BWoS largest part of overspend shock!
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: in my combat underpants
Age: 53
Posts: 1,065
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BWoS largest part of overspend shock!
MoD overspend hits £3.1 billion
Defence giant BAE Systems was warned to "raise their game" after a report showed its projects were to blame for the bulk of a massive £3.1 billion overspend on Ministry of Defence equipment last year.
Details of the huge cost overrun on heavy equipment like submarines, warplanes and missiles were released amid growing concern over shortages of basic kit such as body armour for troops in Iraq, sparked by the death of Sergeant Steven Roberts.
The additional cost - equivalent to 6% of the entire MoD budget for major equipment projects in 2002-03 - was described as "disappointing" by Sir John Bourn, head of the spending watchdog National Audit Office.
In the NAO's Major Projects Report 2003, published today, he also raised concerns over an average nine-month increase in forecast delays in getting equipment into service.
Four projects involving BAE - the Eurofighter Typhoon warplane, Nimrod reconnaissance planes, Astute submarines and Brimstone air-launched anti-tank missiles - together accounted for 87% of the cost overrun and 79% of the total "slippage" in delivery times.
Tories branded the situation "a scandal" and called on the Government to "get a grip for the sake of our servicemen".
Edward Leigh, chairman of the influential Commons Public Accounts Committee, said the MoD's performance on delivering major projects was "extremely worrying".
Defence procurement minister Lord Bach said the MoD was conducting a "stock-take" of the "smart acquisition" procedures it introduced in 1998 to get costs under tighter control.
He warned industry to take similar action or lose future contracts.
"Industry must recognise its share of responsibility for the serious difficulties that have been encountered," he said.
"They must also raise their game to improve performance across acquisition and ensure that projects are delivered to cost and time.
"We will insist on improvements in industrial project management as a condition of doing business with us."
MoD officials stressed Lord Bach's comments referred to all contractors seeking defence work, but acknowledged they applied particularly to BAE, which receives a quarter of the Ministry's total equipment spend.
Hands up all those surprised people out there in PPRUNE Land.
Defence giant BAE Systems was warned to "raise their game" after a report showed its projects were to blame for the bulk of a massive £3.1 billion overspend on Ministry of Defence equipment last year.
Details of the huge cost overrun on heavy equipment like submarines, warplanes and missiles were released amid growing concern over shortages of basic kit such as body armour for troops in Iraq, sparked by the death of Sergeant Steven Roberts.
The additional cost - equivalent to 6% of the entire MoD budget for major equipment projects in 2002-03 - was described as "disappointing" by Sir John Bourn, head of the spending watchdog National Audit Office.
In the NAO's Major Projects Report 2003, published today, he also raised concerns over an average nine-month increase in forecast delays in getting equipment into service.
Four projects involving BAE - the Eurofighter Typhoon warplane, Nimrod reconnaissance planes, Astute submarines and Brimstone air-launched anti-tank missiles - together accounted for 87% of the cost overrun and 79% of the total "slippage" in delivery times.
Tories branded the situation "a scandal" and called on the Government to "get a grip for the sake of our servicemen".
Edward Leigh, chairman of the influential Commons Public Accounts Committee, said the MoD's performance on delivering major projects was "extremely worrying".
Defence procurement minister Lord Bach said the MoD was conducting a "stock-take" of the "smart acquisition" procedures it introduced in 1998 to get costs under tighter control.
He warned industry to take similar action or lose future contracts.
"Industry must recognise its share of responsibility for the serious difficulties that have been encountered," he said.
"They must also raise their game to improve performance across acquisition and ensure that projects are delivered to cost and time.
"We will insist on improvements in industrial project management as a condition of doing business with us."
MoD officials stressed Lord Bach's comments referred to all contractors seeking defence work, but acknowledged they applied particularly to BAE, which receives a quarter of the Ministry's total equipment spend.
Hands up all those surprised people out there in PPRUNE Land.
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Manchester
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yawn. Predictable response. Is any consideration ever taken of the impact on cost and schedule of changes in requirement and the political impact of a four nation customer base on Typhoon. You might note in the report that BAE Systems has taken a £1bn impact itself, so they're hardly sitting pretty.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Newcastle/UK
Posts: 1,476
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, its not as if it was real money is it? had they not spent it on that would prolly have just went into setting a hundred new quango's, jobs for the boys boys and sister in laws.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Just down the road from ISK
Posts: 328
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If projects didn't slip so long then the requirements wouldn't creep so much!!
