgraded because of the cost so you are left with a diminishing stock of parts to keep them flying. This is the reason why we are also waiting on BLK4 F35 to come out for the majority (hope springs eternal) of our purchase. Trying to retrofit modern avionics onto an old airframe is a certification nightmare (MRA4 anybody?). Keep them as long… Read more »
Yes I agree, don’t waste money on upgrades just try and husband the fleet for as long as possible even if it’s largely in storage try to get as many shares from scrapping as you can.
It is possible and my guess is economically feasible to upgrade T1 Typhoon in a meaningful way. The Spanish have done so, and BAE have also stated that it is feasible. I would say it makes sense to keep that option for a while. We don’t have a limitless purse.
https://www.airforce-technology.com/news/spain-receives-first-upgraded-tranche-1-eurofighter-fighter-jet/
The cost of maintenance is insane, it also make it easier to argue for replacement kit as the chancellor will have no idea what the difference is between tranche 1, 2 or 3.
I would rather politicians where fully aware of how thread bare our military is in reality so they are fully aware of how dangerous the cuts they are inflicting is, even if that includes those abroad.
The current Army Air Corps Gazelle helicopter was set to be replaced by the Airbus H135 in March next year.
However, the MoD decided, a month after receiving the five H135 helicopters it selected to take over from the Gazelle, that they were no longer required for their procured purpose.
The five helicopters, worth a total of £35.28million, have been put on ice while the MoD decide what they’re going to do with them.
They have never been in service and haven’t left the ground once.
Aren’t those used in flight training? If they could help speed up rotary training, it would be no bad thing.
£35.28 million is nothing. I’m assuming H135 aren’t suitable to replace Gazelle.
I know this might not be the most ideal use for the H135 and I’m sure some aspects of them would have to be adapted, radar, door mounted GPMG possible, folding main rotor may be but could they not be used on the batch 2 OPV’s or at least the three most used in antinarcotic/ deserter relief (Spey, Tamar, Medway)? I’m not an engineer but an telescopic hanger could be erected and the helicopter could fit across the ship “for storage” if it could have a folding main rotor as it is around 3m shorter then the width of the… Read more »
its the tranche 1 part of the official statement that concerns me, does that mean we have been disucssing send them the more modern versions.
Who knows what goes on behind closed doors ,we all know to well what our politicians are like 🙄
Yeah until the first of the second batch of 26 F35’s start being delivered at the very least
It’s ridiculous. Our cupboards are getting thread bare. We can’t give our T1 Typhoons to Poland or anyone else. They need to be retained.
At least until Tempest or better still a new batch of thoroughly modern typhoons are ordered.
There are two sides to this coin. It is a very valid point you make about the cupboard being bare, but, it doesn’t come as a surprise that the Tr 1 Typhoons are being withdrawn by 2025, if only to save/release funds for other requirements. Doesn’t make it a good idea of course, especially as no replacement is forthcoming. Given that they are going regardless, they will still have over half their usable life left, would it not be an idea to put them to some good use? Especially if UKR get something much needed out of it too! Personally… Read more »
It’s certainly the standard MOD argument, it’s what they refer to as “efficiency savings” but it’s these same efficiency savings that have hollowed out the armed forces. Sticking Typhoons in storage can’t be that expensive. Like wise operating small numbers of them with a reservist force. It’s like keeping tanks and artillery in storage. Your sure your probably never going to need it and if you do you fully expect not all of it to work and that it will take many months to reactivate. A group of amateurs were literally able to get a Vulcan back in the air… Read more »
You would like to think that putting them in storage wouldn’t be too expensive, I don’t know enough about those costs I’m afraid.
Can see it being ok for a few years, but then getting progressively more expensive to keep and maintain as time goes on, what with spare parts probably becoming difficult to source,depending on what upgrades they have had I imagine.
I would be far happier to gift all the Tr 1 aircraft to Poland if the RAF got say 16-20 Tr 4 aircraft in return.
You can always get/train pilots, can’t always procure new aircraft though.
