The UK government has signalled that further purchases of the F-35A stealth fighter remain under consideration, following confirmation that an initial batch of 12 aircraft will be drawn from existing F-35B procurement plans.
In a written answer to Parliament, Defence Minister Maria Eagle said the Ministry of Defence (MoD) would acquire 12 F-35A jets as part of the UK’s entry into NATO’s nuclear sharing mission. However, she added that future orders would be subject to review under the forthcoming Defence Investment Plan.
“The Ministry of Defence will initially purchase 12 F-35A aircraft from within previously agreed F-35B purchase schedules,” Eagle said. “Future F-35 purchases will be reviewed as part of the Defence Investment Plan, which will conclude in the autumn.”
The statement suggests that while the UK remains committed to a long-term fleet of 138 F-35 aircraft, the balance between the short take-off and vertical landing (STOVL) B variant and the conventional take-off A variant remains undecided.
The F-35A is the only variant certified to carry the B61 nuclear gravity bomb, making it a requirement for NATO’s dual-capable aircraft role. The UK’s decision to join that mission has prompted a shift in procurement priorities, with some F-35Bs now being replaced by the A variant.
The MoD has not confirmed how many F-35As it may ultimately acquire, but officials have indicated that the fleet mix will be assessed in light of operational needs, alliance commitments and the performance of the A variant once it enters UK service.
Although the first 12 F-35As will be assembled in the United States at Lockheed Martin’s Fort Worth facility, the UK remains a key industrial partner in the programme. Eagle noted that “UK industry contributes approximately 15 percent by value of F-35 production,” including work by over 100 UK suppliers and more than 20,000 jobs across the country.
Any move to expand the F-35A fleet would have implications for basing, training and refuelling infrastructure. The A variant is incompatible with the RAF’s Voyager tankers, which use a probe-and-drogue system rather than the boom system the F-35A requires. Eagle confirmed that the UK will rely on allied tankers for now and said sovereign refuelling capability will be reviewed as part of future force development.
The outcome of the Defence Investment Plan, expected in the autumn, will likely determine whether the UK’s shift toward the F-35A is a limited adjustment or the beginning of a broader rebalancing of its combat air fleet.
I would be happy with more A’s as they help fill capability gaps but so long as it doesn’t reduce any further the number of planned B’s or reduce any future Tempest purchases.
But they will
The F35As are in direct competition with Tempest so I am personally against purchasing any (more) of them. Defence capability is not just about the upfront purchase of shiny new equipment; it’s just as much as your ability to manufacture and sustain it in the years to come.
I can see why the RAF of today is in favour of the F35A over the Tempest (a bird in the hand is worth more to them than potentially two in the bush) but I think we’ll collectively rue the decision to purchase these F35As (and any future decisions to buy more of them).
Short-termist thinking at its finest. Sadly, yet another bad decision to add to the others we’ve made in the past 30+ years.
So not only kicking the can down the road, now the “wait for the SDR” excuse has gone, but now if we “wait to see how they perform in service” means several more years.
Since we are likely only buying 27 fast jets out to 2033.
Very, very poor.
Operational need: We have too few jets, less than 4 others in ENATO. More are needed.
Alliance Commitments: B61 mission already covered, we didn’t need to join it apart from politics.
The military need assets. HMG are not addressing that.
I saw a sobering list on X yesterday of what has been cut or gapped since 2010 alone. I knew anyway, but to see it listed was sobering.
If Starmer grew a pair, he would offer Trump a deal. Let the UK keep its 2% digital services tax & that money would be ringfenced to fund over 2.5% GDP defence spending.
So we effectively pay for our Defence by taxing his US Tech M8’s, I think we all know how that would work out 😖
We are already keeping the digital service tax. It’s Canada and maybe the EU that have to drop it. Actually we didn’t give up much at all in the agreement only agreeing to increase quota free beef and ethanol imports.
There’s the autumn defence white paper which should outline further purchases. I’m not inclined to assume anything major from that though.
However it was stated that all reccomendations in the report were noted and I think, agreed with.
“Time will tell”.
Putting us in 5th place is probably being generous. I count France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Turkey and Greece all ahead of us in fast jet numbers, putting us in 7th for ENATO, and 8th in Europe overall if including Russia.
