UK Tornado fleet to retire in 2019, says BAE

[Gary]

Royal Air Force operations with the Panavia Tornado GR4 are to conclude before the end of this decade, with the Eurofighter Typhoon and Lockheed Martin F-35B Lightning II to assume its duties.

"The out-of-service date for the UK Tornado fleet has been confirmed by the MoD [Ministry of Defence] as March 2019," BAE Systems said in its half-year results statement on 2 August.

Flightglobal's MiliCAS database shows that the RAF's active inventory of Tornado GR4s totals 124 aircraft. These are flown from its Lossiemouth air base in Scotland and from Marham in Norfolk, with a detachment also forward-deployed at Kandahar airfield in Afghanistan.

In July, defence secretary Philip Hammond said the UK's future fleet of short take-off and vertical landing F-35Bs are expected to be based at RAF Marham, but a final decision had yet to be taken. Land-based operations with the stealthy type are scheduled to commence in the UK in 2018.

Meanwhile, BAE says it has delivered 73 upgraded aircraft under its Tornado Sustainment Programme deal with the Royal Saudi Air Force, including 12 which were returned to service in the first six months of 2012.

"The weapons element of the programme will see increasing deliveries in the second half of the year," it adds.

Info from Flightglobal

Same date was mentioned at Marham's families day this year

[hertsman]

A few years earlier than I anticipated but not a big surprise. The RAF's policy has been to operate only two fast jets in the front line, Typhoon and Lightning II. As the Lightning arrives, the Tornado gives way after nearly 40 years of service.

The numbers are not going to balance, or anything like it, to start with. But the advanced features of the Lightning are intended to make up the slack. I don't fully buy into that one personally, as our early numbers of Lightnings will be so few that they will not cover separate tasking. Let's hope Typhoon is further developed so it carries the load until we do have more operational 5th generation jets, or other assets to beef up our strike capabilities.

hertsman

[Ronald Reagan]

Saw this coming a long time ago, basically if the JSF came to Lossie then what would the roll of Marham be when the Tornado retires.

http://local.stv.tv/lossiemouth/news/ra ... -aircraft/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Les

Exactly. Luckily it would appear a large number of Typhoons will be going to Lossiemouth. IF the rumours are true of us getting more Typhoon squadrons than planned then maybe Lossie will get some of them. Long term IF we replace Typhoon with F-35A then Lossie may one day get F-35s to.

[Ghastly Whisper]

Frees things up nicely for them to be axed at the next defence review...2015 I think?

[Blackcat1]

Dont do it!!!!!!

[the concerned]

Then why are we paying for another silly upgrade for an aircraft thats only got 7 yrs left.Surely there is something better to spend our money on.

[Gary]

I'm sure the aircrew think they are silly upgrades the Tornado is still our main strike platform therefore still need investment

[the concerned]

but by the time they are upgraded at this countries pace you would probably get 2 yrs use. Does anyone know how much are they spending on the next tornado upgrade.I would much rather us spend it on things like converting a few c-130j's to spectre's

[Snoop 95]

Trouble is with budgetting it is done years in advance and by the time you get to do the work more recent factors and decisions have been brought to bear. Look at what happenened as the cold war ended, new buildings, runways, taxiways, assetts etc. much of which was all of a sudden redundant.

[PR9]

Not sure that date will be set in stone, especially as it is dependent on "Dave" being ready for action.
At least the upgrades in the Tonka will get a longer run than what happened to the Jags and Harriers. That was a massive waste.

[Blackcat1]

Hardly worth turning C130 into a Spectre, as the Atlas will be replacing the Herk in a few years .

[Vulcanone]

the concerned

Why waste money on a conversion that is frankly never ever going to happen?

Since when have we, or are we ever likely to go off and start operating a few AC-130Js? There always has been and no doubt always will be only one country that operates AC-130s, and remember that ours C-130Js are due for retiement in the 2022 timeframe.

Just a thought

As for the retirement of the GR.4s, well the Lightnings were supposed to have gone by 1984/86, but the Saudi Tornado ADV deal and the not quite so perfect radar on the F.2 delayed the retirement till 1988!


Tim S

[Ronald Reagan]

Such a shame the C-130s will all be gone and replaced by more European junk! It should have always been C-17 and C-130J for the RAF.

[Dazza37]

...replaced by more European junk!

So the A400M is 'junk' is it?

-Daz

[Blackcat1]

Well it dont look as nice as the C130 lol, but junk i dont know?

[Ronald Reagan]

...replaced by more European junk!

So the A400M is 'junk' is it?

-Daz

In my opinion yes. Though maybe I am a bit harsh. We already have C-130J and C-17, just buy more C-130Js and more C-17s as and when we need to, I simply see no point at all in the A400. We should stick with the two types we currently have which are both tried and tested. If they are good enough for the USAF and many other forces they certainly are for us.

