Any Good Procurement Stories?

[Shaft109]

Having seen lots of procurement mysteries by the MOD I'm curious as to weather there are any stories of getting it right / under budget / quiet sucesses?

[Cornerstone958]

Are you having a larf?:confused::confused:

[airborne_artist]

I can only congratulate the War Dept section that dealt with procurement of male undergarments in the late 1940s. They must have placed an order for delivery in 1952 for long johns. Some or all of that 1952 delivery stayed on shelves until 1979, for that was when my long johns were issued to me at RAF Leeming as an RN snottie. Only seven years older than me, they continue to serve me very well.

Is there any other MoD equipment delivered in 1952 (or before) that continues to work as well as my long johns?

[Roland Pulfrew]

Is there any other MoD equipment delivered in 1952 (or before) that continues to work as well as my long johns?


This one (http://www.raf.mod.uk/bbmf/)

or this one (http://www.royalnavyhistoricflight.org.uk/home/)? :E

[L J R]

REAPER.....Quickly, quietly, successfully, by a few dedicated individuals.

I now that the mis-informed may disagree, and that is their right.

[airborne_artist]

Roland Pulfrew - good point. When should I expect a request to display my historic apparel? :E

[tyne]

Not long before ARK-R left service, I was shown some comms kit mounded in the cross passage behind the bridge that had valves in it. The makers date was 1974 I think. So that was 11 years before she entered service.

Can't remember what the kit was, but I wonder if it will end up in QE?

[Flap62]

Hi everybody,

My boss is, like, totally bustin me about writing some article or something but I was off the day they taught looking stuff up at Journo school so is there anybody out there who could do this for me?

[airborne_artist]

HMY Britannia's 240v supply was generated by a Paxman-built engine first fitted in HMSM Viper as a main propulsion unit. It was removed from Viper in 1943, rebuilt by Paxman to serve as a diesel generator and fitted in 1953. It is still in place today.

[Stuff]

I paid for a few tons avtur with a GPC. That was quick, efficient and I got what I wanted on time and on budget. :8

[taxydual]

Does anyone recall the green woollen balaclavas issued in the late '80s?

The tale told was that in 1943 some Airship had spotted a rather natty balaclava being sported by some youth or other in one of the the Scottish Outer Islands.

Thinking this was perfect for wartime aircrew, a sample of the garment was sent to the Air Ministry for trial and an order promptly made to the original knitter.

The lady on the Island recruited two of her friends and they went to full speed on the needles.

40 years and some thousands of balaclavas later, someone finally twigged and cancelled the order.

Hence the one-off issue of a balaclava.

The only snag with the things was that they had been stockpiled in some warehouse or other for years and came with the overpowering stink of mothballs.

[pulse1]

In 1964 I met someone who was a machinist at Handley Page. He was still turning out parts for the Halifax to meet MoD orders.

[Red Line Entry]

For success, try this NAO report on support for Fast Jets:

Transforming logistics support for fast jets - National Audit Office (http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/0607/transforming_logistics_support.aspx)

"the Tornado and Harrier Integrated Project Teams costs have reduced from a total of 711 million in 2001-02 to 328 million in 2006-07, providing a cumulative saving of some 1.4 billion over the six-year period"

A significant achievement, not to be confused with the subsequent decision to massively reduce our FJ capability!:sad:

[Dan Winterland]

http://i73.photobucket.com/albums/i206/Mangonel/can_openers.jpg

[allan907]

...and one in every pack!

[tucumseh]

It has long been MoD policy not to trumpet or attempt to learn from procurement successes; of which there have been many.

The official line is that to do so would raise the bar and with it the expectations of both the Users (you) and our Masters (Government). Favourite phrases used to people who dare deliver to Time, Cost and Performance include;

1. "You are an embarrassment to the Department"
2. "You are tainted by your experience"

In both cases followed by "Find another job".

I'm sure everyone will have good fun with this thread, but the above is demonstrably true.

[modtinbasher]

Ask the Non-Project-Procurement-Organisation (NPPO) exactly how much they are saving now!

MTB

[Pontius Navigator]

TD, nice one but clearly not true for the air force as they would have been blue not green.

On the Ark's 'old' kit, the Vulcan had pillar lamps stamped KG VI. The self-same lights were fitted the that great COTS success, the Nimrod Mark 1. Avro's must have had a hangar full.

In 1969 we could still get brand new, newer issued, kit for the Lanc such as drift sights.

[taxydual]

PN,

I would have thought Blue too. But.......they were Green. Also they didn't have any label sewn into them to further identify them. All I know is that Lossie reeked of mothballs for weeks.

Plus, why ruin a good story with the truth. However,.............. stranger things have happened.

Rgds

TD

[BEagle]

Yes, Dan - the famous compo tin widger! Most functional and reliable piece of kit I came across in 35 years of RAF service.

Probably would have worked at 100 fathoms or in outer space - and wouldn't have interfered with a nuclear weapon either.

[Pontius Navigator]

TD, you remind me of a prized bit of kit my old man had. It was a sort of green canvas sleeveless jacket lined with fur. It was a hard fur rather than soft and cuddly. It too was in green.

It went well with his navy uniform :)

[Lima Juliet]

http://www.uasvision.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/RAF_Reaper.jpg

Small money that has made a HUGE difference and saved many Coalition lives; plus a small and perfectly formed DE&S Team to boot! :ok:

LJ

PS. Not a whiff of the River Ribble with this one, either. Perfect!

[taxydual]

Ah, OK.

But it was still green.

[dervish]

are any stories of getting it right / under budget / quiet sucesses?


Not trying to be funny but define "success". IIRC the Chinook Mk3 programme was regarded as a huge success around 2000 with one of the main culprits rewarded with grade skipping (CS terminology?) and a specially created job under his Director General. What I remember is this job entailed offering advice to project mangers and he started all his e-mails with something like "Based on my experience and success managing Chinook Mk3, I require you to....". I worked on ILS at the time so his missives didn't affect me as he didn't understand support and hadn't bothered with it on Chinook.

Think I've got the gist of this right but perhaps tecumseh would correct me if I'm wrong.

[pulse1]

I understand that one of the most successful projects undertaken in recent years was the Seaking AEW radar system. It was under budget, ahead of schedule and is the best system of its type in the world.

I also understand that it was done after the Falkands by a small team of RN engineers with little involvement from the MoD.

I also understand that this is shortly to be scrapped with nothing to replace it.:ugh:

[dervish]

pulse1

These are two different but related systems. The original AEW Mk2 was upgraded to AEW Mk7, then redesignated ASaC Mk7. I hear both have a very good reputation.

Fairer to say they were joint RN/MoD efforts and excellent examples of what happens when the procurers speak to the aircrew and maintainers from the beginning and understand what they are talking about. I do know there was a large degree of continuity from Mk2 to Mk7 in PE, as the Mk7 programme manager (a CS) had extensive and continuous experience of the Mk2 going back to mid 80s. Probably a rarity in MoD and no doubt a significant factor.

[tucumseh]

dervish

Chinook Mk3 - Good memory! I could correct a couple of minor points but it would be splitting hairs. The same 2 Star was responsible for management oversight of Nimrod MRA4 and what you describe regarding the ludicrous missives we received from his tea boy took place at the same time he was being told EXACTLY what was going to happen on both programmes. Both RAF and Civil Servants were ignored, and placed under orders not to dare criticise the graduate he was mentoring.


AEW - Spot on. In later years I was lucky enough to work for both the RN officer who worked 24/7 on the Mk2 in 1982 and the Civil Servant radar designer. Both brilliant men.

[diginagain]

On the staff at JATOC in the mid 90s, I was introduced to a very nice CS IT geek who was running a project assisting the RUC in processing claims for deceased livestock. (Op SADDLE). She would spend all day plotting lift/land times, and used the data to determine when an aircraft passed over a particular claimant's stock, as part of the evidence to be used when paying-out/dismissing. When I met her she'd been ensconsed in her cupboard processing data for a few months. At my suggestion, we got her a couple of transit flights about the Province, with which we managed to convince her that, despite what the computer might say, we didn't fly in straight lines.

[mickey dee]

Your right about the Sea King MK 7, a great bit of kit and not in any small measure because they had a couple of very good operators in the project all along. Unfortunately the ‘Cat and Trap’ debacle means the replacement frame for the mission system may not have the same chance.

[dervish]

M Dee

I believe you are right. It was well known at the time these guys did most of the Man Machine Interface design work as the prime contractor couldn't hack it.

Someone should write a book about that programme as it was a triumph over adversity. The RN's Aircraft Support Executive withdrew all support almost from the beginning and did their best to scupper it. That's why I remember it because the programme manager was only allowed to proceed because he knew how to do all the ASE jobs himself, and did so for years. I provided a small support element and found it strange having to deal with him instead of the RN's Logs and Eng people. He knew his stuff alright. I will never understand how he managed to get round the RN's statement they didn't need a Trainer for the rear crew but it was a feature of the programme that much of it wasn't endorsed by the RN but the PM worked out what the RN needed. :D

[RimBim]

I reckon that most Fast Jet dudes would accept that RAIDS is useful, reliable and cost effective - in service from CQWI 2003!

[Riskman]

There are lots of procurement successes coming out of DE&S and its predecessor organizations. Unfortunately it seems that only the really big ticket projects flounder, calling down the wrath of the NAO, DSC, Daily Rant etc, which totally obscures all the good stuff.

One of the recent success stories to have actually caught some daylight is PANAMA. Those of you on DII can find out more in the announcements archive.

Consultant-News.com (http://www.consultant-news.com/article_display.aspx?p=adp&id=8598)

UORs have been the name of the game for several years and that has prompted questions as to whether or not all projects should be approached in a similar way.

R

[salad-dodger]

I reckon that most Fast Jet dudes would accept that RAIDS is useful, reliable and cost effective - in service from CQWI 2003!
Hmmm RAIDS, had a good hand in the procurement of RAIDS, good to see it's regarded as a success. Plenty of mistakes made though by those who wouldn't listen. :ugh:

S-D

[tucumseh]

There are lots of procurement successes coming out of DE&S and its predecessor organizations. Unfortunately it seems that only the really big ticket projects flounder, calling down the wrath of the NAO, DSC, Daily Rant etc, which totally obscures all the good stuff.



UORs have been the name of the game for several years and that has prompted questions as to whether or not all projects should be approached in a similar way.



I've said it many times here - the press and committees don't want to hear about complex programmes delivered with effortless competence. These far outnumber the disasters we read about. The problem is MoD don't learn from these successes and ask why simpler programmes flounder. The answer is already known and they don't like it. People.

The UOR process has always worked reasonably well, especially with relatively simple kit which doesn't require too much integration. However, in the aircraft domain it breeds sloppiness among those who have never been trained properly in the first place. New kit is hung from aircraft and it works fine, but the basic continuing airworthiness work which underpins the process, in the main configuration control which is directly linked to the Safety Case, is ignored; sometimes for good reason (operational imperative). But if you let this get out of control, then you are left with an inability to define and maintain the basic prerequisite to a Safety Case, the Build Standard. Resurrection becomes so difficult, the beancounter solution is to scrap the aircraft. (After all, they need something to do having been sidelined by the UOR process). Recognise this scenario? It's happening as I write.