A British Conservative government would revisit Royal Air Force transport and ­fighter aircraft basing plans -- and intended closures -- including a move to consolidate all U.K. fixed-wing airlift at one hub.

Gerald Howarth, the shadow defense minister, says reconsideration of the present government's decision to ax Lyneham -- one of the RAF's two main transport bases -- would "absolutely" be part of a strategic defense review, were the party to be returned to power. A national election in the U.K. has to be held no later than June.

"We would put the future basing of our fleets, not just the air transport fleet but the fast-jet fleet, as well into the mix for a strategic defense review, that seems to me to be the sensible thing to do."

RAF Lyneham is currently slated to close in 2012, with the air force's 24 C‑130Js and a small number of C‑130Ks being transferred to RAF Brize Norton. The government announced recently that the fighter base at RAF Cottesmore will also close.

Brize Norton eventually will be the long-term home to at least seven Boeing C-17s, 14 Airbus A330-based Future Strategic Tanker Aircraft, 24 Lockheed Martin C-130Js and, notionally, 25 Airbus Military A400Ms. The U.K., however, will almost certainly cut the number of A400Ms it buys (assuming the program survives) to a maximum of 19. 

Howarth spoke last week at a Westminster Hall debate in Parliament, held to consider the U.K.'s tactical and strategic airlift capacity. The war in Afghanistan and the deployment to Iraq, which ended in 2009, have placed the air force's transport fleet under pressure. This is compounded by delays to the A400M.

Howarth argues that "it seems to me essential -- if we are to have a defense review that will assess the real and potential threats to the nation and if, having done so, we are to decide what military capabilities we require to meet those threats -- that we must translate those decisions into the aircraft, ships, tanks . . . that are needed and the places where they will be based."

The private members' debate was called for by James Gray, a Conservative member of Parliament whose constituency includes RAF Lyneham.

Bill Rammell, the Labour government's minister for the armed forces, is dismissive of the Conservative proposal for a basing review. "Apart from delaying the decision, which would re-create uncertainty about the way forward, I have no doubt that if we were to put the matter back into a Strategic Defense Review, the outcome would be the same decision as the one that we are pursuing at the moment."

Such is the flying rate of two of the air force's key transport platforms that they are not now on track to be able to meet their planned out-of-service dates. The RAF's C-130J Hercules C4 is due to remain active at least until 2030. The present operational tempo, however, means that the type might have to be withdrawn by 2027, pending remedial action.

It is now emerging that the C-17 is similarly affected. Gray says the RAF chief of air staff, Air Chief Marshal Steve Dalton, recently declared that "the C-17s are burning up their useful life at an alarming rate and will not last their projected 25-year lifespan." Defense Ministry officials confirmed the comments attributed to Dalton by Gray.

The C-17 fleet is due to remain in service until 2031, but again the greater-than-anticipated usage is eating into the aircraft's airframe life.

Discussing the issue of the A400M delay and the impact this has on RAF airlift capacity, Rammell says: "There is no immediate airlift shortfall on operations -- the capability gap resulting from the delay after 2012 will be addressed through a package of measures to enhance the availability of the existing C-130J and by the procurement that we recently announced of a seventh U.K. C-17."

Gray asserts that as recently as mid-2009 the U.K. had been leaning toward dropping the A400M program, although he now says this "decision has been overturned."

With talks about A400M contract modifications yet to be concluded, EADS officials are increasingly anxious about the continued outlays associated with executing the program, and they do not know whether governments will agree to a new deal.

The present contract is a major money-loser. In the current situation, the $8.2 billion in payments that EADS would have to return to buyers if the program is canceled is less than the cost of completing the project under existing terms.

Germany, the largest A400M buyer, has shown the least willingness to accommodate EADS's concerns, insisting that both the price and quantities are respected.

However, in advance of another round of ministerial meetings this month, and with Airbus indicating it is starting to think about how to wind down the program, the Germans may be showing they are now ready to negotiate. A defense ministry official now describes the German stance as the nation's entry position for negotiations, signaling it may be ready to make concessions.

Germany is likely to follow the U.K. lead, trading numbers and keeping its total budget commitment level. In that respect, both countries would be pursuing a policy not unlike what they are trying to implement in buying Eurofighter Typhoons -- where the budget ceiling, rather than aircraft procurement numbers, has become the primary driver for acquisition plans.

German government officials also want EADS to share the financial burden of the delays and therefore are not expected to provide the funds to fully cover the cost overrun.

Moreover, buyers want to keep pressure on Airbus Military to properly execute the restructured program. The incentive is expected to be that buyers will waive more than €1 billion in delay-related penalty payments they are owed by industry, if the new schedule that will be defined during talks is respected.

Arguing the logic for the closure of RAF Lyneham, Rammell says the move will bring considerable savings, as well as increased freight handling at Brize Norton, as a result of infrastructure investment. The minister says the overall cost of the program -- including the investment at Brize Norton and the move from Lyneham -- is $323 million. Over the next 10 years, this will return "financial benefits of £437 million." Howarth and Gray also raise concerns about the potential vulnerability of relying on only one air transport and tanker hub.

Regarding the "issue of terrorist threats," Rammell notes "careful consideration to the potential risk involved was given in coming to the decision to base all transport and air-to-air refueling assets at RAF Brize Norton.

"It was decided there was no strategic reason why all the aircraft could not be based at one station," he adds. "It would be highly unlikely that any attack could compromise the ability to operate the fleets based at Brize Norton. For example -- taking just one particular issue -- the length of the runway at Brize Norton is such that it would be unlikely that it would be damaged to such an extent that it would be impossible for aircraft to use it."

Photo: Douglas Barrie