Nimrod MRA.4
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Manchester
Posts: 891
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Normally a mild mannered gentleman but this episode has me boiling with rage, whoever you are, the person(s) responsible for this scrapping are absolute f**k wits,
I hope that one day your yacht strays a few hundred miles out of Helo range and you spend a nail bitting few days waiting for a foreign maritime asset to find you !!
W**kers
I hope that one day your yacht strays a few hundred miles out of Helo range and you spend a nail bitting few days waiting for a foreign maritime asset to find you !!
W**kers
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The loss of Nimrod lies firmly with BAe.
Thereafter BAE operated exactly as any other commercial enterprise would do ie it maximised its profits for its shareholders and stakeholders. Had the customer (MOD) called it to account, it might have done a better job for the customer.
The Government/MOD/RAF complex have much more to answer for.
Amongst many other things....
Political interference in the initial project decision.
Failure to carry out any sort of due diligence in the contractors costs and delivery dates.
Failure to write a contract that would hold the contractor to account.
Failure to use any other form of leverage to hold the contractor to account.
Failure to listen to years and years of expertise from within the command chain.
Is there corruption in all this....?? Without an enquiry (which we won't get) who knows; I favour c**k up over conspiracy every time.
I am absolutely not a fan of BAE, but to cast the blame soley in their direction lets a whole load of jointly responsible people right off the hook.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: england
Age: 61
Posts: 322
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"highjack alert"
WHEN the uk finally decides a MPA is needed again, anyone care to take a guess at a suitable replacement.
i (out of any other choice) am thinking secondhand P3.
WHEN the uk finally decides a MPA is needed again, anyone care to take a guess at a suitable replacement.
i (out of any other choice) am thinking secondhand P3.
a number of factors of which BAE's main contribution is selling a fantasy (delivery dates and costs) to the MOD in 1996
Join Date: May 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
iRaven,
I know you have a problem with BAE, but what is actually wrong with the Mantis UAV concept.
Its a medium altitude long endurance platform to do a similar role as globle hawk but on a slightly cheeper scale. Are you saying the UK shouldnt try and compete with the US and the Israelis, that we should just roll over and admit defeat and spend our tax payers money to help the US unemployed get back on their feet.
I know you have a problem with BAE, but what is actually wrong with the Mantis UAV concept.
Its a medium altitude long endurance platform to do a similar role as globle hawk but on a slightly cheeper scale. Are you saying the UK shouldnt try and compete with the US and the Israelis, that we should just roll over and admit defeat and spend our tax payers money to help the US unemployed get back on their feet.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oz42,
Well, if the choice is this to get something to work on time and approximately to budget, I'd take it everytime over the BAES domestic solution. BAES does have a highly skilled workforce; so they would be equally effective applying these skills in the civilian world. It's not UK mil contracts or bust - so let's not pretend that it is.
S41
and spend our tax payers money to help the US unemployed get back on their feet.
S41
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies for stealing your thunder IRaven, but I would like to answer Oz42.
As a supporter and ex member of the Armed Forces, a taxpayer, and a business owner, I have absolutely no problem with BAE being awarded any public contract and even having a slight commercial bias towards them to protect British economic interests.
Providing the contract is written such that what BAE promises, it delivers, on time and on cost. Otherwise it gets get paid f**k all.
If BAE cannot accept work on this basis, it is no asset to the taxpayer. And if in 2011 the MOD cannot write contracts effectively, then they should be shunted out the way in favour of people who can.
As a supporter and ex member of the Armed Forces, a taxpayer, and a business owner, I have absolutely no problem with BAE being awarded any public contract and even having a slight commercial bias towards them to protect British economic interests.
Providing the contract is written such that what BAE promises, it delivers, on time and on cost. Otherwise it gets get paid f**k all.
If BAE cannot accept work on this basis, it is no asset to the taxpayer. And if in 2011 the MOD cannot write contracts effectively, then they should be shunted out the way in favour of people who can.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Squirrel 41,
I am not defending the pi$$ poor programme management of BAE and I think products should fight in the market place on a level playing field, which in the military world is highly unlikely. But if there is a market we should encourage homegrown products and manage them well. The company should take the risk and prove that the product is worth having. But don’t write it off before its even started. That’s the problem in the UK we are to quick to criticise and even quicker to moan when we have no industry left. I don’t think we would see similar comments from US or French citizens regarding their industry.
I am not defending the pi$$ poor programme management of BAE and I think products should fight in the market place on a level playing field, which in the military world is highly unlikely. But if there is a market we should encourage homegrown products and manage them well. The company should take the risk and prove that the product is worth having. But don’t write it off before its even started. That’s the problem in the UK we are to quick to criticise and even quicker to moan when we have no industry left. I don’t think we would see similar comments from US or French citizens regarding their industry.
