"I trust you are already chomping at the bit to see the cancellation of the A400M, and the F35, both 'a bit late' and 'a bit' over budget or the FSTA which is actually TWICE the anticipated in-service cost of MRA4, and is 'a bit late' and 'a bit over budget', plus I assume you'd turn your nose up at a few F22's, which have in effect nearly doubled in unit cost to the US as the number ordered has been slashed."
Yes, as I am sure there are alternatives out there which are less likely to be an issue. Don;t kid yourself that the A400M isn't going to be cancelled yet .... at least cancelling MRA4 makes this less likely.
No to the F35, as we have no practical alternative.
No and yes to the F22, as the taxpayer isn't paying anything at the moment, so cost overruns are irrelevant until we find out the final price and can decide then. If the unit price trebles, then we order less as thats all we can afford, simples.
No would be if an F22 came on the market (unlikely IMO) , our jolly RAF chums would want to modify the best aircraft in its field, "as it doesn't meet our standards". Thats where UK arrogance comes in.
Yes would be, if we bought it as is, with full US certification, weapons platforms and subsystems and with our pilots trained using US systems and in effect swapping a US pilot for a UK pilot. Just buy them and use them the as the US does and stop fecking around with something that is already proven to work 'as is'.
The UK sadly has a track record of taking something that works, and buggering about with it until it is masively overspent - as a colleague once told me about software development "if it aint broke, we haven't added enough features yet".
Punching above your weight is fine but if it costs massively more than the overweight punch delivers, then its at best a zero sum game.