The UK expects to complete procurement of an additional 12 F-35A and 15 F-35B aircraft by 2033, with the initial batch of 48 F-35Bs due for delivery by March 2026, according to statements made in the House of Lords.
Speaking during a defence question session, Minister of State at the Ministry of Defence Lord Coaker confirmed that the second phase of the UK’s F-35 programme will include 27 aircraft: “12 F-35As and 15 F-35Bs, which will enable the stand-up of the third front-line squadron focused on F-35Bs.”
He added that the government remains committed to acquiring 138 F-35s over the life of the programme, as first stated in its long-term plans.
Lord Coaker also confirmed that the decision to procure F-35As now, ahead of the Defence Investment Plan expected this autumn, was taken in light of “serious geopolitical challenges” and does not alter the total number of aircraft planned. He said it was “important that we made that decision at this particular time in the light of the threat that we face.”
Responding to concerns raised by Lord Houghton of Richmond, Coaker acknowledged that the 12 F-35As would replace 12 of the originally planned F-35Bs and that the A variant is “some 20% cheaper,” saving approximately $240 million. However, he also confirmed that the UK currently lacks the sovereign air-to-air refuelling capability for the F-35A, meaning allied support will be necessary: “He is right about the refuelling capability; there will need to be allied support for that,” Coaker said.
Pressed by Lord West of Spithead, Coaker declined to commit to a review of the UK’s nuclear doctrine but noted that doctrine is always under consideration. He also reaffirmed that the broader investment decisions outlined in the Strategic Defence Review remain on track for the autumn, despite the timing of the F-35A announcement.
Baroness Goldie sought assurance on delivery timelines, to which Coaker responded that he had “every confidence” in meeting the procurement schedule for both variants.
If you need a Plumber to fix that annoying drip, then I’m your bloke.
On a less serious note, I wonder what Corbin thinks about the F35A procurement along with it’s intended role ?
Corbyn is going to be busy creating his new marxist-Islamist alliance party.
If he ever takes power he would sell off the armed forces equipment and give all the money to our ex-colonies.
I’d rejoin the EU tomorrow to avoid that 5th Columnist being anywhere near power.
Hi DM. Highly unlikely he’d get sufficient political traction. The Corbyns, Arderns and Tradeaus left a trail of damage, mistrust and resentment. Their time is over, certainly for the medium futures! I’m unhappy about this F35 timing and the number are simply inadequate particularly in light of the retirement of the Tranche 1 Typhoon. Anyhow, hope you’re having grand summer!
Hi Chris.
Long time no speak.
Yes, thank you.
Airborne is operational, pops up now and again but he’s around.
Yes, a paltry 27, over the best part of the next decade!
But with 12 billion just to develop GCAP, never mind buy it, and 15 Billion on Astrea warhead and associated AWE infrastructure, I’m not surprised.
Sooner people realize actual military kit is last on the list for HMG re the MoD budget the better as far as I’m concerned, but that is my cynical position after near three decades of let downs and I see no sign of that changing with this lot.
It’s pathetic numbers isn’t it. With everything tanks planes you name we are lacking. They think quality makes up for quantity but it doesn’t. Tbh they probably could do with losing a war. Teach them a lesson.
Who are we even defending nowadays. Not me or you that’s for sure.
I’m actually quite pleased if they start a new party to be honest.. as long as the remaining communists sod off from the Labour Party. Get them in a party were they can actually stand up and really say what they believe.. their vote will be minimalist and low impact… ans they can shout and protest from the sidelines safely away from power and government.
Exactly this!
It upsets me that patriotic working class Brits voting for Labour are voting for these people.
The far left is as great a threat as Russia if they ever got in power.
At least it will be honest labelling.
Which suits both the voters and the Labour leadership.
Getting shot of that lot would allow Labour to be a party of The *Working* People.
Currently they seem to be the party of The Welfare People….
He’s a looney. No one will ever vote for him.
