PFI Aircraft
Thread Starter
PFI Aircraft
A couple of questions under the one title;
What aircraft operated by the RAF are provided through PFI funding? i.e. rented, further does this arrangement prohibit participation in flying displays?
FB
What aircraft operated by the RAF are provided through PFI funding? i.e. rented, further does this arrangement prohibit participation in flying displays?
FB
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: london
Posts: 379
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If the thrust of your Q is: does nominal ownership influence ability to display...No.
Case A: write-off and/or liability (dead spectators). Where we own the a/c, we (self-insure) ao we (MoD) pay or write off. When we (rent), the contract will either have an MoD indemnity or the rental price will include insurance.
Case B: over-temp/over-stress/heavy landing/misuse. Where we own the a/c and pay for all maintenance per-event, as required, we snarl at P/O Prune and pay up.
But we don't manage any a/c that way now. All, inc fast jets, are maintained on contract at some form of competiton/market-tested risk-price - Contracts for Availability. Misuse is a chargeable over-and-above. So Public Display Authority is given only to disciplined folk.
Case A: write-off and/or liability (dead spectators). Where we own the a/c, we (self-insure) ao we (MoD) pay or write off. When we (rent), the contract will either have an MoD indemnity or the rental price will include insurance.
Case B: over-temp/over-stress/heavy landing/misuse. Where we own the a/c and pay for all maintenance per-event, as required, we snarl at P/O Prune and pay up.
But we don't manage any a/c that way now. All, inc fast jets, are maintained on contract at some form of competiton/market-tested risk-price - Contracts for Availability. Misuse is a chargeable over-and-above. So Public Display Authority is given only to disciplined folk.
Thread Starter
If the thrust of your Q is: does nominal ownership influence ability to display...No.
Case A: write-off and/or liability (dead spectators). Where we own the a/c, we (self-insure) ao we (MoD) pay or write off. When we (rent), the contract will either have an MoD indemnity or the rental price will include insurance.
Case B: over-temp/over-stress/heavy landing/misuse. Where we own the a/c and pay for all maintenance per-event, as required, we snarl at P/O Prune and pay up.
But we don't manage any a/c that way now. All, inc fast jets, are maintained on contract at some form of competiton/market-tested risk-price - Contracts for Availability. Misuse is a chargeable over-and-above. So Public Display Authority is given only to disciplined folk.
Case A: write-off and/or liability (dead spectators). Where we own the a/c, we (self-insure) ao we (MoD) pay or write off. When we (rent), the contract will either have an MoD indemnity or the rental price will include insurance.
Case B: over-temp/over-stress/heavy landing/misuse. Where we own the a/c and pay for all maintenance per-event, as required, we snarl at P/O Prune and pay up.
But we don't manage any a/c that way now. All, inc fast jets, are maintained on contract at some form of competiton/market-tested risk-price - Contracts for Availability. Misuse is a chargeable over-and-above. So Public Display Authority is given only to disciplined folk.
You've quashed a few rumours I'd picked up. I understand all is PFI now apart from Fast Jets (including Hawk T2), C-130J and current operational Helicopter Fleet!?
FB
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Leicestershire, England
Posts: 1,170
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MFTS, DHFS, AirTanker are all PFI. The Hawk T.2 part of MFTS are MOD owned though. A400M, C-130, C-17, Puma, Chinook, Typhoon, F-35, Hawk T.1, BAe 146/Avro RJ, E.3 Sentry, Shadow R.1, Sentinel R.1, Rivet Joint are all MOD owned outright...
-RP
-RP
Never understood why this PFI malarkey continued after it was first outed as being a way for the Government to ‘borrow’ without increasing public sector borrowing ratios. At least in that guise it made (perverted) sense as a political device to simultaneously invest heavily in the public sector while appearing to exercise fiscal restraint. With that cover blown, it seems to me nothing more than a device for the Government to make investments that are unaffordable over its own (short) financial planning horizon. If investing on a 30-40 year outlook is possible in the private sector with the backing of investment banks, then surely the public sector can do likewise with cheaper finance in the form of Government bonds and cut out the management charges paid to the corporate middle-men? (scratches head... explanation gladly received)
Last edited by Easy Street; 11th Aug 2019 at 15:05.
PFI existed before New Labour came to power - they just expanded its use. In fact, we had to deal with it in MoD before we had networked PCs - I distinctly remember always putting 'NO' in the 'Overseas Sales potential' box on a pre-printed A5 memo to avoid the inevitable waste and programme delay.
Napa Valley refugee,
You SURE?
Are you sure that they aren't in fact all owned by Ascent?
You SURE?
Are you sure that they aren't in fact all owned by Ascent?