Oz42
OK, I'll expand my opinion further backed up by this recent announcement by IQPC (who get a lot of inside information at their conferences):
With the French tie-in I understand that politically the BAE-Dassault thing could effectively be a "done deal".
Great, so we reject all the technology that's available off the shelf and go for a platform that is currently line of sight only (ie. no proven satellite infrastructure), has no demonstrated weapons capability, uses the same engines as the underpowered BN Defender 4000 (RR Model 250s) and to all intents and purposes is no more than an ugly twin-engined Reaper that will probably cost more than twice as much, with half the capability and delivered 15 years after the US version.
I for one do not want my taxpayers' money potentially propping this up in the same way as we were indirectly told by "Fat Boy Prescott" to buy Hawk 128 AJTs instead of the far more suitable and capable Aeromacchi M-346 - why? Because the aircraft's components were built in his Constituency.
I predict another disaster within the Equipment Program (EP) that will be underperforming, overbudget and late. The upshot of this will be a RAF of less than 25,000 past 2020 when we have to make more servicemen redundant to balance the "defence budgetary books" because we've been told to bail out UK jobs at the expense of our own in the Military. The majority of the bulge in the current EP has been made by cost overuns from Typhoon, MRA4, Type 45, Astute Class, QE/PoW CVFs, etc... (all with BAE written all over them). The net result of these is that UK servicemen will get redundancy notices soon (an estimated 3-5,000 in the RAF) just so that poor old BAE can get a guaranteed revenue stream from the cash-strapped MoD - BAE made a profit of £2.2Bn last year, so my sympathy stops between "sh!t and syphilis".
The thing that really grips me if the above is true, is that we're paying them (I suspect £Ms) as indicated by the line "BAE Systems is taking part in feasibility studies funded by the MoD into collaborative work on Mantis-class UAVs, with France", before we've even started or announced the winner of the "down-select"!
Now compare that to General-Atomics:
Not a penny of US DoD funding has gone into either Predator B (Reaper) or Predator C before the US DoD become a "customer" - how about BAE showing some faith in their Mantis from their £2.2Bn profit? I don't think so!
Just an opinion, but I feel that history may be repeating itself once again...and I was hoping to draw that pension that is starting to look more and more unaffordable.
iRaven
OK, I'll expand my opinion further backed up by this recent announcement by IQPC (who get a lot of inside information at their conferences):
The U.K. MoD has recently launched its Scavenger ISTAR requirement with the aim of down-selecting a winning UAV design in 2012. The Scavenger UAV will be optimised for deep and persistent ISTAR beyond the UK’s existing General Atomics MQ-9 Reaper armed UAV. The down-select will, of course, depend on the outcome of the UK’s Strategic Defence and Security Review (SDSR), which is due to be concluded by September 2010. Scavenger will be a sub-element of a wider ISTAR project, now known as Soloman, but previously entitled Dabinett and intended to improve the analysis and dissemination of intelligence.
BAE Systems plans to offer its Mantis autonomous unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) for the Scavenger requirement. The sole example of the Mantis UAV has been returned to BAE’s Warton Aerodrome in Lancashire following a series of flight trials in Australia during 2009. BAE Systems is taking part in feasibility studies funded by the MoD into collaborative work on Mantis-class UAVs, with France and Italy as potential Scavenger contenders.
The next phase of Mantis will depend on the Scavenger down-select. It is unlikely that Mantis will fly again because the flight-test programme of the MoD-funded Advanced Concept and Technology Demonstrator (ACTD) project for the system is complete. The Mantis programme involved five mission-representative flights, including a “blind” search to test the system’s ability to find and identify targets at day and night, as well as its ability to track mobile targets. These flights showed that Mantis had the potential to fly missions of up to 36 hours’ endurance.
BAE Systems plans to offer its Mantis autonomous unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) for the Scavenger requirement. The sole example of the Mantis UAV has been returned to BAE’s Warton Aerodrome in Lancashire following a series of flight trials in Australia during 2009. BAE Systems is taking part in feasibility studies funded by the MoD into collaborative work on Mantis-class UAVs, with France and Italy as potential Scavenger contenders.
The next phase of Mantis will depend on the Scavenger down-select. It is unlikely that Mantis will fly again because the flight-test programme of the MoD-funded Advanced Concept and Technology Demonstrator (ACTD) project for the system is complete. The Mantis programme involved five mission-representative flights, including a “blind” search to test the system’s ability to find and identify targets at day and night, as well as its ability to track mobile targets. These flights showed that Mantis had the potential to fly missions of up to 36 hours’ endurance.
