Unite the union has called on the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to choose Typhoon jets when decisions are made on new fast-jet procurement.
Unite understands a decision is imminent from government on the purchasing of new aircraft for the RAF with a choice between the British-made Typhoon and the American-made F-35(A).
Unite is calling on the government to invest in a new tranche of Typhoon fighter jets to ensure the UK maintains its industrial skills base ready for the 6th generation Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP).
Today’s call also comes shortly after a report last week from the defence select committee that highlighted the importance of Britain’s industrial capability and skills base for Tempest/GCAP to be a success.
With full-scale production of Tempest not expected to begin until the 2030s, retaining final assembly capability and the existing Typhoon BAE Systems workforce of 6,500 will be a significant challenge and will be made more difficult by the dwindling of the UK Typhoon production line, the union claim.
Unite general secretary Sharon Graham said: “The UK possess some of the finest engineers and technicians of fast jets anywhere in the world. With a decision on fast-jet procurement imminent, the government needs to take decisive action to retain these workers and ensure that we are in a position to get more skilled jobs from Tempest/ GCAP.
“We have been saying for some time that The MoD needs to place a further order for Typhoon aircraft, which will fulfil a military requirement, maintain industrial capacity, and preserve jobs and skills.
Labour must now step up to the plate and make the clear unequivocal investment decisions that workers and their employers desperately need.”
The union argeus that a UK order of 24 F35’s would only secure 2-3 months of work in Britain for 2,000 people whereas 24 Typhoons would secure 26,000 jobs for 2 years for workers in BAE Systems, Rolls Royce, Leonardo and the UK supply chain.
Unite defence and aerospace national officer Rhys McCarthy said: “These are highly skilled and well-paid jobs in areas of the UK where this sort of work is hard to come by. In an increasingly unstable world it would be reckless not to ensure that our own domestic defence industry is properly supported and capable of meeting the security challenges we face.
Rhys McCarthy added: “The government has been clear that the British economy needs growth and that our defence industry is crucial to this. Selling the Typhoon overseas can contribute to our GDP but we cannot expect foreign governments to buy our fast jets if our own government won’t. It’s clear that they need to make a decision to ‘make and buy British”.
Come on government, you know it makes sense. Typhoon will be around for a long time so having some of the latest versions can only be a good thing!
Doesn’t matter if this move is right or wrong to me – I just need someone to explain why the expert in this area should be a union. Should it not be the interests of the country we are considering here.
The Union represents the people making the aircraft, they are entitled to try and influence government the same as any other organisation of group of people with a vested interest in government decisions.
It’s the governments job to describe what’s best for the country but that is immensely subjective.
BAE would also love to lobby hard but they can’t as they will worry about pissing off LM.
They’re not the experts as such but they’re entitled to their opinions and in this case I think they’re right.
Buy more Typhooms, support British industry and keep the talent going until Tenpest.
Though, personally, if I were in charge I’d be ordering another 60-80 Typhoons – but that’s just me.
Because the Unions are sponsors of many Labour Party MPs (they founded it) so I guess they have some leverage with government.
We need both ,
We need to ensure we have enough F35s to put a full combat air wing on both carriers and at least replace the Tranche 1 Typhoons we are in the process of retiring . Additional F35a for dedicated overland operations would be a wise purchase .
Imho
F-35A? I thought we had the debate on F-35A and decided it is effectively a 3rd type with all the costs that implies.
F-35A must be a wrong surely?
It’s like the pasty tax, some civil servant comes up with an idea and try’s to push it on every new government, in this instance it is saving a few quid upfront and buy the F35A.
Will labour be daft enough to fall for it is the big question.
To be honest if they want another version of the F35 I’d go for the C version rather than the A. It may be limited to 7.5 G but it can carry more weapons further and if we do go for a version of CATOBAR it could be a prudent move.
F35a would effectively mean heading towards a 4 type fast jet fleet…..ooohhh…were back in the 20th century. With thats happening in the world go EF and maintain sovereign capability.
I wonder could the F35A be a stalking horse..? HMT would probably insist on a ‘competitive’ element to any such order.
If so then I would hope that the order for extra F35B is safe as I believe the UK is committed to additional F35B over the life of the program.
