Air Command to 2030

For everything else UK defence-related that doesn't fit into any of the sections above.
User avatar
AndyC
Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 10:37
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by AndyC »

I am not making a judgement here about whether this latest Equipment Plan is affordable or not. Although I have to say that a £7 billion shortfall on a £186 billion budget equates to just 4% and is hardly huge in percentage terms.

Also, bear in mind that even by the NAO's standards the gap has fallen from £20 billion to £7 billion in one year without any strategic changes. Part of this is that some of the projects run well beyond 2027 but this Plan doesn't.

Finally, I have to add that it's in the MoD's interests to talk up the shortfall as they go into negotiations with the Treasury - after all if they said there was a £7 billion surplus they'd be looking at cuts not additional funding. So let's not panic at this stage but recognise that there's a lot of politics going on here!

As for whether what I'm writing is fantasy fleet stuff - well inevitably part of it is.

Take the £11.05 billion Uncommitted Equipment Plan for Air Command. Pretty much everything on the top half of the list (down to Meteor integration of F-35B) is current policy, it's just the contracts haven't been signed yet. This comes to a total of £10.25 billion.

The next £800 million is what I personally believe should come next and they are listed in the priority that I think they should be delivered in.

If you refer back to the main article you'll see that the top two (Meteor for tranche 1 Typhoons and Advanced Hawks for the Red Arrows) are what I call 'essential' and the article states the case for why they should be so.

The next four (10th frontline Squadron, Storm Shadow for the F-35B, six Meteors on air defence Typhoons and Mk54 light torpedoes on Sea Protector) are 'desirable' - so nice to have if the budget will stretch that far, but not top priority.

The final two (CFT on Typhoons and ASRAAM on Hawk T2) are 'optional' which for me means would be useful but not much of a priority. So they would be the first to be dropped from the list if the budget isn't large enough although, at the moment, I believe it is.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

AndyC wrote: shortfall on a £186 billion budget equates to just 4% and is hardly huge in percentage terms.
Agreed [oops; was writing inside the quote box]

Also, bear in mind that even by the NAO's standards the gap has fallen from £20 billion to £7 billion in one year without any strategic changes
Can't compare the previous 'worst' with the new 'likeliest'.
- in fact, worst-on-worst has gone up by 10%
AndyC wrote:what I personally believe should come next and they are listed in the priority that I think they should be delivered in.
We should definitely be discussing the best uses for the uncommitted (but 'allowable') amounts
- being clearer about which is which can only be a good thing... inviting informed comment
- as an example: it has been for many years looking evident that the next big sums (after Apache) to be spent (=uncommitted) on helos would be for the medium category. And out of the 'blue' come more Chinooks! I am not going to critique the plan as there must be 'facts' in support of it. But - boy! - will we have a skewed helicopter force compared to anyone else. And that, in itself, is no criterion for 'good' or 'bad'.
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Defiance
Donator
Posts: 870
Joined: 07 Oct 2015, 20:52
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by Defiance »

My point is you're blending your own opinions with known plans which gives the impression that your wish list has some sort of official credibility behind it when it has none.

FF is fine, it's just frustrating having to sift it out of actual, useful information.

RetroSicotte
Retired Site Admin
Posts: 2657
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:10
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by RetroSicotte »

Defiance wrote:My point is you're blending your own opinions with known plans which gives the impression that your wish list has some sort of official credibility behind it when it has none.

FF is fine, it's just frustrating having to sift it out of actual, useful information.
But the entire thread is and always has been about Andy's opinions, that's why he made it. That he writes well and includes some sourcing is a boon to its depth for discussion or even just for attached interest, not an attempt to deceive. If you're looking for official information, I wouldn't advise this thread, there's plenty others out there, because this one has never been about that by intention.

User avatar
AndyC
Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 10:37
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by AndyC »

The assessment below is based on the MoD’s defence equipment plan 2019 which can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... -plan-2019


Air Command Top Level Budget 2019-29 - £5.7 billion in Uncommitted Equipment Procurement.

Consolidating the budgets for Air Support, Combat Air and air weapons not included in the Complex Weapons Programme.

