Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

Statements of the Bleeding Obvious

Wikiposts
Search

Notices
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

Statements of the Bleeding Obvious

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 16th April 2007 | 23:16
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Community Influencer
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,614
Likes: 7,320
From: Peripatetic
Statements of the Bleeding Obvious

The USN has cancelled construction of Littoral Combat Ship (LCS) 3, which was being built by Lockheed Martin. The fate of LCS 1 remains in the balance.

LM are one of those companies who have expanded into nearly every market as a "Prime Systems Integrator". In the case of shipbuilding, even though they have no background in ship building, and own no shipyards.

As a result of this fiasco, Merrill Lynch analyst Ron Epstein uttered these sage words, which can be taken both as a statement of the bleeding obvious - and as sound advice to those awarding contracts blindly to companies such as BAe, Boeing etc because of their size...

"We believe the termination points to a potential weakness in the system integrator model and suggests that domain expertise is of vital importance,”


In the meantime construction of the Northrop Grumman DDG-1000 class destroyer - at $3 billion each, continues, with everyone hoping they don't tend to capsize in a following sea....

Last edited by ORAC; 16th April 2007 at 23:29.
ORAC is offline  
Reply
Old 16th April 2007 | 23:26
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
From: UK
Aviation ??
threepointonefour is offline  
Reply
Old 16th April 2007 | 23:27
  #3 (permalink)  
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
40 Countries Visited
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 1,886
Likes: 97
From: U.S.A.
ORAC,
I can't let you give all the credit to the Navy. Same contractor involved in the US Coast Guard's effort and they are currently screwing up a $25Bn (that's billion) Program to refit and re-equip their fleet. Apparently big cracks opening up are a bad thing on a ship...
http://www.usnews.com/usnews/news/ar..._cid=rss:site1
Two's in is offline  
Reply
Old 16th April 2007 | 23:28
  #4 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Community Influencer
 
Joined: Jul 2000
Aviation Qualifications: Spotter
Posts: 24,614
Likes: 7,320
From: Peripatetic
Aviation ??
Lockheed Martin have been known to take an occasional interest in that field, as have Northrop....
ORAC is offline  
Reply
Old 16th April 2007 | 23:32
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Oct 2002
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
From: UK
Lockheed Martin have been known to take an occasional interest in that field....
Tenuous link given that the subject is shipbuilding.
threepointonefour is offline  
Reply
Old 17th April 2007 | 06:03
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 1,538
Likes: 0
From: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
"LM are one of those companies who have expanded into nearly every market as a "Prime Systems Integrator". In the case of shipbuilding, even though they have no background in ship building, and own no shipyards."



Ok, Lockheed Shipbuilding built LSDs 41-43 for the USN in the 1980s; LPDs (amphibious personnel transport, dock) 9-15 back in the 1960s-early 70s; 5 Knox FFs in the same time period; and 3 Brooke FFGs & 2 Garcia FFs in the early 1960s... and General Dynamics Shipbuilding (merged with Lockheed in the 1980s) built all of the Ohio SSBNS & Seawolf SSNs, and half of the Los Angeles and Virginia SSNs from the 1970s-current, and LSDs 37-40 in the late 1960s-70s.


So there IS just a tad of shipbuilding experience there, you know.
As well as shipyards that they do now own, and have owned for decades!


Which makes the current problems all the more embarrassing and problematic.

They really should be handling the design & build a lot better... but so should Northrop-Grumman... as they bought the Avondale and Litton-Ingalls shipyards... which have between them built most of the guided missile destroyers and cruisers of the USN (along with many of its LSD/LPD/LPH ships) for the last 40 years, and are still building them today.
GreenKnight121 is offline  
Reply
Old 17th April 2007 | 08:28
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Feb 2000
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
General Dynamics Shipbuilding is owned by that company, and never "merged with Lockheed in the 1980s". IIRC Lockmart acquired GD Fort Worth (i.e. the F-16 factory) but not the whole of GD
Pegasus# is offline  
Reply
Old 17th April 2007 | 10:13
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 1,541
Likes: 1
From: firmly on dry land
awarding contracts blindly to companies such as BAe, Boeing etc because of their size...

"We believe the termination points to a potential weakness in the system integrator model and suggests that domain expertise is of vital importance,”
Er I believe we use BAE and have the odd Boeing System. The read across should be fairly clear as BAE has been known to act as a system integrator have they not?
Wader2 is offline  
Reply
Old 17th April 2007 | 10:49
  #9 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 3,311
Likes: 365
From: uk
"We believe the termination points to a potential weakness in the system integrator model and suggests that domain expertise is of vital importance,”


I'd say this is accurate, if only because MoD/Ministers disagree!!
tucumseh is offline  
Reply
Old 17th April 2007 | 12:53
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Joined: Mar 2004
Posts: 484
Likes: 0
From: at the end of the bar
Relevant in that LM have fingers in many UK defence aviation pies, not least as Prime Contractor on the Navy Merlin.
http://www.lockheedmartin.co.uk/prod...anisation.html
XV277 is offline  
Reply
Old 17th April 2007 | 13:30
  #11 (permalink)  
20 Anniversary
 
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 295
Likes: 10
From: Temporarily Unsure!
Yukspeak

A statement of the bleedin' obvious it may be but it is a fine example of management yukspeak
rarelyathome is offline  
Reply

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off



Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.