Additional Typhoons is a nice surprise if we get them…
Cheers CR
Ditto…
I didn’t know F35-A was even a possibility, surely it’s more of a choice between more Typhoons now and fewer Tempests later? Seems like an easy decision to make though as we need to retain those jobs and we need to replace tranche 1.
Is there any fresh news on the possible Turkish or Saudi orders? If either or both orders came off then would we have the capacity for our own domestic order as I thought they were UK/Spanish lead orders and not German or Italian and Spain will be busy with their own extra orders? Not very many I know but we do have another order of 12 for Qatar to keep things ticking on for now.
I think it is a matter of where money is spent on protecting whose jobs.
F35B about £120mil, 15% spent here so real cost £114mil. Very good plane that the RN and RAF want more of. Mainly US jobs.
F35A about £80mil, 15% spent here so real cost £76mil. In many ways even better plane although also with limitations and RAF only. Extra support line needed. Mainly US jobs.
Typhoon T4 about £95mil, all spent here so real cost £63mil. In some ways as good or better that either of above, but also in many very important ways inferior. All British jobs.
I believe the RN wants extra money spent on F35Bs, the RAF the same although they could live with F35As. The Union wants Typhoons for UK jobs.
It is a trade off. For the same money spent over the next 10yrs you get more now with the F35 but restarting British aircraft production for the Tempest will cost far more. Do we want to protect British jobs and skills or humour Trump? Thinking of how much time and cost has been added to ship building costs by stop-start production I would go with Typhoon and have the skill base there for Tempest. Saying Foxtrot Oscar to Trump is pure bonus.
I don’t think its that simple as your figures suggest as you are forgetting that we are commited to buy more F35 as part of us being the Tier 1 partner. That means we build 15% of every single F35 built for anyone not just ours which brings in £Billions of revenue and Tax.
Do the Maths 15% of 3000 F35 vs 100% of 24 Typhoons also what everyone forgets is that 15% is the average workshare overall, its actually nearer 20% for the F35B due to the lift fans.
Its not a choice I’d want to make but those F35B are fully funded and nothing else is, also the Yanks may not take too kindly to us backing out.
I think the UK percentage is higher with F35B than with A or C because Rolls Royce make the lift fan. I’m not sure how much extra though.
I think we need F35B, typhoon and tempest. White tempest is not going to be built in numbers to provide replacements for typhoon for some time having a production line running will allow prototype tempest aircraft to be built alongside on going typhoon production at potentially lower cost.
The union ask for 24 typhoon is not unreasonable and purchasing another 30 F35B would also be reasonable. Add in 6 prototype tempest over the same time frame.
BAE workshare of Typhoon is 33%, plus we get the benefit of final assembly for our own aircraft. So, any RAF order is not 100% spent in the UK. On the other hand, we still have a workshare of all the new German and Spanish Typhoons on order, just not the final assembly.
Los Typhoon Italianos también
President Trump is the country’s best hope of getting rid of the traitor Chairman/woman Starmer🐹🦄🌈. 👍🏼
And who do you suggest replaces him?
Either a mistake or the carrier capable force being robbed of the additional 24 F35b planned. Can’t see the requirement for F35As in a NATO first led review.
Wouldn’t be surprised if the order if the order of F35Bs is at risk, would hope though that some sense prevails and it ends up a split Typhoon/F35b order
Like you say I think an order of 24 jets split between Typhoon and F35b would be the best way forward. Besides not all the tranche 1 Typhoons being retired are sill operational although they are on the MOD inventory
The requirements are for 27 F35B, 24 Typhoons would be welcome, but without extra funding, the F35B has it.
Defence must not be a job creation scheme.
Defence must be a job creation exercise..the nation without a defence industry will loss the war that matters ( the war for survival)…every single existential peer war in modern history is essentially won by 4 things:
1) industrial output ( the war machines you can build and access to resources and power )
2) population size ( the number of young men you can send off to die)
3)economic output ( the materials you can afford to build and men you can pay)
4) Political will ( the willingness to send all your men to die and spend all our economic output)
Standing forces essentially don’t win wars..because to put it bluntly they are destroyed and remade..it’s how quickly and how much you can remake that will determine if you win or loss a war. The job of a standing force it to first deter a war from happening by showing how much the will hurt the enemy and then to die giving a nation time to build and actual wartime force.
