Why can't we just buy this?

[Skipness One Echo]

http://www.airliners.net/open.file/1309217/L/


Honestly, is there a particularly good reason why we can't simply order a fleet today given the money being pissed up a wall at the MOD at the mo pfaffing around on this? Would the world really end buying off the shelf?
It's becoming a national embarrasment IMHO.

[Jackonicko]

Money.

Though a half-ar$ed PFI will cost far more over the life of the programme, there are no huge up-front capital costs to scare the Treasury.

If you want to spend real money, buying real tankers that you'll then own outright, then what do you sacrifice to pay for them?

[Tiger_mate]

So Australia is getting new tankers and new helicopters, both of which we need soonest. Shame we spent all that money on Typhoon, for it will be years before we are adequately so equipped.

It is quite natural for everybody, myself included. to consider their own particular element of the trainset to be important, but I am sure that the troops living under fire 24/7 will not consider a new tanker in their top 10 of essential needs.

Things would not be so bad if a political solution to the world affairs was even slightly visible on the horizon. If the newspapers are to be believed, the UK Govt Plc will be on damage limitation in the coming months which will put MOD spending back at rock-bottom.

Body bags no longer make the news and the Police want a pay rise....nuff said.

[Pontius Navigator]

Originally Posted by Jackonicko

Money.

If you want to spend real money, buying real tankers that you'll then own outright, then what do you sacrifice to pay for them?

Swiss Des perhaps?

[Ronald Reagan]

What the forces really need

A large increase to the defence budget. Increase it from £32 billion to £50 billion next year and every year from then on. Then also give each service a single £30 billion payment to buy new equipment. When you think we are supposed to be the fith largest economy on Earth and yet we cannot afford 232 Typhoons, 150 JSF, 2 carriers and some new tankers its unreal.

Take the money from the welfare state and all the single scrounging mums and dolights out there!

Oh almost forgot, give all you guys a large pay increase to.

By the way I am a civilian and a Conservative. I just hope if they get in they will help you guys more. They make the right noises but 'Options for Change' comes to mind! I do think that they have chagned and may be better for defence than the filth we have now.

[Suzeman]

This may explain how it works?

Just found this courtesy of Private Eye.

Would be funny if it wasn't true !!

Suzeman


UNCORRECTED TRANSCRIPT OF ORAL EVIDENCE
To be published as HC 151-i
House of COMMONS
MINUTES OF EVIDENCE TAKEN BEFORE THE COMMITTEE OF PUBLIC ACCOUNTS
Monday 3 November 2007

THE PRIVATISATION OF QINETIQ
Any public use of, or reference to, the contents should make clear that neither witnesses nor Members have had the opportunity to correct the record. The transcript is not yet an approved formal record of these proceedings.


Q193 Mr Bacon: Yes, I would have thought so too. Mr Woolley, are you a chartered accountant?

Mr Woolley: I am not.

Q194 Mr Bacon: Are you a qualified financial person of any kind? Do you have any financial qualifications?

Mr Woolley: I do not have financial qualifications.

Q195 Mr Bacon: What is your job?
Mr Woolley: I am the Finance Director of the Ministry of Defence.

[Chugalug2]

By the way I am a civilian and a Conservative. I just hope if they get in they will help you guys more. They make the right noises......

Where have you been for the last ten years RR? Just in case, as your ID suggests, you come from another space time continuum, 'they' no longer make any such noises and are all part of our nice new inclusive cuddly non scary left of centre Peoples Party. Are you the Ghost of Christmas Past? Bah, Humbug Sir! Oh, and Happy Christmas!
Chug

[Skipness One Echo]

The VC10 is 40 years old. It's rather like the new VC10 in 1966 replacing something that flew over Flanders.....that's where these morons have left us.

[Ronald Reagan]

Any chance things will change?

Guys do any of you think that things will chnage if there is a chnage of government? I do want these fools out. Just imagine the look on Gordons face and also Geoff Hoons face, the ass hole who killed Colt and the Jag when they lose office! What would be even better is if they lost their own seats!

But I am a Conservative as I hoped they were and to a degree I think they are better. But if you guys can suggest any party which is better then I would join them.

Maybe some ex forces people should form a new party. With someone like General Mike Jackson as leader. If they ever won the yanks would probably think Michael Jackson was our new PM!

I chose my name for this site on the basis of a leader who equiped his military forces well. Under his watch the US military grew and grew. Shame we could not find a leader like that. I had always hoped David Davis would have made Tory leader and one day PM. But sadly not to be

[Lyneham Lad]

I had always hoped David Davis would have made Tory leader and one day PM.

....and with so many open goals staring him in the face, just how many has the said David Davis scored? Very few, if any.

