tony de wonderful

Estimated at over £6 billion now and the aircraft aren't even in service yet.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...?commentpage=1

alcazar

iTrader: (2)

Same old same old: win a contract, start work, ask for more money...and the government, instead of jailing the CEO of the company for fraud, gives in and pays up.

We, as taxpayers, are screwed...every time.

dpb

Who would build these things?

SJ_Skyline

Agree that the taxpayers get screwed but the people who should really be jailed are the civil servants that did not perform sufficient due diligence on the contract and that signed it, allowing the provision for the supplier to increase the costs like this. Nobody forced them to sign the contract with such terms in it and it was pretty bloody stupid of them to do so knowing this provision was in the contract for the supplier. In the same way that Jowell made the assumption the Olympics would be VAT free when she signed - you don't make assumptions when there are millions and billions at stake...

Or perhaps you do when you're spending someone else's money?

^Qwerty^

Prediction: Due in 2016, delivered in 2018 at over £12 billion, and then wait another 2 years for the F35 to become operational, which won't be fit for purpose.

Tidgy

Selecting a plane thats a compelte camel to use on it was never a good idea to start with. Also the gov keep changing their mind on what they want, so there's no wonder the prices jump.

Had they had a proper aircraft in place, a specification fixed it would come in on budget, but like every other gov project they change there mind (might be due to new gov) and thats why costs soar.

Do we need them? I would sugest yes considering how our military forces are set out, carriers are mobile airfields, we have no long range strike aircraft anymore, so you have two options, 1. more bases 2. mobile forces.