Buy British! ...or not??
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Fletcher Memorial Home
Age: 59
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back in the days when aircraft were built from wood and canvas and baling wire, any nation could state that they wholey own the aircraft manufacturing process.
Then the product became more complex, and instead of one company making everything they started sub contracting specialists to make part of the aircraft; engines, hydraulics, avionics etc. If all the companies were based in the same country, then it could still be classed as a national aircraft industry.
Then parts of the aircraft got more complex, and some companies folded or got bought out by bigger companies some of which were based in other countries. By now, if you want to build an aircraft which is going to be the best you can get, then you have to go to the best company for each of these parts. If you want to get cheaper, then you still need to go to another company (perhaps another nation) becuase you don't have the time and money to build the capability yourself.
So these days if you want an aircraft engine you have a half dozen names at most, Rolls Royce is probably the only one in the UK. The number of companies who can manufacture the specialist airframe parts is pretty small, avionics systems will come from one or two big names and so it goes on.
So if you want a wholey British built aircraft you either have to develop some specialist areas (costing money) or pick the second or third best in the world suppliers and hope the capability is up to scratch. But at least the money you pay for the aircraft, and all of the components that make up the aircraft, will go into the coffers of British companies who will pay their employees who spend the money in British shops.
However, if you just decide to stuff it and buy something that was designed and manufactured in another country, all of a sudden all those British jobs that were in with a chance of taking part now have nothing to do. No work and the companies close, the expertise and experience goes off to do whatever will pay the bills and all of a sudden we don't have the capability anymore.
Shotone, by all means buy your new military hardware overseas, but don't expect to come back in 10 years and decide to buy British because you won't be able to. And if you do buy from somewhere else, you either take the off-the-shelf package which may not fit the bill, or tweak it to your spec and pay the price. But in paying the price you are putting more money into the pockets of a company in another country.
Then the product became more complex, and instead of one company making everything they started sub contracting specialists to make part of the aircraft; engines, hydraulics, avionics etc. If all the companies were based in the same country, then it could still be classed as a national aircraft industry.
Then parts of the aircraft got more complex, and some companies folded or got bought out by bigger companies some of which were based in other countries. By now, if you want to build an aircraft which is going to be the best you can get, then you have to go to the best company for each of these parts. If you want to get cheaper, then you still need to go to another company (perhaps another nation) becuase you don't have the time and money to build the capability yourself.
So these days if you want an aircraft engine you have a half dozen names at most, Rolls Royce is probably the only one in the UK. The number of companies who can manufacture the specialist airframe parts is pretty small, avionics systems will come from one or two big names and so it goes on.
So if you want a wholey British built aircraft you either have to develop some specialist areas (costing money) or pick the second or third best in the world suppliers and hope the capability is up to scratch. But at least the money you pay for the aircraft, and all of the components that make up the aircraft, will go into the coffers of British companies who will pay their employees who spend the money in British shops.
However, if you just decide to stuff it and buy something that was designed and manufactured in another country, all of a sudden all those British jobs that were in with a chance of taking part now have nothing to do. No work and the companies close, the expertise and experience goes off to do whatever will pay the bills and all of a sudden we don't have the capability anymore.
Shotone, by all means buy your new military hardware overseas, but don't expect to come back in 10 years and decide to buy British because you won't be able to. And if you do buy from somewhere else, you either take the off-the-shelf package which may not fit the bill, or tweak it to your spec and pay the price. But in paying the price you are putting more money into the pockets of a company in another country.
Seems to me the logic of that is buy British to keep a sector of the industry alive, not because its the best kit for the mission.
Natural selection has its place in business as well.
Natural selection has its place in business as well.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Fletcher Memorial Home
Age: 59
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
West Coast
It is certainly true, but conversely if you want to make it the best kit for the mission perhaps you need to invest in British industry....
Oh and stop meddling with the contract. How much money is wasted when the MOD has Champagne wishes but only wants to pay Beer prices.
It is certainly true, but conversely if you want to make it the best kit for the mission perhaps you need to invest in British industry....
Oh and stop meddling with the contract. How much money is wasted when the MOD has Champagne wishes but only wants to pay Beer prices.
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
Ogre
Not always the case.
Uk apache took the helicopter and re engined it plus a few other things.
Aust has taken a number of platforms and added value or modified them in Australia using Australian workers.
You can do both but I also agree with west coast.
At what point do you buy off the shelf versus buy and modify ?
We have the same problem here in aus.
