The Royal Meteorological Society (RMetS), as the UK’s learned and professional society for weather and climate, recognises the strategic pressures facing public research investment. We note the Natural Environment Research Council’s (NERC) recent announcement outlining a pivot towards new technologies in atmospheric research and the cessation of funding for the Facility for Airborne Atmospheric Measurements (FAAM). As an independent, evidence-based voice for the meteorological community, we believe it is essential that this decision is carefully scrutinised, not only in terms of scientific impact, but in terms of whether it is in the United Kingdom’s long-term strategic interest.

For 25 years FAAM has been a cornerstone of UK atmospheric science, and together with its predecessor, the C-130 Hercules aircraft (1972-2001), has enabled UK scientists to carry out world-leading research into cloud processes, atmospheric chemistry, air–sea interaction, severe weather systems, natural hazards, and climate dynamics. Aircraft-based observations provide unique, accurate, high resolution, multi-variate, in situ measurements of the atmosphere that are impossible to obtain by remote sensing, whether from land-based platforms or satellites, or most uncrewed aerial vehicles. These measurements are foundational to the science that underpins weather forecasting, climate projections, air quality management, and environmental policy.

FAAM has delivered clear operational and resilience benefits. During the Eyjafjallajökull eruption in 2010, flights provided critical evidence to support the UK’s role in the Volcanic Ash Advisory Centre. The aircraft also made flights at the request of the Home Office in response to the Buncefield oil depot fire and the Elgin gas platform release, among others. These missions illustrate that airborne measurement is not solely a research tool; it is a national contingency asset. Decisions about its future should therefore be viewed through a resilience and security lens, not purely a budgetary one.

This capability directly serves the national interest. The atmosphere does not respect borders. Many of the processes that shape UK weather, including rapidly intensifying cyclones, atmospheric rivers, evolving convective systems, ocean–atmosphere heat exchange, occur over the oceans or within dynamic systems beyond the reach of fixed instrumentation. Aircraft provide the flexibility to deploy into developing high-impact events, sampling within clouds and hazardous environments. That flexibility cannot be substituted by land-based assets. Without it, the UK risks weakening its ability to understand and anticipate the very extremes that increasingly threaten lives, infrastructure and economic stability.

As one RMetS Fellow reflected:

“Scientific aircraft are often seen as glamorous and expensive, but underpinning science is impossible to do without actually getting out there and making the measurements.”

Aircraft measurements are also essential for calibrating and validating satellites, testing instrumentation, and improving numerical weather prediction and climate models. In an era of rapid advances in artificial intelligence and machine learning, the strategic importance of high-quality observational data only increases. Data-driven systems are entirely dependent on the integrity and representativeness of the measurements used to train and evaluate them. 

RMetS strongly supports innovation in autonomous systems, advanced remote sensing and new observational technologies. These developments are welcome and necessary. However, they should be regarded as complementary to airborne capability, not replacements for it. Uncrewed systems typically carry smaller payloads, have range and regulatory limitations, and cannot yet deliver the breadth of simultaneous, high-precision measurements required to understand complex atmospheric processes. Critically, without aircraft-based observations, the UK would lose its ability to properly calibrate and validate the very drone and satellite systems intended to replace it. A transition that removes airborne capability before alternatives are demonstrably equivalent risks creating a long-term capability gap.

We are also concerned by widespread reports that this decision followed limited consultation and came as a shock to much of the atmospheric science community. Major changes to national research infrastructure, particularly those involving assets with decades-long lifetimes, warrant transparent process, broad engagement and clear articulation of the strategic rationale. Abrupt withdrawal risks not only scientific loss but erosion of trust between funders and the communities they support.

Finally, there is the question of skills and national capacity. FAAM sustains a highly specialised community of scientists, engineers, technicians and aircrew whose expertise has been built over decades. Once dispersed, such capability is extraordinarily difficult, and costly, to recreate. Strategic interest must include consideration of whether the UK wishes to retain sovereign capability in airborne atmospheric measurement, or become reliant on others.

The United Kingdom has long been recognised as a global leader in atmospheric science. That leadership rests on a balanced ecosystem: satellites, surface networks, modelling, autonomous systems and airborne platforms working together. As weather and climate risks intensify, not diminish, the case for comprehensive observational capability strengthens.

RMetS therefore urges continued dialogue between funders, government and the scientific community to reassess the long-term implications of this decision. Investment in new technology is essential, but it should build on proven strengths, not prematurely dismantle them. The question is not simply whether FAAM is affordable in the short term, but whether its loss serves the country’s strategic scientific, economic and resilience interests in the decades ahead.