Realising the benefits of Avionics

[Saintsman]

Apparently they don't offer bungs

[hugel]

Unfortunately the rest of my thread to which this is a reply has been removed. But I'd like to continue the discussion. My research is concerned primarily with the benefits, the drivers and competition. Someone has recently sent me a very interesting PM that large contracts (military contracts in particular) are awarded with scant regard to the technical aspects of the proposed procurement and the over-riding factor is the political lobbying, identity of the non-exec directors of some of the bidders, impact on local economy and employement.

Is the decision making really that flawed in aerospace procurement ?

hugel

[Cpt_Pugwash]

Hugel,
In a word, yes. Research the UK AJT procurement for an example.

[VinRouge]

What does capability matter when you have idiots willing to give up their lives for their country, especially when lucrative civilian contracts can mean re-election for a party or at least a local election.

Its the purchase of votes by other means. Look at the US Boeing Vs Airbus tanker contract for a good example, or the second research F-35 engine for another.

[Op_Twenty]

I'm interested in any AJT links, I've had a hunt but no joy.

[Herc-u-lease]

Hugel,

Have you considered Porter's five forces when looking at this? I'm guessing from the languge you've used that you have considered this model already. I looked at your survey but I'm not in a position to complete it; I work for the Government.

One item i did notice is that one of your questions asked for order of importance regarding the product i.e. 1,2,3. you did not include performing to specifications in there. Some may take this as granted but performing to spec comes a close second to safety in my opinion. whether that is the view shared by a commercial entity is questionable; however, if they've not met the spec, they've not met the contract, likely not going to get any profit.

Good luck!

[hugel]

I've been nose-deep in "Competitive Strategy" and "Competitive Advantage" for some weeks now

When you say performing to spec, presumably you mean the aircraft meets the specified performance criteria. As a means of selling a demonstrator or showing feasibility its a good one.

The other interesting aspect for a commercial evaluation is bid compliance. Most of the big companies have complex marking scheme as part of their investment appraisal.

The question is how could a company best compete ? Demonstrating capability rather than simply stating it in the tender is an obvious way (show don't tell)

Although I haven't been involved in procurement for a while, cardinal-points specs were the order of the day (what'ya got !?!) rather than prescriptive specifications. I suppose it's all different again now

If anyone is wondering what on earth I am talking about, you can add your opinion to the (academic) survey using the link Realising the Benefits for Aviation Industry - Competitive Advantage in Avionics Survey

hugel

[hugel]

Do you think OR people or Airlines know what they want ? In my experience they tend to describe the next generation of products in the language of those currently available. I remember consulting once users on a new mapping product and was told: "we want it like the old one, but better!"

hugel

[Cpt_Pugwash]

Op Twenty,

Here's an extract from Hansard and few links for you

Hawk Advanced Jet Trainer

Mr. Gerald Howarth: To ask the Secretary of State for Defence
(1) whether he intends to invite BAE Systems to underwrite the through life costs of the Hawk Advanced Jet Trainer; [204832]
(2) what his latest estimate is of the in-service date for the Hawk Advanced Jet Trainer; [204833]
(3) what the main provisions of the gain share agreement between his Department and BAE Systems in respect of the Hawk Advanced Jet Trainer are; [204834]
(4) what design changes the Integrated Project Team for the Hawk Advanced Jet Trainer proposes to make; [204836]
(5) what he expects the through life costs of the Hawk Advanced Jet Trainer to be. [204837]
(6) when he expects to sign the contract for the (a) development phase and (b) production phase of the Hawk Advanced Jet Trainer. [204838]
Mr. Ingram: We expect the Hawk 128 Advanced Jet Trainer aircraft to cost approximately £3.5 billion Through Life", which amounts to some 20 years. The aircraft will be procured conventionally and paid for by the taxpayer, therefore there is no requirement for BAE Systems to underwrite the Through Life Costs (TLC).
The Ministry of Defence and BAE Systems have defined and agreed a mature Hawk 128 aircraft specification. We do not envisage any significant design changes to the specification during the Design and Development phase.
Gain share incentivises a Company to reduce costs and in return receive financial benefit. This information is commercially sensitive and it would be inappropriate to comment further.
The Design and Development Contract (DDC) was awarded to BAE Systems. on 22 December 2004. Final aircraft numbers, delivery schedule and In-Service Date will all be set at the main investment decision point which is planned for Spring 2006. at which time approval will be sought to place a Production Contract.


UK MoD signs 450 million contract for BAE Systems? Hawk 128 advanced jet trainer-19/10/2006-Flightglobal.com

Check the final .pdf in these Treasury documents particularly the question marked as "Only if asked" , on page 8.

PW

[hugel]

Here's a question for all the end-users.... how much choice does your airline get in the avioincs fit for your aircraft...Are you running MEL or do you have some sexy suites installed. What was your airlines attitude to the choice/options available ? Was it a choice of an integrated suite or nothing ?

hugel

[forget]

.... how much choice does your airline get in the avioincs fit for your aircraft

Hugel, I hope this isn't granny and eggs but are you familiar with civil ARINC standards? Brilliant idea from the 40s. Aircraft in production are wired and racked to a certain Standard. Avionics manufacturers produce boxes to fit the Standard wiring (pin outs) and racking. Airline customers can then go to several manufacturers to select their avionics boxes/systems. Keeps the whole thing very competitive and eliminates 'single source'.

There are three classes of ARINC Standards:

ARINC Characteristics: Define the form, fit, function, and interfaces of avionics, cabin systems, and aircraft networks

ARINC Specifications: Define the physical packaging or mounting of avionics and cabin equipment; communication, networking and data security standards; or a high-level computer language

ARINC Reports: Provide guidelines or general information found by the aviation industry to be preferred practices, often related to avionics maintenance and flight simulator engineering and maintenance