Poland could well place a large order and push us back to 9th. Utterly ridiculous for a country that has had the highest budget in Europe for decades, and continues to have one of the highest.
How many 5th Gen aircraft do those countries have?
What kill ratio do you expect between a F35 and Turkish F4?
So just another way of saying…umh,maybe, inthe future, under review, subject to. Waste of space.
That’s crappy, the F35As should have been in addition to the F35Bs if they’re not additional jets then they add minimal capability over the F35Bs as an aircraft the nuclear thing is a complete red herring and less capability to be operated from the carriers or FOBs, although I think the RAF has probably given up on operating them as they planned to operate the Harriers, which given the advent of drone warfare is likely the right decision. This stinks of RAF politicking (Again!) though likely hoping to undermine the RNs carriers.
Confirms all that stuff in the SDR and talk at NATO of increasing the defence budget was literally just hot air….
I think the RAF only ever played lip service to operating the B from austere locations, it’s a sensitive and complex machine that’s blasts off like an rocket launch, theres no way your STOVL operating a B without destroying the road surface you are operating from and sending great slabs of burning tarmac in all directions….
It can only be operated from a road, in the same way as a Thypoon or Gripen.
The number one conventional military force the UK should bring to NATO is fighter planes and the F35A is the cheapest quickest way to add combat power. If this purchase for 12 is just an initial buy and we end up with around 70 F35B and 70 F35 A in six squadrons then I can get behind that especially if we can retain 6 typhoon squadrons.
Honestly squeezing in three more squadrons to bases should not be a big deal. It’s that kind of thinking that has the RAF stuck in such a rut. As for tankers we can buy the F35A with drogue refueling or just stick booms on the voyagers or even better do both.
The US is cutting its intended F35A purchase rate in half meaning there are suddenly lots of new slots available. As for pilots we have considerably more pilots than planes nowadays. We could simply go to the “extreme situation” of having one pilot per plane like we did a long time ago. This would allow for an attritional reserve of aircraft instead of pilots which is now more important than the other way around as planes are hard to make.
There’s no doubt that F35A represents an ideal choice in many ways from an operational perspective.
If we ended up with an expanded RAF that comprised of three F35A squadrons, three F35B squadrons and six/eight Tempest squadrons, I would be very happy.
A sensible mid/high mix that was capable of knocking anyone’s door down on day one of a war.
If we are going to establish a real standalone F35A force,then I would suggest remodeling Leeming.
Regarding AAR, Air Tankers contract is up in 2035, so we can start shopping for a solution.
I would suggest a buy of boom equipped A330’s, perhaps with freight doors to maximise cargo flexibility.
For just 12 F35A’s ?
It was mentioned that other NATO AF’s would provide that capability.
“yeh, that’ll work then !”.
If we set about expanding the A fleet…
Well it does already !
Personally I’d hang fire with remodelling. an RAF base and see what Hegseth does next year. If they pull USAFE out of Europe we get a nice fully F35A friendly RAF base for zilch.
Great idea, Maybe we could just ask them for it back, tell them we don’t need their protection. See if they can leave behind a few B61’s.
I suspect that something like the numbers and mix you suggest has been agreed in principle.i.e. the conceptual acceptance that F-35B is for the FAA, a halting of F-35B numbers at the minimum to deploy one full sovereign carrier strike or 2 with allies, an increase in RAF fast jets – to be F-35A and the upgrade of remaining Typhoon fleet – with the cost of the Typhoon upgrades being moderated by transferring some to Turkiye.
The F-35A is not qualified for any in service UK weapons except for AMRAAM. And that’s only because Meteor integration is decades late.
I agree. In fact I would ‘go the whole hog’ and transfer the F35B fleet to the FAA and upgrade Yeovilton, and allow the RAF to concentrate on building up the F35A fleet at Marham. The 2nd tranche of Bs delivers a total of around 60 aircraft, allowing for 3 FAA frontline squadrons say; enough to provide a very credible carrier strike capability; one which can be grown and matured, and can retain focus if owned by the FAA. if the RAF can be built up to 10 frontline combat squadrons (7 Typhoon + 3 F35A), then again very credible in a NATO European context. Further purchases would then consolidate this force to the levels you infer in your post. Uncertainty and procrastination seem to be the watchwords with UK governments, with difficult consequences, e.g. the recent announcement that the UK Typhoon assembly line at Warton is to close with potential loss of jobs and skills.
