During a debate in the House of Lords on 26 March, Lord Clarke of Nottingham (Conservative) pressed the Government on its approach to European defence integration, suggesting that post-Brexit gaps in cooperation were hampering the UK’s strategic influence.
“Do the Government now agree with the opinion that President Macron has held for some years,” asked Lord Clarke, “that the European arm of NATO must be made stronger and credible, and eventually an equal partner with the US in the NATO alliance? It will take at least until the 2030s for us to achieve that desirable aim.”
He continued:
“Meanwhile, we are being excluded from the arrangements in Europe for defence procurement, and we are not fully aligned with them. No one voted for Brexit because they wanted us to cease to have defence and security alliances with our European neighbours.”
Lord Clarke urged the Government to “press hard for the closest possible integration of our defence policy with that of our European allies, so we can tell the Americans there really is a self-sufficient, credible European armed alliance.”
Responding on behalf of the Government, Lord Coaker (Labour) acknowledged both the importance of the UK’s relationship with the United States and the need for renewed cooperation with European partners.
“The US-UK relationship is absolutely fundamental to the future security of Europe and across the globe, and we look to maintain it,” said Lord Coaker.
“As far as Europe is concerned, we are looking to reset the EU-UK relationship in terms of defence and security, and work is ongoing.”
He also noted that efforts were underway to strengthen industrial links across the continent:
“Specifically with respect to industry, of course we are looking for greater collaboration and co-operation across Europe with respect to a European defence industrial strategy, and those negotiations continue.”
While not addressing the UK’s exclusion from certain EU defence procurement frameworks directly, Lord Coaker stressed that bilateral and multilateral cooperation remained strong.
“In many respects, both at European and bilateral levels, we are seeing increased co-operation, and that is essential for our European security and to demonstrate to the Americans that Europe is taking its responsibilities as seriously as it should,” he added.
Slightly off topic but has anyone read the reports in the Times that the UK won’t be buying Typhoon but will be buying up to 100 F35A’s and the UK may be considering equipping them with B61 tactical nuclear weapons.
Reports are that the UK government has evaluated any risk from the Trump administration but they believe that the UK’s status as a tier 1 partner and the ability it has to alter the F35 software means that it could continue to operate F35 even if the USA removed support.
Further reports state that the UK is not concerned about a shortage of work on typhoon affecting Wharton as they are confident Turkish and Saudi orders will sustain production for a decade right up until Tempest production starts.
If this is true I am in two minds. Getting 100 F35 A along with the existing 48 F35B and 100 Typhoons is a massive increase in RAF fire power and it puts us back in the clear position of being the number one Airforce in Europe. It’s probably the cheapest and quickest way to get there as well. With that kind of scale the RAF could defeat the Russian Airforce on its own and S400 would pose little difficulty to us. On the flip side Trump is a **** 🤔
Hopefully the speculation on the UK’s independent capability to operate F35 is also true and it will solve a lot of problems. HMG is not daft and did put a lot of time and money into this aircraft including development and we know there was a big spat back in 2009 over source code access and the Uk was given additional permission that other partners did not get.
If it does happen I wonder if all the F35Bs will be moved over to the Navy.
I am making a good salary from home $4580-$5240/week , which is amazing under a year ago I was jobless in a horrible economy. I thank God every day I was blessed with these instructions and now its my duty to pay it forward and share it with Everyone,
Here is I started_______ 𝐖𝐖𝐖.𝐖𝐎𝐑𝐊𝐒𝐓𝐀𝐑𝟏.𝐂𝐎𝐌
The concept of a 100 + F35 is not new news; however, such a move would be welcomed under this new government. The penny has dropped regarding UK defence, which is also reflected in Europe. That said, the magnitude of new spending will grow exponentially as the Russians rebuild their forces at an alarming speed. Many leading military observers fear Russia will invade elsewhere in Europe and beyond within the next decade, and with lessons learned in Ukraine, its ability to fight should be greatly improved. More T26 and T31 hulls will ensue, once the current order is complete and an appreciable increase in the Army’s strength both in troops and kit should be expected. Sadly, the costs will be difficult for the Labour Party to digest, knowing their past resistance to spending on UK forces.
