L-3 Awarded Nimrod R1 Upgrade Contract
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Thread Starter
L-3 Awarded Nimrod R1 Upgrade Contract
U.K. Picks L-3 for Helix Program’s Risk-Reduction Phase
L-3 Communications has landed its first major British defense contract. The Ministry of Defence here announced that the New York-based company will undertake the assessment phase of a program to update the mission systems on Royal Air Force Nimrod R1 electronic reconnaissance aircraft. The breakthrough deal will see L-3’s Integrated Systems subsidiary carry out a two-year, 11.5 million pound ($22.7 million), risk-reduction phase on a Nimrod R1 project known as Helix........
If the Helix project goes according to plan, L-3 is expected to receive approval to move on to the demonstration and production phase of the contract in mid-2009. That deal has a projected value of up to 400 million pounds over a seven-year period. First aircraft deliveries are scheduled for early 2013.
L-3 will act as lead systems integrator and prime contractor, heading a team that includes British firms QinetiQ, LogicaCMG and BAE Systems Integrated System Technologies. The U.K. companies will be responsible for about 65 percent of the program delivery, Cook said. The Helix contractor’s main role will be to modify R1 mission systems infrastructure and architecture, and to update associated hardware and software capabilities........
L-3 is bidding for several significant U.K. programs. Project Listener, a program to provide time-critical targeting capabilities for RAF aircraft, is likely to be the next in line for a decision. The company is competing with BAE, General Dynamics UK and Lockheed Martin UK for the lead systems integrator role. Selection of one or two bidders to undertake risk-reduction studies is expected later this year. That could be followed in 2009 with the selection of a winning contractor.......
So, delivery about the same time as the MRA4 then?
L-3 Communications has landed its first major British defense contract. The Ministry of Defence here announced that the New York-based company will undertake the assessment phase of a program to update the mission systems on Royal Air Force Nimrod R1 electronic reconnaissance aircraft. The breakthrough deal will see L-3’s Integrated Systems subsidiary carry out a two-year, 11.5 million pound ($22.7 million), risk-reduction phase on a Nimrod R1 project known as Helix........
If the Helix project goes according to plan, L-3 is expected to receive approval to move on to the demonstration and production phase of the contract in mid-2009. That deal has a projected value of up to 400 million pounds over a seven-year period. First aircraft deliveries are scheduled for early 2013.
L-3 will act as lead systems integrator and prime contractor, heading a team that includes British firms QinetiQ, LogicaCMG and BAE Systems Integrated System Technologies. The U.K. companies will be responsible for about 65 percent of the program delivery, Cook said. The Helix contractor’s main role will be to modify R1 mission systems infrastructure and architecture, and to update associated hardware and software capabilities........
L-3 is bidding for several significant U.K. programs. Project Listener, a program to provide time-critical targeting capabilities for RAF aircraft, is likely to be the next in line for a decision. The company is competing with BAE, General Dynamics UK and Lockheed Martin UK for the lead systems integrator role. Selection of one or two bidders to undertake risk-reduction studies is expected later this year. That could be followed in 2009 with the selection of a winning contractor.......
So, delivery about the same time as the MRA4 then?
:Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
400 million for three updated fits in 30 year old aircraft, not even reengined, rewinged etc as per the MRA4? 130 million apiece? Good lord. For an extra couple of bob, I'm sure we could have the airframes rerfurbished to the same standard as MRA4 at the same time.
L-3 Communications has landed its first major British defense contract.
What about the Sentinel R Mk1 ? And the rest of the ASTOR project ?
The first aircraft was modified by L3 at Greenville, Dallas.
Or were L3 just sub-contractoring to Raytheon ?
Or maybe the Sentinel work was not a major contract.
Stone me what a life !
What about the Sentinel R Mk1 ? And the rest of the ASTOR project ?
The first aircraft was modified by L3 at Greenville, Dallas.
Or were L3 just sub-contractoring to Raytheon ?
Or maybe the Sentinel work was not a major contract.
Stone me what a life !
ASTOR is a Raytheon Systems Ltd contract.
1st a/c was modified by RSL and L3 and all subsequent a/c by RSL.
L3 themselves are describing HELIX as their " 1st large program in the UK"
I think L3 were only involved in the airframe missionisation of the prototype.
RSL UK are the design authority for the ASTOR project
1st a/c was modified by RSL and L3 and all subsequent a/c by RSL.
L3 themselves are describing HELIX as their " 1st large program in the UK"
I think L3 were only involved in the airframe missionisation of the prototype.
RSL UK are the design authority for the ASTOR project
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Balmullo,Scotland
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RSL UK are the design authority for the ASTOR project
Sorry mate but you are wrong there, I worked on the project for over a year and we always had to go back to L3 for any design decision as per Tom Yeager(RIP) and his merry men
Sorry mate but you are wrong there, I worked on the project for over a year and we always had to go back to L3 for any design decision as per Tom Yeager(RIP) and his merry men
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Balmullo,Scotland
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would they do that? DA transfer would cost the earth, please let us continue this communication by PM you are obviously close to the project and apparently know who I am. I will not converse any longer about this subject in public view I will continue to converse on general subects but no longer ASTOR rest assued any PMs from you will be confidential.