Great, so we reject all the technology that's available off the shelf and go for a platform that is currently line of sight only (ie. no proven satellite infrastructure), has no demonstrated weapons capability, uses the same engines as the underpowered BN Defender 4000 (RR Model 250s) and to all intents and purposes is no more than an ugly twin-engined Reaper that will probably cost more than twice as much, with half the capability and delivered 15 years after the US version.
I for one do not want my taxpayers' money potentially propping this up in the same way as we were indirectly told by "Fat Boy Prescott" to buy Hawk 128 AJTs instead of the far more suitable and capable Aeromacchi M-346 - why? Because the aircraft's components were built in his Constituency.
I predict another disaster within the Equipment Program (EP) that will be underperforming, overbudget and late. The upshot of this will be a RAF of less than 25,000 past 2020 when we have to make more servicemen redundant to balance the "defence budgetary books" because we've been told to bail out UK jobs at the expense of our own in the Military. The majority of the bulge in the current EP has been made by cost overuns from Typhoon, MRA4, Type 45, Astute Class, QE/PoW CVFs, etc... (all with BAE written all over them). The net result of these is that UK servicemen will get redundancy notices soon (an estimated 3-5,000 in the RAF) just so that poor old BAE can get a guaranteed revenue stream from the cash-strapped MoD - BAE made a profit of £2.2Bn last year, so my sympathy stops between "sh!t and syphilis".
The thing that really grips me if the above is true, is that we're paying them (I suspect £Ms) as indicated by the line "BAE Systems is taking part in feasibility studies funded by the MoD into collaborative work on Mantis-class UAVs, with France", before we've even started or announced the winner of the "down-select"!
Now compare that to General-Atomics:
“Our company has been uniquely successful in forecasting military needs and delivering extremely capable unmanned aircraft that are ready for near-term military use," says Thomas Cassidy Jr, GA-ASI president. "Just as the first Predator B aircraft were developed and flown on IRAD [Internal Research and Development] funding because we saw the need for this type of capability, likewise, Avenger was developed through foresight and significant company investment.”
Just an opinion, but I feel that history may be repeating itself once again...and I was hoping to draw that pension that is starting to look more and more unaffordable.
iRaven
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Somewhere nice overseas.
Posts: 225
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Iraven
Thank you so much. I've opened a second bottle, you've given me a lot to think about.
A very well informed/thought out post.
Bloody hell though, really? Is it truly that way, or truly that bad? I'm getting tired of this bullish@t. The RAF has honestly been my entire adult life, I don't have anything else, and it appears (mostly through inept leadership) to be pointless. Squandered opportunities and so on.
And probably about to throw me out, over 40, as an officer who has held every rank bar one all the way though for 20-odd years and many deployments, ground crew boy entrant, flying noncom then commissioned the long route etc etc. Valued by none eh? Forgotten very quickly I would think.
So, off I pop from an air force of about 35000 compared to the air force of about 100000 I joined, with little capability left apart from the ability to promote militarily worthless health and safety and equal opportunities policies to people who who don't understand or give a sh!t.
Go Air Force.
Thank you so much. I've opened a second bottle, you've given me a lot to think about.
A very well informed/thought out post.
Bloody hell though, really? Is it truly that way, or truly that bad? I'm getting tired of this bullish@t. The RAF has honestly been my entire adult life, I don't have anything else, and it appears (mostly through inept leadership) to be pointless. Squandered opportunities and so on.
And probably about to throw me out, over 40, as an officer who has held every rank bar one all the way though for 20-odd years and many deployments, ground crew boy entrant, flying noncom then commissioned the long route etc etc. Valued by none eh? Forgotten very quickly I would think.
So, off I pop from an air force of about 35000 compared to the air force of about 100000 I joined, with little capability left apart from the ability to promote militarily worthless health and safety and equal opportunities policies to people who who don't understand or give a sh!t.
Go Air Force.
Thought police antagonist
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Where I always have been...firmly in the real world
Posts: 1,371
Received 116 Likes
on
83 Posts
" BAES does have a highly skilled workforce; so they would be equally effective applying these skills in the civilian world "
Very true, but there is one small problem here. There is nowhere for them to go, irrespective of their skill levels. For the guys on the shop floor, the "traditional" escape route was the UK heavy maintanance market as contractors and subsequently the airlines for those who made the transition.
This market is now saturated with engineers, be they Lic.Engs, Techs or mechs.....and with a distinct paucity or work, most of it having left these shores over recent years. For those in the design world, same problem as there are a finite number required by other manufacturers, the same criteria being applicable to the shop floor guys seeking to continue in the manufacturing sector.
Bleak and barren best summates matters.
Very true, but there is one small problem here. There is nowhere for them to go, irrespective of their skill levels. For the guys on the shop floor, the "traditional" escape route was the UK heavy maintanance market as contractors and subsequently the airlines for those who made the transition.
