Some BAE/JSF bits from the Financial Mail
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Bournemouth, Blighty
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some BAE/JSF bits from the Financial Mail
From the Mail but even so, might be of interest to some.
Taken from a wider article about the alleged rift between BAE's chairman Dick Olver and chief executive Mike Turner (19th June).
Taken from a wider article about the alleged rift between BAE's chairman Dick Olver and chief executive Mike Turner (19th June).
For the chairman of Britain's most important manufacturing company, this was a vital mission. Dick Olver of BAE Systems was in Washington to wine and dine with President Bush in a desperate attempt to keep alive the Joint Strike Fighter project with American company Lockheed Martin.
...
Despite the US President's previous agreement, the Americans are still refusing to transfer technology on the Joint Strike Fighter Project to the UK.
In crude terms, it means that if the plane, which is not due in service until 2014, breaks down, it will have to be sent back to America for repairs. Britain, in Turner's graphic description, would be reduced to the status of a 'tin-bashing manufacturer'.
But there is more. The Government has invested £2bn in the project and tempers are fraying at the Ministry of Defence. There are even those in senior positions who believe that Britain should scrap it unless the Americans come across with the technology.
One industry source told Financial Mail: 'The Americans will never allow some of the technologies to be handed over: I would be astonished if we ever see these planes.'
And if there are no planes, what is the point of the two Royal Navy aircraft carriers for which they are being built? The £3.5bn carrier project has still not been agreed by the builders, BAE and VT."
...
...
Despite the US President's previous agreement, the Americans are still refusing to transfer technology on the Joint Strike Fighter Project to the UK.
In crude terms, it means that if the plane, which is not due in service until 2014, breaks down, it will have to be sent back to America for repairs. Britain, in Turner's graphic description, would be reduced to the status of a 'tin-bashing manufacturer'.
But there is more. The Government has invested £2bn in the project and tempers are fraying at the Ministry of Defence. There are even those in senior positions who believe that Britain should scrap it unless the Americans come across with the technology.
One industry source told Financial Mail: 'The Americans will never allow some of the technologies to be handed over: I would be astonished if we ever see these planes.'
And if there are no planes, what is the point of the two Royal Navy aircraft carriers for which they are being built? The £3.5bn carrier project has still not been agreed by the builders, BAE and VT."
...
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Hunched over a keyboard
Posts: 1,193
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have long wondered what the the point of the JSF might be. Can anyone give me a good arguement for buying this overpriced, underperforming white elephant?
I thought the carriers were to be built by BAE and Thales, not BAE/VT?
I thought the carriers were to be built by BAE and Thales, not BAE/VT?