However, if you just decide to stuff it and buy something that was designed and manufactured in another country, all of a sudden all those British jobs that were in with a chance of taking part now have nothing to do. No work and the companies close, the expertise and experience goes off to do whatever will pay the bills and all of a sudden we don't have the capability anymore.
Shotone, by all means buy your new military hardware overseas, but don't expect to come back in 10 years and decide to buy British because you won't be able to. And if you do buy from somewhere else, you either take the off-the-shelf package which may not fit the bill, or tweak it to your spec and pay the price. But in paying the price you are putting more money into the pockets of a company in another country.
Shotone, by all means buy your new military hardware overseas, but don't expect to come back in 10 years and decide to buy British because you won't be able to. And if you do buy from somewhere else, you either take the off-the-shelf package which may not fit the bill, or tweak it to your spec and pay the price. But in paying the price you are putting more money into the pockets of a company in another country.
Not always the case.
Uk apache took the helicopter and re engined it plus a few other things.
Aust has taken a number of platforms and added value or modified them in Australia using Australian workers.
You can do both but I also agree with west coast.
At what point do you buy off the shelf versus buy and modify ?
We have the same problem here in aus.
What comes first, the warfighter or industry?
Ogre
I understand your point, but what's the ultimate goal of the kit, keep an industry propped up or give the troops the best kit?
Artificially keeping an industry artificially afloat provides no incentive to improve.
I don't mean to sound like a hypocrite, the US does the same.
I understand your point, but what's the ultimate goal of the kit, keep an industry propped up or give the troops the best kit?
Artificially keeping an industry artificially afloat provides no incentive to improve.
I don't mean to sound like a hypocrite, the US does the same.
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: by the Great Salt Lake, USA
Posts: 1,542
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by typerated
In the 80s we should have gone F-15C - (or even better for the UK F-15D with the radar in the back) probably with the conformal tanks that were later fitted to the Es
They were first tested on the F-15B in 1974.
While they are optional on F-15C/Ds, all U.S. F-15Es, and Strike Eagle export variants such as the IAF and Singapore models are fitted with CFT's between the wing and fuselage, and require modification to fly without them. That is because they are permanently mounted, to remove the G-limits placed on those aircraft with the CFTs mounted temporarily.
The disadvantage of the CFTs for the F-15C/D is that their usefulness as a maneuvering fighter is reduced (unless the CFTs are empty) and they cannot be jettisoned in-flight. That is why they are not normally installed except for aircraft in specific locations - like the F-15C/Ds that were assigned to Iceland.
Perhaps if anyone has any doubts why we buy 'British' equipment, they should read the Government's Prosperity Agenda. It is one of the biggest drivers of FCO activity these days; foreign governments see us using British equipment on operations, or bobbing around the oggin, and they are more likely to buy it. The numbers of jobs the defence industry supports is truly astounding and still allows the UK to have a pretty credible R&D and manufacturing base.
And let's not think solely of selling the kit. There is the in-service sustainment - upgrades, training, refurbishment and disposal. Moreover unit costs are driven down if the UK sells this kit abroad and remember, irrespective of the seller, most military equipment is sold Government to Government.
It's about business and jobs, and defending the UK from economic failure. Sounds trite? Look at the figures...
And let's not think solely of selling the kit. There is the in-service sustainment - upgrades, training, refurbishment and disposal. Moreover unit costs are driven down if the UK sells this kit abroad and remember, irrespective of the seller, most military equipment is sold Government to Government.
It's about business and jobs, and defending the UK from economic failure. Sounds trite? Look at the figures...
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Fletcher Memorial Home
Age: 59
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
500N, I agree, back in the day the UK took ex-US F4 Phantoms and put Rolls Royce engines in them. That sort of thing puts some work the way of local companies, but makes the engineering a bit of a nightmare.
You comment about Australia is true, so lets consider the upcoming Australian P-8 purchase. How much will Australian companies actually do,and how much will be done by US based companies who operate in Australia? Slight difference, but the latter probably means the intellectual work is kept in overseas hands.
West Coast. I agree again, the main purpose is to give the troops the best kit. But Off-The-Shelf (OTS) kit may not be the best that your troops need, they may want it to do something slightly different or some other whistles and bells that the OTS kit doesn't have.
Buying OTS means you get the OTS package. If you want it in a different colour or with wider wheels you need to pay more. More money for the OTS manufacturer, or as 500N pointed out you can get the work done locally - on the proviso that you actually have workers who can do the work. Any monkey can follow the instructions ifall they are doing is fitting the bits someone else designed and built, but what does that do for the state of your nation if you only fit someone elses kit.