Just for thoughts the DA is always the DA can you imagine Boeing or Airbus alowing DA to transfer from their hands to others? as I said and believe you are obviously aware of the project but otherwise you are very unaware about proprietry issues, I do not want to turn is into a pi$$ing contest( as I suspect we ar ex collegues, but I have no I have no idea who you are) if you think I am wrong please contact me via PM.
Just for thoughts the DA is always the DA can you imagine Boeing or Airbus alowing DA to transfer from their hands to others? as I said and believe you are obviously aware of the project but otherwise you are very unaware about proprietry issues, I do not want to turn is into a pi$$ing contest( as I suspect we ar ex collegues, but I have no I have no idea who you are) if you think I am wrong please contact me via PM.
Last edited by matkat; 5th Apr 2007 at 22:44.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Matak
I'm not on the project and no idea who you are - the position on DA transfer is simply in public domain, maybee I read it wrong but don't think so. Here's the gen;
http://www.raytheon.com/feature/stel...s04_018357.pdf
http://www.raytheon.co.uk/products/astor.html
I'm not on the project and no idea who you are - the position on DA transfer is simply in public domain, maybee I read it wrong but don't think so. Here's the gen;
http://www.raytheon.com/feature/stel...s04_018357.pdf
http://www.raytheon.co.uk/products/astor.html
UK DA was a condition of the contract, simple really.
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Balmullo,Scotland
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The article is dated July 2006 and says that DA will be transfered next year, judging by the delays that has been encountered so far that is unlikely to happen anytime soon so therefore L-3 is still the DA period!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 53:09:50N 0:31:27W
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DA Transition
Concur with Matkat on that one. DA transition to RSL UK Ltd is not scheduled until 'System Acceptance', and as that stage has not yet occurred, DA still rests with L-3.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can see huge benefits in having the Designer Authority co located with the Sqn and IPT elements at Waddington as well as potential pinch points. I wonder if this is a model which could be used
elsewhere! Anyone know for sure how things are working out (good, bad, or indifferent) - or is it too early to call yet.
elsewhere! Anyone know for sure how things are working out (good, bad, or indifferent) - or is it too early to call yet.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Scotland
Age: 59
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DA or ADO, are we mixing it up?
At ISD doesn't DA transfer to the MoD IPT and the ADO remain with industry, until ISD DA and ADO remain with industry? Ie ADO for R1 is BAES like MR2 and MR4A, DA is and will be DLO. DE&S merger may change DLO nomenclature, but IPT remains the same, doesn't it?
“At ISD doesn't DA transfer to the MoD IPT”
The transfer that occurs around ISD is control of responsibility for the design. i.e. It goes from “Under Contractor Control” to “Under Ministry Control”. It is a sad fact of life that the MoD seldom subsequently maintains full control of the design, which is seen as an easy target for the beancounters on the grounds that the money doesn’t produce anything tangible, like stock on a shelf. It maintains safety (as opposed to delivering it in the first place), a concept they don’t understand.
While there are exceptions, for example the MoD is DA for some engines, the contractor is usually appointed as the Design Authority or Design Custodian, depending largely on where the Intellectual Property Rights lie, and whether the equipment is of foreign origin or not.
The MoD is also DA for Service Engineered Mods not subject to a superceding cover mod. Various Defence Committees have recommended that DA (they don’t understand the Design Custodian concept) be competed at regular intervals, which completely ignores the simple fact that what sustains the entire process is expertise and continuity at the contractor. Similarly, managing the maintenance of the build standard is a lost art in MoD. If you were to study the reasons why many modifications programmes are years late (e.g. BOWMAN platform conversions) the common denominator is this failure of process and procedure.
There is little or no understanding of this in most IPTs, despite there being perfectly good Defence Standards written by people who do this for fun. Many think it a complete waste of money. Many DECs never even ask for funds in the first place, so taking the decision away from IPTs. It’s a false economy – investing in something so fundamental is the key enabler to upgrade programmes, of which there are more and more as we don’t have funds to replace kit.
The transfer that occurs around ISD is control of responsibility for the design. i.e. It goes from “Under Contractor Control” to “Under Ministry Control”. It is a sad fact of life that the MoD seldom subsequently maintains full control of the design, which is seen as an easy target for the beancounters on the grounds that the money doesn’t produce anything tangible, like stock on a shelf. It maintains safety (as opposed to delivering it in the first place), a concept they don’t understand.
While there are exceptions, for example the MoD is DA for some engines, the contractor is usually appointed as the Design Authority or Design Custodian, depending largely on where the Intellectual Property Rights lie, and whether the equipment is of foreign origin or not.
The MoD is also DA for Service Engineered Mods not subject to a superceding cover mod. Various Defence Committees have recommended that DA (they don’t understand the Design Custodian concept) be competed at regular intervals, which completely ignores the simple fact that what sustains the entire process is expertise and continuity at the contractor. Similarly, managing the maintenance of the build standard is a lost art in MoD. If you were to study the reasons why many modifications programmes are years late (e.g. BOWMAN platform conversions) the common denominator is this failure of process and procedure.
There is little or no understanding of this in most IPTs, despite there being perfectly good Defence Standards written by people who do this for fun. Many think it a complete waste of money. Many DECs never even ask for funds in the first place, so taking the decision away from IPTs. It’s a false economy – investing in something so fundamental is the key enabler to upgrade programmes, of which there are more and more as we don’t have funds to replace kit.