Ministry of Defence's F-35 blunder: £57B and counting

Government spending watchdog eviscerates penny wise, pound foolish approach

Britain's Ministry of Defence (MoD) is being criticized for undermining its F-35 stealth fighter program through years of short-term budget decisions that have increased long-term costs and left the fleet understrength and undercapable.

A scathing report from Parliament's Public Accounts Committee (PAC) highlights "significant problems" with F35 procurement and management, echoing an earlier rebuke from the National Audit Office (NAO) over similar shortcomings.

The UK's F-35 force lacks essential capabilities, including stand-off weapon to attack ground targets from a safe distance. The Spear missile is ready but awaits integration through Lockheed Martin's Block 4 software update — now delayed until 2031, five years behind schedule. Without it, PAC warns, the jets can only attack ground targets by dropping bombs "like in WW2."

The report's main criticism targets the MoD's pattern of delaying purchases to meet annual budget targets, driving up total program costs while reducing operational capacity.

As a result, whole-life cost estimates have tripled to £57 billion ($75 billion), excluding personnel, fuel, and infrastructure — which push the National Audit Office's estimate to £71 billion ($93 billion). And delaying support infrastructure for the Royal Navy's 809 Naval Air Squadron by six years added nearly £100 million ($131 million) in costs.

"During our inquiry, the MoD told us that they viewed these kinds of decisions costing the taxpayer many millions more in the long-term than the money saved in the short term, as a 'conventional consequence' of budget management. This is exactly the sort of attitude that our committee exists to challenge," said PAC Chair, Sir Geoffrey Clifton-Brown.

The F-35 program also suffers from a shortage of suitably qualified engineers - the biggest threat to delivering the full capability of the stealth jets, the report says. During a 2021 joint deployment, the US Marines operated with nearly double the personnel per aircraft compared to the Royal Navy — a gap the MoD failed to anticipate.

The PAC's report had further criticism for the MoD over its announcement in June to buy a dozen of the F-35A variety of the aircraft, designed to operate from land-based airfields. The ministry has not disclosed its preferred mix of F-35A and carrier-capable F-35B models, potentially impacting the Royal Navy's ability to field sufficient jets from its two aircraft carriers.

The Senior Responsible Owner for the F-35 program, understood to be Air Commodore Nick Lowe of the Royal Air Force, has only recently begun talks with partner nations about the new capabilities and the relevant requirements, and has yet to estimate costs. PAC demands an update within six months on the F-35A's whole-life costs and timeline for nuclear certification arrangements.

What the report doesn't point out is that the MoD, like many UK government departments, experienced budget pressure in recent years, with defense spending falling in real-terms by 22 percent between 2009/10 and 2016/17, according to figures from the House of Commons Library. Some of the cost-cutting and short-termism could be seen as a response to this.

However, the Public Accounts Committee does not see any reason to let the MoD off the hook.

"Making short-term cost decisions is famously inadvisable if you're a homeowner with a leaky roof, let alone if one is running a complex fighter jet program - and yet such decisions have been rife in the management of the F-35," Clifton-Brown states. ®