Latest news with #U.K.RoyalAirForce
The Hindu
27-06-2025
- Climate
- The Hindu
U.K. F-35B fighter jet to be shifted to hangar facility of Thiruvananthapuram airport
The F-35B fighter jet of the U.K. Royal Air Force that remained grounded at Thiruvananthapuram International Airport since it made an emergency landing on the night of June 14 will be shifted to the Maintenance Repair and Overhaul (MRO) facility at the airport. According to a statement issued by the British High Commission spokesperson on Friday, the U.K. F-35B aircraft is awaiting repairs at the airport after developing an engineering issue. The U.K. has now accepted an offer to move the aircraft to the MRO facility. The aircraft will be moved to the hangar once the U.K. engineering teams arrive with specialist equipment, thereby ensuring there is minimal disruption to scheduled maintenance of other aircrafts. Ground team 'The aircraft will return to active service once the repairs and safety checks have been completed. Ground teams continue to work closely with Indian authorities to ensure that safety and security precautions are observed,' the spokesperson said while thanking the Indian authorities and Thiruvananthapuram International Airport for their continued support. The F-35B aircraft was unable to return to the HMS Prince of Wales aircraft carrier due to adverse weather conditions prevailing in the region on the night of June 14. The emergency landing of the combat jet due to adverse weather conditions had generated intense media interest and speculation. A decisive force multiplier, the multi-role combat aircraft is billed as the most advanced and connected fighter jet in the world. It is also a capable stealth aircraft that can fly undetected through contested airspace.
Yahoo
28-04-2025
- Yahoo
Tempest Future Fighter Aims For 'Really Extreme Range,' Twice F-35 Payload
The U.K. Royal Air Force officer in charge of defining requirements for the Tempest future fighter says the program's top priority is a large payload — roughly twice that of the F-35A stealth fighter. The same officer says the service is eyeing 'really extreme range' for the new aircraft, with potentially enough internal fuel to fly across the Atlantic without refueling. These requirements provide some more ideas about the size and capabilities of the sixth-generation stealth fighter and also parallel similar concerns that have driven the development of the U.S. Air Force's Boeing F-47 under the Next Generation Air Dominance (NGAD) initiative. The comments came from an officer known only as Group Captain Bill, who heads up the Requirement and Concepting team for the U.K. Ministry of Defense. This department is charged with defining the capabilities that the Tempest needs to meet the Royal Air Force's evolving operational requirements. He was speaking earlier this month on a special edition of Team Tempest's Future Horizons podcast, partnered with the Royal Air Force's InsideAIR official podcast. GCAP, or Global Combat Air Program, is the effort under which the United Kingdom's Tempest next-generation fighter is being developed, in partnership with Italy and Japan — the podcast raised the possibility that, once in service, the aircraft itself might not be known as Tempest, although that would still seem the most likely name for the Royal Air Force, at least. A demonstrator for the Tempest program is now being built, although its precise relationship to the final aircraft is not completely clear. The aircraft is supposed to take to the air in 2027. Meanwhile, a Boeing 757-based flying testbed for the Tempest program, named Excalibur, is also now flying, with its sensors planned to include the Multi-Function Radio Frequency System radar from Leonardo, plus communications systems and electronic warfare equipment. More broadly, for the United Kingdom specifically, the Tempest will be part of the Future Combat Air System (FCAS) program, a wide-ranging air combat initiative that also includes next-generation weapons, uncrewed platforms, networks and data sharing, and more. Bill described the plan for Tempest, as the core platform within the FCAS system of systems, to be a 'quarterback.' This is a term that's cropped up before for emerging and future combat aircraft missions, as well as existing 5th generation fighters. The latter use their superior situational awareness and survivability to operate forward as a force multiplier for less capable assets. In terms of 6th generation tactical jets, it also refers to the ability to control uncrewed Collaborative Combat Aircraft (CCAs) and/or other drones, as well as networked weapons. 'It's the platform that walks onto the field knowing the plan,' Bill continued. 'It understands what plans it has available, it's no longer able to maintain the connection back to the coach on the sidelines because you're too deep into the field, and the other players that are there in that team, some of those will be expendable. They will not make it through the play that we're executing, and that play will not go to plan either. The quarterback needs to have the ability, the strategic vision, and the reactions to be able to deal with what plays out when they start and then pick how it's then going to deliver the tasks to what remains on the field, to look at what's going on and then decide how it achieves the aim. It's survivable enough to take a hit if needs be, it's no kind of fragile back-row player. Also, if need be, it can score a touchdown itself. But the aim here is that it's going to orchestrate many others, many other parts in that system of systems.' 'This aircraft is going to approach replacing Typhoon in a different way,' Bill said. 