§ 9. Mr. Rankinasked the Minister of Aviation to what extent the faults and shortcomings of the F111B will be remedied in the F111A; and if he will make a statement on the matter.
§ 15. Mr. Hastingsasked the Minister of Aviation whether he is satisfied with the potential performance of the F111; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. MulleyAs I said in answer to the hon. Member for Orpington (Mr. Lubbock) on 1st March, my right hon. Friend the Secretary of State for Defence and I are kept closely aware of development of the F111A and there is no reason to believe that this aircraft will not satisfy the R.A.F. requirement.
§ Mr. RankinI thank my right hon. Friend for that Answer, but is he aware that there is a third version of this generation of aircraft, the FB111, of which President Johnson is ordering 200? Is he satisfied that this new version will not put the F111 somewhat out of date?
§ Mr. MulleyThe FB111 version is a version for a strategic bombing rôle, a purpose quite different from that for which we require the F111A, as a Royal Air Force Canberra replacement.
§ Mr. HastingsHas the Minister seen a report by the United States House of Representatives Armed Services Committee, part of which was published only a week or two ago, which seemed to cast the gravest doubt on the capability of this aircraft, not only in the nuclear rôle but in the conventional bombing rôle, having regard to a number of criticisms? Is he still satisfied, and, if he cannot make a statement about it now, will he say something much more definite when we come to the debate later today on the F111?
§ Mr. MulleyThe report to Congress to which tthe hon. Gentleman refers was about the FB111, and the criticisms against this aircraft do not seem to me to be relevant to a consideration of the one which we have ordered. All the information we have, which is, of course, supported by the fact that the United States Air Force is to have it in service two years before it comes to us, makes us quite satisfied that this aircraft will, as at present advised, meet the Royal Air Force requirement.
§ Mr. Maxwell-HyslopSince the F111, the basic aircraft, has hardly begun its flight test programme and is in severe difficulties as regards both the compressor and the reheat system, what positive reasons are there for the Minister to believe that it will meet its performance guarantees?
§ Mr. MulleyThe hon. Gentleman knows quite well that I cannot go into the actual ranges and other characteristics of an operational requirement. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why not?"] But, quite clearly, we, along with the United States Air Force, are taking a close interest in this, and the hon. Gentleman, who has acquaintance with the aircraft industry, knows quite well that one cannot wait until an aircraft is actually in service for some years before buying it without being charged with buying an obsolescent aircraft.
§ Mr. R. CarrIn view of the continuing doubts about the performance of the F111, have the Government made arrangements, or, if they have not done so already, will they make arrangements, for some guarantee from the United States in case of, for example, a cancellation, as happened with Skybolt?
§ Mr. MulleyI think that we have all the guarantees for delivery of this aircraft and its meeting our requirements which any Government could reasonably request.