If you need an annoying drip, then I’m that bloke.
This split purchase preserves the UK’s option to persue multiple acquisition/deployment strategies for F-35. Inspired decision, whether deliberate or fortuitous.
Hardly inspired. Just more cost cutting
That is a very positive way to look at mate. Good on ya.
Most on here are concerned about what it means for the carrier air wings and to be honest that is my concern as well. 2033 is well down the road as well, but I guess they need to wait for the build up of the defence budget…
Cheers CR
So with 74 aircraft in eight years time we will be able to have three squadrons. WOW! 36 (?) in the active wing and 38 for….?
Availability of F35 is around 50 percent. So yes
Very interesting. Thanks Hugo
Ideally you want all the aircraft in your front line squadron to be ones actually operationally ready to use (subject to short term repairs and maintenance). You do not assign specific aircraft to specific squadrons permanently but have one pool from which each squadron gets its aircraft in cycle.
3 squadrons of 12 plus and an operational conversion training squadron, 3 test and development aircraft. The rest give you a reserve to manage annual average flight hour limitations, longer term maintenance, broken planes that take more time to fix and probably a couple to cover accidents like dropping one off a carrier over the life time.
Same principle as the strategic sub. 4 boats give you 1 at sea at all times. One ready to sail at short notice, one in repair and recovery and 1 in long term maintenance. Always 1 at sea and, with some time to prepare for a war you think may happen soon, up to 3 in surge if you can manage your maintenance schedules and crew availability.
Appreciate your reply Dave. I agree with your anaysis. What has always worried me is numbers. If there is, God forgive, a major conflict we will have to spread three squadrons between two carriers and maybe non carrier use overland and only then in eight years time. We need to make a decision as to what it is we want. The F35B if there are 48 will enable us to run each Carrier (if we can) with 15/18 aircarft each. If we are now going to buy the “A” version, even if it’s primarily a political decision in my view, lets buy 24/30 and let the RAF have a decent overland strike force. This all assumes of course that we can train enough pilots.
I vote the 12 f35A’ s will be called the Lord Coaker squadron and when it’s decided that this was the wrong decision all those involved should hand back their govt pensions
A political purchase.
Lord Robertson did not support it, and said as such. So who decided on this?
8 years, to equip the RAF by 27 further aircraft. Which, no matter how they spin it, is no expansion, considering the hundreds discarded with no replacement over the last 20 years.
How does it improve NATO one iota having 12 RAF jets capable of dropping free fall bombs the US shares in war with other NATO air forces?
Nailed it.
I have tried and failed to imagine the process that led to this decision. Happily, given the time to delivery, there is a good chance this utterly bizarre commitment will be reversed.
It does seem strange to drag this small order out to 2033. If we ordered today, they would be in UK service by 2030 at the latest.
I would imagine the RAF is scratching it’s head and wondering what to do with 12 F35A,
Is it the OCU and spares for no operational squadrons ???
Is it 9 aircraft for the Red Arrows, with three spares for display and tactical nuclear attack during the winter break???
Lol…they’re for the OCU, mate.
So if they intent to stand up one operational squadron, I assume they will be ordering around 30 F35A ??
Or is it stick to 12, with 4 operational aircraft on a sort of standby nuclear alert?
It doesn’t matter how you look at this, it makes no sense.
The 12 F35A go to an existing Squadron, mate. No 207 Sqn, the OCU.
That will release some, but not all, of that Sqns B contingent so they go to front line Sqns.
Those Bs, plus the 15 new Bs in tranche 2, plus the remaining Bs coming by March next year of the first tranche, a dozen or so I think, will in time enable a third front line Sqn to form.
Leaving us – 617 Sqn, 809NAS, X future Sqn, and –
207 Sqn ( OCU ) 17 Sqn ( OEU )
Almost certainly all will be at Marham. The only way a second F35 station appears is if by some miracle we order many, many more and the RAF expands. Which we know with British governments, is not happening.