£3.32 billion committed to in SDSR15, but not under contract by March 2019:
• £1.11 billion for sixteen long-range Protector UCAV – U$1.07 billion on development plus manufacture of 16 for U$430 million; £/U$ rate 1.30
• £1.01 billion for Bulk Buy 2 of 13 F-35B to bring the total to 48 by 2024 – unit cost U$101.3 million; current £/U$ rate 1.30
• £750 million made up of 4.5% of U$6.7 billion outstanding (out of a total of U$12.1 billion) for Block 4 software development and £520 million on integration of Meteor B JNAAM, ASRAAM Block 6 and SPEAR 3/-EW on the F-35B - £10.8 million unit cost
• £250 million to purchase two new Shadow R2 ISTAR aircraft and upgrade the existing six and
• £200 million for tranche 2 and 3 Typhoon integration of SPEAR 3 and SPEAR-EW.

£2.4 billion Typhoon Phase 4 Enhancements (P4E) from Equipment Support and the TyTAN contract:
• £1.6 billion made up of £317 million on development of the ECRS2 AESA radar plus integration on tranche 2 and 3 Typhoons after 2025 – unit cost £12 million
• £500 million on AMRAAM AIM-120D – order for 200 at a unit cost of U$3.25 million; £/U$ rate 1.30
• £65 million to integrate AMRAAM AIM-120D on to tranche 1 Typhoons – unit cost £2 million
• £150 million on establishment of a tenth frontline Squadron (stated as costing £19 million per annum in a Parliamentary answer in March 2013) for eight years and
• £80 million to upgrade tranche 2 and 3 Typhoons to carry six Meteor A BVRAAM plus four ASRAAM Block 6 in QRA and air defence roles – unit cost £750k.

£4.03 billion for essential extras:
• £2.16 billion for five E-7 Wedgetail AEW&C and
• £1.87 billion for Bulk Buy 3 of 24 F-35B to enter service in 2025/26-2028/29 – unit cost under negotiation U$101.3 million; £/U$ rate 1.30.

£300 million of desirable and optional extras:
• £170 million for eight Sea Protector UCAV – unit cost U$27 million; £/U$ rate 1.30
• £50 million to integrate Storm Shadow on Poseidon
• £40 million to integrate four ASRAAM Block 6 on the Hawk T2 – unit cost £1.5 million and
• £30 million for Mk 54 torpedoes with HAAWC – follow-on order for 30 to equip Sea Protector at a unit cost of £1 million.

Air Command TLB spending totals £7.65 billion - £1.95 billion overcommitted.

User avatar
AndyC
Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 10:37
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by AndyC »

Options to cover £1.95 billion of overspending.

Option 1. Cancel Bulk Buy 3 of the F-35B saving £1.87 billion and maintain the size of the F-35B fleet at 48. The advantage of this is that it is simple, easy to achieve and effects only one programme. The disadvantages are that this only provides enough aircraft for one carrier, leaves too few aircraft to provide a significant land strike role and would threaten the UK’s 15% commercial share of the JSF programme, putting significant jobs at risk.

Option 2. Salami slicing several different Air Command programmes until £1.95 billion in spending cuts have been achieved. There have been plenty of leaks to the media suggesting this is exactly what the MoD is planning. Under consideration are savings of:

• £860 million by reducing the E-7 Wedgetail order from five to three aircraft, see https://www.defensenews.com/global/euro ... ng-planes/. As it is widely believed that five is the absolute minimum that the RAF would need to cover the UK’s airspace this is a very risky proposal or

• £230 million from buying all five E-7 Wedgetails secondhand rather than in the current contract where two are being bought secondhand and three new, plus

• £470 million by delaying the final F-35B orders by one year in Bulk Buy 2 to 2025 and moving back the start of Bulk Buy 3 to 2026. Unfortunately this may already be a done deal, see page 22 of the NAO report Carrier strike - preparing for deployment https://www.nao.org.uk/wp-content/uploa ... oyment.pdf Even after this if the UK commits to buying six F-35B per annum there will be 138 in service by 2040

• £170 million through not integrating Block 4 software and UK weapons on the oldest 16 F-35B built as part of the LRIP programme. These aircraft would then be allocated to the OCU, see https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3 ... -its-f-35s The savings here are fairly limited as the MoD has already paid a substantial sum towards the development costs of the Block 4 software upgrade

• £800 million by only introducing ECRS2 AESA radar on to tranche 3 Typhoons, and not tranche 2, see https://www.thedrive.com/the-war-zone/3 ... better-one and

• £300 million through not proceeding with any of the ‘desirable and optional extras.’

