Yes, C-bert, and it both infuriates and confuses Industry. They don’t get a spec and the MoD customer isn’t allowed to “solutionise”. If they ask for key supporting information, like Interface Control documents or work/studies carried out to date, they are usually told that only the winning bid will get them. (Although favoured contractors or those who did the studies will be given them anyway, and so have an advantage). The resultant bids are difficult to mark, as some will have gone for a staged approach, thus sticking initially to the lower figure; others will “go for it” and bid high. Assessors are never comparing like for like. Prior knowledge is important, so bids from existing suppliers look credible, even if they’re bolleaux.
The answer? I’m told I’m wrong, but what worked in the past was single tender the Design Authority (which saves 9 months or so on the tendering exercise and, after all, they MUST be a major player to modify and get MAR) and have them run a competition at sub-contract level. Or variations on this theme. Quicker, as they’re not hide-bound by MoD beanies yet their process is still auditable for probity/fairness (which MoD’s isn’t!). You’ve no idea how much time and money is wasted on faffing around determining procurement strategies when the answer is blindingly obvious. ISD 2009? They’ll have to go some. Some would suspect they know the answer but have to put it in the bulletin because of competition dogma. This is common.
Still, it seems we've moved on from the stated assumption in 1986 that, if the C130 can't airdrop to a CVS, it'll just land on board. The guy's boss was an old ALM, and he was in fits of laughter, until over-ruled. Jack, you old dog. Hope France is treating you well.