Creating a second station for F35 would be too expensive to operate so few aircraft at two locations.
On the nuke thing, I doubt any would be on any V bomber type alert. If the situation deteriorates, plenty of time to get the bombs on a handful of them.
Right, cheers for that Daniele, that sort of makes sense, in a fashion anyway!
So an OCU that doubles up as a nuclear strike squadron.
Bizzare idea mate…
It ticks the boxes, for the government.
Headlines about F35A and nukes. Public clueless that this is an existing commitment since 2022 but split. Headlines.
Tick.
Starmer looks serious.
Tick.
( Not really, NATO should be laughing at him except for one thing….Trident )
Saves, I recall, 240 million.
Tick.
Cheaper to use for day to day pilot conversion in OCU.
Tick.
Uk can join NATO , US bomb program.
Big tick.
Negatives.
Cheaper now, expensive later?
Taking a small fleet and splitting it into 2 smaller fleets. Moronic.
Harrier, Jaguar all went that way when a fleet number is so small deleting it is attractive.
Inpact on QEC, less B in buy but some B released for 617 and 809 so saved airframe hours.
My preference:
Full 72 F35B buy, THEN by at least 24 A. And develop a stand off missile with France. Or buy into their existing, whatever.
Give the RAF a few JSM for their 12 F-35A & they become useful.
Never mind the A, how about we buy JSM for external carriage on the B and also Protector?
We really need something bigger than Spear for the CSGs.
Kongsberg offered to integrate the JSM on Japan’s F-35B. Never heard if Japan took it up. Japan has bought JSM for its F-35A.
Italy is integrating JSM on F35B, I think, so we wouldn’t need to do extra work.
Hear, hear : I just understand how, with 63 F35Bs, we will still only have 3 frontline squadrons. What do they do with their aircraft? As for the 12 F35A, UK Armed Forces Commentary sums it up perfectly, when in particular he calls into question the viability of even this timid increase in the context of GCAP ramping up. I think GCAP is a fantastic initiative, and nothing should hold it back, but we have these two carriers, and we struggle to put 1 squadron on board. Surely at 3.5% GDP in the 2030s, four squadrons should be feasible? Naive, I acknowledge.
The whole thing is daft. I suspect it has more to do with the so called “free trade” deal that Starmer has given into than anything to do with defence.
Second that.
You have to remember that NATO has reinstated the ten year rule, so we know that all these aircraft will be fully operational before that time is up. After all the ten year rule worked extremely well in the 1930’s, so of course it will work well again. Or am I misreading my history?
This is thin end of the wedge stuff.
Inter service politics at its worst.
The idea that they are marginally cheaper to buy is irrelevant as they are useless for CSG.
The next tranches will now all be A because….
Idiots.
8 years assuming Block IV is either working or we decide not to wait 🙂
Can we strap Lord Coaker to a B61-12 a la Major TJ “King” Kong when we take delivery of the first F35A ?
12 F-35a, which would fly to collect the bombs from another location. How many will be combat-ready? Hollow posturing.
At least it is nearby, a minutes flying time?! Lakenheath and Marham are close.
Or would just moving them by road be better?
Marham has a SSA at the SW end of the station that could take them, but would cost to update it. And of course the vaults beneath some of the HAS.
Whatever, we should be building our own stand off tactical capability, not using US.
From 74, maybe 10-12 will be in the sustainment fleet. The aircraft are operated as a pooled fleet. All 74 will be in service, but jets are moved around depending on requirements, deployments and maintenance/upgrade ect.
six,seven? BUT where are these bombs going to be used.? By my reckoning Russis is about 700 miles away. Are we really going to attack Russia if they have already advanced into Poland Or Germany, unlikely though that seems, considering they can hardly get into Ukraine. So are we going to drop nukes on our allies countries? I don’t think so and if we are not why are we buying the “A” version? Surely not as a trainer. It just does not make sense.
NATO Tankers will refuel to extend their range.
The RAF will now have more types in inventory that it cannot refuel than those it can
Alice in wonderland world of our defence establishment.
I’d have rather they’d gone out and spent money
putting booms on Voyager.
Too simple, never mind more logical, my friend.
Any whiff of extra Typhoons being purchased and or upgraded and sooner?
I’d previously read that the original all-F35B Tranche 2 was going to be delivered at a rate of 3 airframes a year, which could have meant Q4/2034 or Q1/2035. So this is an acceleration, presumably due to us being able to order 4 F35As a year will a similar amount of funds as for 3 F35Bs.
The extra 12 F35s flying to Lakenheath to pick up the bombs will be the difference between winning and losing I’m sure as they’re won’t be enough already there to do it themselves I’m sure, there are a more F35s in Lakenheath than the entire RAF F35 fleet. I really don’t see what this purchase is offering to anyone
So the next small batch of F35 which is now split in half won’t be done until 2033. That’s two years before Tempest is suppose to be ready which means the RAF will never go back above 200 airframes.
If the government is serious about going to 3% or 3.5% on defence what do they suppose they will spend it on.
A big increase in the RAF fast jet force procuring F35 was probably the only area the uk had the industrial and manpower capacity to generate a significant force increase and by stretching out an already previously confirmed purchase for a further decade it can no longer do anything as fleet numbers can’t be increased for at-least ten years and the army can’t even recruit the 73,000 it has authorised.
Probably add five years onto 2033 before Tempest is in RAF Sqn service.
“If the government is serious about going to 3% or 3.5% on defence what do they suppose they will spend it on.”
Industry. DNE. Pensions. Ukraine. More industry. Housing. The SIA. More industry. Lots of R&D ( going to industry ) And as much non actual core conventional military spend as they can put in to their % would be my answer.
This government have less interest in defence than the last, no matter what Starmer grandstands.
Windmills (made in China), solar panels (made in China with slave labour) covering fields that should be growing food. Oxford PV has invented a perovskite/silicon dual layer solar panel, much more efficient than a silicon panel. Why not build a state of the art, automated factory to make them in Britain?
Our politicians don’t seem to bet on ourselves very often.
Why indeed?
These F35As should just be seen as a stopgap for Tempest which, let’s face it, probably won’t be delivered on time.
It’s a shame we’ll be using B61s though. It would make more sense to have a sovereign deterrent.
Anyone know wht the refuelling probe isnt a standard across NATO . It would make more sense surely ?
I know the USN has to have probe and drogue because they can’t physically fit a boom into an aircraft that is small enough to go on a carrier.
Can someone answer a question for me? I understand from reading this forum that F35 is currently unable to carry weapon systems such as Meteor and that further weapons integration work is required that will improve the situation in future ‘blocks’ of the aircraft. Does this mean that our current fleet of F35s will never carry the equipment we desire or does the term relate to block upgrades of existing airframes as well as new production aircraft?
Cheers
So that will be around 71 front line jets.. from that we get 3 front line squadrons..that’s a bit pathetic to be honest.. OCU 12, 3 squadrons 36 = 48 jets then a 20% sustainment fleet =58 jets.. in reality 71 should give you 4 front line squadrons.. there are going to be 96 single seat typhoons and from that the RAF are running 6 front line squadrons, the Falklands flight and the joint squadron as well… jet wise 6 front line = 72, Falklands =4 , joint =6 OCU =12 essentially the typhoons will be operating with an almost none existent sustainment fleet unless they cut typhoon squadrons compared to the F35 which will have a 23 jet sustainment fleet for 3 squadrons.. the F35 is it seems to be suffering an issue in that it is so much less able to deliver front line flying hours per jet that that you need a 40% sustainment fleet…..
Agree, the numbers are abysmal and with this announcement there is no longer any hope in sight. There will be four squadrons of F35 now in a way as the OCU will now become a nuclear capable strike unit but that just seems like a gimmick to me.
