3,000 jobs to go at Waste O'Space
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: UK
Age: 76
Posts: 41
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C-17 - a successful programme? I seem to recall huge cost overruns - several BILLION dollars - and long progamme delays due to wing failures and control system problems. It's easy to buy "off the peg" when some one else has done the hard work and taken all the costs.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Borderline England
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So,
BAe screws everything up
Forces loses tens of thousands of jobs and capabilities as a result
Aircraft orders are cut
BAe loses profit, needs to cut thousands of British jobs, UNLESS.....
They secure foreign orders for Typhoon, the biggest of which is for India at £7.1bn....
Who are the biggest recipients of our ridiculously over-inflated foreign aid budget.
This country, thanks to those that run it, is the pits and a laughing stock.
BAe screws everything up
Forces loses tens of thousands of jobs and capabilities as a result
Aircraft orders are cut
BAe loses profit, needs to cut thousands of British jobs, UNLESS.....
They secure foreign orders for Typhoon, the biggest of which is for India at £7.1bn....
Who are the biggest recipients of our ridiculously over-inflated foreign aid budget.
This country, thanks to those that run it, is the pits and a laughing stock.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unchecked
As I have said before the BAe Jet Provost Mk 5, BAe 125's and BAe 146's that I flew in the RAF all worked perfectly well.
I would suggest that many of the difficulties suffered by Combat Aircraft types could well have been the result of poorly defined requirements for weapons and their delivery systems.
As I have said before the BAe Jet Provost Mk 5, BAe 125's and BAe 146's that I flew in the RAF all worked perfectly well.
I would suggest that many of the difficulties suffered by Combat Aircraft types could well have been the result of poorly defined requirements for weapons and their delivery systems.
Suspect the common thread in the "success" stories ought to be that the MoD is not allowed to get involved in respecifying the kit or trying to beggar about with the delivery / finance. I well remember one IPT member for C17 telling me that the Safety-case for the aircraft was entirely predicated on US operating procedures. If the RAF or MoD wanted to change something outside that, it had to justify and bear the cost.
Even the C17 "lease" fiasco is actually because the Centre could not make up its mind on the required airlifter mix (remember the "other" options?) and the airlift was needed "right this second". Sclerosis in the MoD (particularly the MB end, which is NOT being addressed) is at least as much to blame as t' Baron, however unpalatable that may be.
Even the C17 "lease" fiasco is actually because the Centre could not make up its mind on the required airlifter mix (remember the "other" options?) and the airlift was needed "right this second". Sclerosis in the MoD (particularly the MB end, which is NOT being addressed) is at least as much to blame as t' Baron, however unpalatable that may be.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Borderline England
Posts: 211
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand that Caz, maybe if i replaced 'BAe' in the first line to 'MoD' it would be a tad fairer ? Even so, the emphasis of my post lies in the last 2 lines ! There are a plethora of stupid and avoidable reasons for the state of both the UK forces and UK Defence Industries, as ever though, it's those on the frontline, the shop floor and the taxpayer which bear the brunt.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: France 46
Age: 77
Posts: 1,743
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unchecked
It was ever thus.
When I joined the RAF nearly 50 years ago Building Maintenance and Construction was the role of the Air Ministry Works Department; this meant that if you wanted something built then it was highly likely that it would be built on an Airfield. Granted it might not be the right Airfield - but you can't have everything .
It was ever thus.
When I joined the RAF nearly 50 years ago Building Maintenance and Construction was the role of the Air Ministry Works Department; this meant that if you wanted something built then it was highly likely that it would be built on an Airfield. Granted it might not be the right Airfield - but you can't have everything .
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Malkin Tower
Posts: 847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BBC News - BAE Systems is to announce 2,280 job cuts, the BBC learns
"The BBC has learnt that 2,280 jobs will be cut by BAE Systems on Tuesday, with three factories affected.
Brough in East Yorkshire will lose 900 jobs, Warton in Lancashire will lose 820 jobs and Samlesbury, also in Lancashire, will lose 560 jobs. !
"The BBC has learnt that 2,280 jobs will be cut by BAE Systems on Tuesday, with three factories affected.
Brough in East Yorkshire will lose 900 jobs, Warton in Lancashire will lose 820 jobs and Samlesbury, also in Lancashire, will lose 560 jobs. !
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Ban Chiang,Thailand
Age: 67
Posts: 191
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The hallmark of BAe has for a long while been overpriced kit delivered late(or not at all) at great expense to the UK taxpayer.
Cost plus contracts,very basic mistakes in the case of both Nimrod programmes.
Ex MOD civil servants and RAF officers on the board to smooth the way and corruption to boot.
Cost plus contracts,very basic mistakes in the case of both Nimrod programmes.
Ex MOD civil servants and RAF officers on the board to smooth the way and corruption to boot.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Between the customer (MoD) and the manufacturer (BAE Systems and its prior constituent companies), with political meddling thrown in for good measure, it has been proven over 50 years or more that the UK is incapable of indigenously furnishing its defence equipment in a sustainable manner.
Time and time again the same set of buoys is gone round. It is the natural consequence of this that the industrial design and manufacturing capability will die out as being uneconomic.
Thus leaving the only game in town as the Americans. "Can we have a couple extra widgets on the airframe for UK purposes?". "The last time you tried that, you had 8 helicopters sat on the ground for 10 years rotting away. The time before, you got an underpowered F4, and ended up buying some used standard ones anyway. So, no, can you fcuk have some extra widgets. You can order the standard export version, and we'll let you know when you can have it. Sign here, numbnuts".
It's not exactly rocket science...
Time and time again the same set of buoys is gone round. It is the natural consequence of this that the industrial design and manufacturing capability will die out as being uneconomic.