Difficult, to say the least!
They spent several hundred millions upgrading Marham, and the second HAS complex has not been touched yet.
So a lot more needed at Yeovilton to enable F35 there.
On top of that, Yeovilton has around 88 helicopters based there. It is full.
So another location, with history of operating fast jets, runway length, HAS in place, links to GPSS, and SSA required, even before upgrades.
And then add the hundreds of posts to operate the admin and support side of the station, never mind man its assigned units.
Narrows it down somewhat.
The FAA can contribute people to all parts of Joint Force Lightning, but not in its entirety, as it is joint with the RAF. So a bigger budget and several hundred more FAA personnel needed.
I agree with the idea, but the practicalities of it are horrendous.
Jim there is a reason Canada is busily buying 9 x A330 MRTT with booms (4 new builds and 5 conversions done in Spain). They costed out F35A with drogue fuelling and went ouch, so as they needed to replace their tankers it was way cheaper to just add booms. It may seem like a simple thing to just add the extra capability as it’s already in the F35B/C, but LM will not be to keen on adding a tiny bespoke variation into what is a completely rammed out production cycle. Three versions being produced on just 2 production lines is a production nightmare as it stands so messing about with it would probably slow it all down. Funny little fact Italy is assembling their own F35A / B and they aren’t doing it either !
If it was me in charge we would either be renegotiating /extending the Air Tanker contract (runs out in 2035) and getting the 9 core ones converted.
It may go against the grain but it’s an agreed contract and does work as originally designed, we do actually need the capability now and there are a lot of other things we need to spend limited CAPEX on.
Just remember we have an obligation to get spending up by 2035 and a lot needs doing before then.
Oh and I’d put a big fence around the Brize Apron and then just let a dozen hungry German Shepherds out over night and at weekends.
A decade from now the ghastly voyager PFI will be over & hopefully the RAF will have bought outright a fleet of 14 A330-800 MRTT. Half of which have booms.
DIP in the Autumn is where It’s at.
Then we can all moan and winge or even actively engage with the powers that be, if nothing tangeable comes of the SDR reccomendations.
“It’s going to be a long and lonely Winter”.
Personally I welcome the F35A’s for their focussing of minds in the kremlin “in 8-9 years” !!!
Imagine if we all stopped moaning and whinging until the autumn—UKDJ HQ would be forced to make some tough decisions and would almost certainly end up in administration.
Safe to say none of them know what they’re doing now—so how can we expect them to plan for the future? Unless the Defence Investment Plan comes with real substance and actual orders soon after, it’s just more bullshit, I’m afraid.
#Day24
If Russia is going to move, it will be 3 years before these aircraft land.
Ummm how do you work that one out? At their current rate of advance and given the appalling scale of their attrition and losses they will be lucky if they have reached the outskirts of Dnipro in three years time. 🇺🇦👍
This Defence Investment Plan due out in Autumn has a lot to live up to.
Ever get the feeling it will be a damp squib? Yes, me too.
It’s guaranteed
This is all a load of nonsense.
The RAF doesn’t need to evaluate the A variant. It’s been in operational service with NATO allies for years.
Just send some people on a good old RAF jolly…I mean fact finding trip to evaluate the performance of the allied aircraft. USAF, Norwegian, Dutch, Danish, Italian air force all have the A variant. That’s point one.
Point two- it’s no coincidence that the MOD teases is with this issue at a time when the Typhoon going out of production is now and this there are calls for more typhoons.
I appreciate the RAF wants the F35A but the typhoon is the only aircraft currently certified for meteor, storm shadow, brimstone and therefore getting more typhoons fits our weapons, unless we are about to go all in and build a whole ecosystem around the F35A- so tankers and US weapons like JSAM, AMRAAM, sidewinder 9-X block 2s?
Expensive proposition and if RAF gets it’s way and more jets are ordered what will the impact be on the Tempest programme.
Don’t get me wrong I think 70+ F35As, around 100 typhoons and 70+ F35Bs for a combined fast jet fleet of +240 is where we should be.
