MoD urged to buy cheaper Navy jets
COST CONCERN An artists impression of a Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) aircraft soaring above the Royal Navys two new carriers
THE Ministry of Defence is facing internal pressure to pull out of buying F-35 Joint Strike Fighter jets for the Royal Navy’s new aircraft carriers, The News can reveal.
A number of MoD officials are understood to be calling for Britain to withdraw from the under-fire Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) programme, which has faced criticism in America and Australia as costs run into hundreds of billions of pounds.
A ‘Plan B’ has emerged for the UK to equip HMS Queen Elizabeth and HMS Prince of Wales with a fleet of older, less-capable F-18 jets, rather than buying 138 state-of-the-art F-35 planes.
An MoD source said: ‘F-35s will cost millions more than we thought and may not even be ready when we need them in 2020. F-18s already exist and will cost us peanuts, so why should we take the risk?’
Britain has already sunk £1.4bn into the US-led JSF programme since it began in 2002 and an MoD spokesman said the ministry was ‘100 per cent committed’ to the F-35s.
But insiders say F-18s, which have been around since 1978, are a reliable, cheaper option as Britain attempts to plug a £38bn black hole in the defence budget.
‘The argument is like saying: “I haven’t got enough money to buy a Porsche 911 right now so I’ll buy an Audi TT instead,’” said a source.
Since last year’s defence cuts left the Royal Navy without its Harrier jump jets, three navy pilots have been out in America training with F-18s and are understood to be singing the aircraft’s praises.
More navy pilots are set to go to the US ahead of the new carriers coming into service in Portsmouth in 2020.
At an estimated total cost exceeding £300bn, JSF is the most expensive military-industrial programme ever.
The F-35 jets built by global defence firm Lockheed Martin promise to do everything from stealth missions to aerial combat, with variants tailored to ground or sea-based operations. But costs have soared by more than 40 per cent from US estimates of $80m per plane in 2002 to $113m per jet today.
A ‘risk management’ programme is ongoing between the US Defense Department and Lockheed Martin to drive costs down amid criticism of the project, which was blasted as a ‘train wreck’ by former US presidential candidate John McCain.
Just last week, the Australian government – which is looking to buy 100 F-35 jets – said it may withdraw from JSF if it does not get on track.
However, Paul Livingston, the UK aero director of Lockheed Martin, told The News JSF has turned a corner.
He said: ‘Last year was a bit of a shambles financially and we had some issues. But testing is going really well now and I’m confident we will come out of probation soon.’
He said JSF creates thousands of British jobs and the MoD should stick with F-35 as F-18s are becoming outdated.
He said: ‘There are people within the MoD, particularly the navy, who have been out and flown on exchange programmes flying on F-18s who say they would like them instead but it is not something that stands the financial test or the test of time.
‘Whilst we understand some people wanting to be financially conservative and think about F-18, it really is the right answer for a whole bunch of reasons, politically and financially, to have F-35.’
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Portsmouth
Friday 25 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 13 C to 25 C
Wind Speed: 22 mph
Wind direction: East
Tomorrow
Sunny
Temperature: 13 C to 23 C
Wind Speed: 24 mph
Wind direction: East
Comments
There are 16 comments to this article
Page 1 of 2
Portsea Islander
Thursday, August 4, 2011 at 09:18 AMAgree with Fratton's post 13; we need to sort ourselves out first by stopping foreign aid to save 12 BILLION A YEAR , pulling completely out of Europe to save paying them 8 BILLION A YEAR, and then once we've sorted our own debts & the NHS out then we will be in a fit state to help other nations. I can't understand how so many Britons don't realise how much we're giving away every year.
GerryVonCourtlandtVenonicaJackson
Wednesday, August 3, 2011 at 07:59 PMComment removed by moderator
Liebour 1997-2010
Wednesday, August 3, 2011 at 07:54 AMBack in the late 1990's the F35 was the cheap option at around US$40m per aircraft, cheaper than the F18E cheaper than the Typhoon. Surprise surprise the aerospace industry got it wrong its now US$130m each and still rising plus its 10 years behind schedule. Interesting point regards the TSR2 ever increasing costs and by 1965 the RAF didnt want it, they wanted the F111. The trouble is there is no real alternative to the F35.
