Nimrod Cancelled?

[Tripe Loch]

The local news in the Northwest has just reported that BAE has cancelled the Nimrod project due to spiralling costs with a potential loss of jobs. There was a picture of the new aircraft in pre production state.
Is this the case?

[Stan Bydike]

From the BBC Website 19/02/03




"A defence contract has been halted in Greater Manchester after production costs spiralled by £500m.
BAE Systems has reached an agreement with the Government to temporarily halt production of the Nimrod aircraft at its Woodford plant, near Stockport.

The move is likely to have implications on jobs, but it is not yet known how many will be affected.

The firm has a contract to build 18 of the planes for the Ministry of Defence.

Production is expected to restart when agreements on design, development and pricing have been reached.

The Nimrod contract is one of two to be changed - the other is the Astute attack submarine, which is produced in Cumbria.

BAE's agreement with the Government involves delaying further production of the Nimrod until the performance of the first three aircraft in this current order is demonstrated.

The project's funding has also been increased by about £270m. "


End of article, draw your own conclusions

Oh yes, forgot to mention but I believe BWoS announce their results to the city tomorrow:}

[Smoketoomuch]

Today's Times;
"BAE Systems, Europe's biggest defence firm, said today it had capped cost overruns on two major projects at £750 million.
The UK group has reached an agreement with the Ministry of Defence regarding the structure of the contracts, which are to build Nimrod planes and Astute submarines."
...more

So, can anyone make clear, has this basically now become a form of 'costs plus' contract? Only in this case it is 'costs minus £750m, plus.....', in which case surely BaeS only have to inflate their apparent costs to recoup the 750m. Or am I just being cynical?

[Spot 4]

Virtual News Room
In The News - Archives

19 February 2003
BAE SYSTEMS ANNOUNCES AGREEMENT WITH THE MOD TO RE-STRUCTURE NIMROD AND ASTUTE CONTRACTS

BAE SYSTEMS and the UK Ministry of Defence (MoD) have today agreed changes to the contract structure for both the Nimrod MRA4 maritime patrol aircraft programme and the Astute attack submarine programme.

In December 2002, the company announced that additional issues had arisen in relation to these programmes and that it had become apparent that there were substantial schedule and cost implications.

Under the terms of today's agreement, the current contracts for design, development, production and support on each of the two programmes will be revised. These revisions will separate the Design and Development phase of each programme from the Production phase. Design and Development will be completed under new Target Cost Incentive Fee (TCIF) arrangements. Both programmes will be placed on a firm footing for the delivery of the Astute and Nimrod capabilities into service.

BAE SYSTEMS and the MoD have established new Target Costs and Fee levels for both programmes, and have high levels of confidence of delivering the programmes within these new target levels. Up to the Target Cost level, cost saving will be shared by the customer and company as an additional Incentive Fee for the company. Any cost overruns above the Target Cost will be shared by the customer and the company, up to the maximum level established for the company by the agreement. These new arrangements will place a significant economic incentive on the company to perform. The company has reviewed its project management of these programmes, consistent with today's best practice, and is taking actions based on lessons learned.

Pricing of the Production phase of each programme will be concluded following achievement of sufficient risk mitigation from the Design and Development phase to enable production costs to be established with confidence.

NIMROD

The difficulties in the Nimrod programme stemmed principally from issues associated with delays in design causing an increasing concurrency between design, development, and production in the programme.

Production work on the last 15 of the 18 Nimrods in the MRA4 programme will stop. This work will not be resumed until significant risk reduction has been accomplished, using the first three aircraft as development aircraft. Design and Development, including the completion of the three development aircraft currently in build, will be completed under new TCIF arrangements. Prices for the production of the last 15 aircraft will be established after Design and Development stability has been achieved.

FINANCIAL

Today's agreement enables the company to recognise the cost to complete these programmes under the new contract terms. As a consequence, exceptional costs of £750m (£572m after tax) will be charged to the 2002 accounts comprising £500m for Nimrod and £250m for Astute. These charges cover in full the company's residual exposure to higher development costs up to maximum level established for the company by this agreement.

The cash consequences of these charges, after tax, are expected to comprise £225m in 2003 and £100m in 2004 with the balance of £250m expended in 2005 and beyond.

These new terms mean that these programmes can be completed by the company with financial certainty.

[whowhenwhy]

Delays in design? I'll say that they've got delays in design. The wings they built don't bl**dy fit! It could only happen on an MoD contract. Our American cousins can manage to keep the Buff going and are planning to do so I believe until the type's 100th birthday; so what's our problem? Oh yes, silly me, mentioned it already didn't I? MoD contract!;) :D

[BEagle]

Not for nowt is 't Baron Waste o' Space known as 't Bungling Baron Waste o' Space.........

[rivetjoint]

Ah ******, so just what do they have to offer new Nimrod WSOps now?

[Biggus]

If I were to take a wild shot in the dark I would say the same as they have to offer old Nimrod AEOps!

