The current number being thrown around is 48, but we’ll have a clearer idea after the 2015 SDSR. The govt have announced recently that as per current plans an order for the first squadron (13 aircraft) will be made in the coming months, to be added to the 3 the UK already flies for test purposes. Whether these will actually be added to the operational fleet remains to be seen.

It’s not even that – it’s the money.

The cost of developing an entirely new aircraft where we can only be sure about UK orders isn’t really feasible. As it is, BAE has a significant stake in the F-35, and it has been developed jointly with the UK since the beginning. In many ways it’s a joint US/UK program, which replica helped to inform.

I think this is actually down to two different components:

– How long does it take to produce the aircraft from scratch
– At what rate can they be produced

I think a starting point might be to look at the Long-lead items. IIRC the long lead items for the last batch of F/A-18E/Fs are due to be ordered about now, for final completion around the end of 2015, which is 18 months away. Of course, this is in peacetime, so if push comes to shove this might be increased significantly, but we’re still looking at months.

It’s my hope that the UK will invest in an F-111 class bomber, something that can operate at the theatre or sub-strategic level.

Something that would enable long-range missions from UK or friendly bases, long loiter times over the battlefield to provide on-call support and, if necessary, another arm to the UK nuclear deterrent. Tornados have been used to conduct missions over Lybia straight from the UK, but a next-gen design with supercruise and more range could do this, and similar missions, much more effectively.

But that’s dreaming. At this rate we’ll be lucky if they get some Tucanos for CAS.

I noticed that they want 64. It would be funny it they ended up with more than the UK.

The current number being thrown around for the UK is about 48 F-35Bs isn’t it? An order of 14 soon to be followed by more?

I have also read (but only from one source) that the F-35 is being considered as a possible Typhoon replacement – any confirmation on this? If it is the case then I would expect the 48 number to increase considerably, with the RAF/RN operating a force of F-35s and UCAVs. To be honest, if moving to a single multi-role type is what it takes for the RAF/RN to have decent numbers of aircraft then I think it’s a positive move.

The key is: ‘Should there be independence at any cost?’

ie, at what point does the financial cost of independence outweigh the imperative?

Even if Scotland and England did agree a Sterling union, there would be a cost to England of implementation, which would have to be passed back to Scotland. That goes for any other similar situation too.The Devil is always in the detail, and I don’t believe Mr Salmond has made a convincing case.

I am unclear on the plans for defence – can someone fill me in? Is there an expectation of a split of the current armed forces?

I wholly agree with Charlie that even in the event of a ‘No’ vote, Scotland should have more autonomy.

I think that’s a question that only the residents of Scotland can address.

Just my 2 cents, if Scotland decides to go then I think it’ll be sad in many ways, but it’s not for rUK to stop them. However, I do think that the pro independence lobby has been giving a false impression of what the situation would be following a yes vote. From that point on the govt in Westminster has a big responsibility to the people of the rest of the UK to get as good a bargain out of the situation as possible. Naturally I think this should be a fair split and that Scotland is entitled to its share of Union assets, but it doesn’t mean rUK (or anyone else for that matter) will simply agree to the terms set out by the SNP. This seems to be the attitude portrayed by Alex Salmond, that Scotland will get X,Y,Z without any push back from anyone else. Sorry, Alex, but we’re going to go for the best bargain we can get too.

On a side note, I have heard some murmurings of Shetland independence too. If they were to campaign for this so they could grab a large EEZ and (proportionately) vast oil reserves they could live like kings, why shouldn’t they be allowed to?

If the US were to go, leaving Mildenhall and Lakenheath vacant, it might be interesting to see what happens to the bases themselves – merge them into a new major airport perhaps?

Indeed. The F-16 is an alternative. No axe to grind here – I’m curious why no existing European F-16 user is considering it. I imagine that it is because Gripen is a newer design with ongoing development guaranteed for decades to come.

Well it’s coming to the end of it’s service life with its primary user, and there’s unlikely to be any major upgrades in future – at least Gripen will still be manufactured into the near future.