'The threat environment means that range has become a really big thing for all of us.' This is something that's being recognized in sixth-generation combat aircraft programs around the world, whether in NGAD in the United States or in broadly similar Chinese developments. For the Tempest program, the kind of threat environment envisaged means that the fighter will likely 'have to leave the tanker a long way behind' in various combat scenarios. This is pushing the demand for 'really extreme range, kind of maybe getting across the Atlantic to America on internal fuel.' This compares with the Typhoon, which would normally need three or four tanker hook-ups to cover the same distance. 'We're building an aircraft that is going to have an awful lot of range,' Bill continued, 'but at the top of our list is the payload.' 'Payload is what we're all about,' Bill emphasized. 'In fact, in pure capability terms, I don't care how I get [the payload] there. It could be in the back of an A400, from a submarine, or from space. It just so happens that our analysis tells us the best way to get that payload there right now is in a fast jet. But the payload, now you'd expect weapons to be in there. So that's obvious, and boy, will we have weapons.' According to Bill, the Tempest will have roughly double an F-35A's worth of payload. It's unclear how this would be broken down in terms of fuel and weapons, but just in terms of internal and external ordnance, for the F-35A, this equates to more than 18,000 pounds, according to the manufacturer. Considering the Tempest's mission, as described above, this is likely referring to internal payload, which would put it at around 10,000lbs compared to the F-35A's 5,000lbs — two 2,000lb-class guided bombs plus a pair of AIM-120s. This would be an impressive load and would give Tempest quite an arsenal of its own. The weapons that would fill its big bays are also expected to include new types of missiles now in development. Here, there will very likely be a focus on ultra-long-range air-to-air missiles. Plans to arm the Tempest with larger air-to-air missiles offering a longer range than those currently used by any of the three GCAP partner countries were revealed earlier this year, as you can read about here. While Bill said the Tempest should not be characterized specifically as a specialist for beyond-visual-range combat, it's clear there is also an expectation that it should defeat aerial threats at longer ranges than the Typhoon, for example: 'I think the idea of defeating an enemy by turning harder, we have to ask ourselves, is that necessarily the way you want GCAP to fight? Tempest may be able to defeat a threat without needing to turn at all, and that's a really bold statement to make, remember, because we made that statement once before in the 1960s with Phantom where we said maneuverability was no longer a thing, and that missiles would be able to do the job, and radars would be able to do the job. That turned out to be the wrong assessment, and we had to go through a whole cycle to get ourselves back to a place where we understood how we were going to use combat air. So we're not making any of these kinds of statements lightly. There's an awful lot of analysis that goes on behind it, but I wouldn't characterize GCAP as only a long-range platform at all.' The prodigious payload for the Tempest will not just be made up of fuel and weapons. Just as important will be the sensors, especially bearing in mind the envisaged quarterback role. 'Everywhere GCAP goes, it carves a picture of the world to support other military capabilities, to be able to exploit that, use that,' Bill explained. 'And so getting the sensors forward is as important as getting the weapons forward. And those sensors also mean that when we go deep into enemy territory, and we may not be able to reach back to anyone else's help, [or if] there's no connection with the E-7 in the future, we still can complete the kill chain, so the ability to find and fix something, to identify it, to engage it, and then work out how that engagement went. We can still do that within our platform or within our formation.' The final piece of the payload puzzle will be the Tempest's function in what Bill described as a 'flying server rack', specifically in support of complementary drones and other autonomous capabilities, including ones pushed even further forward into the battlespace. He continued: 'We're going to take the compute forward and then take the server rack forward. Because if you want low-cost autonomous systems, we all know from turning our iPhone on, how much data you pull to use ChatGPT. Well, where's that server going to be if you're deep in enemy territory? So if you want low-cost autonomous systems, they need a server to back them up, and they need sensors to back them up to make them capable. So that quarterback has a really important role now, because you're carrying the sensors and the servers to enable that system-of-systems that's forward in that contested area.' The importance of the Tempest as a resilient data-gathering and data-sharing hub also ties into its planned quarterback role, and this function becomes all the more critical bearing in mind that the aircraft will be expected to use its various capabilities, including stealth, to penetrate deep into enemy airspace. 'So the idea of us being able to guarantee a connection back to our side, that's not reasonable,' Bill explained. 'What I can guarantee is a connection back to the GCAP, that core platform. That's why I call it a quarterback. So we'll be able to maintain, we have to maintain a local network.' Bill also reflected that the F-35 is already a good example of an aircraft that can gather huge amounts of data and distribute this to other assets, although the Tempest will take this a step further. 'The F-35, when it's in a formation, is greater than the sum of its parts,' Bill said. 