UK MoD tries to resell surplus Eurofighters to India, Japan
Supersonic chickens coming home to roost
Analysis Reports indicate that British officials have been in talks with several far-flung nations with a view to offloading scores of enormously expensive Eurofighter jets which the MoD has ordered but cannot pay for - or even use.
The Financial Times this morning says that unnamed "defence officials have confirmed" that the UK has held discussions with Saudi Arabia, India and Japan about reselling surplus Eurofighter Typhoon combat jets. The MoD is currently taking delivery of 144 planes under the first two tranches of the multinational Eurofighter pact. This is already enough and then some for the RAF's seven planned fighting Typhoon squadrons.
However, Blighty is committed to taking a further 88 jets under Eurofighter Tranche 3. It is an open secret that if Tranche 3 is delivered to the RAF, up to a hundred British Typhoons will never fly, sitting in storage hangars for decades before being scrapped - as happened from the mid-1980s onward with the Eurofighter's predecessor, the comical Tornado F3 fighter.
This sort of outrageous wastefulness looks even worse nowadays, with British troops fighting and dying in two combat theatres overseas, hamstrung by the lack of comparatively cheap helicopters, light armour and transport aircraft. And yet it has been set to happen all over again, for at least the last ten years, and absolutely nothing has been done about it - until now.
The Tornado F3 was bought in much greater numbers than the RAF wanted supposedly in order to keep alive British jet-fighter manufacturing capability - seen as vital to maintaining UK independence and sovereignty. Sadly this didn't work: the Eurofighter is a collaborative international effort, and nobody any longer pretends that the UK could build a modern fighter alone. Indeed, it turns out that the Eurofighter also contains enough American technology that the US can - if it chooses - veto the plane's export outside Europe.
So why not just cancel Tranche 3? The FT says that the Eurofighter deal was modified in the 1990s - largely to prevent Germany constantly cutting its orders and driving up the unit costs for everyone else. This means that cancellation penalties would cost almost as much as simply taking the planes.
We here on the Reg defence desk have been covering this issue for years now, and it is true that modifications were made following German vacillating. The exact nature of the Eurofighter deal is hard to fathom - negotiations go on constantly, and are typically kept secret on various spurious grounds. However, according to many other analysts, according to the various defence sources we have spoken to, the idea that Eurofighter Tranche 3 is inescapable is not - quite - true.
Even the head of BAE Systems plc, the UK-headquartered arms globocorp which stands to scoop enormous profits from the Eurofighter, has admitted that Tranche 3 can be cancelled - if all the governments involved agree to do so. It's that simple; if the UK, Germany, Spain and Italy agree, Tranche 3 is dead and the UK would save perhaps £3bn. This would see Blighty's 144 Eurofighters come in at around £120m each - plus whatever it costs to sort out their ground-attack capabilities to the RAF's satisfaction (some of the RAF jets can now drop smart bombs, but the flyboys want more - much more).
The cash-strapped MoD could really use that £3bn. Our troops in combat overseas would, perhaps, be quite pleased with us for once, if we sorted that extra cash out for them. By contrast, even if we manage to shift Blighty's surplus jets to somewhere respectable, the MoD won't get £3bn back; you could bank on BAE and local contractors, middlemen etc snaffling most of the cash.
And it's all too likely that the customer government would prove untrustworthy, would sell Europe's (and America's) war-winning tech to anyone who asked for it. There have already been rumblings from the US about an earlier Eurofighter deal with Saudi Arabia.
Perhaps, in fact, the MoD ought to be focusing more on its negotiations in Italy, Germany and Spain - not those in Japan, India and Saudi. ®
@ Chris G
Agree totally with the analysis. My fear is that Bush actually wants a war with Russia (or, more likely, wants to get them to back down to avoid such a war). That, together with the apparent desire of some of the commenters here for at least a face-off with Russia, makes me very afraid.
Georgia is very like Iraq, pre Gulf War 1. At that point Saddam was our friend despite the fact he was killing his own citizens. Then he went and invaded Kuwait. And we all know how well that turned out for the West, don't we?
Saakashvili is another evil murderer of his own people, which NATO is courting only to provoke the Russians. Unless someone hits NATO with a damn big clue stick sometime soon, we WILL be at war with Russia, and this one will be short and nasty.
And JonB - you're an idiot. Do you make defence policy for NATO by any chance? If so, we are all doomed.
For God's sake let's stop supporting evil regimes just because it suits us today, becasue tomorrow things will be very different.
Georgia has a pipeline
That could provide cheap oil to the west (read USA), an important part of US national security. That is why Bush has pushed NATO into an alliance with Georgia. If the situation was a little different he would be quoting that the Georgians have WMDs and we should invade to save the world ( and the oil). President Saakashvili is a despot and is responsible for the deaths of hundreds of people, but their lives are easily tradeable for access to cheap oil. I am not saying that Russia is right in this but they are no more wrong than the USA and the west, Georgia is just `piggy in the middle´this is not about saving them from the nasty Russians it's about using them. The US runs around the world trying to dictate the price that oil is going to be sold to them for, such as in Venezuela when it doesn't happen the way they want it they try anything else, such as allowing a dump like Georgia into NATO. Regarding Georgia as a serious member of NATO is laughable. The only reason Saakashvili has been strutting around the way he has is because he thinks his buddy Bush will back him up all the way, some how I don't think so.
@goggyturk , you are a true optimist and a comedian indeed and a true believer of that comedy propaganda joke film from Fakewood starring Tom from the very wooden dyslexic school of acting(even a dense lump of unformed lump of clay has more emotion then that silly twat at the best of times) called laughingly "Top Gun" made so last century ago , but with the US DOD supplying the expensive hi tech obsolete play toys truth has never been the first option post Korea 1952 anyway !
I love your patriotic propaganda , for in real life things have been much different as many war games post 1989 have shown to the real world we live in and not that one you choose to haunt !
Do much armchair keyboard and kite flying on some unidentifiable white powder I see , like a well known socialite ?