Yes I agree, a small buy of 16 to 20 tranche 4 would have allowed us to continue to operate a force of 6 squadrons of typhoons but if we are not getting any extra then I can’t see us having enough to gift anyone. Realistically Poland is buying F35 anyway and has no need or desire of Typhoons.
The RAF does not think it can operate T1 as part of a wider fleet of typhoons but it think that Poland can operate a small fleet of T1’s with no other examples in service.
That’s quite telling.
Depending on cost, but possible it seems. Spain has successfully achieved this. “Airbus performed the upgrade at its facilities in Getafe. The enhancements included the introduction of hardware modifications, which support the Operational Flight Program 02 (OFP-02) developed by Spain’s Armament and Experimental Logistics Centre (CLAEX). As part of the upgrade, the company integrated Tranche 2 and Tranche 3 equipment on the aircraft, including a computer symbol generator, digital video and voice recorder, laser designator pod and maintenance data panel. Airbus is also delivering enhancements to a second two-seat Eurofighter aircraft. CLAEX intends to initially use both aircraft as test… Read more »
It’s quite telling that the MOD “knows” it can’t keep tranche 1 typhoons and it “knows” it would not be cost effective to upgrade them but it has never asked BAE for a costing on this. One wonders where the RAF gets its “knowledge” from if not from the people who actually make the plane.
Perhaps if the rest of the F35 purchase beyond two squadrons for the carriers was suddenly cancelled indefinitely the RAF might decide that junking $ 3 billion worth of aircraft is not the most cost efficient use of tax payer funds.
Agreed, I wonder how Spain can afford it but we cannot. If we retire the T1s that will leave us with a fleet of 107 Typhoons.
Probably the same reason that Spain got 891 ASCOD’s for $1.3 billion and we are paying £5.5 billion for 589.
But ours have much better acronyms and General Dynamics board of directors is fully compliant with the British Army’s hiring policy related to retiring Senior Officers and civil servants.
Hi Jim, there is absolutely no comparison between an ASCOD /UHLAN and an AJAX.
cheers
Ian
There is a comparison, they are both cannon armed armoured vehicles based on the same design. AJAX is certainly far in advance of ASCOD and being built 15 years later but AJAX cost 10X more.
A similar comparison might be Tranche 1 to Trance 4 typhoon.
Tranche 4 is a radically more capable aircraft with AESA radar and EW capabilities not imagined just 20 years ago but prices are similar not an increase of a factor of 10.
Hi Jim, I have to disagree with your comparison. The ASCOD is a basic IFV, cannon armed as you say but it’s a basic vehicle, essentially a steel box, I’ve seen inside. Compared to an AJAX it’s sighting system is positively archaic, the 30mm Mauser is good but lacks the punch of the 40mm CTAi cannon. ASCOD/UHLAN/Pizzaro, call it what you will, does not offer anywhere near the levels of protection afforded by AJAX. The cost comparisons really are apples and oranges.
cheers
If Airbus have developed a minimum update to keep their tranche one machines viable, why not induct the RAF’s machines into the line too, it should be regarded as an UOR!
We need to be keeping numbers up now, not allowing them to further fall….
We certainly cannot afford to let the numbers slip.
Hi Jim.. I think the plan is to carry on operating 7 squadrons of Typhoon plus OCU. Just with the Tranche 2/3 aircraft. I guess with 107 aircraft T2/3 the RAF can just about operate all 7 squadrons. Seems to be what they are suggesting anyway. Smaller Squadrons?
It will be 7 Typhoon and + 2 F35 at best then eventually 5 typhoon and 4 F35.
There was talk of an 8 squadron before the latest round of “efficiency” savings and the first time they tried to kill the tranche 1 back in 2015.
Yes, I remember 8 Squadrons of Typhoon being mentioned. Guess 9 squadrons of aircraft is where the RAF are going to be long – term potentially anyway.
Or I should say. RAF/RN.
The other issue is that at the very best the Treasury might consider a 1 for 1 replacement of Typhoon for Tempest. The more typhoons retained even if they are not that active the more chance of getting more Tempest’s If we keep the Tranche 1 in a operational reserve or national guard style force like the USA does then we can move the Tranche 3 in once tempest starts being produced to replace the tranche 1. We could eventually end up with an air national guard operating 50+ Typhoons tranche 3 with CAPTOR E and Meteor and decades of… Read more »
I’ve always liked the idea for RAUXAF to start flying again.