Yes and no Jonathan.
Our Armed forces are now so very small that bespoke orders just absorb the budget and you end up with the disparity of spending billions and having little to show for it.
Much of the industry you speak of has unfortunately already gone, we can’t even build small arms anymore in quantity, the most basic of defence requirements.
As per my original comment, if the government wont increase spending and the order is Typhoons or F35B, then
F35B wins, it’s the more pressing requirement at the moment.
I agree the most important order is taking the F35b fleet up to 74, that’s a must, there has to be 3 f35b squadrons and the OCU, to allow a full airwing on a carrier if required…+ the possibility of sticking the OCU on the second carrier if it’s really really needed.
This is more about any further Order because in reality to maintain the pitiful squadron numbers we have now the RAF needs a fleet of 200+ fast jets…so either the F35b fleet goes to 100 or the typhoon fleet goes to 130….personally I think it’s more important to get the mass back as cheaply as possible while maintaining the UKs ability to produce fast jets. So for me that extra 30 aircraft should be typhoons….but that should not come at the expense of getting the F35b fleet to 74…and any discussion of f35A is a bit bonkers really.
Govt trying hard to get the Typhoon order from Turkey. Then they can order F-35B without upsetting BAE or the unions.
The Germans are playing foul again. Including them was the fundamental flaw of the typhoon program. They have killed multiple foreign sales on moral grandstanding.
I envy the French, who have no such qualms and are also more independent of US restrictions.
I think it’s a Typo but it really shouldn’t be a “one or the other” choice as we not only need a purchase of more of both but not ordering either one will cause problems.
If we don’t order more Typhoons then we risk losing the skill sets required for GCAP and given the numbers in service vs tasking we are just asking for trouble down the line.
If we don’t buy the next Tranche if F35B then how do we justify being the only Tier 1 build partner and making £billions out of producing parts of jets we then don’t buy. Try telling Trump that one and get away with remaining a trusted partner. Besides which we actually really need those Aircraft !
IMHO A is bad, but B could be devastating.
Which is a decision probably taken years ago when they put the present Equipment Spending Plan together, the last announcement I read was the funding for the Tranche 2 buy of 48 F35B is allocated and should be ordered later this year.
And on that note there was zero £££ in the plan for any extra Typhoons so ordering more is either going to be at the expense of a cut elsewhere or extra funding has to be provided.
So 🤞🏻 the SDR contains a meaningful overall increase in Defence spending otherwise “computer says no” ☹️
I read elsewhere the SDR authors told HMG their recommendations can only be funded on 2.75% GDP to which they were told to go back and rewrite for 2.5%. The upcoming SDR that’s going to be published will be a joke as HMG has absolutely no intention of increasing defence spending. Rumours are also circulating that any uplift to even just 2.5% won’t happen in this parliament. Same old crap from HMG – Tory, Labour, it doesn’t matter – they both are to blame.
Well said David
Well I firmly believe that the one constant truth about U.K. Defence expenditure since the 90’s has been Treasury opposition to spending anything never mind increasing it.
It really doesn’t matter which party is supposedly in power they are 100% advised by a CS that is 100% focussed on the Defence of the CS, hence spend money on anything else as it boosts the CS.
The only way round that is to allow Parliament to agree on Defence Priorities and legislate the funding.
If parliament can pass a law that mandates 0.7% of GDP on foreign aid it can do the same for defence. The major issue is that Borris Johnson just ignored that law and the government continues to do so.
In the UK the government has excessive powers and parliament is rather weak.
Spot on….