At the end of the day you can go the easy way and buy the OTS package, as long as you are happy the OTS package is exactly what you want for the life of type (which for an aircraft could be 30 years plus). However buying OTS means if you suddenly change your mind about what you want it to do (different government, different type of operation...) then who do you go to to make the changes? Suddenly you have no local experience to do the work, so it's back to the manufacturer (which means it gets done at their cost, their schedule, and they keep the intellectual property). If you do have a local capability to modify your OTS kit, you now have a whole raft of engineering and property issues around design authority, change it without the original manufacturers permission you could lose all warranty or design support ("not the kit we designed anymore, sorry we won't help you").
Buying OTS kit from somewhere else is easy if its a new vehicle which you expect to last 5 years, but the longer you need to keep it I suggest you need to think about buying local
You comment about Australia is true, so lets consider the upcoming Australian P-8 purchase. How much will Australian companies actually do,and how much will be done by US based companies who operate in Australia? Slight difference, but the latter probably means the intellectual work is kept in overseas hands.
West Coast. I agree again, the main purpose is to give the troops the best kit. But Off-The-Shelf (OTS) kit may not be the best that your troops need, they may want it to do something slightly different or some other whistles and bells that the OTS kit doesn't have.
Buying OTS means you get the OTS package. If you want it in a different colour or with wider wheels you need to pay more. More money for the OTS manufacturer, or as 500N pointed out you can get the work done locally - on the proviso that you actually have workers who can do the work. Any monkey can follow the instructions ifall they are doing is fitting the bits someone else designed and built, but what does that do for the state of your nation if you only fit someone elses kit.
At the end of the day you can go the easy way and buy the OTS package, as long as you are happy the OTS package is exactly what you want for the life of type (which for an aircraft could be 30 years plus). However buying OTS means if you suddenly change your mind about what you want it to do (different government, different type of operation...) then who do you go to to make the changes? Suddenly you have no local experience to do the work, so it's back to the manufacturer (which means it gets done at their cost, their schedule, and they keep the intellectual property). If you do have a local capability to modify your OTS kit, you now have a whole raft of engineering and property issues around design authority, change it without the original manufacturers permission you could lose all warranty or design support ("not the kit we designed anymore, sorry we won't help you").
Buying OTS kit from somewhere else is easy if its a new vehicle which you expect to last 5 years, but the longer you need to keep it I suggest you need to think about buying local
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Manchester, UK
Posts: 1,958
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ogre, you seem to have the impression I wanted a particular answer when I started the thread but that's not the case. You raise a valid point about OTS versus bespoke ordering, but this applies whether the gear is bought here or overseas and probably warrants a thread of its own. Have you ever purchased any machinery with your own money on that basis? What would, say, an ipad look like if ordered to an MOD spec? A bit like a chest freezer I suspect!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Fletcher Memorial Home
Age: 59
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ShotOne
No, but I have worked in the defence engineering business for many years. I have dealt with contracts where we have Commercial OTS, Modified/Military OTS, and Government furnished OTS ("We bought this stuff, now fit it to our planes and make it do everything we want") and had to make it fit. When the military want something they lay a whole raft of military specifications on it, everything from the colour it is to be painted to the temperature and humidity it has to survive under. Mil-Spec is tougher that civil spec, so your Ipad would have to survive a harsher environment, withstand shock loads above and beyond what Apple rate it for, operate at a reliability in those environments that Apple never dreamed you would want to use it in, and make it usable by any (and every) member of the armed forces with the minimum of training.
In short, it would look like a chest freezer because the contract wants it to do everything everywhere and keep doing it.
I understand the question you asked originally, what I am trying to explain is that it's not like buying a German car rather than a British (!) one. There is a lot to think that the end user never gets to see (other than complain about lugging his chest freezer Ipad around).
I have a couple of stories about the evolution of the development of a laptop computer for the military, maybe one day I'll get the chance to write it down
No, but I have worked in the defence engineering business for many years. I have dealt with contracts where we have Commercial OTS, Modified/Military OTS, and Government furnished OTS ("We bought this stuff, now fit it to our planes and make it do everything we want") and had to make it fit. When the military want something they lay a whole raft of military specifications on it, everything from the colour it is to be painted to the temperature and humidity it has to survive under. Mil-Spec is tougher that civil spec, so your Ipad would have to survive a harsher environment, withstand shock loads above and beyond what Apple rate it for, operate at a reliability in those environments that Apple never dreamed you would want to use it in, and make it usable by any (and every) member of the armed forces with the minimum of training.
In short, it would look like a chest freezer because the contract wants it to do everything everywhere and keep doing it.