F15 only outlived F22 because F22 was really a prototype aircraft.
F35 will likely be flying into the 2070s which I doubt Typhoon will.
True but stealth aircraft age really badly F117 and F22 will be long gone before any 4th gen aircraft fleets are retired even by the USA.
4 gen aircraft will always serve a role as you need something cheaper to operate in a low to medium threat environment for air policing but still capable enough to lob big missiles really far.
With the shortage of RAF fighters and they,re discussing to give them to Poland ?, No sense at all or maybe they get totally crazy.
I guess if they are to be retired, together with German T1 and even Spanish/Italian (?), it may make sense to ensure they are all standardised and then to gift them to the Ukrainians. Better this than RTP process anyway. NATO airforces could probably supply up to 60 examples and as long as they are standard fit, this could be the most efficient way to provide air superiority fighters
Our MOD/RAF won’t accept that the Ukrainians can possibly learn to fly and operate Typhoons in under 4 years because that’s how long it takes them and they assume everyone else has to move at the same glacial pace making sure they have multiple design studies with cleverly crafted four letter acronyms and sufficient board seats made available for ex pilots and air marshals. The Ukrainians on the other hand think it they can do it. If we can’t keep them I would be much more inclined to see them put to good use by Ukraine than back stoping Easter… Read more »
Hi Jim. The problem isn’t so much training the pilots. It’s maintaining the aircraft and supporting it. Aircraft like Typhoon need a huge amount of support that isn’t quick to set up. Maintenance contracts, logistics, ground support equipment, stimulators, engine support contracts, let alone training the engineers. Software upgrades, etc. It’s these same complex requirements that means keeping T1 Typhoons in storage is a massive ballache. You can wrap up 30 T1’s and stick them in a hangar for a rainy day. The problems start when you want to fly them again. Fast jets need maintenance, lots of maintenance. They… Read more »
I agree with what your saying however it’s also the constant argument used by the MOD that’s basically cut our forces to nothing. The UK has the newest most available aircraft fleet in the world and its tiny. There are countries with budgets 20% of ours operating fleets almost as large as ours. Aircraft in storage or extended reserve may be difficult to reactivate but even sitting in storage they act as a deterrent. They still produce value for little extra cost. That’s the kind of calculus the MOD has long since forgotten, our current crop of military “leaders” are… Read more »
We do look at other nations. But other nations can’t deploy like we can or have the global footprint like we do or the influence. They are not permanent members of the UN Security Council, etc. I wish we had more of everything, I really do. But unless we have a very large increase in the defence budget, the Armed Force’s will pick capability over numbers every day of the week. If we don’t have the technical capability, then we might as well not bother turning up. A large chunk of our budget also goes on wages, pay and conditions… Read more »
With the current geopolitical climate we should be looking to retain the tranche 1’s or replace them with tranche 4’s as the Germans are. Of course there’s no money to do either!
You can arguably justify having a small army with less tanks than our allies by following the argument that the UK has traditionally focused on expeditionary capabilities and enablers to play a leading role in wider coalitions……but it’s a lot more difficult to justify 150 fighters whilst sticking to that line when France, Italy and plenty of others are looking to retain and expand their fleets.
Too true. What’s the point of having all the bells and whistles multi role aircraft when we couldn’t deploy them to carry out these roles without leaving gaping holes in home air defence?
It’s defeated the point of having them. Frankly we might as well just have a fleet of cheaper pure air defence jets.
How long has the US kept the B52 in service and still fitting new engines ?
Isn’t it something like 2050
Trigger’s Broom springs to mind…
Ben Wallace is clearly NOT talking about donating Typhoons but rather providing security for Poland to cover the gap from donating its MiGs.
We’ve done this previously. Last year when Poland donated its Soviet-era tanks to Ukraine, we backfilled their loss by stationing Challenger 2 tanks there. 🤷🏻♂️🤦🏻♂️
The Polish Airforce wouldn’t want our Typhoons anyway. They don’t have any Typhoons currently and aren’t planning on buying any. So they have no pilots to fly them, no ground crew to maintain them.