[Tonkenna]

You have to love the line "Production on the last 15 of 18 Nimrod MR4s will stop"!!!

So, 83% stopped then.

Still, good job they didn't get the contract to build a couple of aircraft carriers:confused:

[Big Toe]

Direct reference to badly written contract FT.com - BAe/Nimrod Fiasco (http://news.ft.com/servlet/ContentServer?pagename=FT.com/StoryFT/FullStory&c=StoryFT&cid=1045510884567):(

[Compass Call]

Whowhenwhy

As I said in a previous thread, Bae were told 6 years ago that the wings would not fit. This is what comes of employing young inexperienced EXPERTS - instead of time served Specialists!!! :mad: :mad: :mad:

[soddim]

One is left to wonder which very senior officer(s) will retire soon into a lucrative job with BWoS. Meanwhile, as usual, the taxpayer pays and the forces get taken for another ride.

[smartman]

soddim

Apologies if I'm wrong, but if you are a current member of HM forces, then I presume you wouldn't be interested in a nice number with BAES upon your retirement?

[The Gorilla]

Heh heh heh!

I have been saying for the past 2 years on this forum and I repeat..

It HASN'T flown
and
It will NEVER fly!!
:p

So much for the manning predictions at last weeks Airmen Aircrew
sustainability study roadshow!!

Flight Engineers in surplus manning by 2007?? I don't think so!!

:D :D

[soddim]

Smartman,

I have already done both so I know better now and I have learned how to recognise conflict of interest.

[TheSeeFarShadow]

Guess there's no point in putting a Poll out for 'Who saw it coming' and 'Who didn't see it coming' on PPRUNE.

Rumour has it that they are looking to put the new Serachwater 2000MR on 4 existing MR2s.

This'll be the beginning of the end then. Whatever happened to the Nimrod Mk3???

[Gainesy]

Nimrod AEW Mk.3, another screw up. From memory, 11(?) airframes allocated to the project-- last seen being cut up at Abingdon I think.
:mad:

[wub]

http://www.pbase.com/image/13354550
http://www.pbase.com/image/13354647
http://www.pbase.com/image/13354725
http://www.pbase.com/image/13354743

[Charlie Luncher]

Good job I didn't hang around to have a go on the new toy then.
So along with the new ACO, Nav and the other gear is it still the MR2, or is it an AIP program in disguise.
:p

[Stan Bydike]

Nimrod MR(A) 2.5P Update X by the time we see a replacement

[BEagle]

"He he he" chortled 't Bungling Baron Waste o' Space as he fondled the ears of Boogeroff, his trusty but ever-flatulent whippet. "Didn't I tell thee that old mad Maggie had promised there'd allus be summat' for 't men at 't werrks. Now they've stumped oop wi 't brass, we can get 't owd Comet Mk 8 airrborrne in a year or few, 'appen?" His chuckling increased to a crescendo and the bells on his best clog-dancing trousers tintinabulated merrily. In fact his mood became so cheerful that he sanctioned a second bowl of gruel for 't men at 't werrks whilst he tucked into Medaillons of cow's udder served in a wild toadstool, dandelion and burrdock jus from 'Albert's brasserie - devoted to Northern Nouvelle Cuisine, tha' knows...'.

[Woff1965]

To be honest how can anyone justify rebuilding airframes as old as Nimrod.

The original project would (just) about be viable if the USN had bought into the project. The cost of developement and production would have been spread over both the US and UK plus whoever they could pursuade t obuy the thing.

But to rebuild this aircraft when the total market is going to be 18 or 21 airframes must be economicaly dubious.

To be blunt it may well be more cost effective for the RAF to lease P3C's from the US until the USN gets around to building the P3 replacement.

[The Gorilla]

Or why not just buy the P3's that are sat in the desert?
As well as more Hercs and Transport Aircraft?

Maybe that way we could get more food into the Gulf to feed
our troops!!

Ahh no, sorry Geoff I forget. We are having enough trouble retaining the aircrew for the aircraft we have now, without having to recruit more!

Silly me. Oh well back to the barons plan for delaying the MRA4 into service...:(

[Biggus]

The Daily Torygraph talked about a new "in service" date for MRA4 of 2009. I realise that is probably total b***ocks, but can anyone enlighten me as to definition of "in service"? Is that first Sqn operational, or entire fleet conversion?

Thanks in advance!

[Dan Winterland]

Anyone remember the Nimrod AEW?

[opso]

Biggus, it depends on the contract, but usually the first day that one has been accepted by the RAF, whether for an OEU, OCU or sqn. The date you are thinking of is the much later 'In Operational Service' date.

[nav attacking]

I believe that the in service date is for either 4 or 5 aircraft accepted by the RAF rather than the first front line sqn formed. Somebody may wish to correct me though.

As for the P3 option, no way do we want it, its cr@p. Unless you are talking about the AIP but then that doesn't fill one of the roles required for nimrod.

Anyway what other role is there for the military these days other than propping up a defunct and obsolete company such as BWoS?