Ummm…it is w/in the realm of possibility that budgetary relief could be sponsored from an extremely unlikely quarter–The Donald. Recent articles, including accounts of his Davos speech, indicate that he will be pressing for a 5% of GDP defence expenditure rate across NATO. Unrealistic? Perhaps, but ENATO has to contemplate the announced w/drawl of 20K of US troops from Europe (and potential additional drawdowns) w/ some trepidation, given current gaps in ENATO capabilities. Will the Donald achieve the 5% target? Perhaps not, but willing to wager that the revised goal will be (considerably) north of 2%. Also believe that tariffs and/or free trade agreements will be indexed to meeting ENATO defence budget goal. The Donald is entering “The Art of the Deal’ negotiation mode, and certainly willing to utilize a carrot and stick approach May not be wise to underestimate his determination to force significant expedited change. He probably is not concerned that changes in the social welfare systems of most ENATO countries will be required, and that he will be despised by ENATO publics for this action.🤔
The Donald is so unpopular in the UK and Europe he is almost a negative influence when he is calling for increased defence spending as part of NATO, the Donald has no intention of moving the US to 5% of GDP and actually intends to cut to 2.7% by 2030 and probably more if DOGE gets going.
I can see him still calling for 5% even as the US cuts more, he will make out that NATO is a US club and other members need to “pay more” than the USA.
If ENATO is spending 3% it really has little need for the USA, I can see countries in Europe moving up to the high 2% low 3% range as the US drops down to this level.
I can see the UK getting funding up to 2.5% by the end of this parliament as we are already close to it. I can see a vague aspiration to 3% but that’s about it.
Everyone including China, Russia, USA, France and Britain is broke, no one can afford a modern arms race. 2.5% is the sensible long term spending average in times of great power competition, it’s what Britain spent for 300 years before 1937.
I didn’t know he still had a copy of Tony Schwarz’s book “The Art of the Deal” 😂
I will happily argue for an F35A purchase and have done so before, but I was not aware of any government interest in doing so.
Sounds like union scaremongering to me.
We absolutely do require additional Typhoons (fully upgraded with new radar and performance pack); but in addition to F35B’s, not as substitutes.
In the end the typhoon fleet was designed to stand at 160 with around 130 being single seat versions, this was for very good reasons…we often forget that fast jets are consumable items and if you don’t have a decent sustainment fleet you will fatigue your airframes and run out of airframe hours.
At present we have will have 96 single seat tranche 2 and 3s and 5 front line squadrons IX bomber squadron, Falklands flight, joint squadron, OCU, and test and evaluation squadron..normally ( if you look back ) most squadrons would have had 12 single seat and one or 2 duel seat, apart from the OCU which had around 12 single and 8 dual seat. So numbers wise the squadrons will need the entire 96 single seat airframes..with zero in the sustainment fleet..traditionally the RAF would have around 30% of airframes in the sustainment fleet..so around 30 Airframes for surprise surprise around 130 single seat aircraft.
This means without another order the RAF don’t actually have the correct number of typhoons to maintain the squadrons it has and will have to probably drop one maybe even two if it does not get 20-30 more typhoons.
Accept the sustainment fleet has been made up of T1 jets, which haven’t been in service for years. Many have already been stripped for spares.
Yes and that’s worse, think about it, the longer a sup par situation is in place the worse it gets..we will see more when I get all the results of my FOI.
I believe Typhoon squadrons have already shrunk to 10 airframes, they will probably further reduce to 9 to keep the illusion of 7 squadrons.
It’s beyond obvious to all of us that we require a tranche 4 buy of Typhoon, at least 30, with all tranche 2 and 3 machines being upgraded to the same standard.
The fall back position if GCAP fails will be Warton start assembly of F35A for the RAF, with an order for 120 ish aircraft.
Labour won’t do a thing about it, they are as bad as the Conservatives.
It’s not often that I agree with the unions but on this, they’re 100% correct.
Forget about the debate on whether they f35 A/B because it amounts to the same thing.
Keep your eyes on the prize, which is GCAP/Tempest.
If I was a betting man. I’ll say they will order 27 F35B’s. Commit to spending £2.35bn upgrading T2/3 Typhoon. And commit more money to Tempest. I’ll eat my hat if they find the money to also purchase 24 new Typhoons. I’d very much like that to happen. But I just can’t see it with the budget pressures the MOD faces.
It all depends, are they taking about an order over the 74 already agreed, if they ordered another 27 over the 74 and take the fleet to 100 then they could stand up four squadrons, that would allow them to cut the typhoon squadrons to 4 which would allow appropriate manage of the fleet. Essentially whichever jets they buy the UK needed around 200 single sea fast jets for 8 squadrons.
