Operationally Capable Helicopter Acquisition
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 345
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Operationally Capable Helicopter Acquisition
Why is it that we seem to procure helicopters that to all intents and purposes are not fit for the battlefield until they have had significant upgrades and armouring to the original specification?
Why do we not buy equipment that is fit for the military role from the outset perhaps with detachable armour for peacetime operation?
The latest regarding merlin is the provoker for my questions. UOR ought to be for mission design creep issues and surely not for the fundamentals of crew and passenger protection on the battlefield for which the aircraft ought to be designed?
Why do we persist in purchasing civilian aircraft and only then attempting to militarise them?
Thoughts.............
Why do we not buy equipment that is fit for the military role from the outset perhaps with detachable armour for peacetime operation?
The latest regarding merlin is the provoker for my questions. UOR ought to be for mission design creep issues and surely not for the fundamentals of crew and passenger protection on the battlefield for which the aircraft ought to be designed?
Why do we persist in purchasing civilian aircraft and only then attempting to militarise them?
Thoughts.............
Join Date: May 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Serious answer:
Because we live in a procurement environment that has its No 1 priority as keeping the initial cost down. It's not important to have capability at this stage, it's only important to get the order placed, for the number of airframes we want. Anything else is a bonus!
We then retrofit because (even though we thought of it originally) we are now in a position that we cannot afford not to fit, whatever it is.
Tongue in cheek answer:
Because it is more important to spend our money on Typhoons than aircraft and equipment we actually need! Why? So that we can nurture our future CAS's.
Because we live in a procurement environment that has its No 1 priority as keeping the initial cost down. It's not important to have capability at this stage, it's only important to get the order placed, for the number of airframes we want. Anything else is a bonus!
We then retrofit because (even though we thought of it originally) we are now in a position that we cannot afford not to fit, whatever it is.
Tongue in cheek answer:
Because it is more important to spend our money on Typhoons than aircraft and equipment we actually need! Why? So that we can nurture our future CAS's.
Because the procurement process is filled with chimps who know naff all about the kit or it's intended use? Because no one asks the 'users' what will be required of the kit? Because the self-seeking wasters who populate the system won't have to use the kit?
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wilts
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
also because the highly paid bean counters are lining their back pockets for retirement..!!
was it £6m per merlin for upgrade with kevlar...
10% back hander from £6m !!
nice if you can get it !!!!
was it £6m per merlin for upgrade with kevlar...
10% back hander from £6m !!
nice if you can get it !!!!
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Wilts
Posts: 254
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CGB...
surely the answer is self evident...
a military force needs military choppers not uprated civvy ones..
buga,
thats logic !!
forces dont work on logic !!!
Philrigger,,,,
ROFLMAO...
that sums it up nicely !!
surely the answer is self evident...
a military force needs military choppers not uprated civvy ones..
buga,
thats logic !!
forces dont work on logic !!!
Philrigger,,,,
ROFLMAO...
that sums it up nicely !!
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Ottawa
Age: 53
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Because the procurement process is filled with chimps who know naff all about the kit or it's intended use? Because no one asks the 'users' what will be required of the kit? Because the self-seeking wasters who populate the system won't have to use the kit?
Not true! Unless the process has changed since I left the RAF 6 months ago, Users are included in the procurement process, who do you think drafts the initial capability requirements? In the CHIPT, RWEOTU were included in all requirements reviews for new equipment etc. Mick Strigg has summed it perfectly (both answers).
HEDP, why do you ask? Have you just been posted to a DEC?
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: US
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Canadian, I think you need to look a little further upstream. Retired senior rank people, working for major manufacturers and keeping close ties with "Future Planners" of their ex service(s), come up with a concept to fill those needs. Usually it starts out as "I think we may have something you should take a look at". This is accompanied by the usual Power Point presentation with all the lightning bolts, ability to solve all the "Future Problems" in a single bound etc., etc. It is shown around, massaged to appeal to as many end users as possible and based on this effort, and usually the efforts of their competiton as well, because each has their supporters and detractors within the services, becomes the baseline requirement for the aircraft/ship/truck, whatever. Now all the rest come in, hang all the lights on the tree, only to be told that the budget won't run to that, so the base version is bought. And then come the "Mod's" to make it a christmas tree again. Did I forget to mention the program funding limit's are known well in advance?
And yes, unfortunately, people who should not have any input in the process do.
And yes, unfortunately, people who should not have any input in the process do.
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Tullahoma TN
Posts: 482
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Homage to a Government
Next year we are to bring the soldiers home
For lack of money, and it is all right.
Places they guarded or kept orderly,
Must guard themselves, and keep themselves orderly.
We want the money for ourselves at home
Instead of working. And this is all right.
It's hard to say who wanted it to happen,
But now it's been decided nobody minds.
The places are a long way off, not here,
Which is all right, and from what we hear
The soldiers there only made trouble happen.
Next year we shall be easier in our minds.
Next year we shall be living in a country
That brought its soldiers home for lack of money.
