Should the UK procure and licence build US designed aircraft?

[Aynayda Pizaqvick]

As part of BFJT at Linton each course is required to do a presentation loosely connected to UK airpower. In light of recent defence procurement problems we have chosen the above as our subject and are presenting an argument in favour. Any thoughts, opinions, or comments would be much appreciated.

Regards 211 cse.

[Twinact]

211 Cse

Sounds like a short debate - we already have - Apache, Wessex, Whirlwind to name a few rotary.

[SilsoeSid]

Should the UK procure and licence build US designed aircraft?

I thought it had already been done;



http://www.whl.co.uk/images/history_westland_sioux.jpg http://www.whl.co.uk/images/history_dragonfly.jpg http://www.whl.co.uk/images/history_whirlwindseries3.jpg http://www.whl.co.uk/images/history_ws58wessexmk1.jpg http://www.whl.co.uk/images/history_ws58wessexhcmk2.jpg http://www.whl.co.uk/images/history_seakingmk3.jpg http://www.whl.co.uk/images/history_ws-70_blackhawk.jpghttp://www.whl.co.uk/images/history_apache.jpg


twinact, you beat me to the 'post' button, but thought I'd highlight our point.

[Front Seater]

It could be argued that actually it is not a 'problem' but infact a huge saving in risk and R&D. Commercial Off The Shelf (COTS) or start from scratch yourself? Keep British Industry in the loop with the 'licenses' and do a bit of component swaps (engines, DAS etc) and bobs your uncle. Many will still argue that we should be with an F-15E over the Typhoon or a PC3 Orion over Nimrod MR4.

[BEagle]

Why American and not European? If you're only talking about pointy-jets, why not Gripen...or Rafale...or even Su-27/34, come to that? That's what I'd ask you!

Looking only to the west is about 60 years out of date. And no, you may NOT use that strapline!

[lightningmate]

There is a particular issue with procuring US products, in most cases the US Government will not 'sell', even to the UK, the most capable product due to their technology export restrictions. Hence, in the case of an 'export standard' air platform the airframe may be up to par but the clever electronic bits will have a lesser capability than the same item fitted to a US operated air platform. Even if the latest kit is provided, provision of relevant technical data or support equipment is often denied, thus preventing full exploitation and local development of a system.

It is likely similar restrictions could be applied by other nations, albeit in a less Draconian manner.

Hence, what may appear a good idea often has important adverse issues that must be fully considered. The devil is always in the detail!

lm

[c-bert]

I think most people here are looking at it from the wrong perspective - that of the end user. From an industry point of view if we procure all COTS/MOTS equipment from overseas we lose our industrial know-how and before long there isn't an economy to defend. Imagine a UK without BAE Sys and its subsidiarys....

[ORAC]

http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/phantom/xt595.jpg F4K

http://www.thunder-and-lightnings.co.uk/phantom/xt582.jpg F4M

[VP959]

Another thing to bear in mind is that the actual airframe cost is invariably quite a small part of the total procurement cost. Mission systems, UK specific safety requirements and defensive aids fits, plus training and support requirements (which will be pretty much UK specific as well) will mean that there is no such thing as a truly "off the shelf" buy of a foreign military aircraft (excepting, perhaps, some near-civil types).

Certainly it could be argued that we should buy exactly the same kit as, say the US, but the counter to that is that we operate on a vastly different scale and require much greater force flexibility (and hence broader platform and crew capability) as a result.

It is this latter point that so often ends up moving the goalposts in procurement, and causing the inevitable delays and cost growth. We always seem to want to do absolutely everything we possibly can with each platform, simply because we don't generally have the resources any more to dedicate platforms to a narrow range of tasks.

It should be an interesting presentation, I hope that it stimulates some of the wider issues around this challenging and ongoing procurement dilemma.

[Edited to add:

When did we buy Blackhawks, SS? My memory doesn't stretch to us having ever had them on inventory (but I could be wrong) ]

[Training Risky]

http://www.chinook-helicopter.com/news/Korea/Philippines/E_Model_on_the_beach_a.jpg

HC1/2/2A..... does the Mk 3 count?:O

[Archimedes]

VP,

Wastelands had a licence to build the Blackhawk. It was, IIRC, mooted as a possible Puma/Wessex replacement for the RAF. I don't think that they ever made use of the licence, although as I write, I have a nagging doubt that that is not actually correct.

[steamchicken]

Imagine a UK without BAE Systems? Errrr.....half the hookers in London out of a job?

[SilsoeSid]

Thanks Archimedes,

All info available from http://www.whl.co.uk/

VP959, the info about the Blackhawk from the WHL site is as follows;

"A direct result of the Sikorsky association was an agreement that Westland would build the Blackhawk under licence, for supply to a Middle-East customer. A single aircraft was built and flown, but events were overtaken by the outbreak of the Gulf War after which the requirement had changed."


What a waste!!!!!!
Pity the British didn't procure it for themselves. :ooh:
The AH roadshow never acknowledged this when asked! :ouch:

[VP959]

Archimedes,

WHL did indeed have a Blackhawk licence from Sikorsky, but they never built any for the UK and I'm pretty sure the licence has now expired, perhaps partly to do with the severing of the long standing WHL/Sikorsky relationship a few years ago.

Cheers,

VP

[Edited to add (posts crossed...):

I knew that SS, but the fact remains that the UK never purchased or operated a Blackhawk]

[Training Risky]

http://www.airshow.org/1997/image/mike.anselmo/aall10112z.jpg

I think Mr Lockheed might have something to say about your presentation title!

[SilsoeSid]

VP,

The question is, Should the UK procure and licence build etc....

Who owned the aircraft?
Mmmm, a British company? (Britain, part of UK !)

No mention in question about purchase/operate !

SS

[VP959]

Semantics and hairsplitting SS, as well you know. I read the original question as intended, I suspect, in that "UK procure" means "UK Government procure", not "Middle East Government procure".

If your interpretation of "UK procure and licence build" is "any defence aircraft made under licence by a British company, irrespective of purchaser" then why is the Blackhawk singled out as the only one in your delightful little montage? Surely you could have included all of the "British" made, licence built export aircraft if that's the way you originally interpreted it? I rather suspect that you originally made a simple mistake by including the Blackhawk picture, but don't have the testicular fortitude to admit it.


Anyway, being somewhat pedantic, WHL (more correctly the overarching company, Agusta Westland) is now effectively a wholly Italian company, not British. It's been half Italian for the past few years in fact.

VP

[Thud_and_Blunder]

It's not all one way...

http://website.lineone.net/~roling49/Jetbombers/B57-1a.JPG

http://www.airwar.ru/image/i/attack/av8a-i.jpg

http://www.airwar.ru/image/i/other/t45-i.jpg

...someone will doubtless want to say something about offsets.

[Zoom]

The F-4 procurement programme in the 60s/70s might have created the ideal template if it had been carried out a bit more scientifically: buy a decent American airframe, slap in some good British engines, add some British and American/British electronics, hang on some British and other weapons and off you go. You get a decent bit of kit that keeps a substantial chunk of the design and building work in the UK. Sadly, the desire to fit a turbofan engine meant replacing a long, thin, reliable engine with a short, fat, unreliable one. Naturally it didn't fit, and so began a rather sorry and expensive tale. Nevertheless, with the application of a bit more common sense it could have worked, and it might have set a reasonable trend for the future whereby we bought only airframes and kitted them out with homegrown engines and electronics.

I've just spotted T&B's post. Unfortunately things don't seem to work so well in the opposite direction. With both the AV-8B and Hawk acquisition programmes there was a good deal of wailing, gnashing of teeth and debate about why the USN/USMC should buy British designs rather than American ones and both programmes were delayed considerably by political attempts to get them cancelled in favour of 100% American products. I don't think we have quite the same hang-ups anymore.

[Twinact]

Siloesid,

Your response was so much more professional - you must be a a staff officer!

:}

[SilsoeSid]

Petty VP.You say it yourself,

"I read the original question as intended, I suspect, in that "UK procure" means "UK Government procure", not "Middle East Government procure".