This market is now saturated with engineers, be they Lic.Engs, Techs or mechs.....and with a distinct paucity or work, most of it having left these shores over recent years. For those in the design world, same problem as there are a finite number required by other manufacturers, the same criteria being applicable to the shop floor guys seeking to continue in the manufacturing sector.
Bleak and barren best summates matters.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Outside the Matz
Posts: 220
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
IMHO anything to do with the brand of BAE is tainted. This company reminds me of British Leyland. For those too young, google.
In the last 24 years, I have been involved both directly and indirectly with these spongers on various projects. What I find extremely disappointing, nay Fuc£$ing treacherous, is that ex senior Officers that had the respect of their lads, have quite happily gobbed off about how crap this company is, then come exit date sell their soul to 'the greatest threat to national security'.
Shame on you.
In the last 24 years, I have been involved both directly and indirectly with these spongers on various projects. What I find extremely disappointing, nay Fuc£$ing treacherous, is that ex senior Officers that had the respect of their lads, have quite happily gobbed off about how crap this company is, then come exit date sell their soul to 'the greatest threat to national security'.
Shame on you.
Whilst we're on the "underperforming" debate on a certain aircraft company in the North West that seems to excel in just that.
The Reaper's single Honeywell TPE331-10 turboprop engine is rated at 900shp and weighs 403lbs, whereas the Mantis' RR Model 250s are rated at 450shp each and weigh 205lbs each (410lbs total) - I cannot see how they can say "a production version of Mantis would be able to fly at altitudes up to 50,000ft and deliver an endurance of over 36h." This would be nearly twice that of Reaper.
Standby for senior officers to go all blurry eyed again at over inflated performance figures and be hoodwinked by t'Bungling Baron Waste o' Space, his pet whippet Boogeroff and the cheap car lot sales team...
The Reaper's single Honeywell TPE331-10 turboprop engine is rated at 900shp and weighs 403lbs, whereas the Mantis' RR Model 250s are rated at 450shp each and weigh 205lbs each (410lbs total) - I cannot see how they can say "a production version of Mantis would be able to fly at altitudes up to 50,000ft and deliver an endurance of over 36h." This would be nearly twice that of Reaper.
Standby for senior officers to go all blurry eyed again at over inflated performance figures and be hoodwinked by t'Bungling Baron Waste o' Space, his pet whippet Boogeroff and the cheap car lot sales team...
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do wonder how close to being an operational integrated package MR4 was or how much was it going to cost and how long was it going to take to get it there. Reminds me of AEW3 back in 70's/80's.
Could I be right in thinking its not as black and white as the media are portraying it?
And how much of the flack is being directed at the RAF/Govt that should be being directed at the Contractor?
Could I be right in thinking its not as black and white as the media are portraying it?
And how much of the flack is being directed at the RAF/Govt that should be being directed at the Contractor?
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NURSE, if the customer cannot write a contract that puts the emphasis on the supplier to deliver on time, on spec and to budget or else they get nothing, then the customer deserves everything it gets. Can't blame BWoS for taking advantage of an incompetent procurement organisation, constantly changing requirements, goalposts, etc etc.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 1,515
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The postman speaketh the truth and he be wise.
For those that wish to dig out the history of the AEW, you will find that it is often used as an example of all that was wrong with procurement policy......until now.
The only real mistake is the one from which we learn nothing
For those that wish to dig out the history of the AEW, you will find that it is often used as an example of all that was wrong with procurement policy......until now.
The only real mistake is the one from which we learn nothing
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Stockport
Posts: 121
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Very true, but there is one small problem here. There is nowhere for them to go, irrespective of their skill levels. For the guys on the shop floor, the "traditional" escape route was the UK heavy maintanance market as contractors and subsequently the airlines for those who made the transition.
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: YES
Posts: 779
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I totally agree about the contracts but that also happens when its a fore gone conclusion what is going to be procured and you only have 1 supplier nationally.
But I've stated before MoD(PE) or what ever name it goes under should be staffed not by civil servants but by lawyers and Professional Procurrers.
But I've stated before MoD(PE) or what ever name it goes under should be staffed not by civil servants but by lawyers and Professional Procurrers.
I don't think you can blame all the Civil Serpants on this as they spend the money where they are told - usually by senior Serpants or 1-4 stars. A current ongoing equipment competition looks like going to the wrong company (again!) and the OF-2 to OF-5s can see it's the wrong thing to do as well as the Serpants at the same level - it's just that none of us are being listened to...
The answer is that the "very high level" guidance must be followed and that guidance smells of Garlic (if you know what I mean
); and I'm not talking about Vampires!
LJ
The answer is that the "very high level" guidance must be followed and that guidance smells of Garlic (if you know what I mean
); and I'm not talking about Vampires!LJ