Topic Author
Posts: 3546
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 1999 11:34 am

Blog On UK Ministry Of Defence Procurement

Wed Sep 19, 2012 8:35 pm

Lasdt night I came across a series of articles on the excesses of the UK Ministry of Defence Procument Policy. They really make you want to cry.

The background:

The Apache/Chinook/ Anglisised Phantom saga's:

The Tornado F2/3 saga:

The Typhoon

The Nimrod:

[Edited 2012-09-19 13:45:30]
David L
Posts: 8552
Joined: Tue May 18, 1999 2:26 am

RE: Blog On UK Ministry Of Defence Procurement

Fri Sep 21, 2012 2:26 pm

Quoting VC-10 (Thread starter):
The Tornado F2/3 saga:

Oh yes... The old "Blue Circle" radar system.   

I just can't see short-term-Brownie-point-seeking politicians and the lumbering juggernaut of the Civil Service even beginning to learn lessons anytime soon.
Posts: 1700
Joined: Fri Dec 04, 2009 2:29 am

RE: Blog On UK Ministry Of Defence Procurement

Sat Sep 22, 2012 9:40 pm

Read 2 so far, really good but really sad at the same time. And I'm not even a UK citizen,so not my taxes wasted......
Posts: 674
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 10:20 am

RE: Blog On UK Ministry Of Defence Procurement

Sun Sep 23, 2012 6:19 am

I read all five of them. Maybe I should take some of the comments with a grain of salt, but generally this is a keeper. I imagine that in most (if not all) countries, the "System" does exactly the same.
Posts: 12665
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Blog On UK Ministry Of Defence Procurement

Sun Sep 23, 2012 8:42 am

They are not exactly 'new' are they, these stories?
Plus anything connected to the Daily Mail is deeply tainted.

The one of the Tornado F2/F3 apart from being near 30 year history, is deeply ignorant.
The ADV was not meant to be a 'fighter' in the sense that the blogger asserts, just purely an interceptor for the UK, against Soviet bombers.

The old chestnut about Typhoon only being designed for air to air, BS.
You can now search the entire archive of Flight International on line, presumably the blogger did not bother between the his numerous cut and paste jobs with ones from the late 1980's, including interviews with senior RAF staffers explicitly stating a multi role tasking within the design.
The UK pushed for a larger design, as built, to accommodate the attack role better, over the German partners who wanted something a bit smaller for AD only.

So sorry, not impressed, mostly very old stories, playing to the ill informed gallery on a noxious website.
There are loads of good stories about MoD cock ups, waste, out there.
Posts: 2680
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2005 11:46 am

RE: Blog On UK Ministry Of Defence Procurement

Sun Sep 23, 2012 10:12 am

What I find so bewildering is that a system that is so badly organised has not been thrown away despite it reducing military capability for decades.

I suggest:

- Accelerate the decision making process. Decisions that could be taken in days or weeks should not take months or years. With constantly evolving technology an extremely protracted decision making process results in revision due to consideration of incorporating new technology.

- Once a requirement is formulated, that requirement is not subject to revision.

- Salaries payable to personnel organising procurement should be low. The bulk of their earnings should come from bonuses payable for hitting targets on time and within budget.

The effect of his approach would be:

- Faster delivery of equipment. This would mean enhanced capability through punctual delivery of the capability provided by new equipment. It would also help avoid updating existing equipment due to delays in its replacement being delivered, thereby increasing cost.

- Much lower cost than with delayed programmes. The reduction in cost would avoid delayed programmes soaking up funds that could be used for other purposes. It would avoid reductions in overall capability due to the need to cancel other programmes for budgetary reasons or to reduce existing capabiity for budgetary reasons.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 7 guests