Why the Tempest Fighter is the Wrong Bet for Britain's Future Airpower

In the face of an accelerating global arms race driven by artificial intelligence, cyber warfare, and autonomous systems, the United Kingdom's Tempest program is a costly throwback to a fading era. Branded as a sixth-generation stealth fighter, the Tempest is slated to enter service around 2035. By then, the strategic landscape will be radically different — and the manned fighter jet will likely be a relic.

The Tempest is not just expensive, it is strategically obsolete before it even flies.

1. The Development Timeline Problem

The time it takes to develop a modern fighter aircraft is immense. From inception to deployment, even the most efficient programs span 10 to 15 years. That means the Tempest, already years in planning, won't see full service for another decade. Meanwhile, AI-enabled drone systems are developing on exponential curves. Technologies in autonomy, real-time target acquisition, cooperative swarming, and beyond-visual-range (BVR) engagement are not only maturing — they are outpacing traditional fighter design.

By 2035, combat will likely be shaped more by code than cockpits. Developing another crewed fighter is not just slow; it's strategically blind.

2. Cost vs Capability

Estimates for the Tempest's per-unit cost range from £100–£200 million. Add pilot training, support infrastructure, and lifetime maintenance, and you're investing billions for a platform that may never get close to the battlefield.

Contrast this with autonomous drone swarms:

• Per-unit cost: from a few thousand to low millions.

• Production scalability: hundreds per year.

• Mission flexibility: ISR, SEAD, decoy, strike, interception.

• Attrition-tolerant: drones are expendable by design.

  
  

For the price of one Tempest, the UK could fund entire fleets of autonomous combat drones across multiple mission profiles. Faster. Cheaper. More survivable. More scalable.

3. Lessons from AlphaDogfight: The AI Has Already Won

In 2020, DARPA hosted the AlphaDogfight Trials — a competition pitting AI pilots against human fighter aces in F-16 simulators. Heron Systems, a small AI firm, fielded a reinforcement-learning agent that defeated a USAF Weapons School graduate 5-0.

The AI:

• Performed fearless nose-to-nose merges that no human would attempt.

• Fired without hesitation, with millisecond-level reflexes.

• Maintained perfect energy efficiency in maneuvers.

• Confused human pilots with erratic, non-intuitive flight paths.

  
  

The dogfight is dead. The future is algorithmic air dominance. No G-force limited, sleep-deprived, emotionally-variable human will beat an AI trained in millions of simulated battles.

4. The Changing Nature of Air Superiority

Future combat won't occur at visual range. The air domain is becoming a sensor mesh, where milliseconds matter and airframes are judged less by speed and stealth than by software adaptability.

• Swarm drones can saturate enemy radar.

• Decoys can mimic fighter signatures.

• AI fighters can coordinate complex attacks across terrain, weather, and jamming.

• Command platforms (manned or unmanned) can direct engagements from hundreds of kilometers away.

  
  

By the time a Tempest gets close enough to dogfight, it will likely have already been detected, spoofed, and destroyed.

5. Strategic Redesign: What the UK Should Do Instead

Britain should abandon the traditional fighter model and go all-in on a dispersed, resilient, AI-driven air force:

• Airborne command platforms (manned or optionally manned) to coordinate swarms.

• Multiple drone classes: ISR, strike, decoy, jamming, A2A.

• DARPA-style innovation programs: Fund 10 competing British tech companies to develop autonomous systems. Select 2–3 for production, but integrate ideas from all.

• Software-first doctrine: Prioritize rapid iteration, modular upgrades, and fleet-wide AI updates.

• Strategic ambiguity: Drone swarms are hard to count and track. Ambiguity becomes deterrence.

  
  

This model isn’t just more cost-effective. It’s future-proof.

6. Tempest as a Bridge, Not a Destination

If the Tempest must proceed for political or industrial reasons, then let it serve not as a fighter, but as a development testbed or flying command node. Strip its offensive armament. Fill it with AI coordination gear. Let it command drone wings from afar. But do not pretend it is the tip of the spear. It isn’t.

Conclusion: Fast, Cheap, Smart Wins

The UK cannot afford to fight yesterday’s war. The Tempest is not a bold leap into the future; it's a swan song for a dying era of military aviation. If Britain wants to remain a credible airpower in the coming decades, it must think like a startup, not an empire: agile, networked, code-first.

Don’t build another Spitfire. Build the software that kills it.

"Victory in air combat will not go to the nation with the fastest plane, but the one with the fastest model update."

And here is my policy brief on the matter.

UK Autonomous Air Doctrine: A Strategic Vision for AI-Dominant Airpower

Executive Summary In the face of escalating geopolitical threats and accelerating technological disruption, the United Kingdom must pivot decisively away from legacy fighter-centric air strategies. The future of airpower lies not in £150 million manned platforms like the Tempest, but in swarming, AI-directed autonomous systems that are cheaper, faster, more scalable, and strategically ambiguous. This doctrine outlines a bold, decentralized model for developing, deploying, and commanding next-generation unmanned combat systems, placing Britain at the forefront of 21st-century warfare.

1. Strategic Context

• Geopolitical Pressure: Rising tensions in Eastern Europe, the South China Sea, and the Arctic demand rapid-response airpower without reliance on vulnerable, crewed aircraft.

• Technological Maturity: AI, edge computing, and autonomous swarming capabilities have matured sufficiently to overtake human pilots in both within-visual-range (WVR) and beyond-visual-range (BVR) scenarios.

• Budget Constraints: The UK's limited defence budget and depleted RAF force size cannot sustain another decades-long manned fighter project without strategic vulnerability.

  
  

2. The Case Against Crewed Fighters

• Time-to-Field: 10–15 years to field a manned Tempest is too slow.

• Cost: Each Tempest projected at over £150 million; pilot training adds millions more.

• Survivability: Modern IADS and AI-driven interceptors make crewed jets highly vulnerable.

• Irrelevance: Dogfighting is functionally obsolete; future engagements occur in sensor webs, not visual-range duels.

  
  

3. Strategic Vision: The AI-Driven Swarm Force

Command Core:

• Develop 1–2 high-altitude, survivable airborne command platforms.

• These serve as flying C3 (command, control, communications) hubs for drone coordination.

  
  

Swarm Composition:

• Modular drones in four operational classes:

  1. ISR (Intelligence, Surveillance, Reconnaissance)

  2. Decoys and Jammers

  3. Precision Strike Platforms

  4. Air-to-Air Interceptors

     
     

Doctrinal Pillars:

• Decentralized Autonomy: No single point of failure; drones operate independently if comms severed.

• Adaptive AI: Agents trained via reinforcement learning and adversarial red-teaming.

• Human-in-the-Loop: Ethical compliance and nuclear