'But in some ways, that F-35 formation is a little bit selfish with the way it does that, with GCAP and sixth-generation, where we're heading for is something that's greater than the sum of its parts, but that benefit is shared across the domains, so with maritime, with land, with space and with other air assets. Our ability to connect is going to be fundamental to our success. And when we're outside of the threat environment, we'll be connected in a very broad, low-latency, high-speed, high-bandwidth way, and as we go in, we'll narrow that down and manage that for our survivability.' The fact that the connection back to a command center or other distant operational node cannot always be guaranteed is also the reason why, for now at least, the Tempest will have a pilot. Bill suggested that this will be a single pilot, although in terms of function, they will be closer to being a weapons system officer (WSO) than a traditional pilot. 'We're prepared, though, for the time when artificial general intelligence does catch up,' Bill added, pointing to the possibility of a future uncrewed version of the Tempest, an idea that U.K. officials have also raised in the past. Earlier this year, Chief of the Air Staff Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton said it was 'absolutely' possible that an uncrewed version of the Tempest platform could be developed in the longer term. Bill also tackled the issue of drones and whether the proliferation of uncrewed platforms threatens the continued relevance of crewed combat aircraft like the Tempest. While admitting that, for the cost of a fast jet, an air force could pay for perhaps 10,000 drones, the future threat environment will demand a balance of high and lower-end capabilities. After all, the key demands of air combat will be long range and some form of survivability, whether through stealth or speed, or a combination. 'By the time you've made your long-range, high-speed, somewhat stealthy or completely expendable drone, you probably end up at a cost point, which isn't necessarily where you'd expect,' Bill reasoned. 'So there's a balance to this. In all of it, if you want it to be low cost, you really want the sensors to be somewhere else, maybe in a GCAP. If you want that compute to be somewhere else, so they're smart, they're not dumb, you're going to need a server rack in the right place where you can connect to with without getting them killed, because talking too loud can get you killed in a modern threat environment. So you need a server right there. Maybe that's GCAP as well.' Despite that, Bill noted that there is 'absolutely a place for saturation through autonomous and expendable systems,' characterizing this as 'definitely one of our three S's.' These are stealth, suppression (for example, electronic attack assets), and saturation. 'We've done that for years with weapons already, but drones are the new form of saturation. Put those three things together, and you have got yourself a really nice mix. But if you pick any one antibiotic and just overuse it, what you breed is antibiotic resistance, you get yourself whacked by something that's evolved to deal with you. So you need to have a spread.' Interestingly, Bill mentioned all of these capabilities coming online somewhat later than in previous plans. He spoke about the goal for Tempest to replace the Royal Air Force's Typhoon in the 2040s, while earlier official statements had suggested an in-service date of 2035. Whatever the case, there's no doubt that developing the full range of planned exotic technologies in time and in an affordable manner will still be a huge challenge. And this is before negotiating the various political obstacles that likely still threaten to interrupt the Tempest program's progress. Contact the author: thomas@
Yahoo
01-04-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Puma Helicopter Retires From UK Service After More Than 50 Years
The Puma medium support helicopter, one of the longest-serving aircraft in the history of the U.K. Royal Air Force (RAF), was retired by the service today, after 54 years of operations. While the workhorse helicopter was seen off in style, with farewell flights in the United Kingdom, as well as in Brunei and Cyprus, the Ministry of Defense is yet to decide on a replacement for the Puma. At the time of its formal withdrawal today, March 31, the RAF had 23 Pumas on strength, all of which had been upgraded to the definitive HC2 standard. However, months in advance of the retirement, the main operating base at RAF Benson, England, had already begun putting Pumas into storage. The announcement that the Puma fleet would be withdrawn by the end of this month came last November, as part of sweeping cuts of the U.K. Armed Forces, as you can read about here. By that time, the frontline Puma fleet was reduced to 17 active aircraft. As well as the Pumas, 14 of the oldest Chinook heavy-lift helicopters used by the RAF were also slated to be removed from service. The farewell flight by three Pumas — callsign WARLOCK flight — out of Benson on March 26 took in various locations that held an important place in the type's RAF career. Among them was Northern Ireland, where the Puma was heavily involved during The Troubles, providing support and transport for the British Army, as well as during subsequent peacekeeping efforts. Key training bases and exercise areas, including Cranwell, Halton, Honington, Shawbury, and the Stanford Training Area (STANTA), were also included. View this post on Instagram A post shared by RAF Benson (@rafbensonofficial) Meanwhile, Boscombe Down and Airbus Kidlington were on the itinerary, these sites having been central for the maintenance and operational upkeep of the RAF Pumas in their last years of service. 'This flight route is via various locations of significance,' said Wing Commander Nick Monahan, the commanding officer of No. 33 Squadron and Puma Force Commander. 