fratton
Wednesday, August 3, 2011 at 01:07 AMHello Yocal thank you for your comments well firstly I DRIVE A CAR,and I USE MY car very sensibly thank you.You talk about carbon footprints well, I have to laugh are you telling me that we can not control our own country well what ashame we have people like you saying such crap,I FOR ONE want complete with draw from the EU COMPLETELY,STOP FOREIGN AID get tough on immigration ASAP,AS AT PRESENT WE HAVE A SOFT GOVERNMENT IN POWER AND ARE SCARED OF THE NAZI STYLE MUPPETS IN EUROPE SAYING HOW THE ENGLISH SHOULD LIVE I SAY TO THEM LYNCHPINS GET STUFFED AND STICK YOUR LAWS ELSEWHERE OUR POWERS COME FROM WESTMINSTER NOT FROM THE MUPPETS IN BRUSSELS ETC OK TAKE THE EURO FOR INSTANCE WHAT A FARCE THAT IS KEEP THE POUND THANK GOD CHEERS FOR NOW
Prozium
Tuesday, August 2, 2011 at 11:49 PMYocal- I know why we are in the JSF project, I've followed it for many years, I remember being very excited to see the engine and mock up at Farnborough a number of years back. But when you see decisions like this it does make you wonder why it was worth it? It's almost like the TSR2 project repeating....
Yocal
Tuesday, August 2, 2011 at 09:42 PMFratton@3-----------Given that you and others probably have a carbon footprint that is unsustainable, hence is causing drought and other problems in Africa and other places. You and others are responsible for 'foreign aid' being required. If you stopped driving your car so much and thought about how you spent your money. Then foreign aid wouldn't be required. A lot of the flowers bought in the UK were grown in Kenya and other places, instead of food. You and many others are distorting the markets. Sure, maybe cutting foreign aid may be a good long term goal, once we have reduced our carbon footprints and sorted out our own abuses.
Yocal
Tuesday, August 2, 2011 at 09:32 PMProzium --- The reason why ''miilions" was spent on the JSF was because it was cheaper than spending even more money on a UK aircraft of equivalent sophistication. The UK worked on the vertical take off version because of the expertise in developing the Harrier. The Americans had the skills in stealth technology and other advanced systems.
MikeB
Tuesday, August 2, 2011 at 07:20 PMThe best option would be to lease F18 until the F35 is available at a good price. Land based aircraft are notoriously difficult to convert to carrier operations. The Growler would be a good buy along with the Viking and Hawkeye.
Liebour 1997-2010
Tuesday, August 2, 2011 at 06:56 PMCarrier capable Typhoon, I can you just image the cost! New undercarriage, new fuselage structure and so on. Remember when they decided to delete the 27mm cannon from the RAF Typhoon they spent £50m on a modifcation that didn't work so they had to install the gun any way. The naval Typhoon option contains to much risk and cost for a country in the economic mess we are in. The F-18E is the Super Hornet and has a production run to 2016 on USN orders. the cost of the F18E is around US$49m dollars, plus low maintenance costs. The F35C will cost at least US$130m, plus high maintenance costs. No brainer really. Where as the RAF Typhoon costs US$120m. Lots of very expensive options, only one cost effective one the F 18E.
diamond8080
Tuesday, August 2, 2011 at 06:40 PMPost 3, how nice that somebody actually speaks sense, even if it is not "PC". The fact is that this country cannot pay for its own people and military so it really is time that we stopped trying to pay for all the disadvantaged people in the world and maybe instead developed our own economy and protected our home industries. Instead we now have a society of welfare scoungers who spend our hard earned tax money on booze, fags and drugs, we have people coming from all over the world, bypassing richer economies, just to live off our welfare state. If somebody could just stand up and start putting the benefit of the United Kingdom first maybe we could all grow richer and then, and only then, we could look at how much we can donate to help the rest of the world.
jump749
Tuesday, August 2, 2011 at 04:52 PMI'd go for the Typhoon as well, British jobs for British people (mostly).
rslade37
Tuesday, August 2, 2011 at 04:48 PMFit hooks to the Typhoon. The Indians want to do it and are prepared to pay for it and, at the very least, it is largely British.
Prozium
Tuesday, August 2, 2011 at 04:31 PMReading articles such as this makes you wonder why we even pumped billions into the JSF project in the first place. I agree with post 3 and we should buy a mix of aircraft, but make sure it is the Super Hornet, otherwise we will be buying obsolete aircraft for a state of the art carrier. But you can't put anything past those in Whitehall.
fratton
Tuesday, August 2, 2011 at 04:03 PMWould it be a good idea to have air force pilots and navy pilots fly the same aircraft and we could afford better planes if we cut foreign aid and pull out of the eu altogether and ban immigration completely and spend the money on our own bloody country
Airwolf
Tuesday, August 2, 2011 at 02:41 PMbest idea ive read in ages troutbridge! if the RAF had them too all pilots could rotate round on carrier duty as well as the aircraft improving servicability and training all round.
Page 1 of 2
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.