F3RB:
Of course, I understand what you're saying (although it seems BAe managed to strong-arm Brown into signing a the Carrier deal that would guarantee keeping Rosyth open and the workforce paid even if the boats were cancelled, so maybe there is a precedent) and I know that aircraft and other systems are developed and manufactured in response to a stated demand or requirement from a host nation or other government.
It just sits uneasy with me that BAe seem to have absolutely no qualms about disposing of the capability, both in terms of personnel/expertise and locations, once a particular contract is finished. It seems that they cant wait to get out of the "conventional" aviation business which gave them the backbone of the firm once it had been floated.
I mean look at it:
146 finishes: Hatfield closes.
Nimrod finishes: Woodford closes
Typhoon Tranche 3 finishes: Warton will close.
What price Brough going when the Hawk's time is up?
Once this capability is lost, it will never come back. It just strikes me as cutting off your nose to spite your face (at best) and naked asset stripping/slaughtering the cash cow once you've milked it at worst.
And considering how little of their workforce and how little of their business actually depends on the UK these days, it makes you wonder
a) What exactly the strategic direction of the company is and where it is going and
b) Why the British government seems to be completely beholden to this particular supplier considering the way its management are behaving?
Again, dont get me wrong, this is not a dig at the BAe workforce, not in any way shape or form. Its just that their management have been behaving in a particular way for some time now that is making me quite uneasy and distinctly suspicious of their motives.