'Each place reflects the rich history and contributions that the Puma has made during its time in service. The aircraft has been a cornerstone of global defense operations for more than five decades. We want to celebrate its contribution to supporting our people around the world over the past 54 years.' RAF Pumas from 33 Squadron depart from @RAFBenson for the final Puma has been in Service for 54 years and begin its draw down on 31 in 1971, it has been successfully deployed in various Operations & humanitarian missions. — Royal Air Force (@RoyalAirForce) March 27, 2025 Two more farewell flypasts took place at the RAF Puma's other final operating locations: Brunei, on the island of Borneo, where the helicopter supported a battalion of the British Army's Royal Gurkha Rifles, and Cyprus, where the type equipped the RAF's last remaining dedicated search and rescue squadron. The Cyprus-based Pumas were also used to support British military activities on the island and for aerial firefighting. Designed by Aérospatiale of France and built in the United Kingdom by Westland, the Puma first entered RAF service in 1971. Initially, its primary mission was carrying troops and logistics, as well as casualty evacuation, which it was expected to do on the battlefield if NATO had ever gone to war with the Warsaw Pact on the Central Front. The Puma could carry 12 fully equipped troops or up to 4,400 pounds of freight, the latter moved as internal cargo or underslung, or a mix of the two. For casualty evacuation, it could be configured with up to six stretchers. The helicopter soon gained a reputation for agility, speed, and versatility during the course of multiple overseas operations and humanitarian relief missions. As well as in Northern Ireland and Belize, the RAF Puma saw notable operational service in Rhodesia, in the 1991 and 2003 conflicts in Iraq, and in the former Yugoslavia, where it contributed to the U.K. effort as part of the NATO-led Kosovo Force (KFOR). Of the 48 original Puma HC1 variants, 24 were upgraded to HC2 standard, one of these being lost on operations in Afghanistan. The Puma HC2 featured more powerful Makila 1A1 turboshaft engines, increased range, new composite tail rotor blades, and a modern digital cockpit, among other changes, collectively known as the Puma Life Extension Programme (LEP). The first upgraded Puma HC2s entered RAF service in September 2012, followed by an initial release to service in August 2015. Once upgraded, Pumas saw extensive service in Afghanistan between 2015 and 2021. The RAF Puma helicopters and personnel that formed the 'Toral Aviation Detachment' in Kabul, Afghanistan have returned to @RAFBenson after over 6 years service in support of @NATO more: — Royal Air Force (@RoyalAirForce) July 16, 2021 'It's a great aircraft for the operations we've been on,' Squadron Leader Niall Davidson, second-in-command of No. 33 Squadron, told Forces News. 'Be that Northern Ireland, Iraq, Afghanistan.' He continued: 'It's a great aircraft for getting in and out of really tight urban sites, even in high altitudes of Kabul we are able to lift troops out of really tight sites and keep them off the roads.' "Still looks great" after 54 years The RAF is bidding farewell to the Puma after it has served for more than 50 Ldr Niall Davidson has commended the outgoing aircraft on its years of more — BFBS Forces News (@ForcesNews) March 30, 2025 Other recent Puma assignments included Operation Ruman, providing humanitarian support in the Caribbean after Hurricane Irma struck in September 2017. In the United Kingdom, the Puma was active in the response to the COVID pandemic, under Operation Rescript in 2020. In Belize and Cyprus, the Puma's role will be taken on as of next year by six Jupiter (Airbus H145) helicopters, a type that the RAF otherwise primarily uses for advanced training. As for the bulk of the RAF Puma fleet, a replacement is still to be decided. Last month, it was reported that the United Kingdom was 'close' to deciding on a type for its New Medium Helicopter (NMH) requirement. This is the program to replace the Puma, but it's been dogged by delays, cost concerns, and the withdrawal of two of the three bidding vendors. Expected to be worth $1.5 billion, the NMH competition calls for up to 44 new rotorcraft, although, should the program survive, it's likely to be trimmed down to 23–30 helicopters. As well as the Puma, the NMH is intended to replace the six shadowy 'Blue Thunder' AS365N3 Dauphin IIs that are used in support of special forces operations, notably by the Special Air Service (SAS). Previously, the Airbus Helicopters H175M, Leonardo AW149, and Lockheed Martin S-70M Black Hawk were all in the running for NMH, but last year, both Airbus Helicopters and Lockheed Martin withdrew their participation. The companies said that they couldn't fulfill the requirement within the budget provided. While it might be expected that Leonardo has now sealed the competition, there are still questions about whether it will survive, at least in its current form, amid a time of tough defense procurement decisions. As for the retired Pumas, it's also unclear what will happen to them. While old, the airframes have been upgraded and well looked after and they could well be attractive on the secondhand market, provided they are not scrapped. An alternative might be to donate them to Ukraine, which would surely find a use for them. Kyiv has also previously received helicopters retired by the U.K. Armed Forces, specifically former Royal Navy Sea Kings. Meanwhile, Portugal has also donated eight Pumas to Ukraine, so there would be some useful type commonality. Whatever happens next to the ex-RAF Pumas, there's no doubt that these venerable rotorcraft provided invaluable service to the British Armed Forces over a remarkably long period. Contact the author: thomas@
Yahoo
28-02-2025
- Yahoo
F-35B Has Flown With Meteor Long-Range Air-To-Air Missile