No plan to buy F 35A and rightly so. It has all of the current weapon integration limitations of F35B and is no use to the navy. There is no point in ordering more of either version unless and until block 4 allows us to use UK weapons. The current capability of the F35B is very limited which is why we seem to be reluctant to use it.
We are using the Typhoon quite hard in both air policing and strike roles. Buying 25/30 more would ensure we keep a (barely) adequate fleet to last until Tempest deliveries begin.
I presume the “F-35A” designation is typo/error. The government is in a difficult place, the assumption since at least 2020 was that a large Saudi order for at leas 48 more Typhoon’s would keep the Warton final assembly and checkout line humming until the late 2020’s. For various reasons (but mainly German objections when contract signature was imminent) that now seems unlikely, and France and Turkey have instead been invited to make proposals. There is probably no choice but a UK order for 24 Typhoon Tranche 4’s to fill the gap. But 47 F-35B’s (effectively 44 as the oldest 3 are test/training aircraft so unrepresentative of operational TR2/TR3 standards that they will surely soon be retired) is not simply enough to maintain two frontline squadrons of 12 aircraft each. Experience suggests (regardless of aircraft manufacturers eternal promises of lower maintenance requirements) that 60 airframes are required, implying 13 more aircraft are needed – probably ordered as a trickle of 2-3 a year. The Typhoon is slightly cheaper than the Lightening F-35B, but the MOD is still probably looking at spending an extra £1.5B over 5 years on fast jets than is allowed for in the current equipment plan. For comparison, that would be enough for three badly needed Batch 2 Type 31 frigates, whilst the last round of defence cuts in December “saved” just £500M over 10 years.
Yes you noted that 44 F35Bs is not really enough to maintain 2 front line squadrons..there will be 96 single seat typhoons maintaining 5 front line squadrons, Falklands flight, joint squadron and IX bomber squadron…in the end with 96 single seat typhoons the RAF will probably drop to 4 squadrons total + OCU.
I think the total number of Tranche 2&3 aircraft purchased by the UK is 107, plus a handful (4 plus a few sustainment reserves?) of Tranche 1 aircraft retained for the Falklands Flight. You are right, it will be a big stretch to maintain even five frontline squadrons out of that number, particularly as the average aircraft age (despite the withdrawal from service of most of the Tranche 1s) is probably again creeping above ten years and will keep increasing given that the final two Typhoons ordered for the RAF will be delivered in Q1 2025. Airframe fatigue and flying hours are also important, but the aircraft are being hard worked (by military standards) as there is no spare capacity given the low level wars that the RAF has been continuously fighting for 25 years now.
‘that the final two Typhoons ordered for the RAF will be delivered in Q1 2025’ , makes no sense – RAF orders were completed and delivered at least 5 years ago.
Hi RB the total jet numbers include 2 seaters which essentially need to be excluded and counted separately as that are a different capability ( a training one) the total single seat tranche 2 and 3 buy was 96…
I really despise the idea that the defence budget should be allocated towards preserving civvie jobs. It’s for buying kit and paying people to defend the country and our interests overseas, if necessary. I want the best kit operated by the best people in uniform.
It’s not so much about civvies jobs as it is protecting UK industry – which will be needed in a major war to build more planes etc.
The problem of buying foreign off the shelf is that it puts us at the mercy of foreign politics and also makes us reliant on those foreign suppliers, who will always prioritise their own country’s military orders over others’.
Nations win wars through its industrial complex Simple as…no industrial complex means you will loss the war that matters.
Sure, lose the skilled engineers, lose the manufacturing base, and come a major conflict lose that too! It’s no coincidence that successive governments seeming willingness to sit and watch British engineering jobs, skills and manufacturing capability decline has also resulted in the abject decline in our nation as a world power. Far too reliant on foreign imports for almost everything now, we need to protect and increase our manufacturing base before there’s nothing left to protect…
Fair point, but what would you be prepared to cut to pay for these 24 additional Thypoons?
Because if they get order, the additional needed F35B’s will likely be cancelled or curtailed to a handful of airframes.
Totally agree, but let’s not forget with a Labour government, the Unions are pulling the strings now, so if they apply enough pressure they might just get a sustainment Typhoon order.
