MRA4 slips right
 

AW&ST:

BAE Systems has been forced to further delay, by up to 12 months, first flight of its Nimrod MRA4 maritime patrol aircraft, provoking the Defense Ministry into a review of the impact of the latest problem on the $4.2-billion program.

The Nimrod MRA4 airframe remains stolidly attached to the ground despite BAE's efforts so far to achieve a first flight.
The company had been looking to fly the MRA4 by November or December. This in itself was almost a 12-month slippage on an intended January 2002 first flight. BAE now says that will not occur until the latter half of 2003. Some sources suggest late 2003 as the most likely........

Well, quite frankly I'm very surprised.
A multi-billion pound UK military project is delayed??? Surely not.

Given the size of the white elephant stable being built at Ice Station Kilo I would've thought that at very least the whole project will be cancelled. In fact the amount of building work in general going on there would suggest that the station itself will be for the axe soon.

Anyhoo, must dash - time for my medicine....

Yes, I must say that I'm almost as astonished as Mr S.Start at this surprising revelation.

A UK military programme project managed by BAE Systems failing to meet its deadlines and cost limits seems most unusual, and really is newsworthy.

Perhaps it's been over-shadowed by the shock news that Ian Duncan Smith has again failed to overtake Tony Bliar in the opinion polls?

Or perhaps other Pruners have alternative explanations as to why this isn't front page news?

I hope it doesn't turn out to be another AEW3P, I remember it at Doncaster International airport a few years ago.:rolleyes:

On a different topic, AW&ST has an article confirming that the MOD have started talks about retaining the C-17s. No comment as to whether by purchase or lease extension.

The decision is stated as having been driven by the need to retain an out of area heavy lift capacity above and beyond that available with either the C-130 or A-400M. The suggestion being that the AT force will eventually consist of the C-17 and either the C-130 or A-400M; and if the A-400M ever actually goes ahead, it's the C-130s that will go.

Quote, "If despite its trials and tribulations the A400M does finally proceed, then this will leave the British Royal Air Force with a dilemma in that it has previously argued against operating three types of aircraft within its airlift fleet. It could, suggest some industry sources, look to an early disposal of the C-130J".

According to JDW, the Germans will review defence procurement choices next month, but no decision on the A-400M can be expected before the next budget in March/April next year at the earliest.

Oop at 't werrks came fear and confusion. Seth, 't foreman, came rushing up to 't office and rushed in to see 't Bungling Baron Waste o' Space........

"Sithee, master, there's trouble at 't werrks! 't men are woooried about 't Nimrod......"

"Now then, Seth, don't thee fret so", chortled 't Baron whilst caressing the ears of Boogeroff, his favourite whippet," there's now't to worry thee se'n about. 't Nimrod'll keep thee an' I in brass for many a year yet. Mad old Maggie promised us as such an' 't airr forrce has been flying 't old Comet spin offs for more then fifty years now, tha knows."

"But master, 'twas serrposed to be 't Nimrod 2000. Now us'll be lucky to get 't booger flying afore 2004......", whined Seth.

"Now, now Seth. Don't thee fret so. 't airr forrce can't afford owt' else, so we'll joost keep 't programme tickin' over an' t' brass cooming in for a while yet. Sit thee down, have a slice of pig's bladder and testicle tart an' stop worryin'", 't Bungling Baron continued, "them boogers in Loondoon'll never suspect nowt'. He he he.....am I a clever old Baron or what?"

And he laughed long and hard, the bells on his trousers tintinabulated merrily - and the RAF waited...and waited....and waited............

and waited and waited and waited....

In the meantime they treated their Flight Engineers so badly that one day the cupboard was bare..

And then the old aeroplanes they had couldn't fly any more...

hehee

:p

BEagle I almost fell off my seat when I read that, thats the funniest thing I've heard for ages. Are you the bloke who writes the parish newsletter in Private Eye? :D

On a more serious note, who is the villan here? Is it...

a. BAE Systems?
b. Other contractors (Rolls Royce, Ultra Electronics etc)?
c. The DPA?
d. The MOD(Air)?
e. The Treasury?
f. Combinations of the above?

I know BAE Systems is much maligned on PPRuNe, but (based on knowing people who have worked in MOD projects and having a brief skirmish with the defence industry myself (nothing to do with aircraft)) I would say that, in my opinion, many (if not most) of the problems with defence procurement are down to interference by politicians and ill informed civil servants (usually trying to penny pinch). Penny wise, pound foolish?

In design and development work, there is the concept of the "quality lever". Generally design alterations follow what is known as the "Ten Times Rule", that is that the cost of implementing design changes increases tenfold at each subsequent stage of the project. If the penny pinchers comprimise the engineering (by limiting the amount of work done on a particular subsystem, for example) at an early stage it tends to lead to expensive and time consuming modifications.

Another consequence of the quality lever and the ten times rule is that projects are liable to be delayed if the specifications get changed. This might not be relevent to the Nimrod MRA4 delays, but if new sensors/communications/navigation gear (for example) get added in the development (instead of design) phase it will invariably lead to delays and extra costs.

The above two points are not exclusive to aircraft, or MOD projects, they are proven (not to the bean counters and beaurocrats though:rolleyes: ) facts. I'd just though I would add my two pennies' worth, I don't think we should heap all the blame on BAE Systems. Remember, other nations have problems with defence procurement too.

BTW, I am not, nor have I ever been, an employee of BAE Systems.

With respect, neither the 'Quality Lever' nor the 'Ten Times Rule' are "proven fact", they are postulated hypotheses.

