The CEO of Leonardo framed a possible acceleration of the Global Combat Air Programme (GCAP) as a political and operational priority, saying ministers have pressed to move the initial in-service date earlier than the programme’s stated 2035 goal. Mariani warned that a faster timeline would likely require changes to the initial requirements and a stepped approach to meeting the full capability set.
Lorenzo Mariani on timing and requirements
Speaking on an investor call in Milan, Lorenzo Mariani said the aim to bring the first entry into service “closer by a couple of years” has been voiced in ministerial meetings and is “motivated correctly” by urgency to field a multi-domain system. He said accelerating the schedule is “probably modulating the requirements that this initial version would fulfill,” adding that complex programmes often achieve final capability progressively.
Mariani did not name which specific requirements might be reduced or deferred. He did, however, make clear that advancing the entry into service — the report frames an example target of 2033 versus the official 2035 date — would mean "significantly accelerating the testing and production phases" for the sixth‑generation fighter.
Edgewing industrial consortium: Leonardo, BAE Systems, Japan Aircraft Industrial Enhancement Co.
Leonardo, Britain’s BAE Systems, and Japan Aircraft Industrial Enhancement Co. lead the Edgewing industrial consortium responsible for GCAP development. Mariani’s comments point to internal and ministerial pressure within the consortium’s political and industrial circles to compress the development timeline.
The consortium leadership was cited by Mariani as central to any change in schedule, since schedule compression would require coordinated shifts across development, testing and early production activities managed by those lead companies.
Japan’s timetable and the F‑2 retirement connection
Reuters reported, and Mariani reiterated at the Farnborough Airshow, that Japan is particularly keen to have the aircraft in service by at least 2035 because that is about when it plans to retire its F‑2 fighter jets. The timing of legacy fleet retirements is presented in the reporting as a key driver of urgency behind requests to accelerate GCAP delivery.
New participants and interested states: Canada, Singapore, Saudi Arabia
The GCAP program expanded this month with Canada added as an observer, according to the reporting. Janes, citing an anonymous source, reported that Singapore has expressed interest in joining the program, and Mariani confirmed at Farnborough that Saudi Arabia “still has an interest” in GCAP, more than two years after Riyadh first expressed ambition to be involved.
When asked about deadlines for other states to join, Mariani offered his personal view — “maximum one year from now,” i.e., 2027 — as a cutoff point for new entrants to be considered in the near-term planning envelope.
What this means for Japan, the Edgewing partners, and procurement planners
- Japan: With the reported alignment between GCAP in‑service timing and the planned F‑2 retirement, Japanese planners will be focused on whether an accelerated GCAP entry into service can bridge the capability gap around the mid‑2030s. The reporting suggests Japan’s schedule preferences are a visible pressure point.
- Edgewing partners (Leonardo, BAE Systems, Japan Aircraft Industrial Enhancement Co.): Those companies will face the practical challenge Mariani flagged — compressing testing and production while managing a possibly reduced initial requirement set. That implies trade-offs between capability depth at initial rollout and speed to operations.
- Procurement and policy officials in potential partner states (Canada, Singapore, Saudi Arabia): Canada’s observer role formalizes a closer watching brief; Singapore’s reported interest and Saudi Arabia’s continued engagement mean procurement authorities in those capitals will need to decide within the stated window if they will join as partners or observers and how their timelines align with a possible 2033–2035 entry into service.
Mariani’s statements stitch together ministerial urgency, industrial capability, and national retirement schedules into a single pressure point: can a sixth‑generation program be brought into service "a couple of years" earlier without accepting phased capability deliverables? The CEO’s answers were cautious — endorsing progressive delivery as feasible while declining to name which requirements might be delayed — and he set a practical administrative limit for new partners at about one year from now.
Original reporting: GCAP timeline could shrink ‘by a couple of years,’ Leonardo CEO says — Breaking Defense
