F-35 - International Participation

SolarisKenzo

Well-Known Member
Turkey's own 5th gen project seems like nothing but a propaganda program.
No real progress after the great "revealing" with Erdogan himself there, basically all the electronics and the enginges are western.
This new F-16 deal ( 23 billions USD ) seems like the tombstone on the TAI program.

Regarding F-35s, I wouldnt sell a car to Erdogan, forget a 5th gen fighter.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Seems to be some debate wrt to the RN’s F-35B fleet size. An apparent budget black hole of 20£ billion is the reason and government is claiming GCAP and a bigger F-35B isn’t affordable. Given the range issue, block 4 delay, weapons integration delay, and increased sustainability costs for the “B” version, perhaps the carrier CATOBAR conversion may have been the better idea.

 

StingrayOZ

Super Moderator
Staff member
Seems to be some debate wrt to the RN’s F-35B fleet size. An apparent budget black hole of 20£ billion is the reason and government is claiming GCAP and a bigger F-35B isn’t affordable. Given the range issue, block 4 delay, weapons integration delay, and increased sustainability costs for the “B” version, perhaps the carrier CATOBAR conversion may have been the better idea
If the UK delays or even cancels I am certain others would be interested, Japan would probably gobble up any spare F-35B. Singapore seems very keen to get theirs ASAP.

I'm not sure the C version would have saved things. The USN doesn't seem overtly enamored with that version either. But at least then if they had gone CATOBAR or STOBAR they would have had more options.

It isn't the F-35 program that is creating an enormous black hole in the UK budget either. They are just looking for places to make cuts, and that is a big juciey programs with other issues. Like block IV and weapons integration. Also the 6th gen tempest, by cutting numbers creates more of a space for that program to fill, if it ever happens.

Carriers are super expensive, and you need multiple programs to go right for them to work.

Are they worth it? Well they are cool ships. Do they make Britain globally relevant? Maybe. But without the escorts and the rest of the firepower, they aren't perhaps the jewels that some people had hoped they would be from day 1. But then again, the UK was basically rebuilding it carrier capability from scratch with all new platforms. It takes decades.
 

seaspear

Well-Known Member
Is it accurate to just say it is the cost of the carriers for both was 6.2 billion pounds, I'm not sure of the lifetime costs for these vessels ,the Dreadnaught class is 7.75 billion I,m citing wiki here which cites other bodies which suggests these boats will take a large percentage of the U.K defence budget dwarfing the carrier costs
The programme is managed by a new Submarine Delivery Agency (SDA), established on 3 April 2017 within MOD's Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S) organisation. BAE Systems and Rolls Royce are the programme's Tier One industrial partners.[22]

In 2011, the programme's Initial Gate report estimated costs at £25 billion. In 2015, the programme was estimated to cost £31 billion including estimated future defence inflation, design, testing and construction of the US-UK Common Missile Compartment and modernisation of shipyard facilities in Barrow, with £10 billion of additional contingency set aside. In March 2023, £2 billion of the contingency fund had been accessed to reprofile spending and bring construction forward.[22] These costs do not include the related Trident missile renewal, new infrastructure projects at the re-nationalised Atomic Weapons Establishment, and new nuclear fuel production facilities at Rolls-Royce.[22]

Once in service, annual in-service costs are expected to be approximately 6% of the defence budget (about £3 billion).[22]

Studies by the Nuclear Information Service and the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament have suggested that the MOD cost presentation is under-estimating replacement programme costs. Including all related costs, including new infrastructure investment and decommissioning costs, and 30 years of in-service costs, they estimate a cost in the region of £172 to £205 billion.[22] Crispin Blunt, Chair of the Foreign Affairs Select Committee, estimated in July 2016 that the renewed deterrent lifetime cost would be £179 billion.[23]

A January 2018, the National Audit Office expressed concern about the programme's spending profile, including that it was "unaffordable in the early years of the project" within the MOD allocated budget.[22][24] Subsequently the MOD moved £300 million into the Dreadnought programme from elsewhere, and later the 2018 budget added £1 billion to the defence budget, 40% of which went to the Dreadnought programme. The 2020 Spending Review allocated an extra £16.5 billion to the defence budget over 2020 to 2025, in part to "continue the renewal of the UK's nuclear deterrent".[22]
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
Huge costs for SSBNs for sure but at the end of the day a nuclear deterrence is needed considering Russia's recent behaviour and nuclear proliferation in general. SSBNs are the most secure launch option. If it means reducing carrier capability and availability or even disposal due to budget pressure then so be it. The QE class and Dreadnought costs were more or less predictable as was the likely revenue available. It should have been apparent if one program needed to be sacrificed. Naval aviation via a JC type carrier might have been an affordable option together with Dreadnought.
 

Redshift

Active Member
Seems to be some debate wrt to the RN’s F-35B fleet size. An apparent budget black hole of 20£ billion is the reason and government is claiming GCAP and a bigger F-35B isn’t affordable. Given the range issue, block 4 delay, weapons integration delay, and increased sustainability costs for the “B” version, perhaps the carrier CATOBAR conversion may have been the better idea.

"Unnamed British defense sources have raised concerns to The Telegraph newspaper about a potential cut to the planned 138-aircraft F-35B fleet"

This is the source. Unreliable probably an ex Tory defence minister spreading muck. There is a huge amount of this going on in the UK at the moment take a lot of things from the very disgruntled right wing press with a huge pinch of salt.
 

Redshift

Active Member
"Unnamed British defense sources have raised concerns to The Telegraph newspaper about a potential cut to the planned 138-aircraft F-35B fleet"

This is the source. Unreliable probably an ex Tory defence minister spreading muck. There is a huge amount of this going on in the UK at the moment take a lot of things from the very disgruntled right wing press with a huge pinch of salt.
Also the telegraph has a very very long history of opposing the carriers and is very happy to spread rumours
 
Top