There are two parts to this debate. There are those who are arguing against the RAF’s decision that a CWS is needed in Tornado; and those, like myself, who are asking why MoD have decided to serially lie over the events between 1998 (endorsement) and today (still not fitted).
The former is a Requirements issue and we all know the failure to manage this component of acquisition is the biggest cause of late, over-cost and under-performing equipment projects. It is the main reason why the GOCO bid collapsed; largely because I suspect MoD (London) didn’t want to address this underlying failure. It suits them to let procurers in DE&S take the blame. (The problem with DE&S is not the procurers, but those at the top who have yet to attain the basic entry criteria for what was MoD(PE) and DPA. And no, this is not thread drift).
Requirements should always be challenged of course and I wonder if this one is being challenged as a result of this thread. I’ve challenged a few in my time. I didn’t agree with AML buying Active Dipping Sonar kit for Hercules and Sea King HC Mk4. (The latter with the RN’s agreement, which was bizarre and didn’t help my argument). I didn’t agree with the Army plans to buy some video kit from the US with an NTSC output, only to bin it when, for some extraordinary reason, it didn’t work when plugged into PAL kit. I didn’t agree with letting the BOWMAN contract for obsolete VHF & HF radios (also binned), when kit two generations newer was already being delivered and deployed (and, to cap it all, the subject of two concurrent replacement programmes). But hey ho, you can’t win them all.
Merry Xmas, war is over (according to Cameron).