Si Clik
1st Jan 2008, 17:01
Much has been made here of the current PR08 issues and the departure of Lord Drayson to drive well funded cars. Thinking of the politics of the moment and the need for the current Govt to present a positive spin to the spending round outcomes - most of which are driven by the overspent EP, I believe we should stand by for it to be dressed as the new DIS Mk2.
The first one is here:
http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/F530ED6C-F80C-4F24-8438-0B587CC4BF4D/0/def_industrial_strategy_wp_cm6697.pdf
I give an example:
B5.4 The Future Rotorcraft Capability (FRC) programme was created
in July 2004, to identify a future strategy that maximised the capability that
could be delivered from available funding.
Which is didn't, it just ordered the Merlin CSP and BLUH/SCMR compendium.
The FRC programme was directed
to explore opportunities to use each helicopter type to deliver more than
one capability, reduce the number of types of helicopters in-service and
promote off-the-shelf (OTS) solutions, limiting unique UK requirements to the
essential in order to drive down costs of ownership.
Which it has conspicously failed to do, strategic partnerships being more important.
So this could be a really easy area for the MoD to make announcements to projects which are failing to deliver, and provider cheaper, OTS solutions.
Just read through and see the gaping holes anyone in procurement could use to reduce costs.
Si
The first one is here:
http://www.mod.uk/NR/rdonlyres/F530ED6C-F80C-4F24-8438-0B587CC4BF4D/0/def_industrial_strategy_wp_cm6697.pdf
I give an example:
B5.4 The Future Rotorcraft Capability (FRC) programme was created
in July 2004, to identify a future strategy that maximised the capability that
could be delivered from available funding.
Which is didn't, it just ordered the Merlin CSP and BLUH/SCMR compendium.
The FRC programme was directed
to explore opportunities to use each helicopter type to deliver more than
one capability, reduce the number of types of helicopters in-service and
promote off-the-shelf (OTS) solutions, limiting unique UK requirements to the
essential in order to drive down costs of ownership.
Which it has conspicously failed to do, strategic partnerships being more important.
So this could be a really easy area for the MoD to make announcements to projects which are failing to deliver, and provider cheaper, OTS solutions.
Just read through and see the gaping holes anyone in procurement could use to reduce costs.
Si