You’re right. I’m from Poland and can’t see how the UK suppose to transfer Typhoons to our air force, rather as you said is all about providing us assistance before we acquire F 35s.
Finally after reading all the comments someone actually understood what mr Wallace was saying.
The RAF providing cover is what he meant. In the same way the challenger 2s went to Poland to cover the tanks Poland donated.
Poland is getting its FA50 to replace the mig29, SU22. The deliveries from Korea seem to be coming fast.
Cheers for that.
I’m gobsmacked how so many people just ran with the idea of us donating Typhoons to Poland without thinking it through first.
The Poles have F16s and FA-50s and F35s on order. Not a single Typhoon currently in their fleet.
The Polish will probably back fill their Mig 29 loss with secondhand F16C’s from the US.
In time they can be upgraded to a comparable spec to their in service machines.
This all sounds like press or politicians adding up 2 + 2 and getting 7. When the idea of passing NATO MiG 29’s to Ukraine (easiest option as they already operate them) first came up last year the Poles wanted to replace them with additional F-16s which they already operate. It doesn’t make sense to anyone to replace them with Tranche 1 Typhoons.
At least Boxer manufacturing has started.
We dont have any surplus aircraft or ships… We are so short we should be asking Ukraine for some!!!
There are two conflicting comments for me to make. Firstly, yes, I agree it would be a good idea to keep the Tranche 1 Typhoons as reserves. We don’t have enough as it is. The conflict is about why we need them – frankly, their most obvious use would be in a future war with Russia rather than a future war with China. By passing some of them to Ukraine they will be used against Russia anyway – thereby reducing the strength of Russia. The hope, of course, is that they would never be needed to fight Russia – hopefully… Read more »
I should point out that yes, I know it’s actually Poland we are looking to give them to – lack of clarity in my writing! I should have said it is equivalent to passing them on to Russia!
We aren’t looking to give the Typhoons to Poland FFS 🤦🏻♂️
It’s not what Wallace said and Poland doesn’t want them.
My issue is that it’s China that is the real threat not Russia and if it kicks of with China first we may loose a lot of aircraft very quickly. Having the tranche 1 would allow us to maintain a force capable of UK homeland QRA under all circumstances. Some how I don’t see countries like Poland getting involved in the pacific. Indeed I think it will be the UK, USA and Australia pretty much going solo as per usual well all the other big hero’s of the world do their usual war proffering. I seriously doubt article 5 will… Read more »
Article 5 has never applied to the Pacific, the NATO nations are under no Treaty obligations to respond there.
He’s not the brightest tracer in the armoury…
See text above
Yes it does because Alaska is covered, the demarcation line is the tropic of Cancer, there is no line indicating an east west boundary only north south. The US senate foreign relations also considers Hawaii to be covered by default. https://www.military.com/history/hawaii-may-not-be-protected-under-article-5-of-nato-treaty.html But your kind of making the point, many countries in Europe would likely see this as a technicality and use it to get out of a war against China. The UK would not, no matter where the US was attacked the UK and Australia would be on the US side irrespective of any treaty text. Much the same reason… Read more »
If China gets involved so will Russia. As for the Pacific, Japan and South Korea will also be involved. South Korea will be mainly concerned withNorth Korea at first, but reality is North Korea won’t last long. In the next war, for the US it will be China first. The weaker Russia is the better for us. And if Russia can be weakened enough before China and the US go for it – perhaps, just perhaps, Russia wil realise they have more to lose against China and realign.
