Caribbean wrote:Jensy wrote:Reports today in the Telegraph and Express ........ could all be nonsense but Gavin Williamson had a lot of form with leaking to the Telegraph when he was chief whip and this fits his style.
Hidden in the Express report is an interesting snippet. Seen a reference to it before, but first time I've seen a "reporting date".
"Williamson also set in motion a Combat Aircraft Industrial Strategy, which will be published this summer and will decide the future spending on jet fighters"
Now we just need one for armoured vehicles ...... and the Government cash to make it all happen.
Good spot.
Gavin looks to be following some of the sentiment on this forum. Perhaps he's lurking?
It seems that there are about three, in production, fast jets that the UK makes a substantial contribution too: Gripen, Typhoon and F-35 (+maybe Indian Jaguars)..
Two are currently in/entering service with the RAF. Of these two, only one is assembled here. So the industrial argument would likey support further purchases of the Typoon by a country mile.
I know the arguments over future capability and stealth will be made strongly in favour of the F-35 and I personally think the B model is the most innovative fighter in the skies; but these decisions are multi-faceted.
Back when the FCBA was merged with Harrier replacement, but before the concept of a joint Lightning Force, the split was 60 -> 48 Navy and 90 RAF (150->138). You could say the minimum number for carrier ops has barely shifted in nearly 20 years. So long as we are above the level there seems little issue with the wartime requirements for the carriers. Even if we only bought 60-72, that is still one heck of a fleet of aircraft.
With regards to our workshare, I once mapped UK F-35 contribution across the UK and globe for Farnborough some years back. I found, from the information available, that it's more about quantity than quality. The US is bringing that and the other partners don't really measure up. Certainly there are some high profile UK primes involved but they tend to manufacture elsewhere. The SMEs and niche suppliers are the real champions for British jobs, now and in the future.
I can't imagine the US would be delighted to see us halve out order (even considering arguments about intial investment and tech transfer). That said, we're not unique amongst some of the other Tiered partners:
T2: Italy 131 -> 90
T2: Netherlands 85-> 37
T3: Canada 65 -> 0-?
T3: Denmark 48 -> 27
T3: Turkey 100+ -> 0-?
Only the Aussies are really bringing international quantity to the project, with the Italians having the additional consideration of an assembley facility, which we lack.
A modest split buy for future requirments seems most sensible and politically wise. If balanced correctly this could deliver world-class capability and a domestic mil-air manufacturing base. As countries start lining up for next-gen development alliances the later grows in importance.
Jensy