Option 3. Fund some or all of the £1.95 billion overcommitment from somewhere else in the defence budget. In practice this means the Navy or Army Command’s Top Level Budgets.

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by Scimitar54 »

Option 4. Provide the level of Funding Required!
Please bear in mind that Option 1/is not an option, as it will not provide sufficient aircraft to FULLY EQUIP 1 x QEC Aircraft Carrier. :mrgreen:

topman
Member
Posts: 771
Joined: 07 May 2015, 20:56
Tokelau

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by topman »

Probably just resort to norm, go to the maintenance, infrastructure, training, exercise etc budgets and take it from there.

Then enter discussion about why we can no longer do xyz.

User avatar
AndyC
Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 10:37
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by AndyC »

Yes, I sort of decided that an increase in the Defence Budget was not a likely option! :lol:

User avatar
AndyC
Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 10:37
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by AndyC »

The 2020 Spending Review

Prior to the Spending Review the government was committed to increasing defence spending by inflation + 0.5%. In real terms this amounts to an extra £2 billion over the four years from 2021/22 to 2024/25.

In the 2020 Spending Review the government announced it would provide an additional £16.5 billion for defence, making a total extra of £18.5 billion in real terms covering the four years from 2021/22 to 2024/25.

The government also announced commitments to military research & development, the National Cyber Force, Space Command and Artificial Intelligence totalling £3.8 billion.

Restoring the reductions made in the 2019 Equipment Plan budget requires £5.5 billion.

In addition, £2 billion is needed to cover the overspending in the Air Command Top Level Budget as a result of the unfunded purchase of the E-7 Wedgetail.

That leaves a total of £7.2 billion still to be committed.

If this extra funding is divided in the same way as the 2020/21 budget then 55% would be allocated to day-to-day running costs and 45% to the Equipment Plan.

That means an extra £3.95 billion for day-to-day spending, mostly personnel costs. As this represents about 4.5% of existing current spending that would be equal to an additional:
• 3,700 full-time troops
• 1,500 reservists
• 1,100 Royal Navy personnel
• 300 Royal Marines and
• 1,400 RAF personnel.

This leaves an extra £3.25 billion for the Equipment Plan.
A priority for Air Command is to cover the unplanned expenditure on the E-7 Wedgetail and bring the Air Command Top Level Budget budget under control.

The additional 1,400 RAF personnel should be sufficient to stand up a Ballistic Missile Defence Squadron, maintain the Sentinel R1 Squadron and stand up a Squadron of Sea Protector UCAVs.

The MoD should commit to investing up to £2 billion from the additional Equipment Plan to joining the French-Italian project to upgrade the Aster 30 to Block 1NT (New Technology) standard including ordering 200 ground-launched and 300 ship-launched missiles.

These changes have been included in a fully updated and revised main article at the start of this post.

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by Scimitar54 »

466 personnel per Squadron! :yawn:

User avatar
AndyC
Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 10:37
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by AndyC »

1,400 personnel to ensure that the three mentioned Squadrons have the full numbers that they need but other 'spare' personnel could be allocated where most needed, such as a tenth frontline Squadron!

topman
Member
Posts: 771
Joined: 07 May 2015, 20:56
Tokelau

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by topman »

Be better used to fill in gaps in existing units/stations before worrying about creating more Sqns.

