Select committee: Defence Committee

Future Aviation Capabilities

Closed Opened 10 Sep 2023 Closed 3 Sep 2025 3 recommendations 12 conclusions
Inquiry scope (the committee's words)
This inquiry was originally conducted during the 2019 Parliament and was interrupted by the 2024 general election. In November 2024 the re-established committee agreed to complete the inquiry. Following the conclusion of its first inquiry into aviation procurement, the Committee is now launching a new follow-on inquiry which will focus on future aviation capabilities. The Committee welcomes written evidence on any or all of the topics below, to be submitted by Monday 23 October: Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) : What will be the key challenges in delivering GCAP’s aim to deliver a 6th generation combat aircraft by 2035, and what should the MoD be doing now to address them? What lessons can be learnt from previous large multilateral defence programmes such as Typhoon? How can the MoD ensure that GCAP attracts and retains political and public support over the next decade? With full-scale production of the new aircraft not expected to be underway until the 2030s, how can the MoD and industry ensure that an appropriately skilled workforce is retained in the interim? Rotary wing What are the reasons for, and the implications of, delays to the New Medium Lift helicopter procurement? Is planned investment across the rotary wing fleet appropriately balanced to deliver the capabilities required? Advanced jet trainer With the Hawk T2 expected to leave service in 2040, and synthetic training becoming increasingly prevalent, how should the MoD approach the procurement of its next advanced jet trainer? Munitions What is your assessment of the MoD’s vision, strategy and planning of future airborne weapons systems across the combat fleet? Is the air mobility fleet suitably equipped for the transport of such weapons? Defence industrial strategy How can the MoD ensure that these procurements best contribute to a sustainable and thriving defence industrial base, by building and maintaining appropriately skilled, effective and active defence manufacturing teams? How should exportability be built into these programmes from the outset, and what should the MoD, and the Government more broadly, be doing to maximise their export potential?

Where it stands

The inquiry is closed, opened 10 September 2023.

The committee has published 1 report, most recently 3rd report - The Global Combat Air Programme on 14 January 2025.

The government's response

Published 21 March 2025. The deadline was 14 March 2025.

Summary written by Accountability Index from the government's response. It is not the government's own words.

The government welcomes the Committee's assessment of GCAP's importance, agrees with several recommendations, and does not give a specific response on the Hawk conclusion beyond saying alternative options are being assessed.

  • On partners, it says the UK, Japan and Italy "are open to further partners", but that this "must similarly be driven by the needs of the programme and its agreed timeline".
  • On delivery structures, it agrees that "an empowered joint delivery organisation will be essential", citing the 2024 treaty ratified by all three partners to set up the GCAP International Government Organisation.
  • On costs and transparency, it says it "is committed to transparency to support proper scrutiny" and is "actively pursuing means to manage costs". The response does not commit to the multi-year funding arrangement the Committee asked it to consider.
  • On Hawk, it says recent events led to an investigation, that "further investment will be required" for Hawk T2 to reach its 2040 out of service date, and that alternative options "are being assessed".

Read the government's response ↗ Report an error

Recommendations and conclusions 15 shown

1: Global Combat Air Programme welcomed as vital for UK combat air sovereignty and allied relations

Conclusion · 3rd report - The Global Combat Air Programme · Addressed to Ministry of Defence

Concluded (the committee's words)
We welcome the establishment of the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP), which will be one of the UK’s most significant defence programmes over the next decade and beyond. If delivered as planned, GCAP will enable the UK to retain national sovereignty in combat air, providing a vital military capability in an increasingly volatile world. We also recognise the opportunities the programme brings to deepen the UK’s relationships with its allies and to shore up defence industrial capacity. (Conclusion, Paragraph 13) Structures and partnerships

Link to this item · Read this item

2: Confidence in Japan and Italy's commitment and technical capabilities for Global Combat Air Programme

Conclusion · 3rd report - The Global Combat Air Programme · Addressed to Ministry of Defence

Concluded (the committee's words)
The Committee’s visits to Japan and Italy inspired great confidence in the commitment and capabilities of both our international partners. In particular, recognising that involvement in GCAP entails a significant step both politically and militarily for Japan, the Committee was impressed by the depth of the Japanese offer and the technical progress they have made to date. (Conclusion, Paragraph 15)

Link to this item · Read this item

3: Assess potential new Global Combat Air Programme partners cautiously, prioritising 2035 in-service date

Recommendation · 3rd report - The Global Combat Air Programme · Addressed to Ministry of Defence

Recommended (the committee's words)
An open-minded but cautious approach should be taken to including new international partners within GCAP. The potential benefits will need to be weighed carefully against the risks, with any proposed partnering opportunity carefully assessed on its own merits. Any additional partnering arrangements that could jeopardise the 2035 in-service date should not be contemplated. (Recommendation, Paragraph 21)

Link to this item · Read this item

4: Sustain empowerment of Global Combat Air Programme delivery structures to ensure timely decision-making

Conclusion · 3rd report - The Global Combat Air Programme · Addressed to Ministry of Defence

Concluded (the committee's words)
Given the ambitious timescales for GCAP, its delivery structures at the Governmental and industrial levels will need to be sufficiently empowered to take timely and binding decisions as the programme progresses. A repeat of the structural failings which contributed to unnecessary delay and cost on the Eurofighter Typhoon would place the programme in jeopardy. We are encouraged that this imperative has been recognised by both the MOD and industry. It was clear from our visit to Italy that they, having also 29 experienced the delays that had been caused on Typhoon, had drawn the same conclusions—and meeting the 2035 target date is critical for Japan. This early commitment to empowering GCAP’s delivery organisations must be sustained throughout the programme’s development if it is to succeed. (Conclusion, Paragraph 29)

Link to this item · Read this item

5: Flexibility in Global Combat Air Programme workshare supported while ensuring equal partnership perception

Conclusion · 3rd report - The Global Combat Air Programme · Addressed to Ministry of Defence

Concluded (the committee's words)
We support an element of flexibility in workshare arrangements for GCAP, whilst also recognising the need for all three nations involved to be, and be seen to be, equal partners over the course of the programme. (Conclusion, Paragraph 36)

Link to this item · Read this item

7: Provide multi-year funding and transparent cost information for the GCAP programme.

Recommendation · 3rd report - The Global Combat Air Programme · Addressed to Ministry of Defence

Recommended (the committee's words)
With the defence budget under increasing pressure, it is incumbent on both Government and industry to keep tight control of costs as GCAP progresses. As more detailed information on programme costs becomes available, it must be made available to Parliament and the public in a timely and transparent manner to enable effective scrutiny. The Government should consider providing a multi-year funding arrangement to put the programme on a secure footing and provide international partners with confidence in the UK’s ongoing commitment. (Recommendation, Paragraph 47)

Link to this item · Read this item

8: Promote the broader economic benefits of GCAP to maintain public and political support.

Conclusion · 3rd report - The Global Combat Air Programme · Addressed to Ministry of Defence

Concluded (the committee's words)
If political and public support for GCAP is to be maintained, it is essential that the Government not only makes the case for its necessity as a military capability, but also promotes the broader economic benefits that it will bring. (Recommendation, Paragraph 48)

Link to this item · Read this item

9: Support and encourage Japan's legislative progress to enable successful GCAP fighter exports.

Conclusion · 3rd report - The Global Combat Air Programme · Addressed to Ministry of Defence

Concluded (the committee's words)
The Committee was greatly encouraged by Japan’s recognition of the importance of exports to their GCAP partners. Nonetheless, Japan’s inexperience as a defence exporter is likely to present unique challenges for GCAP which were not in evidence for Typhoon. The UK government must continue to support and encourage Japan in making the necessary legislative and industrial progress to ensure that the new GCAP fighter can be successfully exported. (Recommendation, Paragraph 56) Capability

Link to this item · Read this item

10: Ensure GCAP is future-proofed to accommodate UK AI advances and counter adversary capabilities.

Recommendation · 3rd report - The Global Combat Air Programme · Addressed to Ministry of Defence

Recommended (the committee's words)
Our recent report on Developing AI Expertise and Capacity in UK Defence examined some of the challenges and opportunities presented by the use of artificial intelligence in defence. These are not exclusive to the air domain, 30 but they will need to be carefully managed as GCAP progresses. The Government must ensure that GCAP is future proofed so that it can not only accommodate advances in our own AI capabilities, but also counter those of our adversaries. (Recommendation, Paragraph 67)

Link to this item · Read this item

11: Build sufficient flexibility into GCAP to operate alongside future uncrewed combat solutions.

Conclusion · 3rd report - The Global Combat Air Programme · Addressed to Ministry of Defence

Concluded (the committee's words)
There are many unresolved questions about how best to harness Autonomous Collaborative Platforms (ACPs) alongside the existing and future combat fleet, with the development of advanced uncrewed platforms in particular requiring significant further work. Given these uncertainties it is essential that sufficient flexibility is built into GCAP to allow for the main aircraft to operate alongside a range of future uncrewed solutions. (Recommendation, Paragraph 74) Training

Link to this item · Read this item

12: Failure to capitalise on Hawk success led to loss of UK manufacturing capacity.