Maurice, you really think SDR will significantly increase the army’s regular headcount? I have my doubts, unless they truly cut Civil Service numbers first (not saying MoD CS).
Is that in addition to or instead of the additional 27 F-35B that the UK is supposed to be buying ? If the UK were to purchase F-35A in the suggested numbers where does that leave GCAP ? I suggest up scream with no orders from the UK.
The way it’s being reported in the times it’s 100 additional F35A’s on top of 48 F35B already ordered. Typhoon will be retained but it’s not confirmed it will remain at the 100 airframes.
GCAP is safe as I have explained below, it will be the replacement for Typhoon not F35.
Paul, must be ‘in addition to’. 47 x F-35Bs is not enough for two carriers plus OCU plus Attrition Reserve plus Trials detachment.
Paul- here is my take- taking into account mis reporting and misquoting,i think that the 2nd Batch of F35B will be delivered as planned to take the Fleet up to 74,and that will be it.That will provide enough for the Carriers for the foreseeable future.Then a modest Batch of F35A will be ordered ( 26-30) to take the WHOLE Fleet up to around 100 Airframes.
I’d take such stories with a large pinch of salt. But I do believe the RAF would prefer more F35s over Typhoon.
Ultimately it won’t be an RAF decision but a political one.
Sustaining BAES Warton’s capability will figure heavily in the calculation.
The other part of the calculation is bringing able to deploy a freefall nuclear bomb. I don’t believe that F35B has that clearance and I know that Typhoon doesn’t either.
So those are the main drivers that I can see quite apart from the other F35 capabilities.
Why a freefall nuclear bomb could be relevant in 2025 environnement? (Not Even considering 2035´s environnement).
In Ukraine, plane don’t go to the front line anymore. Why does anyone believe it would be wise to conduct a strategic mission with a mission profile that seemed difficult in the 60’s? Why don’t any other nation in it’s right mind do that with a B52, a B2, a Tempest, a Rafale, a Su30, a Su57, a J20, but with a F35, it is gonna be fine.
Why does an obsolete armement + a senseless mission is used to justify the purchase of F35?
Why does a country able to make a missile to hit a tank or does a cruise missile to hit a bridge thinks it would work to use a freefall bomb…
One thing is sure: this has nothing to do with military rational, but political reasons goes beyond military decision making process.
F-35A with ASMP?
You need F35 for the B61 and in the same way you need RAFALE to carry ASMP.
It’s a one off story from the times.. someone is briefing for a purpose, but who knows what.. I’m not sure a 1 off order of 100 F35A makes much seem really.
First it will completely change the squadron structure of the RAF and introduce a 3rd fast jet squadron type, second it would essentially neuter the UKs carrier force..when its aready invested about 11 billion in capital.
The Uk carrier force needs 3 F35b squadrons as a min to make it really value for money.. so it needs a min of 60-70 jets… I could possibly see a split buy of say 12 more f35Bs and 88 F35A for a total of 96 typhoons, 60 f35b and 88 f35A with 5 typhoon squardons + Falklands 4 f35A and 3 F35b for 12 fast jet squadrons..I have alway said 12 was needed..but it’s a massively inefficient way of doing it in regards to ongoing costs.. as you need 3 OCUs instead of 2 if you just ordered F35Bs and typhoon.
But I would be very very surprised if the RAF got 100 more fast jets and the squadrons for them ( 5 more + OCU) that’s 10 billion pounds capital and around 1 billion a year In ongoing costs.
Yes but £10 billion in capital and £1 billion a year to run is well inside the likely RAF increase in funding.
Having 250 jets was a reality as recently as around 2010 before Dave took an Axe to the MOD budget and now we are projecting to increase the defence budget to its highest level since the 1990’s.
4 squadrons of F35A and 100 more jets is very doable although I agree a split of three F35B squadrons and three F35A squadrons makes more sense.
The F35A would essentially become the Tornado GR4 replacement with the F35B reverting to being the Harrier replacement
If it was going to happen I could see it going that way.. don’t think they would buy all F35As.
The French would never.
It can be discussed. But the rational of it is uncertain. USA would not open electronics, not give access to F35 code. So…
I am afraid intégration would be difficult.
All very interesting. I have only one question, where are we going to get the pilots and ground crews regardless of what type we go for.
Our pilot and ground training pipeline is atrophied to a drinking straw!
It’d take years for us to get the first F-35As; plenty of time to train up pilots and ground crews.
Or they’ll receive F-35A training from the Yanks.
I’d rather see the money go on enablers.
My main concern over this, if it were to be real, is that we’d be stuck with the same issues as the F-35Bs currently; can’t launch our own Meteor or ASRAAM missiles, and stuck either buying all American weapons or just dropping gravity bombs unless and until Block IV comes out, for which we might as well be waiting for Jesus!
Personally, I’d prefer more Typhoons over F-35s of any type.
If you ask the Pilots that Fly them they will pick F35 over Typhoon – every time.
Will they if they’re up against Russian GBAD and all they have are gravity bombs?
I’d rather be in a Typhoon, able to launch a Storm Shadow from 300 miles away, than an F-35 having to get in close in order to drop a bomb from 15 miles away.
We’re talking about the F35A here, they will have a more comprehensive Suite of Weapons available, including options for Stand Off at long ranges. F35B was never going to use Storm Shadow anyway, if you need to use them then Typhoon is your platform.
This story really come out of blue and would be worried that the defence minister is making policy up on the hoof. We haven’t got block 4 yet talk of another major f35 order is premature. This may also kill off tempest project.
I do not see why it should affect Tempest. This continuing nonesense of pulling out of Tempest is not only stupid but counter productive. Not only
Politically it would be stupid, technically is would be very stupid .
It would finish any trust in this country being a partner in any large scale defence project. It will be the final nail in the U.K. fighter business and rob us of the spin off from Tempest technology.
Given the Trump best efforts to market the F-47 , the potential market for Tempest just got a lot bigger .
I have said this before and I will say this again, I will be very surprised if there are not very heavy penalties associated with any party trying to pull out of Tempest development.
Trappier, Dassault CEO seriously doubt UK and Japon commitment to the Tempest, for the same old Trump reason.
How to solve a trade issue with Trump? Buy F35.
How to sign a trade deal with Trump? But F35.
I feel bad with the way things are going. UK… a plane manufacturer… no more…
I think that’s more wishful thinking on the part of Dassault considering the UK, Japanese, Italian offer is way more ahead of the French German offer,
Dassault and France, of course, aren’t biased against a competitor company (BAE) and country (UK).
Good Day, just a note, Germany is now on a war footing.
Thats according to the BBC. Quote, Germany decides to leave history in the past and prepare for war!
Perhaps the UK should wake up and do the same before its to Late!
Nick
The UK already announced defence expenditure budgets exceeding Germany in GDP terms.
Germany needs to get its ass in gear as it’s spent nothing for decades. The UK by comparison has always exceeding NATO spending targets. The UK is now gearing up for spending at 50% above NATO spending targets and at a level matching the USA in the next parliament.
There is not much else that can be done.
The F35 is probably the easiest major item to currently purchase due to the very large active production line and LM are currently advising the first production slots available for new orders are in 2029.
It’s very hard to spend increases in defence budgets quicker than the governments current ramp up.
Jim, you dont seem to understand. Germany is on a war footing and the UK should Act accordingly. Nick
Jim, you dont seem to understand. Germany is is increasing hugely on defence and the UK should Act accordingly by increasing defence spending in the same Männer!
The UK spends a huge amount more than Germany, they are just playing catch up..just as example the UK nuclear deterrence costs the same as buying and running 10 full armoured brigades including fires and full CS/CSS.. that’s 3 fully equipped armoured divisions…
Germany is all talk. Their 2022 100bn fund turned into nothing
Ken Clarke was a fully paid up traitor with his loyalty to a foreign power long ago. Now he is trying to drag us into the mess they created.
What foreign power was that exactly?
The only people in British politics that can sensibly be described as traitors are those leavers that knew they were illegally funded by Russia, as proven in court.
Up to 100 F-35As would be brilliant. It would plug the major gap in our airpower left by the removal and non-replacement of the Tornados in the critical strike/interdiction role. We have masked that shortcoming by tasking the Typhoons to do some ground attack, but that is a long way from being able to interdiction enemy roads, bridges, railways, field parks etc.
An F-35A force would give us the stealth capability to.blitz Russia’s A2AD S400 missile launchers, which would be a game changer.
The F’35A would be an excellent choice. Not having to cart a heavy lift fan around, as per our F-35B version, the A is faster, can hold twice the weapon load internally, has a better rate of climb and critically, has a much better range
It is also some £15m cheaper per copy than the B version we are currently buying
Before anyone starts complaining that we will have two different marques, which will mean different training, maintenance etc, Japan, Italy and I think S Korea are doing this without problem, using the F-35A for their air forces and the B for their carriers and amphibs.
100 As would equate to 4 sqns, each with 12 frontline aircraft, which would let us pack a good offensive punch. If the story is true, this could be very good news.
very good news.
I’d be amazed if it happened, as where is the money for it?
Even if Batch 2 of F35B was cut then you have 12 billion of Tempest development money over the next decade and the small matter of billions spent on 2 Carriers which won’t meet their full potential with only 48 F35B.
Unless RN UCAV are more developed than we thought.
The government already announced an extra £6 billion per annum starting in 27 and its targeting to raise it by another £15 billion per annum in real terms over that in the next parliament.
100 F35A would be a pretty small cost based on those kind of increases.
It won’t leave much extra for the army but then it’s air power that Europe needs and not more boots in the ground to defeat Russia.
Boots on the ground
Great if all that extra cash actually goes on conventional defence rather than inflation, DNE, R&D, new housing, and much else.
I hope it does mate.
Until it’s happening and orders are being placed, I’ll remain sceptical.
So far Labour have cut ships and helicopters.
Jim, If Russia were ever crazy enough to invade a Baltic state, it would result in the mother of all land wars. It would be hopeless our offering a small army contribution.
That’s my thinking as well.
In separate ways either F35B or Typhoon would be better than a massive order for F35A.
B is just as good as A for SEAD with UK weapons, does anyone really think we’ll be getting US gravity nukes?The ability to operate from roads near the front lines nearly nullifies the range disadvantage and improves survivability.
Politically much more of B is built in the UK.
Typhoon is built nearly entirely in the UK and we really need our production lines used to large scale orders ready for a (hopefully) large order for Tempest. Small export orders won’t allow for upscaling the workforce in preparation.
In the raw air defence role it is (nearly) as good as F35, especially in the short term until F35 gets Meteor. The problems come when it tries to do SEAD or long ranged strikes, for which we will have F35B and Storm Shadow respectively.
So I think a mixed “top up” order of both F35B and Typhoon would be preferable to a bulk Amy order.
Maybe 1 extra squadron of each, plus extras?
Agreed.
As others mention though, the tac nuke thing is interesting.
You mean… A mission you would not do with any plane, or drone… Since this one caries a nuclear warhead, he will be able to fly high over enemy concentration…
Sure.. they will certainly not have air cover, nor Sam batteries. This is what troup concentration look like in 2025.