Should the UK procure and licence build US designed aircraft?

Why cannot the question be asked to cover the whole aviation industry? I obviously read the question differently.

I added the pic of the WS-70 especially, as it was a point of mine during the BLUH presentations a while back. So the size of my testicular region is of no consequence as I am more than capable of owning up to my mistakes if needs be.

Why was it singled out in my montage and why didn't I include other aircraft?
It's the only one on the WHL site and the thread isn't just for you and I to contribute to. Others can mention the rest.

As you quite correctly state, "WHL (more correctly the overarching company, Agusta Westland) is now effectively a wholly Italian company, not British. It's been half Italian for the past few years in fact.

However, if you would be so kind as to read my post from the WH-70 article on the WHL site, you would notice the line ;

"events were overtaken by the outbreak of the Gulf War. "

I didn't realise that Agusta Westland had been running the show at Yeovil for the past 13 years. But if I'm wrong, at least I will have the sacs to say it! :ok:

[VP959]

Ah! Now I know who you are SS! I guess you were the stroppy one asking the questions about Blackhawk at that presentation last year.

VP

[SilsoeSid]

Stroppy, maybe. :E

Last year, fraid not. :(
---------


Anyway, perhaps the way this thread has gone, has actually highlighted a good scenario for Aynayda's presentation.

See how much the WH-70 was being built for at Yeovil adjusted for todays rates and compare it to the off the shelf cost from Sikorsky.

No doubt allow for the extra cost for a UK variant such as
RR engines
weapon platform changes
gun fits
ashtray/cup holder removal,
etc.

If possible, compare costings/time down with directly comparable aircraft currently used by both UK and other countries, EH-101, S-61, AS355 and try and come up with a reasonable guesstimate for the Blackhawk.

I'm sure that could fill a good 45 minute presentation. :ok:

If it's more expensive to build in UK buy from manufacturer.
If it's cheaper, see above. ;)

I'm sure there are a lot more things to add, but isn't this Aynayda Pizaqvick's presentation? :ouch:

Another of the group could do a fixed wing version.


I may be talking Bo££ix, but I'm only trying to help as the Wx is below limits now it's dark out there! :sad:

[just noise]

I think you would be suprised how much US kit is made up of UK black boxes.

Try looking in the fairy racks on a C17 and see who makes the kit.

As said previously the airframe manufacture is generally small change in the overall purchase.

[WG774]

I hope you can excuse me parking my civvy behind in this forum and going off at a slight tangent, but personal experience illustrates how important work for firms such as BAE is to what's left of the UK manufacturing industry.


From an industry point of view if we procure all COTS/MOTS equipment from overseas we lose our industrial know-how and before long there isn't an economy to defend.


A salient point indeed. Numerous associates of mine that work in specialist engineering / design fields have migrated overseas in past times due to the lack of employment opportunities in Blighty, a creeping brain-drain has taken hold over some time.


Imagine a UK without BAE Sys and its subsidiarys....


Aside from recession in the high-class call girl racket, let’s imagine... My job involves visiting numerous fabrication / machining / finishing etc facilities; upon enquiring about what the firms are making, a typical response would be: "they’re for BAE, those are for BA engineering, that’s for DERA" and so on.

I’d estimate that well over 50% (probably nearer 70% or 80%) of the items I see on the lines at the facilities I visit are for aerospace. With health + safety, labour costs, cost of raw materials, cost of land etc being what they are in the UK, we are unable to produce volume goods cost-effectively, and what’s left of our once great manufacturing industry (800,000 jobs lost since ’97...) has to live on scraps fed to it by firms such as BAE for one-off orders.

The work performed for BAE has to be to a high standard compared with other markets such as automotive etc, and requires skill inherent in the UK infrastructure for which BAE pay a premium. I would go as far as to say that work given to the facilities by the likes of BAE in effect enables my non-aviation company to remain manufacturing in the UK.

There’s little doubt in my mind that if the aerospace market dropped away tomorrow I would have no option but to get on a jumbo to Taiwan as the UK facilities would simply shut down...