Conclusion · 3rd report - The Global Combat Air Programme · Addressed to Ministry of Defence

Concluded (the committee's words)
The Hawk trainer aircraft has been a UK defence export success story, but with domestic production lines closing four years ago the skills and manufacturing capacity which had built up over decades will prove challenging and costly to regenerate. We recognise that innovative training solutions, including modular aircraft and synthetics, may offer new opportunities for industry; but we find the failure to capitalise on the success of Hawk remarkably short-sighted and deeply regrettable. (Conclusion, Paragraph 82) Workforce and industrial capacity

Link to this item · Read this item

13: Implement a holistic approach to recruit and retain a skilled GCAP defence workforce.

Conclusion · 3rd report - The Global Combat Air Programme · Addressed to Ministry of Defence

Concluded (the committee's words)
Building and maintaining a skilled workforce will be crucial to GCAP’s success. With the defence industry facing fierce competition from other sectors for skilled workers, it is essential that a holistic approach is taken to recruitment and retention. GCAP offers a welcome opportunity to attract new talent into the UK’s combat air industry, but the focus cannot just be on the recruitment of new apprentices into industry primes. (Conclusion, Paragraph 91)

Link to this item · Read this item

14: Prioritise retaining Typhoon workforce and securing export orders to bridge Tempest production gap.

Conclusion · 3rd report - The Global Combat Air Programme · Addressed to Ministry of Defence

Concluded (the committee's words)
Retention of the existing Typhoon manufacturing workforce, made more challenging by dwindling production runs and the gap until full-scale production of Tempest is underway, must be a priority; and securing further Typhoon export orders to ensure a consistent pipeline of production will be critical to achieving this goal. (Recommendation, Paragraph 92) 31

Link to this item · Read this item

15: GCAP must break the mould of previous multilateral defence programme failures.

Conclusion · 3rd report - The Global Combat Air Programme · Addressed to Ministry of Defence

Concluded (the committee's words)
Whilst progress to date has been positive, previous multilateral defence programmes have frequently seen costs spiral and delays pile up and GCAP will have to break the mould if it is to achieve its ambitious target date. Decisions made at this early stage around partnerships, delivery structures and workshare by both Government and industry will be key to ensuring the aircraft arrives on time and to budget; and the importance of recruiting and retaining a suitably skilled workforce cannot be understated. The recommendations in this report are intended to help ensure that GCAP’s potential is fully realised. We will continue to provide robust scrutiny of the programme as it proceeds. (Conclusion, Paragraph 94) 32

Link to this item · Read this item

Reports

1 report

Oral evidence sessions

3 sessions

On smaller screens, scroll horizontally to read every column. Keyboard users can focus the table region and use the arrow keys.

Date Session and witnesses Source
21 Feb 2024
Panel 1
Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton KCB · Ministry of Defence, James Cartlidge MP · Ministry of Defence, Lieutenant General Rob Magowan CB CBE · Ministry of Defence, Richard Berthon OBE · Ministry of Defence
View ↗
24 Jan 2024
Panel 1; Panel 2; Panel 3
Herman Claesen · BAE Systems, Ian Waddell · The Confederation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Unions (CSEU), Mr Rhys McCarthy · Unite the Union, Nick Laird CBE · Spirit AeroSystems, Simon Barnes · BAE Systems, Tristan Crawford · AERALIS
View ↗
9 Jan 2024
Panel 1; Panel 2
Brian Phillipson · Eurofighter GmbH, Lucia Retter · RAND Europe, Professor Trevor Taylor · RUSI, Tim Rowntree · OCCAR
View ↗

Who gave evidence

14 witnesses

On smaller screens, scroll horizontally to read every column. Keyboard users can focus the table region and use the arrow keys.

WitnessOrganisationSessions
Air Chief Marshal Sir Richard Knighton KCB · Chief of Defence Staff Ministry of Defence 1
Brian Phillipson · Former CEO/COO Eurofighter GmbH 1
Herman Claesen · Managing Director Future Combat Air Systems BAE Systems 1
Ian Waddell · General Secretary The Confederation of Shipbuilding and Engineering Unions (CSEU) 1
James Cartlidge MP · Minister for Defence Procurement Ministry of Defence 1
Lieutenant General Rob Magowan CB CBE · Chief of the Defence Staff (Financial and Military Capability) Ministry of Defence 1
Lucia Retter · Research Leader RAND Europe 1
Mr Rhys McCarthy · National Officer for Aerospace and Shipbuilding Unite the Union 1
Nick Laird CBE · Managing Director of European Space and Defence Spirit AeroSystems 1
Professor Trevor Taylor · Director of the Defence, Industries & Society Programme RUSI 1
Richard Berthon OBE · Director Future Combat Air Ministry of Defence 1
Simon Barnes · Group Managing Director Air BAE Systems 1
Tim Rowntree · Former Director OCCAR 1
Tristan Crawford · CEO AERALIS 1

Correspondence

2 letters

On smaller screens, scroll horizontally to read every column. Keyboard users can focus the table region and use the arrow keys.