Indeed, with so much positive Press and now public opinion polls showing that the 'ordinary man in the street' is beginning to acknowledge the massive and prolonged ill-treatment/underfunding of the Armed Forces, I despair of the official Opposition. How can any political organisation, when offered so many opportunities on a plate, not make more political capital of them? If they are so inept in Opposition, would they be any better in Government?

LL

[Ronald Reagan]

Any suggestions?

Any suggestions on any party or politician which you guys think is any good?

Most Torys seem to care but as to how much they will really do is another question!

Labour are scum.

The Lib Dems are nice but rather inept. I don't think they are fans of the military and defence spending would likely decrease.

UKIP are mainly a one issue party but do probably care.

BNP care a lot about the forces but are anti Typhoon and seem to hate electronic equipment and class the only threat we face as an inward one.

The Green party, well the less said the better!

So I think thats about all of them!

I am open to any opinions you guys may have.

[Guzlin Adnams]

Politicians.........#*@#!

If any of that breed even tries to look at my kids when the next general election campaign is on I shall not be responsible for my actions, especially if it's the "Son of the Manse" or one of his devotees.
I've got a feeling that there will be a change in 2008. If there's one thing that stirs people up it's a down-turn to the economy.
I wouldn't expect miracles under Dave but it should get slightly better.
Super-fund the Forces for six years or so to get them equipped with what they need. This could easily be achieved by the Treasury if the will were there, Northern Rock proves that without doubt.

[Two's in]

Somewhat short-sighted to blame the Government of the day for a Procurement system that has been carefully and lovingly crafted by the few remaining Defence Contractors that milk it, and the many senior civil servants that remain employed solely because of it. Look who reallly benefits from cost overruns, changing requirements, late deliveries and that most Holy of Grails, the PFI, and you will start to understand why UK PLC buys Military equipment the way it does. When future civilizations uncover the ruins of Abbey Wood, will they ever guess that it was a venerable shrine to graft, corruption, incompetence and systematic abuse of the taxpayer and the Military end-user? Probably not.

[Cyclone733]

How can we possibly justify something usefull like a new SH fleet or tanker fleet when we can better spend £6 billion a year on subsidising private rail companies or £57 billion (or to put it another way £1800 per tax payer) to keep Northern Rock afloat?

Come on guys the people earning millions a year gambling with your money in the safety of the Dock Lands with no risk of that money being taken back to pay towards their f£$k ups need your support at this difficult time

[RileyDove]

We should have had Airbus freighters years ago to do some of the trooping flights . Keeping the VC-10 going is a farce - the cost is frightening in fuel alone. Unfortunately the management seems to be one which in 1940 would be wondering whether to buy some more Spitfires or just stick with the Gladiators until the Germans go away!

[LFFC]

Jacko

If you want to spend real money, buying real tankers that you'll then own outright, then what do you sacrifice to pay for them?

You've really gotta stop thinking of FSTA as tankers. Sadly, I suspect that the few aircraft that will eventually be made available to the RAF will be mainly be used as Air Transport aircraft to support the Army.

[D-IFF_ident]

Simply put, we CAN buy these; we just aren't. Perhaps it's because of the way we run our budgets, perhaps it's because we can't see past the ends of our noses, perhaps it's just because we are incompetent fools.

The maths are simple enough:

RAAF BUYING 5 of them for $1.5Bn - RAF LEASING 'some' of them for 25 - 27 years for $23Bn. You could argue that we could buy 15.3 of them for that money, with booms and UARSSIs, to the same spec as the RAAF, or the USAF if Northrop Grumman sell them (btw - next gen tankers are the No 1 priority to the USAF) or you could argue some tosh about it being cheaper to rent by the hour than own it outright.

On the other hand - we may well buy some, I'd guess that we will, in about 25-27 years, at a knock-down price of only $1.5Bn for 5 of them - used of course, and with only wing mounted pods, but familiar to us as they will be the ones we've rented for 25-27 years.

IMHO we are not buying them because nobody in a position of authority really gives two hoots about the defence of the nation any more.

[Blacksheep]

The VC10 may be forty years old but in case you hadn't noticed, the B767 is a twenty three year old design...

You guys deserve something that's up to date and equipped with reliable modern systems.

[GreenKnight121]

How many years has it been since the last VC-10 was built... compared to the new-off-the-assembly-line B767s the USAF would get if a decision is ever made?

Maybe the design is 23 years old, but the airframes (and engines) would be completely new.

[Blacksheep]

True, but once the aircraft is out of production - which will be sooner rather than later - spares and technical support will become a problem. The 767s single aisle contemporary B757 recently went out of production and getting support for one is already a chore.

Of course, the RAF tanker fleet are past masters of keeping obsolete airframes airborne, so that wouldn't bother them.