Thus leaving the only game in town as the Americans. "Can we have a couple extra widgets on the airframe for UK purposes?". "The last time you tried that, you had 8 helicopters sat on the ground for 10 years rotting away. The time before, you got an underpowered F4, and ended up buying some used standard ones anyway. So, no, can you fcuk have some extra widgets. You can order the standard export version, and we'll let you know when you can have it. Sign here, numbnuts".
It's not exactly rocket science...
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It was nice to read the other day an article on the C-17's Australia purchased, which seemed to be one of our better purchases probably because we didn't stuff with it. I noticed that one of them was delivered 128 days after the order was placed, thanks to the US Gov't switching the production slots around.
It just shows what can happen when extras aren't added.
.
It just shows what can happen when extras aren't added.
.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fife
Age: 87
Posts: 519
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
you got an underpowered F4
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
So if the Speys had produced even more thrust than they did, they would have overcome the additional drag, and been as fast/faster than the J79s? I'd call that underpowered.
BTW, not "my" J79s, I'm English. Just live here. Thank Christ.
BTW, not "my" J79s, I'm English. Just live here. Thank Christ.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Norn Iron
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lots of successful of pieces of kit bought from the US...and yes they do work well. However, pause two marching paces. Not a penny from purchases goes back to the economy, either in taxes nor in the wages and thence to Mr Tesco!
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia - South of where I'd like to be !
Age: 59
Posts: 4,261
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Lots of successful of pieces of kit bought from the US...and yes they do work well. However, pause two marching paces. Not a penny from purchases goes back to the economy, either in taxes nor in the wages and thence to Mr Tesco!"
That's the same argument they use here in Aust for building the air warfare destroyers here instead of buying off the shelf from the US - at a 1/3rd of the price. And that's before taking into account that it diverts skilled people in Aust from other industry sectors where they are urgently required (Resources / Mining).
So, do the wages / taxes paid and the multiplier effect through the economy make up for the extra $ 4 billion spent or would it be better off being allocated to something else ?
The same applies to the Submarines we build.
Taking those work forces and having even 1/4 of them in the Resources / Mining industry would have a far greater positive effect on Australia than trying to falsely prop up some Politicians home base.
I would think the same points would apply to the UK.
.
That's the same argument they use here in Aust for building the air warfare destroyers here instead of buying off the shelf from the US - at a 1/3rd of the price. And that's before taking into account that it diverts skilled people in Aust from other industry sectors where they are urgently required (Resources / Mining).
So, do the wages / taxes paid and the multiplier effect through the economy make up for the extra $ 4 billion spent or would it be better off being allocated to something else ?
The same applies to the Submarines we build.
Taking those work forces and having even 1/4 of them in the Resources / Mining industry would have a far greater positive effect on Australia than trying to falsely prop up some Politicians home base.
I would think the same points would apply to the UK.
.
Last edited by 500N; 26th Sep 2011 at 23:15.
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I don't buy the "defence budget goes back into the economy" line of thinking, so far as the UK goes.
The UK's defence budget ought to be enough to provide some very well equipped forces. It ought to be able to cherry-pick the very best equipment, in reasonable quantities. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter where the bayonet was made, what matters is that when it's thrust into the enemy, it doesn't break.
The UK doesn't have the budget (in terms of GDP%) to spend any more to maintain the defence industrial base required to remain a player. So just give it up, and spend fewer dollars on perfectly good equipment from elsewhere. Once the Hawk dies off, that'll be the end of it anyway. The Typhoon is a collaborative effort. OK, the Uk could make the whole 9 yards on its own, but I severely doubt BAE Systems would take on that much commercial risk on their own. Especially against Boeing and LM. The UK industry is a dead duck, I'm sorry to say.
The UK's defence budget ought to be enough to provide some very well equipped forces. It ought to be able to cherry-pick the very best equipment, in reasonable quantities. At the end of the day, it doesn't matter where the bayonet was made, what matters is that when it's thrust into the enemy, it doesn't break.
The UK doesn't have the budget (in terms of GDP%) to spend any more to maintain the defence industrial base required to remain a player. So just give it up, and spend fewer dollars on perfectly good equipment from elsewhere. Once the Hawk dies off, that'll be the end of it anyway. The Typhoon is a collaborative effort. OK, the Uk could make the whole 9 yards on its own, but I severely doubt BAE Systems would take on that much commercial risk on their own. Especially against Boeing and LM. The UK industry is a dead duck, I'm sorry to say.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,064
Received 2,937 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
NutherA2
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fife
Age: 75
Posts: 230
Quote:
you got an underpowered F4
Not so; my reheat Speys gave more thrust than your J79s; sadly the airframe modifications needed to install the RR engines created so much additional drag that our F4 K & M were slower than the standard models. On the plus side, though, we produced less smoke & used less fuel.
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fife
Age: 75
Posts: 230
Quote:
you got an underpowered F4
Not so; my reheat Speys gave more thrust than your J79s; sadly the airframe modifications needed to install the RR engines created so much additional drag that our F4 K & M were slower than the standard models. On the plus side, though, we produced less smoke & used less fuel.
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the plus side, at least a 4K could launch off an EAGLE/ARK ROYAL deck without the aid of a force 8 gale.
Bring back the Ministry of Supply and keep the procurement costs out of the Defence Budget.
. I do, of course, realise the in service support dangers in that.
Bring back the Ministry of Supply and keep the procurement costs out of the Defence Budget.
. I do, of course, realise the in service support dangers in that.
Gentleman Aviator
Caz
.. so that'd be the Hunting Jet Provost, the HS 125 and the HS 146. 
As I have said before the BAe Jet Provost Mk 5, BAe 125's and BAe 146's that I flew in the RAF all worked perfectly well.