For the first time, an F-35B has flown armed with the Meteor beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile. Test flights with the missile were a long time coming, but they will pave the way for a major leap in capability for the stealth fighter. British and Italian F-35s will eventually combine the ramjet-powered missile with enhancements under the Block 4 upgrade, including for the aircraft's radar, which will make the Meteor an even more potent addition to their armory. The U.K. Royal Air Force announced today that an F-35B has made the first test flights with inert Meteor missiles. The F-35B used was a U.S. Marine Corps example from the Integrated Test Force at Naval Air Station Patuxent River, Maryland. So far, 'multiple sorties' have been carried out to gather environmental data as part of the campaign to integrate the Meteor onto the F-35. According to captions provided with related imagery, the first Meteor sortie was flown by F-35B test aircraft BF-18, piloted by Royal Navy Lt. Cdr. Nicholas Baker, on November 20, 2024. Photos published by the Royal Air Force show the Meteor — which has cropped fins for internal carriage — inside one of the two weapons bays of the F-35B, alongside an AIM-120 AMRAAM. The latter weapon is the F-35's current standard beyond-visual-range air-to-air missile, and the Meteor was designed from the outset to have better range and overall kinematic performance than the U.S.-made missile. In a media release, Air Commodore Al Roberts, the Royal Air Force's Head of Air-to-Air Missiles, said: 'This milestone is a testament to the effective collaboration between the multinational governmental and industrial partnerships that we have in place. Inclusion of Meteor onto the Lightning II will bring this formidable air combat capability to the U.K. and to the burgeoning F-35 community, significantly enhancing security among allies.' Eventually, the Meteor will be used by the short takeoff and vertical landing (STOVL) F-35B flown by the United Kingdom and Italy, as well as the conventional takeoff and landing (CTOL) F-35A operated by Italy. The fighters will carry a maximum of four Meteors, all internally, preserving the aircraft's stealth characteristics. In January 2024, the U.K. Ministry of Defense confirmed plans to integrate the Meteor — as well as the SPEAR 3 precision standoff air-to-ground munition — on U.K. F-35Bs 'by the end of the decade.' Previously, the U.K. government had said that British F-35Bs would be armed with Meteor by the 'middle of this decade,' while a date of 2027 at the earliest had also been given in a government report dated February 2022. Drop pit testing of AMRAAM, SDB-II, and METEOR from F-35 — Doha (@Doha104p3) January 5, 2025 The Meteor, which is already in service on British Eurofighter Typhoons and which completed operational testing and evaluation (OT&E) on Italian Eurofighters in late 2023, is a weapon that TWZ has discussed in detail in the past. The standout feature of the Meteor is its novel propulsion system, based on a solid-fuel, variable-flow, ducted rocket — better known as a ramjet. This kind of motor can be throttled during different phases of flight. This means it still has sufficient energy during the terminal attack — when traditional air-to-air missile motors are normally losing energy and, therefore, agility. Thanks to its propulsion system, the Meteor's all-important 'no-escape zone' is much larger than for comparable weapons. This means the enemy's chance of evading the missile at the endgame of the engagement, using high-energy maneuvering, is considerably reduced. Another advantage of the being able to throttle the motor is that the Meteor's autopilot can calculate the most efficient route to the target for very long-range shots. As with most contemporary air-to-air missiles, the maximum range of the Meteor is a closely guarded secret. However, most sources agree that it can likely engage targets out to around 130 miles from its launch platform. Whatever the case, like any air-to-air missile, its range is highly dependent on a variety of factors, including the track of the target and the height and speed of the launch aircraft. Along with its ramjet motor, the Meteor boasts a two-way datalink, supplementing the missile's active X-band radar seeker. The datalink provides the missile with inflight updates as it flies out to the target, feeding it mid-course guidance updates from third-party sources as well as from the launch aircraft. Meanwhile, the pilot in the launch aircraft can use the datalink to get information on the Meteor's fuel, energy, and tracking state. That can help determine if and when to fire another, disengage, or even assign a different target of opportunity. All of this makes the Meteor a formidable weapon for a fourth-generation fighter, but it will really come into its own when integrated with the F-35. To start with, the F-35 has an unrivaled sensor suite, meaning it can provide more accurate and timely targeting data to the Meteor. At the same time, thanks to the Meteor's datalink, the missile can also receive mid-course updates from other sources. In fact, the F-35 might not need to use its radar at all to engage the target, meaning it can maximize its stealth attributes. It should be noted that the AIM-120D AMRAAM also has a two-way datalink with third-party targeting capabilities, although it lacks the performance advantage conferred by the ramjet motor. It can be easily imagined how, using its low-observability characteristics, powerful integrated sensors, and advanced networked information systems, the F-35 can go into aerial combat and 'see and not be seen.' The Meteor will meanwhile allow it to engage aerial targets at very long range, including destroying hostile aircraft long before they even know that a hostile fighter is present. Holding the enemy at risk at longer range is becoming more important as advanced infrared search and track (IRST) systems — which are notably aimed at detecting stealthy aircraft — improve and proliferate. . The Meteor is intended to harness the improvements that the F-35 will bring as part of a massive upgrade initiative known as Block 4. Central to the enhancements is a new multifunction active electronically scanned array (AESA) radar designated as AN/APG-85, which will be coupled with advanced electronic warfare