Scimitar54
Senior Member
Posts: 1701
Joined: 13 Jul 2015, 05:10
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by Scimitar54 »

No Sentinel, so no need for 466 of them! Another 466 for a UAV Squadron! Who are you trying to kid? Which land based silos do we have for Ballistic Missile Defence? Unless of course you mean mobile batteries, in which case where is the increased threat to justify them? If anything the threat from “ballistic” missiles is not as high as it was. Or do you think that the development of Hypersonic missiles requires additional resources. First however the means of detecting and destroying them must be made available. :mrgreen:

BlueD954
Member
Posts: 233
Joined: 02 Oct 2020, 05:11
Singapore

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by BlueD954 »

Slightly dated news

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/1 ... ion-tests/


Black applicants significantly more likely to fail RAF selection tests than white counterparts

Defence chiefs claim the tests have been proven not to be biased, and blamed the disparity on 'underlying' educational issues

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by Lord Jim »

There is an outstanding requirement for a Air Défense Systems in the same category as Patriot and Land-Aster. We need at least one Regiment/Squadron with four batteries of three Launch Vehicles, one Radar and one Command Vehicle. The fact that the Aster Launch Vehicle carries twice as many rounds as Patriot is a bonus as is the fact that its Radar is already 306 degrees whereas at present Patriot is directional, means it only covers a given threat zone. This is no problem when you know where the threat is likely to come from But.....

User avatar
AndyC
Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 10:37
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by AndyC »

I completely agree with Lord Jim's comments on the need for a mobile force of Land-Aster launch vehicles, mobile radar and command.

I am suggesting three Flights - each of four launch vehicles, one radar and one command vehicle to make up one new BMD Squadron.

Each Flight would be protected by a new Sky Sabre Battery made up of one CAMM-ER launch vehicle, two CAMM launch vehicles and four Starstreak launch vehicles together with one radar and one command vehicle.

The three Flights + Batteries should be based at RAF Lossiemouth, RAF Leeming and RAF Brize Norton to cover the whole of the UK.

And, yes the decision on Sentinel should be reversed asap.

AdamS
Junior Member
Posts: 4
Joined: 02 Oct 2019, 14:00
South Africa

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by AdamS »

BlueD954 wrote:Slightly dated news

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2020/1 ... ion-tests/


Black applicants significantly more likely to fail RAF selection tests than white counterparts

Defence chiefs claim the tests have been proven not to be biased, and blamed the disparity on 'underlying' educational issues
In the holy name of diversity, this must end now. Take a knee, decolonise those selection tests and sacrifice a Lightning or three if knees be.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 16312
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

AdamS wrote: sacrifice a Lightning or three if knees be
I can see the sense in that... the IIs would be a step too far
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
AndyC
Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 10:37
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by AndyC »

Earlier this week the MoD published the Defence Equipment Plan for 2020-30.

Details can be found at https://www.gov.uk/government/publicati ... -plan-2020

Unlike with previous plans this is just data without any text. This plan represents the situation as it was at the end of March 2020, so before the announcements contained in the four-year Spending Review.

At this time, Air Command had outstanding orders of £5.6 billion committed on equipment procurement for the E-7 Wedgetail, P-8 Poseidon, F-35B Lightning II and the upgrading of the Shadow R1.

The order for five Wedgetail in March 2019 was unbudgeted and resulted in an overcommitment of £2 billion in the Air Command budget. This has been addressed in the 2020 Plan by switching £2.1 billion from the ISTAR heading to Combat Air.

After these changes the Air Command budget still has £9.5 billion of uncommitted equipment procurement which could be spent as below:

Air Command Top Level Budget 2020-30 - £9.5 billion in Uncommitted Equipment Procurement.

£4.7 billion committed to in SDSR15, but not under contract by March 2020:
• £1.6 billion ECRS2 AESA radar made up of £317 million on development plus integration on tranche 2 and 3 Typhoons after 2025 – unit cost £12 million
• £1.01 billion for Bulk Buy 2 of 13 F-35B to bring the total to 48 by 2024 – unit cost U$101.3 million; current £/U$ rate 1.30
• £1.01 billion for sixteen long-range Protector UCAV – £680 million on development plus manufacture of initial three for £65 million (ordered July 2020) and 13 more for U$345 million; £/U$ rate 1.30
• £750 million for F-35B Block 4 software development made up of 4.5% of U$6.7 billion outstanding (out of a total of U$12.1 billion estimated) plus £520 million on integration of Meteor B JNAAM, ASRAAM Block 6 and SPEAR 3/-EW - £10.8 million unit cost
• £210 million for tranche 2 and 3 Typhoon integration of SPEAR 3 and SPEAR-EW – unit cost £2 million and
• £120 million to purchase two new Shadow R2 ISTAR aircraft.