That’s a mission that requires substantial training so I can’t see how the OCU does that and it’s main task with just 12 F35A.
This just seems like the same nonsense we got from the last government with T32 frigates and the like.
Jonathan,
Despite previous information provided, you continue to make these odd assertions about how many squadrons we will have and how the aircraft are deployed.
There are very straightforward maths behind RAF squadron ORBATs, explained repeatedly before. 50% of the fleet will be in frontline squadron service, the other 50% divided between squadron maintenance I.e. routine maintenance in garage, the OEU, the OCU, with a number in war and attrition reserve. There are exact percentages for each of these categories.
I have abandoned trying to get you to understand this so this for the benefit of other confused readers.
75 F-35s, which is the current target, will be sufficient to equip 3 F-35b squadrons, each of 12 frontline aircraft. That’s it. Looking at the numbers, I wouldn’t be surprised if there was an additional small flight of 3 F35As specifically in the nuclear role.
But crimes that is the number of jets and it’s the present squadrons..it’s not an odd made up number, 96 is the number of single seat typhoons the RAf will have in the next couple of years and it has made no indication it’s standing down any of its typhoon squadrons. so either the typhoon sustainment fleet gets massively reduced or the RAF is running paper squadrons.. because the number of single seat tranche 2-3:typhoons is going to be 96 and the squadrons are the squadrons..with no indication of change.
As for number of assigned jets..at one point the RAF was happy to publish exactly which jets were allocated to each squadron and which were in the sustainment fleet.. and at one point each squadron did have at least 12 single seat jets ( ans up to 14) and 1-2 two seat jets..with the OCU actually having 17 jets, 5-6 of which were single seater.. I have a list of which squadrons had which jet and what jets were in the sustainment fleet and it was about 80% directly allocated to squadrons and 20-25% in the sustainment fleet.. but they now will not publish the data.. any guess as to why ?
What I’m point out it’s either
1) they no longer have the correct number of jets to run the typhoon squadrons they have and we have a lot of paper squadrons with a handful of jets each.. because if as you say only 50% are actually allocated to front line squadrons then each squadron will have only a handful of jets.
2) they are going to utterly cull the number of front line typhoon squadrons very soon
3) typhoon is profoundly more effective from the available airframe hours than F35..
Which one is it.. because you simply cannot have one fleet of 96 jets running supplying 6 front line squadrons, a seprate flight and a joint squadron and a fleet of 71+ 3 orange wires supplying 3 front line squadrons.. either one fleet is to small or one fleet is to big…the RAF MOD cannot have its cake and eat it. Which is essentially what it is doing with these two fleets.. saying we can reduce numbers and keep up squadrons for one fleet and need to increase numbers of the second fleet to get a 3rd squadron.. sorry but both cannot be correct.
Just as a snap shot of the typhoon fleet when it had 4 front line squadrons and the Falklands flight.
Sustainment fleet 25 jets ( 23 FGR4, 2 T3)
3 squadron ( Front line) 14 jets ( 12 FGR4 2 T3)
XI squadron ( frontline) 14 jets ( 13 FGR4, 1 T3)
6 squadron ( front line) 16 jets ( 15 FGR4, 1 T3)
1 squadron (front line ) 14 jets ( 13 FGR4 1 T3)
29 squadron ( OCU) 17 jets ( 6 FGR4 11 T3)
41 squadron ( TE) 6 jets ( 5 FGR4 1 T3)
1435 flight ( 4 FRG4)
So when it had 4 front line typhoon squadrons and a Falklands flight it was running them with an average of 13 FGR4s per squadron and 23 in the sustainment fleets. It had 90 FRG4s with 23 sustainment and 67 FRG4s deployed in 4 front line squadrons, an independent flight, TE squadron and OCU… but now it has plans for 96 FRG4s to keep up 6 front line squadrons, the independent flight, joint squadron, TE squadron and OCU..something is not quite working there..at the same time it will have a total of 74 F35 and with that only raise 3 front line squadrons, TE squadron and OCU.
So from that if they are running ( as they say they are) 12 jet F35 squadrons.. then 3 front line squadrons and the OCU is 48 jets.. 20-25% for the sustainment fleet is about 10-12 that is 60 jets, 71 jets would give you a sustainment fleet of 23 jets.. which is the sustainment fleet the RAF ran with typhoon FRG4 when it had 90 jets and 4 squadrons as well as the Falklands flight..
So the data and numbers are clear..the RAF is planning to run a larger than normal fleet for 3 squadrons of 12 for F35 and a smaller than normal fleet for typhoon ( insanely small).
The RAF would even give you the tail numbers of every jet allocated to each squadron..just not anymore.
Article in the FT today.
The last Qatari typhoon is now structurally complete and awaiting painting and markings then that’s it.
HMG need to order a new batch of typhoons now otherwise BAE Wharton will be wound down with no work to do until Tempest programme gets going.
That’s bad news and a real strategic risk for retention of crucial skills.
A 24-36 typhoon order is needed now…will it be forthcoming? Doubt it. HMG have been asleep at the wheel and blind to the perilous state of defence for the last 20 years.
The Typhoon consortium said they were expecting large new orders to put the programme back onto 3 aircraft per month completion yet……nothing…..it’s all hot air. Europe is not serious about it’s defence or defence industrial base.
I’ve got a plan.
48 f-35b makes (theoretically,) 4 sqns. None of them have indevidual markings so they don’t need to really exist. Just give a pilot command of the (sqn). Everyone is happy and we look great!
I know. I should work for the MOD.
Oh and rename 207 sqn to xv as the had a nuclear role in the Cold War. Done. Thank you all
I think we have 38 F-35b at the moment. The new plan envisages 75 F-35s in 8 years time. That is an increase of 37 aircraft over 8 years, so an average of under 5 a year. That is a reduction from the 6-7 average that we budget for. So the MOD is still in reductive.mode and we will continue to have a very thin fast jet combat capability well below comparable allies.
Are the savings going into funding Tempest? That would be understandable, given the pretty limited investment announced so far. Or is it being whisked away to fund the MOD’s new unmanned wunder.weapons. principally for the Navy?
We need to get back to a proper acquisition rate for fast jet aircraft, with a force enlarge to c 250 aircraft. We need to be acquiring 8, 9 or 10 a year, not a desultory 4 or 5.
The numbers here are low.
12 F35As is just a token force, intended for a NATO commitment we don’t really need to commit too. We provide 50% of European NATOs strategic nuclear deterrent force. Other NATO countries can commit to F35As for that mission.
We’d be better placed either ordering a fifth dreadnought class or just adding more nuclear warheads per Trident so each sub going out on patrol is armed to the max capacity.
The lot and batch numbers are locked in with LM and as a result of not forward planning the 27 additional F35s are all we can get on a packed production run until after 2033. By which time hopefully Tempest will have begun low rate initial production runs. So a lack of planning ahead and commitment lead to this outcome. We’d all wanted to see well over 36 additional F35S ordered. Instead we’ve got just the 27 committed too 2 years ago.
I can see there only being demand for maybe another 24F35s from the UK after 2033. One more squadron of F35As and another 12 F35Bs for carriers, then that’s it.
Everything else should be 6th Gen tempest.
Considering the UK has 10% production and the F35 programme is going to end up with thousands of aircraft we’ve done financially very well. Small numbers ordered by the UK and yet many more built by our 10% equivalence.
The UK armed forces aren’t going to get near the 138 promised over the life of the programme.
Not sure why we are not adapting our F35As to refuelfrom our tankers…. according to the manufacturer it would not be a big or difficult modification. It memory serves this is exactly what the Canadians have done on their F35A order.