capabilities. The new radar should be able to engage targets at significantly greater ranges and provide improved resolution. This should really come into its own in the kinds of long-range engagements for which the Meteor is optimized. The upgrade will also include a huge enhancement to the F-35's already potent electronic warfare system, and it will address the F-35's Distributed Aperture System (DAS) and Electro-Optical Targeting System (EOTS). The EOTS provides an infrared search and track functionality, which is set to be drastically improved as part of the Block 4 upgrade. Confusingly, while the United Kingdom in 2023 said it planned to retrofit Block 4 across its entire F-35 fleet, as well as incorporate new build examples of the aircraft acquired in the future, it had previously hinted that only a portion of the existing fleet might undergo the upgrade. Regardless, it's not entirely clear how realistic — or affordable — it would be to integrate Block 4 and the related hardware and software for some of its earliest deliveries. Nevertheless, to provide for the integration of Meteor (as well as SPEAR 3 and the penetrator version of the Paveway IV), the Block 4 upgrade will be necessary. In fact, delays to Block 4 have very likely impacted the timeline for introducing Meteor to operational F-35s, which has slipped to the right. After all, Block 4 relies upon a new suite of hardware and software, known as Technology Refresh-3 (TR-3), which modernizes the F-35's core processor, memory unit, panoramic cockpit display system, and related avionics. TR-3 has been billed as the F-35's new 'computer backbone,' since it promises to provide 25 times more computing power than the existing TR-2 computing system, but its development has been dogged by problems. These issues left new F-35s being parked up and not delivered after they were built, a situation that lasted for roughly a year. Adding the Meteor to the F-35 reflects broader trends in aerial combat, stressing the value of increasingly long-ranged air-to-air missiles. The United Kingdom is already looking at a Meteor successor for its future Tempest combat aircraft, while, in recent months, the U.S. Navy has introduced, at least on a limited level, an air-launched version of the Standard Missile-6 (SM-6) under the AIM-174B designation. Of immediate relevance to the F-35 is another long-range air-to-air missile, the AIM-260, also known as the Joint Advanced Tactical Missile (JATM). The JATM, details about which are still highly classified, is expected to ultimately supplant the AMRAAM, and, crucially, the F-35A and F-35C should be able to carry six examples. All these developments are being driven primarily by the emergence of ever more capable very long-range air-to-air missiles in China and Russia. Meanwhile, for the United Kingdom in particular, there are also questions about how many F-35s they will actually buy. Before the end of this year, the United Kingdom is set to receive the last deliveries from its initial order of 48 aircraft, known as Tranche 1. Originally, plans called for a total of 138 F-35Bs, although consistent budgetary concerns have led to an apparent rethink, and there now seems little prospect that this will be realized. There are meanwhile plans to place a Tranche 2 order for 27 F-35Bs, which will provide a total fleet size of 74 aircraft, although this is still to be signed off. Regardless, a fleet of around 74 is the bare minimum needed to properly meet aspirations for the U.K.'s carrier-based air wing. Beyond that, however, the U.K. Ministry of Defense has urged caution, saying only that it remains open to the possibility of purchasing further F-35s beyond the 74 now specified. However many F-35s the United Kingdom eventually buys, the forthcoming introduction of the Meteor will bring a significant boost to the stealth fighter's already impressive air combat capabilities. Contact the author: thomas@
Yahoo
20-02-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
This Is What A Peacekeeping Air Policing Mission Over Ukraine Could Look Like
The United Kingdom is reportedly prepared to send Typhoon fighters to support a future air policing mission over Ukraine. The apparent proposal comes only a day after the leaders of several European nations met to discuss whether to send troops to help bolster any deal to end the Ukraine war, something you can read more about here. The Times of London today cited a 'senior government source' as saying that an 'air policing' mission for Ukraine would make sense, although also warning that it would need significant numbers of aircraft, as well as ground-based air defense systems to protect the jets on the ground. The same report suggests that British ministers have already discussed ways to provide security guarantees to Ukraine without the need for large numbers of troops on the ground. With that in mind, one proposal involves potentially 'dozens' of U.K. Royal Air Force (RAF) Typhoons that would monitor Russian air activity and help protect a 'smaller peacekeeping force of troops' from the United Kingdom and other European countries on the ground. Previously, Ukraine's President Volodymyr Zelensky has said that a future peacekeeping force might require as many as 110,000 foreign troops on the ground in the country, with perhaps three times that number in total to enable rotational deployments. However, according to a report in The Washington Post, the European Union is considering a much lower figure, between 25,000 and 30,000 troops, which would be deployed for peacekeeping after a potential ceasefire agreement. It now seems that a more powerful air policing contingent might be increasingly seen as a way of compensating for the smaller troop presence, which would otherwise be insufficient to monitor and patrol the extent of whatever Ukraine's future land border with Russian-controlled territory will look like. Regardless of where the border will be redrawn and to what