£3.71 billion for essential extras:
• £2.34 billion for Bulk Buys 3 and 4 of 30 F-35B to enter service in 2025/26-2029/30 – unit cost under negotiation U$101.3 million; £/U$ rate 1.30
• £800 million for 32 Advanced Hawks – unit cost £25 million
• £500 million on AMRAAM AIM-120D – order for 200 at a unit cost of U$3.25 million; £/U$ rate 1.30 and
• £65 million to integrate AMRAAM AIM-120D on to tranche 1 Typhoon, unit cost £2 million.

£910 million of desirable and optional extras:
• £510 million for eight Sea Protector UCAV – £340 million on development plus unit cost U$27 million; £/U$ rate 1.30
• £110 million to upgrade tranche 2 and 3 Typhoons to carry six Meteor A BVRAAM plus four ASRAAM Block 6 in QRA and air defence roles – unit cost £1 million
• £50 million to integrate Storm Shadow on Poseidon
• £160 million to upgrade Sentinel R2
• £50 million to integrate four ASRAAM Block 6 on the Hawk T2 – unit cost £1.5 million and
• £30 million for Mk 54 torpedoes with HAAWC – follow-on order for 30 to equip Sea Protector at a unit cost of £1 million.

Air Command TLB spending totals £9.32 billion.

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 7314
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by Lord Jim »

What about a few extra P-8s?

User avatar
AndyC
Member
Posts: 169
Joined: 11 Dec 2015, 10:37
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by AndyC »

Yes, I guess that's a real possibility.

Up to now I've been arguing for the retention of the four Sentinels and buying eight Sea Protectors but I guess some additional P-8 Poseidons might be better.

How many extra do you think the RAF would need to get at least the same capability?

wargame_insomniac
Senior Member
Posts: 1135
Joined: 20 Nov 2021, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by wargame_insomniac »

Saw this on Twitter.



"When Tony Blair won election, UK had 20 frontline (OCU & OEU excluded) fast jet squadrons (6 Tornado F3, 8 Tornado GR1, 3 Jaguar, 3 Harrier, 2 Sea Harrier demi-sqns). SDR98 cut 1 F3 and 1 GR1 Sqns. Further cuts followed, leaving 12 Sqns by 2010 (7 GR4, 2 Typhoon, 2 Harrier. 1 F3)

Is this correct?"

User avatar
Tempest414
Senior Member
Posts: 5552
Joined: 04 Jan 2018, 23:39
France

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by Tempest414 »

By the end of 2010 there were 3 Typhoon sqns plus the Falklands flight which were 3 , 11 & 6 sqns

Jaguars went without replacement in 2006

Harrier FA2 went and the RN took over one of the RAF Harrier units in 2007 also 1 , 4 , 800 sqns were operating the Harrier up until 2010

25 & 43 sqns were stood down in 2008 and 2009 ready to stand up as Typhoon unit but this did not happen under the Tories 2010 cuts

so in 2010 we had

7 GR4 , 3 Typhoon , 3 Harrier , 1 F3 ,

So all in all close but not the whole story
These users liked the author Tempest414 for the post:
wargame_insomniac

SW1
Senior Member
Posts: 5657
Joined: 27 Aug 2018, 19:12
United Kingdom

Re: Air Command to 2030

Post by SW1 »

The harrier sqns had all gone down to 7 a/c each by 2010 and the F3 was winding up think it was solely assign to alternating NQRA with 6sqn on typhoon. Can’t remember when the Tornado GR went to 10 a/c think that was 2010.

Some of those units moved to reaper but a large number of those supporting it were contractors.

Post Reply