I’m guessing you have not spent a lot of time in Asia. The narrative that holds very true is that any action against China is seen as America’s war in the region. No one in Asia gives a crap about Taiwan and their racism tends to Blind them when it comes to seeing America or the west as anything other than an enemy and China as an agreeved party. Nations are quite happy to accept US security guarantees in peace time but at the prospect of an armed conflict with China over Taiwan especially if they believe the US will… Read more »
Quite right, never been to Asia. But… Agree India will not want to get involved. However, if Pakistan sides with China India may feel they have to do something about – powers tend to line up. Japan has enough issues with Russia and China. They will be drawn in purely for their own interests. Any Chinese or Russian victory would be very costly for Japan. I would expect China to put pressure on North Korea to go for South Korea just in case they started to support the US. That’s a conflict that would probably have happened by now if… Read more »
I can’t image anyone and certainly not Pakistan declaring war on America, Britain and Australia in defence of any treaty with China. China would be on its own in any conflict for sure. I can’t even see North Korea being on China’s side as it would be a very easy excuse for Washington to finally get rid of them. If a nuclear weapons state like North Korea and Pakistan declared war on the US and the UK it’s likely they would be looking at an instant glassing as well. Neither nation has a sophisticated deterrent but they are enough of… Read more »
I couldn’t imagine Russia invading Ukraine. Germany made a big mistake declaring war on Japan – Japan then didn’t declare war on Russia -and there are probably a few you can think about. It all depends on the perceived balance of power at the time. If China were to say to Pakistan or North Korea ‘We will remember our friends’. Sparta did that after winning the Peloponnesian War – ‘What did you do to HELP Sparta’ Neutrals listed as against.
And Japan and South Korea and India and possibly Vietnam and Indonesia and The Phillipines. But apart from them, yeah, totally alone like the white hatted Sheriffs of the free world that you fondly imagine yourselves to be LOL. Plus you forgot your other Anglo pals, Canada and NZ…
The only countries I see China starting a war over would be Taiwan or supporting North Korea if little Kim attacked and was getting defeated near the border.
On Taiwan I don’t think China will move until it’s pretty sure it can take the island fast. China has to at least look like it’s in control so that any support sent can’t make a difference.
The other situations could be a skirmish with India. In that situation perhaps special forces help.
A border dispute with Russia.
The reality is China currently dosen’t have the Amphibious capability to invade Taiwan, it would be a bloodbath in the Taiwan straight and the beaches would run red. The Taiwanese won’t just sit there with a welcoming committee.
Simply put, they can’t put enough capability into Taiwan to win a war.
The US Navy would decimate an invasion fleet and the Chinese Air Force would rapidly loose it’s tier one inventory.
We’ve all all seen just how well Soviet style tactics don’t work….
China is getting really close in having the ability to both enforce a blockade around Taiwan. As well as conducting an amphibious landing. I don’t believe it will happen yet. The Type 03 carrier has just been launched. It will be a while before it/she/he gets to full operational status. They are also building the Type 04 a slightly bigger iteration. If the Type 03, but it will be their first nuclear powered carrier. So that’s also a few years off even getting in the water. Along with their Type 01 and 02 carriers. These four carriers will be able… Read more »
Truly scary stuff and much more likely to provoke WW3 than the events in Ukraine. If China continue down this path Taiwan will be made to choose, bloody war that may well lose, or surrender. Unless the US intervenes then I’d wager the latter.
There maybe light at the end of the tunnel for Taiwan! The Philippines have asked the US Navy to set up shop again in their country. They have been getting kicked out of their traditional fishing grounds in the SCS. Plus they have lost territory to China, after they “acquired” some atolls that were technically part of the Philippines. Strategically this is a big deal. As China have been bullying other Nations out of the SCS. Allowing China to exploit the natural resources., particularly the fishing side of things. With the USN in the area, how will China react? They… Read more »
Until the next populist gets elected in Manila and kicks the US back out again.
The KMT and a lot of people in Taiwan support unification. At the prospect of becoming a battlefield, I think you will see Taiwan fall inline with Beijing very quickly. Taiwan only just started spending money on defence. They are happy for the US to defend them but not if it’s a cost in blood or treasure to themselves.
One of the richest countries in Asia with the biggest security threat in the world and they are only juts now spending 2% of GDP.
It’s not exactly Israel is it.