No rocket science - just that an aircraft contracted for the year 2000 (shall we say for arguements sake!!) and not coming into service until 2012 or 2013 is going to need modernising before it arrives - no sh!t the requirements change in that 13 year period - the whole bl00dy world changes in that time, so why not hit BWoS for the bill? (BWoS are eager to shake the collecting tin when we ask for more early on in a project, before the design is finalised but after the spec has been agreed and the contract awarded. )
The best line in the article has to be " You wouldn't keep employing a plumber that constantly floods your bathroom"!! Well, we have little option as our plumber used government money to buy up the other plumbers' businesses. Now there is only one plumber in the land!!
RANT!
Any spelling mistakes are rapid, rant typing induced!
No rocket science - just that an aircraft contracted for the year 2000 (shall we say for arguements sake!!) and not coming into service until 2012 or 2013 is going to need modernising before it arrives - no sh!t the requirements change in that 13 year period - the whole bl00dy world changes in that time, so why not hit BWoS for the bill? (BWoS are eager to shake the collecting tin when we ask for more early on in a project, before the design is finalised but after the spec has been agreed and the contract awarded. )
The best line in the article has to be " You wouldn't keep employing a plumber that constantly floods your bathroom"!! Well, we have little option as our plumber used government money to buy up the other plumbers' businesses. Now there is only one plumber in the land!!
RANT!
Any spelling mistakes are rapid, rant typing induced!
From my final edition of the Covert Oxonian Aerodrome's station magazine 'The Gateway Magazine' as editor in 1985:
"Whatever the European aircraft manufacturers might say, one can't help feeling that the EFA, ACX, ACA, EAP or whatever they call it next will have to be pretty revolutionary if it's to be better than just an F-16 20 years too late! - Ed.)
20 years too late? Let's see, I think that the YF-16 first flew in 1974 and the first operational F-16A entered service at Hill in Jan 1979, only 2 years after the production model F-16A first flew?
That means my '20 years too late' would have been 1999. Here we are in 2004 - and how many RAF squadrons of TypHoons are there in service? Maybe I should have said 25 years too late....
Mind you, it wasn't all that long ago when we were told that the contract award for FSTA would be in the 3rd quarter of 1998, with a 50% fleet in-service-date of 2004. Hmmm
"Whatever the European aircraft manufacturers might say, one can't help feeling that the EFA, ACX, ACA, EAP or whatever they call it next will have to be pretty revolutionary if it's to be better than just an F-16 20 years too late! - Ed.)
20 years too late? Let's see, I think that the YF-16 first flew in 1974 and the first operational F-16A entered service at Hill in Jan 1979, only 2 years after the production model F-16A first flew?
That means my '20 years too late' would have been 1999. Here we are in 2004 - and how many RAF squadrons of TypHoons are there in service? Maybe I should have said 25 years too late....
Mind you, it wasn't all that long ago when we were told that the contract award for FSTA would be in the 3rd quarter of 1998, with a 50% fleet in-service-date of 2004. Hmmm
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Back in Blighty...
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I cannot wait to see how the late delivery and lack of initial performance of the F-35 will be greeted by some members of this forum - but hang on!; BWoS have a part in that too don't they!
So it'll be their fault then too...
<Walks away laughing>
So it'll be their fault then too...
<Walks away laughing>
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: earth
Posts: 1,397
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That MOD and BWoS between them should be guilty of overspending some 87% of 3 billion is bad enough but just watch the way the latter will,as usual, employ many of the former's senior officers over the next few years. That unholy alliance is scandalous.
Last edited by soddim; 24th Jan 2004 at 00:42.
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Somewhere over the rainbow.
Age: 80
Posts: 621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
soddim,
With hundreds of redundancies looming (it is rumoured) within BWoS I would hope the Old Boys club may be suspended for awhile.
With Tricky Dicky retiring in the near future things may improve but I'm not holding my breath.
With hundreds of redundancies looming (it is rumoured) within BWoS I would hope the Old Boys club may be suspended for awhile.
With Tricky Dicky retiring in the near future things may improve but I'm not holding my breath.