It would mean something else will get the chop to pay for it though.
I don’t see any major confrontation in the future lasting long enough to build any new replacements. The Ukraine has only lasted this long because of donations from NATO. We don’t have that luxury. Looking at Rheinmetal who are really the only company that build tanks on a regular basis, manage to produce 16 Leopards a month at peak production, on average, 4. Plane, tank or ship losses would be irreplaceable.
More Typhoons that would be great ,but will starmer do the UK defence workers justice .He’s kicked the pensioners and the farmer’s in the teeth Labour don’t seem to do our own people any favours .Has for F35A never thought that was on the list ?
And which union rep said ordering more F35’s only amounts to 2-3 months work. That is just a ridiculous statement. Every single F35 ordered, globally, 15-20% is made in the UK. F35 will bring in far more revenue over many more decades than Typhoon. And 5th gen F35 manufacturing has more benefits to Tempest. I’d love more Typhoons in RAF service. But the RAF would rather have more F35’s.
Typhoon is a phenomenal jet but I’m confused why we don’t also build our F35B jets given that we are a Tier 1 partner. If Italy can build them then surely we can, which would more than enhance the skills for Tempest.
The Typhoon order seems increasingly necessary and if true cost is £65m per airframe, and can be delivered quickly because the production line is free, then that probably adresses short term need to increase mass to bolster conventional dettereant – any new f35b order will have to wait its turn in the f35 order book. We still need to plaće order for at least 34 more f35B but beyond that I still think cost benefits of a Split f35B /A order needs considering – £20m less capital per unit, £1.5m per unit lower annual costs. Japan, Singapore and Italy – possibly South Korea – all manage a mixed fleet. Given we are talking f35A orders beyond 2030 at earliest its surely worth considering?
And you mentioned it, the “time line”. What would be realistic delivery time frames for new/refurbished Typhoon’s versus F35A and F35Bs? If the needs pressing why can’t there be a pragmatic mix of all or 1 or 2? How long do they want to wait in the queue and will they have adequate armaments and pilots at the ready?
Italy does final assembly. They don’t manufacture many parts.Final assembly is the easy bit.
Italy makes one of the wings and lot of internal stuff – do your research please.
Let me get this straight, what we are debating here is whether we order the full amount of F35Bs that have been hoped for, or whether we buy some more Typhoons/ or F35A, and reduce F35B numbers. Is that right?
If so, we must prioritise F35B to maintain a credible carrier air group. Only when we have committed to enough of them (subject to UK weapons integration), should we consider alternatives. If we do then it should be more Typhoon or we end up with a third aircraft type placing further strain on future resources.
F35A may lead Typhoon in many areas, but that is why we have the F35B.
I suppose the question is what is the correct amount of F35Bs for carrier air wing. At present the commitment is 74 airframes so around 70 front line airframe.. say 25%ish for a sustainment fleet of 20 so that’s 50 for front line squadrons and OCU that essentially gives you 3 squadrons and an OCU, which is probably enough as that will allow for a 2 squadron or 24 aircraft deployment with one squadron spare and in extremis and if there were both carriers free you could rope in the OCU so each carrier had 2 squadrons….but the would likely be profoundly unusual, maybe if NATO was at war with china and the west was concentrating to to destroy the PLAN in the china seas….so probably 74 airframes is enough.
Surely it makes sense to have a CONTINIOUS production – albeit at a low-level – of certain critical strategic capabilities, to retain knowledge and skills base. e.g. fighter jets, submarines, destroyers, MBTs/AFVs, and basic ammo. Otherwise everything atrophies, just when you really need them, and can’t rely on others, whilst starting again from scratch is very costly and time-consuming.
I have three points to make. Firstly, the obvious one. UK armed forces are badly under strength. Ordering 24 or more Typhoons would help to alleviate this to a limited degree (would prefer double that!). Secondly, if we want to be able to cope with future battlefields we need a dependable source of resupply – reserves. We don’t have any! We need to be able to supply allies with support, for example. We can’t offer Ukraine fighters or more than a token number of tanks – because we don’t have spares! Finally, with all the production lines for many systems closed down we can’t easily restart – qualified staff not there, for example. So we need a rolling purchase system to ensure that supply lines remain open. And yes, we need more F-35s as well!