Tempest was always intended to replace typhoon, so a mixed 5th+6th Gen airfleet I’m comfortable with just as long as Tempest isn’t negatively effected and the carriers are provisioned with an adequate air wing.
Trouble is if they wanted Typhoons they could get them now couldn’t they? By going F35 they can now kick the can down the road for another 10yrs or so!
There are three problems with F35.
1/ Very few weapons are actually (plenty planned) integrated, at this point in time. Those that are don’t even cover the full spectrum. So, for example, we have strike fighter that can’t do maritime strike (or land strike for that matter) apart from dumb / smart bombs. Ukraine pilots can fire a Storm Shadow missile using a hand held tablet computer while flying a Soviet area fighter & hit the target.
2/ While otherwise, F35 performs brilliantly, its availability is horrendous. You need 3 squadrons of F35 to meet the availability rate of 1 squadron of just about any other western fighter (F22 excepted), especially if you try to ramp up past peace time usage. The more you push it, the faster it fails. Most wars, especially amongst peers & near pears last longer that a few weeks.
3/ Hand in glove with point 2, its cost per flight hour & availability of spare parts, is unsustainable. LM will ensure that parts will be shipped to you as the system says they are required? How does that work in the middle of the Atlantic/Indian/Pacific oceans? What if the satellite that passes the message along no longer exists? Just how is sustained wartime utilisation of F35 supposed to work?
Our numbers are scandalously low……..fitout the carriers with full numbers, double the As and get 30+ T5 Typhoons. War footing my arse.
If we do end up at war with Russia or China, every single F35 and Typhoon we have will not only need to be in the air, they will have to down about 30 enemy planes each (without taking casualties in return) to even start levelling the odds.
Don’t worry though, we’ll have a couple of squadrons by the time Tempest is ready… Anyone else think they’re putting the F35 off to wait for Tempest?
It’s quicker to build an air force in Hearts of Iron 2 Darkest Hour when playing as a minor nation than it is for the UK to even make it’s mind up how many planes it wants.
We are crazy to tie our future RAF fleet to USA production aircraft – just look at the chaos a mixed up US President can cause when he gets involved in US armament sales/distribution. Let’s buy more Typhoons – if necessary , modify them to carry US produced weapons – we must ensure that no other American is ever in a position to ‘control’ our air force.
Although I don’t agree with buying F35As, I do think that if we are buying them then we need to do it properly – get the the F35Bs we need for the Navy then get a reasonable force of F35As for the RAF. As it stands, doesn’t make sense – 12 adds nothing. However, first priority has to be with the F35B and a viable carrier force.
Will the Tempest be certified to carry the B61 nuclear gravity bomb?
Second question could the F35A be certified to carry the B61 nuclear gravity bomb?
It already is.
Who cares? If you reach the stage of throwing nukes about, then Europe is likely about to be uninhabitable. Where in Europe can you drop a nuclear bomb without taking out 100,000 civilians (at the minimum + after effects). One bomb on London or Moscow takes out how many? MAD is a real thing. Who wants to push the button first?
The nuclear card is almost impossible to play, especially in Europe. Even if you win, you still loose.
Apart from the supposed nuclear option (in reality dependant on the US giving the OK to use) What does the A varient bring the UK when compared to : Ensuring the B procurement meets the already determined carrier capability, requirement and strategy. ; The upgrade of Typhoon versions Inc.their use of UK weapons and continuation of the UK manufacturing capabilities ; The continued focus on Tempest development. I can’t help but think these additional purchases of the F35A at this late stage in the game can’t help but be detrimental to some/all of those, and smacks of something else as the driver.
Sucking up to TACO
I agree that all the facts are not known. What is the future of the RN carriers? How does the F35A purchase effect the Tempest?
Some analysis may come out of seeing Rafale fall victim to Chinese fighter and missile combo with AEW targeting.
Add the IDF performing at will over Iran , maybe the 5th gens are leaps and bounds above anything else.
Industry needs more Typhoon but operational effectiveness probably means that comes second to survivability.
Relying on a one trick pony which isn’t free from faults and relying on America for the combination number to unlock systems is a really bad idea to have to rely on this aircraft.