Compare the costs and timescales of the Tornado GR4 and Jaguar 97 upgrades and then rule BAE Systems out of the equation as a causal factor of unexpected delay, uncontained cost growth and inflated pricing.

Or compare the cost of the 'internal bid' on Harrier GR9A and the BAE plan.

Of course the politicians and civil servants and senior officers can take a share of the blame too, but BAE's monopolistic position as OEM/DA and the RAF's unwillingness to properly assess, manage and accept risk combine to make these problems common, if not inevitable.

People do not knock Britis Wasteofspace on the basis of unsubstantiated prejudice, WEBF. The company has worked long and hard to earn the reputation it now enjoys.

Come, come chaps,

We all know that to take a 30-year old airframe (which itself was a bastardisation of an airliner that was designed over 50 years ago) and marry it to new wings, engines and systems was bound to be easier, cheaper and quicker than building a new aircraft!

1.3V - in comparison with buying a brand new aircraft from BWoS, it probably is cheaper!:rolleyes:

Fact of the matter is that it isn't just BAE having problems is it??
In isolation it would be a matter of regret only, but taken in with the big picture things are VERY Different and VERY bleak indeed:

1. C130J years late in arriving, still not cleared for TAC Use and still beset with problems. Ohh yes I know the Loadies are well happy with them!!
2. A Tanker replacement is years away and will be a fiasco PFI to dwarf all others.
3. A400M not even signed for yet, production is years away.
4. MRA4 Not flown and I predict will NEVER fly, the same prediction I made a year ago.

Every year that passes without a solution is going to multiply the costs of getting out of this mess significantly!! In the meantime
our expeditionary forces have no decent AT and are not going to have for many, many years to come. The C17's we are using don't actually belong to us, they are on hire contract that's going to cost more than if we bought them outright originally. Duhh!!

Who put the Farce in the Royal Air Farce??
:confused: :mad: :o

:) Beagle - that must be in the top 10 all time PPRUNE posts!!!

On a more serious note, perhaps if they had gone the Orion route the boys might actually be airborne by now...:rolleyes:

GORILLA

'C130J years late in arriving, still not cleared for TAC Use and still beset with problems. Ohh yes I know the Loadies are well happy with them!!'

I think you'll find that your former comment with respect to Tac is not the case and your latter comment is actually true. Given the chance, the C-130J may actually prove to be one of the more successful acquisitions that UK PLC has made.:D ;)

C130J "beset with problems".......
List please.
:rolleyes:

We where told that the MRA4 had to fly this year or the contract penalties would be too crippling for BAE, but just in the nick of time found this post on the RAeS web site

"BAE keeps Nimrod flying 10/10/02

BAE Systems has won a £75m maintenance contract to support the RAF’s Nimrod MR2 maritime reconnaissance aircraft.

The six-year contract will require BAE to provide guaranteed levels of Nimrod availability through spares-inclusive maintenance."

Doesn't that take us up to 2008 and how many MR2 airframes are we going to have to lose before someone notices there are more in pieces at BAE that there are servicable on the line at Kinloss

In my limited two years working on Nimrod 2000 I can give you my unbiased opinion. The original cock-ups were deliberate empire building by BAe Warton.

For example, the electrical systems design work was carried out by the Airbus team at Filton. Now the airbus team are past masters of "not invented here" and "we don't do it like that." but they did get things sorted out very quiickly and according to spec....the spec being to use off the shelf equipment on the aircraft here possible.

Here is a simple example. We offered around thirty products that were in service on similar aircraft such as C17, the Airbus family etc. The fitted the space envelope and met the design requirement. they were added to the drawing after the engineers checked competitors for similar equipment. The drawings went up to Warton for sign off. Warton came back with a "competitive tender" in which, for no clear reason, they had taken a decision to alter the dimensions of every unit on the aircraft so that instead of bidding off the shelf equipment we had to bid new designs, with tooling costs running into the national debt of central Africa. The original cost of out equipment was only UK£36K for the entire fleet, by the time I left we had spent over £100K answering daft questions about the kit before we had to start a redesign. The spec then included questions such as "Will it work submerged in seawater and kerosene?" This is fair enough except the kit is in the cockpit mounted over the pilot's head. If it is submerged in anything the aircraft has already crashed and sunk or has suffered such a catastrphic fuel cell failure that the cockpit is now six feet deep in Esso Blue and the crew have disolved. This aircraft has been cocked up by the Eurofighter mentality of signing a cheap and cheerful contract then writing a star trek spec. and then demanding that everyone invent new technologies to meet it. I am so glad to be out of it now.

....and merrily did 't Bungling Baron chuckle!

"I told thee therr'd more werrk for 't men at 't werrks, didn't ah then, eh Seth?" he chortled, "Patch up 't airr forrce's old boogers for a few morrre yearrs 'till 't new 'un's arrre ready terr fly - we win both ways, tha' knows. Eeee by 'eck, ah'll go terr the foot of owerr sterrs if I'm not 't cleverest Baron in 'ecky-thoomp land"

And he sat down to a light snack of cow pancreas and udder pie, washed down wi' dandelion and burrrdock, before planning the next extension to 't Big House by 't werrks whilst Boogeroff, his faithful whippet, farted contendly by 't fire.......

Going back to te "indignant" replies from C130J crews, the fact is that the project HAS been beset by problem. I like many others, have no doubt that the is a good aircraft, and will improve still further in the future. However, in the context of this discussion, itwas delivered late, was not capable at that time of all that was expected and required of it, and only now, after years of fettling, with tons of extra money thrown at it, it is performing as it should have done origionally. None of this is a dig at the J or its crews, just another example of how manufacturers take us for a ride again and again. :mad: