Managing tolerance build-up is an engineering discipline in itself!

On one RN aircraft programme there was a political overrule. The contract was to be handed to a company in the Procurement Minister's constituency (fatty Soames), despite them never bidding. How to assess them in 5 minutes? Asked to see a wiring loom drawing. They'd put negative tolerances on it. Knew straight away we'd have to find millions to pay Westland to sort it out (yet again).

Many times on this thread the issue of what was FOAEW, and then became MASC, and was cut to Crowsnest was mentioned. One view I heard is that we should focus on networks and sensor fusion. Well here we are:

F-35 and Aegis Combat System Successfully Demonstrate Integration Potential in First Live Missile Test

During the Sept. 12 test, an unmodified U.S. Marine Corps F-35B from the Marine Operational Test and Evaluation Squadron 1, acted as an elevated sensor and detected an over-the-horizon threat. The F-35B sent data through the aircraft’s Multi-Function Advanced Data Link (MADL) to a ground station connected to the Aegis Weapon System on the USS Desert Ship (LLS-1), a land-based ship. The target was subsequently engaged and intercepted by a Standard Missile 6.

“One of the key defining attributes of a 5th Generation fighter is the force multiplier effect it brings to joint operations through its foremost sensor fusion and external communications capabilities,” said Orlando Carvalho, executive vice president, Lockheed Martin Aeronautics. “Those attributes were successfully proven at White Sands Missile Range in a very realistic demonstration of distributed lethality leveraging a U.S. Marine Corps F-35B and the U.S. Navy’s Aegis Weapon System. This only scratches the surface of the potential warfighting capabilities F-35 aircraft will ultimately enable across our military forces.”

Go here for the beer: http://www.pprune.org/military-aviat...ml#post9507288

Captain Nick Walker Provides An Update on the Queen Elizabeth Class Carrier at the Williams Foundation Air-Sea Seminar 2016-09-06 By Robbin Laird

http://www.sldinfo.com/captain-nick-...r-sea-seminar/


http://www.sldinfo.com/wp-content/up...s-1024x794.png

T45 as the "wingman of an F-35 eh?

Well the F-35 better be based close to Plymouth or Portsmouth - last year 4 of the T45's did less that 60 days at sea - the "T45 fleet" spent 1500 + days tied up

The RN were testing working RAF Harmony Rules on the T45 fleet!

These ships are radical designs and of their time. I spent a short period of service onboard T45 at the scrag end of my career and they seemed to my non technical eye, in a word -fantastic. But I can know they require a lot of good technicians, skilled engineers and competent operators, at many levels.
Are they (T45) not alongside because the RN has simply not enough of these people? and doesn't pay them enough to hold onto them anyway? The situation will only deteriorate further when the carrier (s) arrive with their aircraft (whatever they are). I've been slated on here in the past for saying this but to man our ships we have to make it (1) Easier for the ratings in that the deployments are managed with sensible rotations. (2) massively increase the pay to match civilian offshore oil and gas level standard (3) cut the utter traditional bull**** and make it a happier environment in which to actually serve or take part in. Otherwise we will remain to have a small selection of challenging ships with no one to man them. HS2 rail link thing, Hinkley power station build, the new offshore wind farm build of the Humber, to name but three are going to suck in a large proportion of good technically qualified or trainable for such people. What is the RN offering in a way of a career against those?
Need radical ideas here.
I suggest looser RN contracts. Do they call this the gig economy now? Paid for a period of work, then you move on perhaps outside the RN to a civilian build project, and so on. The days the RN would grab people in its claws... - they are over. Bright people wont do it, or put up with it. even not so bright people wont....Need some radical new ideas. The Navy has got to loosen up a bit... Other countries military drift in and out of service (Israel for example) Could we?

Totally agree HS - I've also been hammered on here for suggesting the Carriers would hoover up all the matelots we have.

Interesting ideas about a "flexible" armed forces - but it would mean a MAJOR change - if people are in & out they won't accept the small minded disciplinarians and stupid rules.

Of course good NCO's and Officers lead from the front and will have no problem but unfortunatley there are still too many who fall back on "I out rank you - do what I say"

HH Do you think the Royal Navy might be aware of personnel issues?

damn sure they are only too aware but has any SO actually spoken out and started a serious debate about it??

I don't think so....... they'll wait until they retire and then talk to the Beeb or the Torygraph saying what a disgrace it is................... Maybe we have to pay more money, maybe more flexible detachments but something has to be done.

I'm also sure it affects all the armed forces - but you can still march around with 10% less infantry in a battalion or you just trim the flying hours if you don't have enough airframe guys - on a ship there is a definite minimum crew and if you can't meet that it goes nowhere - like the T45's last year

Is making a public fuss really the best way of doing things? Is there a magic pot of money for recruiting extra people? The RN was meant to get an uplift of 3000 people last year.....

If not - then they would be better of trying to manage what we do have.

However:

....on a ship there is a definite minimum crew and if you can't meet that it goes nowhere - like the T45's last year

Apart from HM Ships Dauntless, Defender, Dragon, and Duncan which all deployed in 2015. Interestingly perhaps, the other two (Daring and Diamond) have both recently deployed on operations.

The RN was meant to get an uplift of 3000 people last year.....

And what actually transpired?

Oh hang on I've seen the reality TV program, that was bound to have them flooding through the gates...

I'm reasonably sure you've put an extra "0" there compared to what was actually announced.

If it helps, annual recruitment has actually increased from circa 1500 post SDSR2010 to nearly 2300 now. Of course that's not "Net" increase - but at least the issue is well recognised and attempts being made to address it.

The current state of the commercial maritime market - in the toilet - won't hurt either.....

I was referring to the pre SDSR 15 rumours that were flying about.....

The manpower uplift as announced:

note the control is still "financial requirements" with delivering commitments a secondary item

Yet in 2014/2015 the rumour was for a manpower uplift of something like 1500 - as noted here.

I think there is a lot of issues with recruitment across the armed forces asides from purely fninancial issues. For example, once you are over 25 you are not eligible for a lot of the roles, at officer level anyway. Obviously there has to be a cut off point, but seriously why can't someone who is 28/29/30 join as a Warfare Officer or Pilot etc.

Then you have some of the draconian health limitations, if you've had childhood asthma you aren't eligible for aircrew, most GPs will tell you that half the nation had asthma when they were children and naturally grew out of it.

If they really want to attract and recruit the best then they need to stop some of their silly nonsense at the recruitment level. Unfortunately they lost me to civvy street, a sad end to my families long, long lineage of service in HM forces!

Many of the recruitment folks I've spoken to have stated their ability to recruit for certain branches isn't a problem (e.g. Pilot). So for some branches, the Services can afford to be extra stringent on entry standards.

The real issue is the training system getting enough qualified branch personnel out the other end to do the role - that's often where things are being held up.

Some branches are struggling to get them in the recruiting office door though, so attracting the right people is still a problem.

Yep nobody seems to like getting their hands dirty when they can "manage" from a pc screen.....

Not quite sure what that comment has to do with the subject being discussed here glad rag...

Are you saying that recruiters aren't getting 'out there' to 'get their hands dirty', and that you see that being the issue from your perspective as a Serviceman? Engineering is certainly an area where there are Attract/Recruit issues, that's for sure. Hence the STEM initiative being pushed amongst the youth.