Telegraph - "MoD to 'Anglicise' Boeing Wedgetail jets after £2bn deal with US firm.."
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Telegraph - "MoD to 'Anglicise' Boeing Wedgetail jets after £2bn deal with US firm.."
MoD to 'Anglicise' Boeing Wedgetail jets after £2bn deal with US firm aroused British companies' anger
The RAF's fleet of E-3D airborne warning and control jets have been worn out by heavy demands on them Credit: SAC Andy Stevens/RAF
The RAF bought pP-8 Poseidon surveillance jets from Boeing without running an competitive tender
Defence chiefs who have been criticised for buying American “Awacs” airborne radar aircraft from Boeing and failing to run an open competition are trying to head off the row by “Anglicising” the aircraft with British-made components.The RAF wants to replace its worn-out fleet of E-3D “Sentry” aircraft and is understood to be poised to agree a deal with the US aerospace giant for its E-7 “Wedgetail” jets.However, the E-7 has very little UK content, meaning British companies will hardly benefit from the £2bn deal.Rival defence companies are furious that the contract has not been opened to competition, though others say the E-7 is already combat proven and other products could take years to develop.
Now MoD bosses are understood to be working with Boeing to load up the six E-7s expected to be ordered with UK-made parts to make the sale politically acceptable.It was expected the deal would be revealed around July’s Farnborough airshow. However, the contract is understood to have been pushed back partly because of attempts to add British content.RAF personnel are already training on the E-7 with the Australian airforce, which has the jet in service.The MoD has been previously been attacked for handing Boeing multi-billion pound contracts without opening them to companies which would carry out work on them in the UK. Recent examples include P-8 spyplanes and Apache helicopters ordered by the MoD.
Attempts to drive work into the UK are thought to include Cambridge-based Marshall converting the Boeing 737 airliner the E-7 is based on to military specification. Major maintenance work once the aircraft join the RAF could also be done in the UK, rather than flying them back to the US.
However, defence insiders have questioned the value of the MoD’s moves.“It’s like making the toilet doors for foreign-built train,” said one. “None of the high-value, high-skilled work will be here, meaning British industry loses out again to Boeing.”MPs on the Defence Select Committee have warned the MoD against “buying off the shelf” from Boeing without running a competition.Chairman Julian Lewis said: “If the MoD’s procurement record was one of unalloyed success they could argue relying on their judgment rather than a competition is reasonable. That’s not the case and it’s wholly unreasonable to exclude viable alternatives.”A Boeing spokesman said: “We work with our UK supply chain, government and military partners to provide critical capability, UK content, UK exports, skills and value for money.”The MoD said a decision on an AWACS “will be taken in the best interests of national security in the face on intensifying threats after full consideration. It would not be appropriate to comment further at this time.”
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,566
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
Change the drawings and you will have one hell of a large testing bill in order to meet the safety case. (One of the problems with updating the E-3D fleet no doubt).
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: The US of A, and sometimes Bonnie Scotland
Posts: 549
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I do wish peeps would stop referring to the P-8 as a “converted” 737. It most certainly is not. It’s built from the first river to the last tyre to be a P-8A.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,064
Received 2,937 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
So take a proven tried and tested design with commonality with your allies and then anglicise it..... The word Kerching comes to mind, so we will end up with the most expensive version probably with a degraded capability and commonality...
Sigh, end of the day it's another nail in the UK PLC's capability to design and build our own aircraft, the current Aeroplane has some excellent articles on the TSR 2 and the Canadian Arrow, it was put up against the thin wing Javelin and was better in every respect but cost more, we were going to order it at one point but we recognised the effect on the UK industry if we bought in from abroad, so along with cost considerations it was dropped.... It seems we never learn.
Sigh, end of the day it's another nail in the UK PLC's capability to design and build our own aircraft, the current Aeroplane has some excellent articles on the TSR 2 and the Canadian Arrow, it was put up against the thin wing Javelin and was better in every respect but cost more, we were going to order it at one point but we recognised the effect on the UK industry if we bought in from abroad, so along with cost considerations it was dropped.... It seems we never learn.
AC, you mean they are going to fit Speys to it? 
If the Hercules C Mk1 is anything to go by, we may expect an autopilot which is unavailable for the first year due to an impedance mismatch, and a navigation system that will tell you where you are as long as you have already told it where it is. A small price to pay for the opportunity of a PM to tell the House that half the cost of the aircraft was in Pounds Sterling. Cries of Hear, Hear,... waving of Order Papers,...prolonged waving of Order Papers...
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Named after the Australian eagle but feel free to call it something else as the Koreans and Turkish have done; Robin or Sparrow perhaps?
Or do you mean 'why the Wedgetail platform?' Combat proven, very reliable, very effective, easier to maintain than the E-3D, easier to operate and more capable than the E-3D, interoperable with Allies, commonality with P8, significantly reduced crew size, Australia spending large amount of money upgrading and adding additional functionality and capability. Do I need to add more?
Y_G
Or do you mean 'why the Wedgetail platform?' Combat proven, very reliable, very effective, easier to maintain than the E-3D, easier to operate and more capable than the E-3D, interoperable with Allies, commonality with P8, significantly reduced crew size, Australia spending large amount of money upgrading and adding additional functionality and capability. Do I need to add more?
Y_G
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,566
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
significantly reduced crew size
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 33,064
Received 2,937 Likes
on
1,252 Posts
And Wedgetail, why wedgetail?
Suppose this argument diverts from the question as to why the E-3's need replacing. Also, wouldn't it be easier just to have a competition - where's the competition??
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Somewhere flat
Age: 68
Posts: 5,566
Likes: 0
Received 45 Likes
on
30 Posts
Just before the result of the competition between the E-3 and the Nimrod AEW3 was announced, GEC Marconi took out full page "adverts" in the newspapers to push their product. Sadly, they used the tagline of "Nimrod will be the Mainstay of UK Air Defence". Many wags at Waddington noted that Mainstay didn't work as well.
Who was it suggested that repeating the same experiment and expecting a different outcome was a good definition of insanity? Was he a clever bloke?
CG
CG
Named after the Australian eagle but feel free to call it something else as the Koreans and Turkish have done; Robin or Sparrow perhaps?
Or do you mean 'why the Wedgetail platform?' Combat proven, very reliable, very effective, easier to maintain than the E-3D, easier to operate and more capable than the E-3D, interoperable with Allies, commonality with P8, significantly reduced crew size, Australia spending large amount of money upgrading and adding additional functionality and capability. Do I need to add more?
Y_G
Or do you mean 'why the Wedgetail platform?' Combat proven, very reliable, very effective, easier to maintain than the E-3D, easier to operate and more capable than the E-3D, interoperable with Allies, commonality with P8, significantly reduced crew size, Australia spending large amount of money upgrading and adding additional functionality and capability. Do I need to add more?
Y_G
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Often in Jersey, but mainly in the past.
Age: 79
Posts: 7,812
Received 137 Likes
on
64 Posts
This sort of procurement makes me think of my cooking method. Find a decent recipe, and then fiddle around with it so that it tastes/looks nothing like the original (excellent) offering. (Serves 4)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 398
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Y_G