I understand the question you asked originally, what I am trying to explain is that it's not like buying a German car rather than a British (!) one. There is a lot to think that the end user never gets to see (other than complain about lugging his chest freezer Ipad around).
I have a couple of stories about the evolution of the development of a laptop computer for the military, maybe one day I'll get the chance to write it down
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
All we'll and good buying your countries product to get capability but
It seems what occurs in aus is a off the shelf will do 90 percent of requirements but someone wants that ten percent and it ends up visiting billions when no one seems to be able to say is it really required.
Why did aus buy tiger ? Because they allowed work to be done in aus ?
Why when Australia's major fighting partner is the us and they use apache,
They operate here in aus and close by.
You also talk about expertise, aus builds for airbus, f35 - 14 of them - and other high end war fighting equipment.
It seems what occurs in aus is a off the shelf will do 90 percent of requirements but someone wants that ten percent and it ends up visiting billions when no one seems to be able to say is it really required.
Why did aus buy tiger ? Because they allowed work to be done in aus ?
Why when Australia's major fighting partner is the us and they use apache,
They operate here in aus and close by.
You also talk about expertise, aus builds for airbus, f35 - 14 of them - and other high end war fighting equipment.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Fletcher Memorial Home
Age: 59
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
500N
All very well, but "doing work" and "designing, manufacturing and integrating" are different beast. One needs people to read manuals and follow instructions, the other require engineering skills of a different level.
If Tiger allowed work to be done in aus, was it design and development or assembly?
As for F35, how much aircraft engineering do you really think Australians working for Australian companies will do? And how much will Australians working for other nations companies do? Other nations companies who could easy pack up and ship off home.
All very well, but "doing work" and "designing, manufacturing and integrating" are different beast. One needs people to read manuals and follow instructions, the other require engineering skills of a different level.
If Tiger allowed work to be done in aus, was it design and development or assembly?
As for F35, how much aircraft engineering do you really think Australians working for Australian companies will do? And how much will Australians working for other nations companies do? Other nations companies who could easy pack up and ship off home.
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
Re and "designing, manufacturing and integrating" are different beast
We seem to major a real cluster fck of it when we try to do it !
We seem to major a real cluster fck of it when we try to do it !
Perhaps the big issue these days is that the UK isn't a big enough customer to support its own defence aircraft industry, hence the need to ensure overseas sales and partnering. F-35 might be a close as we're going to get to "buying British" since Typhoon in fast jet terms. Does anyone here think we'll build a new MPA, tanker, AEW, transport at Warton anytime soon?
Interesting to look at the BAES website and look for combat aircraft. All I found was this...
Then the only thing they mention is Typhoon. 
Interesting to look at the BAES website and look for combat aircraft. All I found was this...
Combat Aircraft
We design and build some of the most advanced combat aircraft in the world.
We design and build some of the most advanced combat aircraft in the world.
In the event of an actual shooting war with China or Russia, how will attrition replacements be built? It won't be easy to get parts from all corners of the world and then pulled together only to be flown somewhere else!
Guess it will be buckets of sunshine ASAP
Guess it will be buckets of sunshine ASAP
Last edited by dagenham; 24th May 2014 at 08:45. Reason: Big fingers, small iPad, jd still in system
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: East Sussex UK
Age: 66
Posts: 6,995
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
On a lighter note ... Who remembers this National Campaign from 1968 ?
It saddens me ... we have the finest science and engineering minds on the planet but never seem to truly capitalise the commercial potential. Leaving Aviation to the side for one moment ... You may think Pfizer were after a tax advantage to HQ here in the UK ... forget it ... they were after the IP held by AstraZeneca for sure ...
It saddens me ... we have the finest science and engineering minds on the planet but never seem to truly capitalise the commercial potential. Leaving Aviation to the side for one moment ... You may think Pfizer were after a tax advantage to HQ here in the UK ... forget it ... they were after the IP held by AstraZeneca for sure ...
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: raf
Posts: 610
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned it already but the problem with only buying British is you are giving Bae or Land Rover a monopoly and therefore a licence to take the pee and do the f' they want. Thats why we are paying stupid money for late products and we are the only customer in the world who gets told what to do by the seller.
If we opened up more competition for a contract, it would keep Bae, Land Rover et all on their toes and give the power back to the customer.
When it comes to contracts it wouldn't surprise me if there's dodgy lobbying, "favours" and back handers going on.
If we opened up more competition for a contract, it would keep Bae, Land Rover et all on their toes and give the power back to the customer.
When it comes to contracts it wouldn't surprise me if there's dodgy lobbying, "favours" and back handers going on.