Considering we mostly work with the US military in my humble opinion we should generally stick with American aircraft designs ie C-130J, C-17, F-4, F-35 and so on. We should have also gone for Super Hornet instead of Typhoon in my opinion and also F-16s/F-15s back in the 1980s instead of Tornado.
The Americans will do a lot of the hard development work for us, they will also buy large number themselves. Many of the best air forces tend to do this such as Israel, Japan and South Korea. Nations such as Australia and Canada aswell.

[RJ79]

It ain't junk based on the displays I/we have all seen! I think of it as a slightly smaller C17 with propellers! Re the Tonka's won't that have made the service life nearly 40 years by the time their scheduled retirement comes round? Not bad really........

Ronald Reagan, based on your thoughts there we should have basically binned our aircraft industry a long time ago, the only thing that I can ever think of that Bae and the like do wrong is to fail to stick to a budget (and there is a simple answer to that). Just remember that Bae and it's forefathers invented some of the greatest planes ever.

[Dazza37]

In my opinion yes. Though maybe I am a bit harsh. We already have C-130J and C-17, just buy more C-130Js and more C-17s as and when we need to, I simply see no point at all in the A400. We should stick with the two types we currently have which are both tried and tested. If they are good enough for the USAF and many other forces they certainly are for us.

Considering we mostly work with the US military in my humble opinion we should generally stick with American aircraft designs ie C-130J, C-17, F-4, F-35 and so on. We should have also gone for Super Hornet instead of Typhoon in my opinion and also F-16s/F-15s back in the 1980s instead of Tornado.
The Americans will do a lot of the hard development work for us, they will also buy large number themselves. Many of the best air forces tend to do this such as Israel, Japan and South Korea. Nations such as Australia and Canada aswell.

Given the bilge written above, and your username, i can only assume that you (a) aren't european, or (b) are a troll. Just about the only other people to have had such a negative view of the British/European aerospace industry were a certain Labour government and they almost totally destroyed the British aircraft industry...

-Daz

[Ronald Reagan]

There was a time when Britain could build good aircraft but that time is over, sadly now the numbers needed are to small. Look at the fiasco of Nimrod AEW and Nimrod MRA4 for example. Might aswell have gone for E-3 and P-8 to start off with, all we did was waste loads of money.
We already have C-130J, could simply buy more of this amazing aircraft, we already have C-17 so again could buy more, we have crews trained to fly both, whats the need for another type. IF we went for something like Super Hornet we could have done much of pilot training in the US so saving even more.
I am not European as you so put it but British. I am all for keeping jobs here IF we can but it should be working with the US and their brilliant aviation industry not Europe. Lets be honest, the US has the greatest aviation industry in the world, if we can be part of that in some small way we should. Where we can I would build under license here to keep as many UK jobs as possible, pushes the cost up but still delivers us American aircraft.
Many I talk to in the British military would also love to have more US equipment, I know many in the army would have loved the UH-60 for example.

[Ronald Reagan]

RR

I agree with you to a point, that Tornado F3 with hindsight was probably not needed, but when the first ADV flew in 79 right up to the F2 going into service the cold war was going flat out. I understand many in the RAF would have liked F14 & F15's, still good reason not to let people go on exchange tours. If you could have predicted that the cold war would be effectively over by 1990, smart money would have been to continue with the re wing of the F4 along with something like the excellent Blue Vixen, and then gone straight to Typhoon. Whilst with F3 was ok, it took a few smart Brits and Yanks to get the datalink to work and give it the the F3 the capability it needed.

Super Hornet against Typhoon, sorry Typhoon wins it, the main reason for the delays in Typhoon were the various governments (especially at the time the German government) sticking their fingers where the sun doesn't shine and just delaying the production process.

Back to the mighty Tonka, can't seeing going beyond 2015, capability gap? didn't stop to governments binning SHAR, GR9, Jag and Nimrod.

Very interesting CH2.
For what its worth from a photography point of view I loved the Tornado F-3, Jaguar, Harrier, Nimrod and unique mix of aircraft we had.
I would also agree Typhoon is a better air to air platform than Super Hornet BUT how many Super Hornets could we have bought for the same cost of Typhoon? We could have used them to give us a carrier capability to. To me Typhoon is a pointless aircraft. Following my ''always buy American policy'' I would have soldiered on with Torn F-3, GR4, Jaguar GR3, Har GR9 until F-35 comes along then gone for an all F-35 force, F-35A for the RAF and F-35C for the Navy. It would appear long term they plan to replace Typhoon with the superior F-35A anyhow.
I would have also gone for P-8 (or surplus P-3s) and never entertained the idea of Nimrod MRA4. As for the transport fleet, C-17 and C-130J. As for tankers back in the 1980s an order of KC-10s would have been made or failing that somewhere along the way we could have got some surplus KC-135s and had them modified.
For helicopters I would have gone for UH-60, would have never entertained Merlin.
One only has to look at the quality of the Israeli, Japanese and South Korean forces and see the aircraft types they purchase, it isn't Tornado or Typhoon!!!!!!!!!!