[Pegasus#]

Lord Bach stated last week that the In-Service date has been re-defined from April 2003 for the 7th production aircraft to the delivery of the first 6 production aircraft, i.e. 9 including the 3 prototypes

[rivetjoint]

The Nimrod is the best in the world at what it does, be proud buy British :O

[Dale Harris]

The P3 is crap? Sorry, sounds like the rest of the world is wrong and you are right I guess..........

[nav attacking]

Sorry Dale I guess I should have qualified my statement. The US P3 is cr@p, at least you have had the sense to fit some decent kit to the Australian P3.

Then again, isn't the Fincastle competition all about finding out who is the best at ASW (whether that be airframe or aircrew...:} ...)

[Pontius Navigator]

Trouble was the Nimrod crews lived in a target rich environment. Training Monday to Friday, ops Friday to Monday <vbg>. The USN just had too many P3s and not enough targets to go around.

For any non-ASW readers, a target is any underwater vessel, friend or foe and apologise later if caught.

[Dale Harris]

Yeah mate, but only recently and with the usual cost overruns and delays!!!! But they are a good piece of kit these days.....

[FishHead]

I could have sworn that Fincastle was mostly about International Night and who won the the Fellowship Trophy.... is there an ASW competition that's run as well?

[melchett]

yeah, I've heard a rumour about that competition as well...

[RCOV 2 ENG]

Are Air Engs' Still required Then?

i heard that there would be no more air eng courses after this year? is this likely to change now? or will we do with what we have already?

minzastella!:cool:

[The Gorilla]

The Air Eng School is planned to close at the back end of 04.
Since the course is 14 months long, I guess the last few must be starting AAITC in the next couple of months.

:O

[Charlie Luncher]

Nav A

The US P3C airframe is fine it is about early 90s Nimrod standard with a few Gucci bits, ok 2 bits. It is just the outdated training and woeful doctrine they are operated by, not including the monkeys pushing the switches. With a bit of training and a little less belief in what they watch on TV or read in Clancy novels oh and loads of intellect it could just work.:eek:

Gorilla nice to see you are still on the wacky bananas, I am sure you would be happy with the P3 as an option so there could be 2 mars bar thieves. :p

[The Gorilla]

Charlie

Rock on Tommy, the P3 works for me!
Of course that would would be a common sense decision so I guess not in my lifetime eh??

:p

[Siggie]

Two things wrong with the P3, it makes you sick in the transit. ;) and too long on task - but at least the wings fit.

[Pontius Navigator]

and the floor is in the right place and the seats are comfy!

Hate to say this but a USN person was actually on a winning Fincastle crew. Tom Lawler circa 1977.

Mighty pissed off he was too as smiling Jim Morris rang Annapolis and had his staff course put back. Rather cleared him to miss the first term.

[reynoldsno1]

Tom Lawler circa 1977.

Great guy - very switched on - had a Master's in oceanography, ISTR. Presented the sqn exec's with a live turkey when he finally left - they didn't get it......

[Stan Bydike]

Ref Tom Lawler

I believe he made Captain before he "retired". Did not go any further because he didn't give the 1 stars and above the answers they wanted to hear.

As all have said. Great guy

[Biggus]

Just read in lots of UK national papers that BAe are letting go up to 1,000 workers, largely as a result in delays of Nimrod MRA4 production. Apparently they can't afford to have them sitting around for 2 years (who is to say it won't be more) doing nothing while waiting to build the aircraft.

Couple of thoughts from a bear with a very small brain. When it comes to recruiting up to 1,000 people to build the MRA4 in 2+ years time, how long will it take to recruit them? Also how skilled will the new lot be in aircraft production (bearing in mind they will almost certainly not be the same people they made redundant 2+ years before!), so what will the quality of the finished product be like!!

Still, what do I care, Mrs Biggus and I will be in a retirement home in Brighton by the time all this finally happens!

[Woff1965]

My Great grand children will be in a retirement home by the time they get any MRA 4's in service!

[aw ditor]

The Shackleton Preservation Trust has now got Nos.1 and 2 engines running on the Mk 2 hangar queen' (king?) at Coventry and Nos.3 and 4 should be running within the next couple of weeks, so, who needs the Nimrod anyway???

[ORAC]

The Americans would never do anything as stupid as put new wings on an old fuselage built in the days before CAD/CAM. Particularily ones which have operated in a high corrosion environment, would they? maybe it's an April Fool....

Flight International - 1 April:

"Lockheed Martin is considering a hybrid approach of focused production to meet the US Navy's requirements for a Multi-Mission Maritime Aircraft Aircraft, which would retain some of the P3 Orion airframe, combined with new-build structural assembles and modern avionics.......The focused production concept under consideration falls half way between the all-new Orion 21 and a service life extension of the P-3C/EP-3 fleet. "New wings, cockpit and mission systems are a starting point" :hmm: :rolleyes:

[Charlie Luncher]

ORAC

May have a reference to the AP3C project which sort of did that and seems to work just fine.
But I am sure the spams will mess it up:=