I would be very surprised as only having 2 f35b squadrons essentially guts the potential of the UK carriers and the carriers are just about the best conventional deterrent the UK provides against Russia.. because Putin knows an E NATO navel force with the UK carriers can and would cut apart Barents Sea bastions..essentially allowing free access to those northern regions and ports..
The min requirement for those carriers is 3 squadrons, better 4.
Also would the RAF really want 3 fast jet types with all the inefficiencies build into that.. after all just running an extra OCU is 15 jets so around 1.5 billion in capital expenditure and say 150 million a year..if they just upped the F35b squadrons and the typhoon squadrons your saving a significant amount of capital expenditure and ongoing costs by missing out on the OCU, ground crew training and logistics for a third jet.
I’m not convinced flying two different types of F35 is that big an issue, lots of other airforces do it.
I suppose if you look at Italy they have gone that way.
USA, Italy, Japan and Singapore all have split fleets. Australia and South Korea could well join that list (Turkey may have also before they got the chop).
There’s a fair amount of commonality between F35A and F35B. F35C has the most unique components apparently.
If this is truly on the cards, I’d prefer a split buy bringing us up to about 75 of each variant. A couple dozen T4 Typhoons would be the icing on the cake. Just need weapon integration on F35 to gather pace.
Jon, do carriers in the European theatre make much sense? there are so many land-based airbases to use across NATO’s 30 x ENATO countries.
Hi Graham it’s the campaign around the Barents Sea.. the fight to crack the bastion will be sea based and from the direction of the Greenland sea.. so essentially operations well beyond practical range for single seat fighter realistic land based air cover.. and essentially you want your ASW assets to have air cover and you want your air cover to reduce his ASW assets.. then your ASW assets and SSNs can destroy his SSNs and SSGNs in the bastion.. at that point he’s lost his ability to strike those UK and Western European strategic bases and your SSNs have the freedom to hammer his northern airbases… pretty soon he’s lost the deep battle in the north and the pressure is off the Baltic states..other than attrition by convict and untrained troops and that’s not going to work when NATO has won the deep battle.
I guess it might be possible to order that number of As.
Tempest is unlikely to be entering service for 8-10 years, so we have a good gap in the fast jet procurement programme, particularly if the As are in place of further Bs.
Yes, we have to pump a few bn into Tempest development and we also have 40 Typhoons slated for a very expensive upgrade to take the ECRS. The RAF equipment budget for combat air is something like £1.8bn a year from memory, which is a lot over 10 years. It might be manageable. I fear it is a typo by the newspaper, they really meant B, or an early April Fools!
Yes 4-5 more squadrons would be an extra billion a year in ongoing costs + the 10 billion in capital costs..it also goes against the grain of where they have been going… suddenly moving to say fast jet12 squadrons and three fast jet types would seem unlikely.. I think a modest buy of f35b and typhoons just to secure enough jets to run 3 f35b and 5 typhoon squadrons + Falklands flight for 8.5 squadrons is all that can be hoped.. after all it was likely to drop to 3 F35b and 4 typhoon so even 3+5 + Falklands is a bonus.
I’m going with Typo. That said the politics of it could make sense, a US order in exchange for no tariffs, the ability to deploy our own warhead with a B61 purchase providing that umbrella for Europe without European countries needing to deal with the US/NPT. Would other nations help pay for that or even the Typhoon upgrades to allow the purchase.
We could be looking at a 180+ fast jet RAF, with a 78+ fast jet FAA.
Even if it’s a typo and it’s “just” a solid commitment to getting to and maintaining a 100 F-35B fleet that’s a big step up from the “148, 60, 78, 90 over the life of programme, 78 again, lol idk” of the past decade.
Yes I would not be surprised if a big order of F35 was being used as a tarrifs offset policy.
The Donald likes big headlines, this would be massive.
The UK having the ability to operate B61 might also be a big part. Taking over the USAF tactical nuclear mission in Europe.
This would be a disaster for Britain, and such a massive win for the US they should be willing to give us them for free. Block 4 with Meteor and Spear? No I didn’t think so.
It would almost certainly signal the end of either Tempest or Typhoon in the UK. We can’t afford to train the pilots and maintenance crews for 48 F-35B, 100 Typhoons and 100 F-35A while ramping up a similar number of Tempest as well. The Treasury would immediately ask, if we can’t afford to buy and operate the Tempest, why should we pay to design them? Ditching Tempest would be a political disaster and an economic opportunity squandered: the Fleet Air Arm would have be crippled for nothing, UK industry likewise and the US nerfed F-47 would have the field to itself for a decade until the French SCAF came online, years late to the 6th gen party. The “solution” for MOD would probably be to ditch the Eurofighter early, without upgrade, just to allow us to build Tempest. Without planes being built or upgraded by the UK, this will increase costs for Tempest, as some of the tech would have been reused and allowing the UK production lines to go cold both for build and upgrade will mean losing skills, with higher ramp up costs to follow.
As for paying to have American nukes on our F-35A or even US bombs with UK warheads, that would increase our dependence on the US further still. It’s just more money spent in America to make us ever more reliant on them.
From what i have read a few points – there won’t be any Technical Limitations from the US regarding any future F35 sales to the UK,we are and will always be a Tier 1 Parner ( the only one ).With Turkey looking at a deal, and Saudi Arabia now almost certain to buy more Typhoons the future of Warton will be very secure out to the date when Tempest is likely to start producion,this changes the landscape as an ‘A’ buy was thought to spell the end of both Warton and Tempest,that won’t be the case.Also given the choice of more Typhoon or F35 the RAF will choose F35 every time,obviously Tempest will replace Typhoon as planned.I’d expect the next tranche of F35b to be ordered and delivered as per schedule so the Carriers will be properly equipped.
I hope you are right. Obviously, if the government says would you like 100 extra fighters, ones that you won’t need to share with the Navy, the RAF are hardly going to say no.
One reason the RAF might not be quite as keen to pick F-35A every time is because they won’t have immediate access to Meteor. Storm Shadow and FC/ASW won’t be integrated onto F-35 either. It must be galling to MBDA not only to lose out on Meteor sales, but to see UK money pumped into AMRAAM-D, a direct competitor.
Paul, what are we getting for our F-35 Tier 1 status? Certainly not a fast build of our Tranche 1 order!
The Build/Delivery schedule has been discussed here multiple times,the MOD have set the pace according to the Contract,plus there are the Block IV issues that LM have to sort out.The F35B is still a work in progress much like the other variants.
Interestingly it looks like Turkey is now heading to buy 20 tranche 1s typhoons from the RAF and then an order of 40 new tranche 4s..so it seems like the Germans may finally have shut up about vetoing the sale to turkey..if that is the case it will secure Warton..
Jon, aren’t those Tr1 Typhoons in bad shape with many parts missing through cannibalisation?….and very old software etc.
From what I read essentially turkey was quite happy to spend the money on the spares to get them to front line readiness again as they have about 40% of their airframe hours left.. so about 3000 hours each.
Essentially showing HMG up for being cheap.. because if turkey are perfectly happy to buy the aircraft and the spares needed, it really puts HMG in a bad light.
As is the case for the C130J Hercules -too knackered for the RAF but potentially good for Turkey.
I read on a different site that 11 of the T1s were mothballed waiting on cannibalisation, 2 were saleable, and the others had already been cannibalised or been ditched. Turkey getting 20 doesn’t stack with that assessment, or possibly they’ll be cobbling bits together. Fair play to them, and as Jonathan says, it shows that we aren’t getting the best bang for the buck.
We could have easily put the better radars on the tranche 2s and speeded the full tranche 3s upgrade programme by now. We sit on these things (like the radars) until they are out of date and are no longer exportable.
The pieces are coming together: Britain’s position as second in command is put into question if the USA isn’t dominant.