degree Ukraine gets parts of its sovereign territory back, this new border would become the line of control. An unnamed RAF source told The Times of London that an air policing mission was more likely than a no-fly zone of the kind that would normally serve to sanitize airspace above an area that does not benefit from a line of control. In contrast, an air policing mission is primarily a peacetime effort that provides surveillance as well as fighter aircraft that can rapidly respond to possible airspace violations and other contingencies. Of course, the nature of the response will then depend on a host of operational considerations, but it could extend to engaging that aircraft if it was determined to be undertaking a hostile action. All this would depend on the nature of the potential ceasefire agreement — at this point, we are still in the very early stages of such an agreement taking shape. Already, however, there are reports that consideration has been given to basing air policing aircraft in Poland, while the same RAF source added: 'We are prepared to do whatever we are told to do.' TWZ spoke to Air Marshal (Ret'd.) Greg Bagwell, the president of the Air and Space Power Association, one of the RAF's most experienced former operational commanders, who oversaw combat operations in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, and Syria, as well as various peacekeeping missions worldwide. Bagwell notes that the U.K. military will almost certainly already be doing contingency planning for a potential peacekeeping mission. 'I would be amazed if people in the Ministry of Defense, Permanent Joint Headquarters, and the likes weren't at least thinking through some of the challenges and some of the things that you'd need to put in place as part of it. Some of that conversation may even leak into NATO, or European nations of a like mind — a coalition of the willing, if you like — so that they could think through what sort of assets would be needed and who might provide them.' At this early stage, however, nothing will be formal and, as Bagwell observes, 'Nobody's asked the exact question, apart from just making offers, or just talking about it in principle.' Obviously, any air policing mission for Ukraine, or whatever kind of peacekeeping force, first requires a peace to keep. 'If it is a peacekeeping mission, then it would need agreed rules, if you like, for what that peace was supposed to be, which would include boundaries and the rules of engagement to match,' Bagwell says. Bagwell also notes that the talk of European nations sending 'troops' to Ukraine, or in support of Ukraine, post-ceasefire, could also refer to air forces (and navies) as well as ground troops. 'It could be anybody from any service depending on the requirement … whatever it would take to maintain peace and you're going to need to do that on land, sea, and air.' 'Peacekeeping is often about keeping two sides apart. In this particular case, let's be honest, we're pretty much talking about keeping one side out. I would expect that policing to be done almost exclusively on the Ukrainian side of that line, and it would be both to keep an eye on any air activity and any potential encroachment, but it would also be used to keep an eye on anything going on the ground, both at the border and beyond.' In such a scenario, the aircraft involved — be they RAF, other NATO, or from different friendly nations — would be used to patrol the line of control. Ultimately, their job would be to forbid Russian aircraft — but potentially also Ukrainian aircraft — from encroaching within a certain distance, whatever that distance may turn out to be. 'The problem is, these days, with the long range of air-launched weapons, you need to keep airplanes quite a long way away to ensure that they're not releasing weapons or potentially conducting an attack. So that buffer might become quite large.' Even so, Bagwell considers that creating a buffer zone exclusively within Ukraine would be sufficient in this particular case. As well as monitoring the airspace for aircraft encroaching beyond the line of control, the mission would almost certainly involve some monitoring of forces on the ground, too. This would then raise the question of how close Ukrainian and Russian ground forces would be allowed to get within that line. Whatever the rules, this is something that would probably be easiest to monitor from the air or space. 'To airmen, the problem won't be that challenging,' Bagwell contends. 'I mean, if it goes wrong, it will be challenging. But in terms of working out how to segregate the airspace, how to have the right sensors in the right places to detect what's going on, and then to have the rules of engagement, and the right things in the right places to intercept or investigate or warn off. If it gets really sticky, those are well-worn procedures that you just have to apply and adapt to the specific circumstances.' The fact that participants — very likely NATO members — would potentially be going head-to-head with Russian forces 'obviously carries an additional degree of risk,' Bagwell notes, 'but we've done that pretty recently in Syria. We've had Western coalition assets flying extremely close to Russian assets, and we've managed just about stay out of each other's way. But it gets fruity at times.'There are then logistical questions to address, although it already seems inconceivable that an air policing mission for Ukraine could be conducted by the RAF alone — at least if it were to be both fully capable and to endure over an extended period. Policing such a large area would involve an operation with a degree of magnitude bigger than anything that the RAF has attempted in recent history and would surely only be attempted as part of a broader coalition. 'The border itself is vast,' Bagwell says. 'You're talking about covering a very large piece of airspace. I think the real question is 'How secure is the peace?' If we've got to a situation where both sides have stood back from each other and are not literally staring at each other from a trench 100 yards away, if they are now miles apart, and things have returned to a relatively stable situation, then monitoring that more stable situation is something that can be done from a more measured perspective.' In theory, Bagwell notes, such a situation could involve a ground alert scenario where, if it was known, for example, that an aircraft had got airborne and was heading west, a fighter could get airborne and head east to ensure that it didn't encroach. In this way, it's conceivable that the operation could get to a stage where it would require a relatively low posture in terms of numbers, but offer very fast response times. 'That's the beauty of air, of course — it can respond quickly,' Bagwell continues. 'You could, in theory, control minor incursions or relatively small amounts of air activity.' On the other hand, if the situation as regards Russia were to become more hostile, to the point where the air policing force was facing 'a hornets' nest, but only 50 miles away,' then the scenario would look altogether different, as Bagwell explains. 'You're then effectively looking to deter; it goes beyond air policing and then really does become a sort of air deterrence mission, where you're saying: 'Don't you dare cross here, because you'll get something back at you' — assuming you've got rules of engagement for that.' However, even providing a ground-alert-type operation, in a relatively stable environment, would involve a lot of assets and expenditure. Furthermore, these assets would likely have to be in Ukraine, Bagwell contends, from where they would be able to fly three or four combat air patrols, between 100 and 200 miles apart, up and down the border, flying around the clock to maintain an air presence. This would be impossible for the RAF to achieve on its own, demanding a multinational rotational force. Bagwell provides the example of putting just one combat air patrol up with two aircraft — which he says would be the bare minimum. 'Just to keep those two jets in that orbit for 24 hours takes almost a squadron's worth of airplanes and crews to sustain it in the long term, because you're putting two up every couple of hours … in a worst-case scenario, you could easily swallow up the entire Royal Air Force's assets if they were doing on it their own, just to give you an idea of scale.' For the best-case scenario, Bagwell expects the operation 'might be able to get away with one or two squadrons, one or two airborne radar airplanes, and a few tankers, but that would be thin, and if Russia tested it, it would be found wanting pretty quickly.' Airborne early warning would be a critical asset for this kind of mission, giving the ability to see a lot further into Russian airspace, especially from a relatively high altitude, fairly close to the border. This would allow incoming aircraft to be detected very early on. While Bagwell can envisage that a Ukraine air policing operation could be a relatively low-cost scenario, compared to a bigger deployment of peacekeeping ground troops, his instinct is that considering it might be unclear how it plays out, commanders 'might want to err on the side of caution and put more in than they need.' For a larger-scale operation, the possibility exists to have assets flown from outside Ukraine, for example operating from bases in Poland or Romania and then flying into Ukraine on patrol, using air-to-air refueling. On the other hand, having other nations on the ground in Ukraine — including in the form of aircraft — could also have a deterrent value, forcing Russia to think twice about future incursions, because of the complications it would bring. Ultimately, there would be an aspiration that Ukraine would be able to take on at least some of the burden of air policing duties, something that will now be easier since it's receiving Western fighter aircraft — first the F-16, and more recently the Mirage 2000. These aircraft types are already more capable of being integrated into a Western-style air defense system, which would also give Ukraine the ability to plug into a broader network and make it more capable as a peacetime policing air force. On the other hand, it remains to be seen just how quickly Ukraine can adjust and adapt to policing its own airspace, also based on the number of Western fighters it is receiving and the speed with which it can integrate these newer systems. Regardless, having the Ukrainian Air Force conduct these kinds of post-ceasefire operations would no longer be peacekeeping, but a continuation of two sides standing off against each other. Once again, this brings us to the argument that politicians in Europe are now grappling with, which suggests that air policing needs to be done independently by a third party. Herein lies the problem of Russia's reluctance to have a third party involved that is also a NATO member or operating under some kind of NATO jurisdiction. Without a doubt, the situation is complicated. In Bagwell's words, 'this is probably as tricky as it gets,' based on the potential consequences of something going wrong. At the same time, it's worth noting that NATO's Article Five wouldn't cover NATO assets operating in Ukraine, since it doesn't extend outside the alliance's boundary. This would be a factor if Russia engaged a NATO aircraft involved in a Ukraine air policing mission, although it's doubtful that the alliance would simply let Russia trample over a Western presence in the country without any sort of response. It's here that U.S. involvement in any kind of air policing effort is perhaps most critical. If Europe's NATO allies are to go it alone and set up some kind of air policing initiative, it will still be a relatively small stick compared to Russia's military might. As such, it will surely benefit from America's much bigger stick to back it up. Contact the author: thomas@