The statues will be standing in the same
Tree-muffled squares, and look nearly the same.
Our children will not know it's a different country.
All we can hope to leave them now is money.
Philip Larkin, 1969
from Larry Auster's View From the Right blog
Reflections humorous and serious on the British character
Next year we are to bring the soldiers home
For lack of money, and it is all right.
Places they guarded or kept orderly,
Must guard themselves, and keep themselves orderly.
We want the money for ourselves at home
Instead of working. And this is all right.
It's hard to say who wanted it to happen,
But now it's been decided nobody minds.
The places are a long way off, not here,
Which is all right, and from what we hear
The soldiers there only made trouble happen.
Next year we shall be easier in our minds.
Next year we shall be living in a country
That brought its soldiers home for lack of money.
The statues will be standing in the same
Tree-muffled squares, and look nearly the same.
Our children will not know it's a different country.
All we can hope to leave them now is money.
Philip Larkin, 1969
from Larry Auster's View From the Right blog
Reflections humorous and serious on the British character
Ecce Homo! Loquitur...
Arithmetic on the Frontier
A great and glorious thing it is
To learn, for seven years or so,
The Lord knows what of that and this,
Ere reckoned fit to face the foe --
The flying bullet down the Pass,
That whistles clear: "All flesh is grass."
Three hundred pounds per annum spent
On making brain and body meeter
For all the murderous intent
Comprised in "villanous saltpetre!"
And after -- ask the Yusufzaies
What comes of all our 'ologies.
A scrimmage in a Border Station --
A canter down some dark defile --
Two thousand pounds of education
Drops to a ten-rupee jezail --
The Crammer's boast, the Squadron's pride,
Shot like a rabbit in a ride!
No proposition Euclid wrote,
No formulae the text-books know,
Will turn the bullet from your coat,
Or ward the tulwar's downward blow
Strike hard who cares -- shoot straight who can --
The odds are on the cheaper man.
One sword-knot stolen from the camp
Will pay for all the school expenses
Of any Kurrum Valley scamp
Who knows no word of moods and tenses,
But, being blessed with perfect sight,
Picks off our messmates left and right.
With home-bred hordes the hillsides teem,
The troopships bring us one by one,
At vast expense of time and steam,
To slay Afridis where they run.
The "captives of our bow and spear"
Are cheap, alas! as we are dear.
Rudyard Kipling
A great and glorious thing it is
To learn, for seven years or so,
The Lord knows what of that and this,
Ere reckoned fit to face the foe --
The flying bullet down the Pass,
That whistles clear: "All flesh is grass."
Three hundred pounds per annum spent
On making brain and body meeter
For all the murderous intent
Comprised in "villanous saltpetre!"
And after -- ask the Yusufzaies
What comes of all our 'ologies.
A scrimmage in a Border Station --
A canter down some dark defile --
Two thousand pounds of education
Drops to a ten-rupee jezail --
The Crammer's boast, the Squadron's pride,
Shot like a rabbit in a ride!
No proposition Euclid wrote,
No formulae the text-books know,
Will turn the bullet from your coat,
Or ward the tulwar's downward blow
Strike hard who cares -- shoot straight who can --
The odds are on the cheaper man.
One sword-knot stolen from the camp
Will pay for all the school expenses
Of any Kurrum Valley scamp
Who knows no word of moods and tenses,
But, being blessed with perfect sight,
Picks off our messmates left and right.
With home-bred hordes the hillsides teem,
The troopships bring us one by one,
At vast expense of time and steam,
To slay Afridis where they run.
The "captives of our bow and spear"
Are cheap, alas! as we are dear.
Rudyard Kipling
Culture on PPrune!! whatever next?
Back to topic - HEDP you need to read the FLynx thread - we have bought and will continue to buy whatever Westlands have to sell us rather than what we need. It is how we got the Merlin and how we will waste money on FLynx.
The smartest procurement policy in the world doesn't compete with politics for awarding contracts.
Back to topic - HEDP you need to read the FLynx thread - we have bought and will continue to buy whatever Westlands have to sell us rather than what we need. It is how we got the Merlin and how we will waste money on FLynx.
The smartest procurement policy in the world doesn't compete with politics for awarding contracts.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Just south of the Keevil gap.
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spot on the money, as usual, Crab.
"The smartest procurement policy in the world doesn't compete with politics for awarding contracts. "
The most apt statement I've seen on PPRUNE for a long time. As one of the procurement chimps, it does get very frustrating to have contributed to a rigourous COEIA supporting a Business Case, only for the recommendation to be overturned due to "Ministerial Direction". I've mentioned the AJT case on these means before......
"The smartest procurement policy in the world doesn't compete with politics for awarding contracts. "
The most apt statement I've seen on PPRUNE for a long time. As one of the procurement chimps, it does get very frustrating to have contributed to a rigourous COEIA supporting a Business Case, only for the recommendation to be overturned due to "Ministerial Direction". I've mentioned the AJT case on these means before......