As an ex BAE employee and shop steward we lobbied every government for both civil and military orders. We’re right to demand sovereign design capability for the UK. The election of a convicted felon in the US shows we can’t rely on the Americans. The F35 is more expensive to buy and more expensive to fly than the Typhoon. IMHO we need both, the F35 for the carriers and RAF but more Typhoons for the RAF. The tories ” retired” 244 planes including the entire Tornado fleet, 77 newly refurbished Harriers (sold to the USMC for £120m) and 9 brand new Nimrod MRA4s. I think we’re left with @ 130 Typhoons of which 30 are Tranche 1 aircraft and due to be retired due to age. My union colleagues tell me only 40 Typhoons are available at any one time. Fewer aircraft are flying more and more hours.
Defence spending will have to rise across the 3 services. The tories left Labour will a terrible legacy on defence. Defence spending creates jobs and new technologies. We don’t have rich industrialists like Tommy Sopwith and Geoffrey de Havilland to bale the country out and no one forgives you for losing conflicts.
“Shop steward” says all you need to know. People like you destroyed UK industry.
There is no F35A buy… it would be better to buy more F35B rather than Typhoons that way we would have a larger national pool of 5th generation planes to use at sea or on land. Having more planes would be a great asset for the UK.
This is all pretty desparate stuff isnt it? Robbing peter to pay paul in every possible way. The big issue for the uk in suštaining or rebuilding credible conventional forces is that the defence budget is having to pay for the dreadnought programme at the same time. Operation of the nuclear deterant should remain in mod budget, but replacement should be off the books. At that point it becomes possible to make rational choices and build credible forces even within 2.5% (though 3% seems necessary). Until then we are going to remain forced to continue to choose the least worst option rather than working to reflect strategic needs.
Agree tgat the deterrent should be a national expenses and not on MoD books.
When the second most important minister link economic growth to a 3rd airport runaway you have much direr problems in your hands.
Too much of this debate is driven by the obsession about equipping one aircraft carrier. That carrier needs to be viewed against the totality of UK air power. The long-standing matrix for combat air is ideally:
– One third air defence/tac air
– One third offensive interdiction
– One sixth close air support for the land forces
– One sixth air support for the fleet
The air defence element, Typhoon, is being cut to 112 aircraft (107 FGR4, 5 tranche 1 F2s). The announced intention is to have 74 F45Bs for land close air support and naval air. That already puts army CAS and FAA at 40% of the available aircraft. If 2 of the 3 F-35 squadrons sail off on the carrier, that takes naval air to 26% of the available aircraft. Which leaves far too few for the wider air picture. The RN is the tail wagging the dog here. An aircraft cannot be in two places at once, if it’s off on the carrier east of Suez, it can’t be available for close air support of our land forces in Europe.
RAF combat air numbers have shrunk far below Germany and Framce.and now below Italy and Spain. The idea that one (vulnerable) aircraft carrier sails off with a quarter of what’s left makes little sense in the wider air picture and is not.replicated by any of our. allies. Those talking about having two carriers and two carrier air groups at sea are just dreaming in colours.
The rule should have been that the RAF pays for the first 48 F-5Bs, to equip two squadrons, one Close Air Support for the land forces, one Fleet Air Arm and thereafter, if the RN wants more, they pay for them out of the RN budget.
As the RAF combat air budget can only afford 6-7 new combat aircraft a year, future procurement over the next 10 years up to Tempest in 2035 looks pretty clear. The delivery rate will be cut to help fund Tempest. We will be lucky to get 6 aircraft a year. Procuring the remaining 41 F-36Bs, to get to the total of 74, will take 7 years up to end-’31. The planned upgrade of 40 Typhoons to the European Common Radar System, which is going to cost the equivalent of close on 50% of a new Typhoon, will add at minimum three years to the acquisition schedule, taking us up to 2034-5. Then we have to accommodate the Block 4 upgrades to probably over 60 F-35Bs, at probably upwards of £25m per aircraft, so years to carry out.
