Poison Dwarf
While you are correct that the Treasury are overly zealous when blindly slashing MoD budgets, it must also be remembered that the MoD are among the most deliberately wasteful Government departments. I say deliberate, because they know they do it, have been criticised continually by bodies such as the Public Accounts Committee, yet have the gall to formally discipline staff who complain about being instructed to knowingly waste funds. This is a simple, verifiable fact and a policy upheld by successive Mins(AF).
As for ESF, I’m not convinced the fair and reasonable cost is really £600k per aircraft. The costings published by the US say below $600k for retrofit, around half if embodied during production. So, how much for fleet embodiment? £25M? Bear in mind there is little or no development cost or timescale, as ESF is a core fit as far as Lockheed are concerned.
Another formal ruling…… Having to find £25M for any requirement (never mind a safety modification), do all the staff work, initiate and manage delivery is considered a routine task for the lowest technical grade in an IPT (typically C2). This has been MoD’s (PE, DPA etc) consistent position for as long as I can remember and, yes, I’ve done it more than once. In cases like this the IPT should self task – it’s a simple DIY job. There are aspects of this policy I don’t agree with – for example additional manpower is usually refused (certainly for something a small as a £25M no-brainer mod programme); but even that is easily overcome. Yes, you still need an endorsed and approved Business Case, but again this is a simple in-house process, with the word “Safety” featuring prominently. Despite MoD denials, I wouldn’t be surprised if someone close to Hercules had already done all this in the past, but the person refusing to approve is being protected.
As ever, I can only speak from personal experience. To me, what I describe is common practice. But when experience is diluted and corporate memory fades, that is when the Treasury take advantage of MoD as there is no-one to mount a knowledgeable rebuttal. While some of the criticism of MoD is warranted - especially deliberate waste - some of it is ludicrous yet no effort is made to defend us. I’m afraid it is a long time since our management set the proper tone, or made any attempt to lead from the front. I shall be utterly astonished if the outcome in this case is much removed from Nimrod – MoD having to accept liability due to failure to implement procedure, process and regulations.