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Somerset
Age: 61
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mick Strigg & Cows, you have hit the nail on the head.
deeceethree, you do a disservice to the vast majority who are doing their utmost to deliver the best they can with what little cash they have been given.
Having myself moved from the frontline to Abbey Wood I can tell you (though I am surprised you do not know already) that every project team has a military Requirements Manager, whose job is exactly as described. Most, if not all, are operators with recent frontline experience.
There are three constraints that govern acquisition: performance, cost and time. You can move one but only at the expense of one or both of the others. The real problem is that we cannot afford what we need. That's partly why so many projects run late - performance, but principally cost have been maintained at the expense of delivery on schedule. It also explains why equipment is sometimes delivered with reduced capability - it has been deemed more important to get it to the guys on the frontline as soon as possible and deal with the shortfalls later.
In short, as has been mentioned many times elsewhere, we are trying to do too much with too little.
Here endeth the lesson.
deeceethree, you do a disservice to the vast majority who are doing their utmost to deliver the best they can with what little cash they have been given.
Having myself moved from the frontline to Abbey Wood I can tell you (though I am surprised you do not know already) that every project team has a military Requirements Manager, whose job is exactly as described. Most, if not all, are operators with recent frontline experience.
There are three constraints that govern acquisition: performance, cost and time. You can move one but only at the expense of one or both of the others. The real problem is that we cannot afford what we need. That's partly why so many projects run late - performance, but principally cost have been maintained at the expense of delivery on schedule. It also explains why equipment is sometimes delivered with reduced capability - it has been deemed more important to get it to the guys on the frontline as soon as possible and deal with the shortfalls later.
In short, as has been mentioned many times elsewhere, we are trying to do too much with too little.
Here endeth the lesson.
"Because the procurement process is filled with chimps who know naff all about the kit or it's intended use? Because no one asks the 'users' what will be required of the kit? Because the self-seeking wasters who populate the system won't have to use the kit? "
Try walking the 2nd floor at MB where the Cap Branches (DECs) live on a day when everyone is mandated to be in uniform. The number of operational medals on display, and particularly the number of gallantry medals on display is enough to make you feel rather humble.
Those doing the process now in MB have come from tours, have mates on tours and will doubtless be going to tours. They know what it is like at the sharp end.
Try walking the 2nd floor at MB where the Cap Branches (DECs) live on a day when everyone is mandated to be in uniform. The number of operational medals on display, and particularly the number of gallantry medals on display is enough to make you feel rather humble.
Those doing the process now in MB have come from tours, have mates on tours and will doubtless be going to tours. They know what it is like at the sharp end.
Jimlad1,
Totally agree; however, the process of procurement is flawed by the various rules and regs that have to be adhered to. As I am sure you are aware, the time frames, ITTs, competitive tendering etc are time consuming and overly bureaucratic. More importantly, if a company knows how to answer the ITT or whatever document is used these days, regardless if their product meets the requirement or has even been built/tested, they will be selected!! MADNESS
Totally agree; however, the process of procurement is flawed by the various rules and regs that have to be adhered to. As I am sure you are aware, the time frames, ITTs, competitive tendering etc are time consuming and overly bureaucratic. More importantly, if a company knows how to answer the ITT or whatever document is used these days, regardless if their product meets the requirement or has even been built/tested, they will be selected!! MADNESS
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Somerset
Age: 61
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BGG
Not quite, although you're not too far from the mark. However, some posters on this thread seem to be lacking in awareness of how the acquisition/procurement process works and making perjorative statements about people who are doing their best in an impossible situation doesn't help (it might be you one day, deeceethree). We live in the real world and there never is and never will be enough money to go round. That doesn't mean we shouldn't fight our corner or make hard-hitting well-conceived arguments based on sound judgement to get the kit we need.
sounds like you've only just come out of the Admiral House 'acquisition school' yourself !
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Ottawa
Age: 53
Posts: 170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
further upstream
Flt Lt,
I concede your point that "networking" with senior industrial figures and former colleges does happen, you would have to be naive to think otherwise (indeed, for a short while, I benefited from former college networking immediately after I left the Service). However, I think you credit these "salesmen" with a little too much influence.
Again, you are correct in that most people know that initial budgets for equipment procurement will not be accurate, which is where "requirements trading" comes into play. However, due to the wonderful funding system imposed by HMG, the lost capability can be added, by modification, over the coming years. If it helps, which I'm sure it does not, I'm finding that the Canadian system has similar constraints, if not on the same scale as our UK counterparts.
I concede your point that "networking" with senior industrial figures and former colleges does happen, you would have to be naive to think otherwise (indeed, for a short while, I benefited from former college networking immediately after I left the Service). However, I think you credit these "salesmen" with a little too much influence.
Again, you are correct in that most people know that initial budgets for equipment procurement will not be accurate, which is where "requirements trading" comes into play. However, due to the wonderful funding system imposed by HMG, the lost capability can be added, by modification, over the coming years. If it helps, which I'm sure it does not, I'm finding that the Canadian system has similar constraints, if not on the same scale as our UK counterparts.