The point being that there is no money for any more Typhoons. The RN has won the battle and got its carrier equipped. It is a complete reversal of the proper use of air power but, hey ho, we have the STATUS of an aircraft carrier, sod the reality of how weak our resulting non-naval combat air power remains. Just have to hope that we don’t get involved in a peer war in the forseeable, as our weakness will be cruelly exposed.
You called it right. Russia, the Atlantic and the Arctic are the priority. The SDR should cap F-35B numbers at 48, enough for the RN to sail one QE as an LPH with 12-18 Bs. The spending priority should be 24 Typhoons, 5 more ‘adaptable’ T31 frigates, one or two more Astutes and artillery. The economy is no excuse. At the last count I think HS2 was costed at £74B. I’m sure Rachel from accounts could find the money.
Wow some flights of fantasy on here today. Remember the 35B was designed in all ways for the USMC as ground support. It in the words of a test pilot “it ain’t no dogfights, We will never see 35B in the QRF role. The problems with going super sonic are well documented and have knock on effects on serviceability. So if you want tried and tested for that role Typhoon. If you want an alternative that will give you even more. F15EX It’s a bomb truck with no equal. Plus it is quick and can fight. The new avionics package is on line with two upgraded 15E variants fitted arrived in Norfolk this week. The 15EX is also top of the IAF list for a reason. The have already asked Biden for early delivery with aircraft diverted from USAF orders. That was refused. No doubt DT will have been asked already. The other spanner to take into account is the 35 is under scrutiny from Congress on cost, capability and serviceability. It may not survive.
We need to buy more defence kit and need it to d British made from British materials because the USA has shown itself, get again, for the upteenth time, to be totally unreliable, it lets everyone down, all mouth and no trousers. We are going to be fighting Putin in Europe and on our own land before the end of this decade.
We have one surviving tsr2, take that as a blueprint and do what we should have in the 50s and build it. Along with harriers as we know they work without an airfield and can carry supersonic missiles. Build them all here and get that 6th gen finished and in the air by scrapping all the russian inspired safety crap that slows us down, this is all urgent, with the yanks dumping Ukraine the way they have dumped so many others we need to understand their word to NATO is meaningless and prepare for the Russians at our door. We can afford it,just stop the employment of hundreds of thousands of diversity managers and the benefits and housing to illegals
Everyone gives their opinion F35 or Typhoon we have to start thinking of numbers. Our paltry amount of F35 will not last a short sustained fight. Time is running out in terms of production to be ready to fight. Typhoon has to be priority in terms of numbers. What no one ever talks about is the £2 billion invested in the F 35 creation and no discount on purchase price, sound investment that by Uk defence secretary
I cant see both carriers surviving SDSR so doubt there’ll be any more F35B orders. The MoD needs to pivot back to Europe so I see additional frigates and specialist ships for infrastructure protection. I think this would open the door to a twin order of Typhoon T4 and F35A with a nod to preserving skills in the UK
Not a chance this will happen. Reeves is obsessed with airport expansion, Miliband covering every inch of countryside with windmills from Copenhagen and solar panels from Beijing and absolutely know one cares about defence because they believe the fantasy that Europe can defend itself which of course it can for about 2 weeks until the bullets run out.
Has anybody done any detailed maths on what a jump from 2.3% to 2.5% actually means for the defence budget? Basic calculations show it’s only a c£5bn increase per year. There are more demands on that than I’ve had hot meals.
Yes, By all means buy more F35s and place your security completely in the hands of Donald Trump. He will stop your access to spares for existing air frames and new builds if you don’t give him exactly what he wants, when he wants it. He may even pull out of NATO. Do you really think the Republicans in Congress are going to stop him. They are afraid for their own and their families safety if they vote against him. Certainly, they are afraid of Trump organizing candidates to run against them. This is the Defence Materiel equivalent of the Sudetenland or the Polish Corridor.
If Europe completely pulls out of the F35 program, it will collapse and take with it thousands of jobs and force the closure of a factory in Texas! Alternatively, Europe could do a Trump and use the threat of a pullout to re-negotiate for a minimum 50% work share. If the Europeans and Canada get together you are talking about a huge amount of leveraging power.
Possibly, Europe start to look at cooperation on upgrades of existing platforms with a view to a common technology base that can be included in new programs. You have nothing to lose at this point.