Ministerial Liability - Aircraft Carrier cancellation costs.

Ministerial Liability - Aircraft Carrier cancellation costs.

Author
Discussion

fluffnik

Original Poster:

20,156 posts

229 months

Monday 25th October 2010
quotequote all
I reckon that the ministers who signed off the ludicrous cancellation costs should be held liable and prosecuted for gross malfeasance.

You?

mybrainhurts

90,809 posts

257 months

Monday 25th October 2010
quotequote all
fluffnik said:
You?
Nuffink to do with me, boss....

mybrainhurts

90,809 posts

257 months

Monday 25th October 2010
quotequote all
.....BURN THEM

TimJMS

2,584 posts

253 months

Monday 25th October 2010
quotequote all
Line them up with the still living from TSR2 for a disembowelling.


Dixie68

3,091 posts

189 months

Monday 25th October 2010
quotequote all
Read "Lions, Donkeys and Dinosaurs" by Lewis Page (ex-RN officer) and you'll see it goes on all the time.
Chinook helicopters bought with no weather radar; Merlin helicopters that couldn't fly in clouds; Apache helicopters where the government insisted that we build them ourselves under licence so as to keep British factories going - despite the fact that it would've been cheaper to buy them direct from the Yanks and give each factory worker a million pounds than what the eventual cost was... and loads more.
It's eye-opening and very depressing.

Edited by Dixie68 on Monday 25th October 02:17

ninja-lewis

4,274 posts

192 months

Monday 25th October 2010
quotequote all
Dixie68 said:
Read "Lions, Donkeys and Dinosaurs" by Lewis Page (ex-RN officer) and you'll see it goes on all the time.
Chinook helicopters bought with no weather radar; Merlin helicopters that couldn't fly in clouds; Apache helicopters where the government insisted that we build them ourselves under licence so as to keep British factories going - despite the fact that it would've been cheaper to buy them direct from the Yanks and give each factory worker a million pounds than what the eventual cost was... and loads more.
It's eye-opening and very depressing.

Edited by Dixie68 on Monday 25th October 02:17
I wouldn't bother. It's piece of trash written by a bitter ex-junior officer with a chip on his shoulder the size of Ark Royal.

Take the Apache example you cite. Page took the Westland Apache and compared it against the Israeli procurement of 24 Apaches direct from Boeing in 1999. Unfortunately Israel made no such order in 1999 - the only order they made in 1999 was to upgrade 12 of the their AH-64A Apaches with an option for 12 more (which they never took up). Even if it was an error in the date (Israel did buy 24 Apaches second hand from the US Army earlier in decade), Page omitted several serious differences.

Firstly, all of our Apaches are AH-64D models featuring, amongst other upgrades, the powerful Longbow radar (the bit above the rotors). This was expensive enough that even the US Army chose only to upgrade a few of their older AH-64As. The Israelis mostly have AH-64As too. More specific changes to the Westland Apache include folding blades (allowing it to support amphibious operations), anti-ice protection for Artic operation (handy for supporting Royal Marines and high altitudes), more powerful Rolls Royce engines (which improve Hot and High performance - makes a big difference over other Longbows in Afghanistan - and are shared with the Merlin fleet), and connectivity with UK comms. These improvements were required for the Apache to meet UK requirements but Page is happy to ignore them. On top of this he quotes the overall UK programme cost (which included all the costs of setting up the UK infrastructure, aircraft, ordance, pares, training and support) against the cost of the aircraft only for Israel. When Greece ordered 12 AH-64D in 2003, they paid $675 million (about $55 million each).

There are a lot of faults in MOD procurement but don't trust Lewis Page to identify them. The NAO and Defence Select Committee do a far better job, together with the Gray and Nimrod Reviews.

DS3R

10,026 posts

168 months

Monday 25th October 2010
quotequote all
ninja-lewis said:
The NAO and Defence Select Committee do a far better job, together with the Gray and Nimrod Reviews.
If you check the current head of the NAO (who signed off the MOD's major projects report the other week) it's interesting to see someone with a very similar name, and picture, just happened to be head of all things Commercial at the MOD for the 3 years prior to his move to the NAO.

Strange that so many contracts went wrong during that time............................

Dixie68

3,091 posts

189 months

Monday 25th October 2010
quotequote all
ninja-lewis said:
Dixie68 said:
Stuff
Stuff
I agree that some of the things Page wrote about seemed dubious, but some I had first-hand experience of, (the Merlins for example). I was also at RAF Leuchars when many of the Apaches were stabled there because of a problem with the servicing contract.

loafer123

15,501 posts

217 months

Monday 25th October 2010
quotequote all
fluffnik said:
I reckon that the ministers who signed off the ludicrous cancellation costs should be held liable and prosecuted for gross malfeasance.

You?
Simple treason.

They abused their position of power and used US style "pork belly" politics in the UK.




remedy

1,671 posts

193 months

Monday 25th October 2010
quotequote all
ninja-lewis said:
More specific changes to the Westland Apache include folding blades (allowing it to support amphibious operations), anti-ice protection for Artic operation (handy for supporting Royal Marines and high altitudes), more powerful Rolls Royce engines (which improve Hot and High performance - makes a big difference over other Longbows in Afghanistan - and are shared with the Merlin fleet), and connectivity with UK comms. These improvements were required for the Apache to meet UK requirements but Page is happy to ignore them. .
Coupled with this was a British (Westlands) modification to the airframe that my company helped manufacture. It reduced weight enough to allow the aircraft to carry more armaments or fuel.
The mod was so successful that the US ordered retrofits to all their Apaches.

dnb

3,330 posts

244 months

Monday 25th October 2010
quotequote all
remedy said:
The mod was so successful that the US ordered retrofits to all their Apaches.
Needless to say, this would be given to the US for free, as is the way with our MOD. Sharing tech with the US is usually a one way exchange frown (Yes, I am still bitter about the cavity magnatron wink )

Edited by dnb on Monday 25th October 22:42


Edited by dnb on Monday 25th October 22:45

Jimbeaux

33,791 posts

233 months

Tuesday 26th October 2010
quotequote all
dnb said:
remedy said:
The mod was so successful that the US ordered retrofits to all their Apaches.
Needless to say, this would be given to the US for free, as is the way with our MOD. Sharing tech with the US is usually a one way exchange frown (Yes, I am still bitter about the cavity magnatron wink )

Edited by dnb on Monday 25th October 22:42


Edited by dnb on Monday 25th October 22:45
According to Remedy, they were purchased.