KMT do not support the kind of unification that China is talking about. defence spending in Taiwan was ~5% of GDP in the 1990’s
I still don’t see it, the straight is 80 miles at it’s closest point to mainland China, even if you could get 100 tanks across the straight in one piece against the blizzard of ASM’s and SSN’s, Ukraine shows us that that Manop anti tank systems would turn them into junk in short order. They be able to put thousands of paratroopers ton the ground, but that number requires a huge amount of logistical support and without Air Dominance, they would be running out of supplies very quickly… Basically if the US steps up, China simply can’t do it. 80… Read more »
We made the same calculus with Japan in 1941. There was never any chance Japan could win the war but their leadership decided to look past their clear military, geographic and industrial limitations and thought their racial superiority would carry the day against the weak decadent Americans. Chinas making much the same calculations now and playing the same propaganda. In this day and age I don’t think any military could take an island like Taiwan. The element of surprise is impossible and Anti Access technologies or so far advanced that the prospect of a direct invasion is impossible. However battering… Read more »
We should tighten them up then since we have so few.
Lets offer to base the Tranche 1s in Poland, operated by the RAF. As they were due for retirement in 2025 the cost can be covered by the Treasury as it is in effect a donation as part of the war effort. Poland gets cover until their F35s arrive, Ukraine get the MIG 29s, and the RAF gets to keep the Tranche 1s. Win, win, win. Assuming Poland agree of course. Although not upgradable without great cost, they can still operate effectively with AMRAAM. The bigger concern is the impact of reducing numbers on Tempest. After all, if the RAF… Read more »
That’s what Ben Wallace was suggesting. To send RAF Typhoons, in the same way we sent Challenger tanks there, to cover any security gaps arising from Poland’s donations.
At no point did Wallace offer to donate Typhoons to Poland.
Poland doesn’t have any Typhoons and is not planning on buying any, so a donation of Typhoons would be useless anyway.
Yes I know. I was just suggesting we framed it as a donation to get funding. The request would have to come from Poland mind.
Everyone on here saying we need these aircraft for our defence ain’t got a clue, and still think like it would be battle of Britain again. You do know we are in NATO now so giving these aircraft to Poland another NATO country protects us more than keeping in a storage unit somewhere. It also would free up money for RAF to spend on something else. We need Ukraine to win against Russia at all costs now as we’ve given them to much in the way of aid which really means loans, which have to be paid back in the… Read more »
Valid points.
Apart from the fact that no one is suggesting giving these to Poland. They haven’t asked for them and Ben Wallace hasn’t offered. If they did go to Poland to backfill it would be as an RAF detachment, so we’d need to keep them first.
Also if NATO was at war with Russia those countries would want assistance. We wouldn’t just be sitting back and waiting to see if Russia can get past them. We need mass for that.
I’m not sure Antony was either. He might have been suggesting we should be open to the possibility of basing t1 aircraft in a place to reassure allies closer to the frontline should they wish to depleat their own aircraft numbers by gifting them to Ukraine. Personally I’m not sure we have very much to offer so far as aircraft are concerned. Ukraine needs to look further afield for that sort of kit.
We are retiring aircraft that still have many thousands of hours of airframe life. If we must give them away , then it should be backfilled with New aircraft delivered with the latest AESA radar.
This is a bonker decision. I am all for supporting Ukraine as much as possible but we are hollowing out even further already over stretched U.K. capabilities
Let’s get these T1 aircraft active and into Poland or the Baltic republics and encourage our NATO allies to do the same. Nothing too aggressive but enough to defend our NATO allies should they depleat their forces by donating kit to Ukraine. We should continue to train up the Ukrainian pilots.
“It has emerged that, despite speculation to the contrary, the UK has not discussed transferring Typhoon jets to Poland to allow Poland to transfer more MiG-29s to Ukraine.” Best news of the year so far. I just wish it had also emerged, that the MoD had placed further orders for more Typhoons and 100 F35A/B the latter being 50/50 split.
If only George 😉
Passing over the T1 Typhoons would not work for Poland as its a type they do not know with and would take years to get them operational. Far better pass them F16’s to equip the couple units of old Migs etc. They know the type already. Whilst they are getting them then we could forward deploy a unit to cover the gap until the F16’s come online. That would be a better solution for them. The T’1’s being virtually a different type to the later T2/3’s mean its really a one role aircraft and as we struggle with need for… Read more »