Thank you for the link NAB.
The Qs and As are appalling.
Crowsnest - Franscois should have drawn parallels to SKAEW7. Then asked what persuaded MoD to select such a procurement strategy. Those who did the systems integration then aren't mentioned.
At Q65 risk reduction is mentioned, and that MoD would learn. Why did it not learn from the 4-phase risk reduction contract on SKAEW7 in 1995/6? It was the foundation of the programme.
Q68 - No lessons learned. It would seem no-one read the Post Project Evaluation report on SKAEW7.
Q82 - 'The scale of the task was underestimated at the front end'. As above, SKAEW7 wasn't underestimated by those who had to do the job - again, it's all set out in the PPE report.
But it WAS underestimated by those in Main Building who wrote the original requirements. They omitted over 60% of the job. If that happened on Crowsnest, then it's entirely possible the contractor has delivered to contract, but what was delivered was not fit for purpose. That was avoided on SKAEW7 by MoD(PE) re-writing the specs and adding little things like systems integration, full mission trainer, logs support, and actually modifying the equipment and aircraft. I'd like to hear the programme manager's view on all this, because he certainly wouldn't be allowed to brief the truth to Bollom.