Au contraire, BG Gilbert
Mend Em, agreed, FSTA is a c0ck up (it does involve EADS, Rolls Royce, Cobham, Thales and VT Group - all with UK interest?), F-35
B was the wrong choice from the start (with bigger weight problems than Vanessa Feltz! But does have BAES and RR partnership), A400M as Airbus's first Mil venture (and probably last? Plenty of UK involvement) but P-8 is on track to deliver (yes, it has used MRA4 kit to get it back on track, but a P-8 is 1/3rd the cost of an MRA4 ($230M)). I agree that MoD procurement is scr3w3d up; we pay peanuts, we employ monkeys and then UK defence companies rip them off! (Usually Northern Monkeys at that
).
Now back to the point of my post...
Here's an interesting analysis of another procurement program that could draw parallels with the MRA4:
Can We Save the RAF? Or Does Unilateral Disarmament Have To Be So Expensive?
An interesting paper examining the procurement of EuroFighter Typhoon.
Here's the abstract "
This paper demonstrates that the United Kingdom's Royal Air Force could have significantly more usable capability if it were to terminate the remaining intended production of the Eurofighter Typhoon and scrap Typhoons already purchased (a total of 232), replacing them with an F-16 force structure with combined procurement and operating costs that had the same discounted cash flow. The conclusions are very robust across a wide range of exchange rates, even when all intended 232 Typhoons are first purchased and then scrapped."
Sound familiar?
Read the link above on the paper from a
Doctorate,
Master of Business Administration and
Master of Public Accountancy - so I offer that
Dr Kenneth Freeman
MBA MPA has the academic accumen to argue such things...I do not. But I get the feeling that he has a good point when the country is having to make tough financial choices.
iRaven