
I hope this is just speculation and posturing. BAE have very promising UCAV programs, and Warton is the logical place to build them. Plus the tories will be in power in 12 months and the current 70's student union attitude to UK defence will pass. Fingers crossed.
Martin Bayliss - Stroud
I noted the MoD has now selected the F35C as opposed to F35B? Announced today in the Telegraph?
Good, this should mean far greater benefits, and the in-service date of the new carriers should surely now be far sooner, say 2012? as the F35C should be ready by then?
John - London
By the time the last of these T3 batch get into service, the first aircraft will be running out of service life. So what will we defend the UK with then? RAF say we will never have more than 120 in service (but not all airworthy) at one time, lets hope we do not need an airforce anytime soon. We may be in a pickle.
steve - Essex
I doubt if the carriers will be in by 2012, more likely to slip to the right by a few years. May be only have money for one initially?
Actually, why on earth do we need the F35 at all, if we need to have the capability lets pay a contractor to supply them as we need them OFS - a new form of contracting for availability! By removing F35 capability there would be no requirement to have either of the carriers. If these two major programmes were 'postponed' to a later date, it might give the MOD a chance to recover from the Treasury blight of the last 12 years, and help shape SDR next year in a much more positive way, than I think will be the case.
As with the political system, we need to re-think Defence on a global scale by opening the market up to international competition and partnering - not lets keep the jobs in the UK attitude. Why not export the jobs where the work is - I'm sure there are people who would love to work and live in other countries for a few years, while this country tries to recover!
Anom - Bristol
BAE has sought to protect Warton for decades, sacrificing other plants (e.g. Kingston, home of the Harrier, which was always profitable) to protect it - a legacy of the BAC dominance of BAE management after nationalisation in '77.
The assumption was that its loss was too important nationally to allow happen. Will they really just 'let it go', or try, once more, to position it as a 'strategic asset' that needs 'make work' programmes, like Typhoon became (whither FOAS?)?
Time will tell, but note that Tory Procurement Minister Gerald Howarth was there a short while back, getting the guided tour.
Anon - Crawley