May I suggest your starting point is the PAC report on Chinook HC Mk3. They called it the "Gold Standard Cock-Up". God knows what they would have said had they dug beneath the surface and discovered the truth.
Do that little bit of digging and then substitute Nimrod for Chinook and you are almost there. You kill two birds with one stone and save a rain forest because the names are largely the same.
Or, why not really annoy MoD and look at it the other way round. Write a paper about similar, concurrent programmes that were delivered effortlessly, ahead of time, under cost and to a better spec than requested. Then ask why not Nimrod and Chinook. Your intended approach rather gives the impression all acquisition (not procurement, learn the difference) is inept.