A question re FSTA

[HalloweenJack]

Can i ask 1 rather simple question which has bemused me alot since the announcement of the US tanker deal:

why is the UK getting 13 tankers @ nearly £1 billion each - thats an aweful lot of money for 1 aircraft - this isn`t the stealth bomber (but the same money) , when the US is getting 179 tankers for nearly them same amount (£18 billion or there abouts)

[Jackonicko]

Because the FSTA cost isn't a price for the aeroplanes, which can be divided by the number of tankers to arrive at a unit cost. It's the value of the contract acrosss 37 (?) years and it provides for those aircraft, and the costs of funding, supporting and sustaining them in service for that many years.

That still amounts to about £25 m per year per aircraft, which seems like a lot of money......

[Roland Pulfrew]

Halloween Jack(o)

the contract acrosss 37 (?)

It gets worse. The contract is/was for 27 years. And worse still, IIRC from a briefing many moons ago, that comprised 3 years of assessment, 4 years of 'transition' (from first FSTA 'in to service' to 'full service delivery') and then 20 years of full capability delivery.

So for your £13B you get 14 aircraft, not all of which will be available unless we are prepared to pay for them to be available and then only 20 years + 4 years as the ac are delivered.

And Broon & broone thinks that PFI is a good deal......:{

[PPRuNeUser0211]

I'm far too lazy to go and find out who on the recent fsta farce thread calculated that, given the street value the USAF are paying for their KC-30 things, we could have 14 new ones, every three years for the duration of the PFI.... (or something like that)

[High_lander]

The MoD spent £27 million in 2006/2007 on PFIs alone. According to Jane's.


Fuc#'ng crazy

[BEagle]

So for your £13B you get 14 aircraft, not all of which will be available unless we are prepared to pay for them to be available and then only 20 years + 4 years as the ac are delivered.


And, at the end of 20+4 years, the MoD will own.......f**k all :confused:

[Riskman]

And Broon & broone thinks that PFI is a good deal......:{

Unfortunately they do.

In looking for the 'extra' £2Bn that Darling announced for Defence I found an annex on acquisition (across all depts not just Defence) which justified PFI. Going from memory it said only 8% of PFIs were more than 3 months late and they didn't cost the taxpayer any extra, as opposed to 73% of conventional projects. Minor details like technical complexity, innovation etc were conveniently ignored.

And, at the end of 20+4 years, the MoD will own.......f**k all :confused:
So instead of a mid-life upgrade it'll be a new contract, new consortium, new ac, oh and a new wheel 'cos that'll have to be re-invented:ugh: