£1bn spent on tank programme....

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by vvaannmmaann, Dec 9, 2011.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. But a lot of happy consultants and sales reps
     
  2. Bouillabaisse

    Bouillabaisse LE Book Reviewer

    How is it that Margaret Hodge gets to spout about MOD procurement failures that are directly attributable to her party and to the government in which she was a minister? MOD haven't spend that £1 billion under the current government
     
    • Like Like x 3
  3. The nub of today's Telegraph report is this:

    Last night defence equipment minister Peter Luff said: “The armoured vehicle programme was left in a mess by the previous Government.

    “We are now sorting out their unrealistic and unaffordable plans by balancing the budget, investing real money in equipment and reforming outdated procurement practices.

    “However, the PAC is again misrepresenting the facts. It is not true to say the £1.1Bn spent on armoured vehicles has not delivered any equipment. It has delivered Titan, Trojan and Viking vehicles, with Trojan and Viking used on operations in Afghanistan.”

    I quite agree with Bouillabaisse, I doubt that the MoD have spent £1.1 billion on anything since the Tories took power (with the possible exception of the two fresh air carriers). Anyway, Titan and Trojan had been in the Equipemnt Plan for years and, as for Viking, again had't that been in the plan for some time? Anyway, wiser counsels than mine will know, but hasn't Viking been completely replaced by Warthog? From reading about Viking in Dead Men Risen, it strikes me as death-trap on tracks.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  4. The comments from the the same telegraph page were interesting:

    melissalee
    36 minutes ago


    One thorough audit of the companies involved should answer where the money went. Anyone working at BAE or any equivalent company knows full well that there are "sink cost codes" - the codes you book your hours to. These are the ones you use when you are sitting doing nothing because you have no work on, but your boss can't let you put this on your timesheet. So you are told "book to the tank one, its huge so no one will care, and its guaranteed to get extra funding regardless. You said Hi to Mr XXX who is on it so that counts". The most expensive staff can cost over £300 to the project per hour doing this (all that persons overheads are included it).

    It is time to really look at what is needed - put in cast iron contracts what will be paid (looking at equivalent systems) and no increase in money requested will be allowed, instead if the items are not delivered on time then the company can and will be sued. At the same time variations to the contract by the MoD after tendering must not be allowed unless in very exceptional circumstances (since that is the only time the costs can ramp up). Sadly there is a big tendency in Government Procurement to want to "make your mark" by adding things to projects.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  5. didn't the replacement for the fv432 and spartan etc start life back in the 70s early 80s?
    plenty of blame for all and any partys to suck up.

    MOD procurment has been a disaster for maggie and major Blair and Brown and Call me dave is the latest victim of over optimism/ [enny pinching and corruption and stupdity
     
  6. And as always, the Officers behind this fiasco will sip their G&T's and shrug 'nothing to do with me old chap'.

    Buy a COT LAV III like the Cannucks use perfectly well in the sandy places?

    No! 'Unique UK operational needs', Unique operational requirements' and all the usual tripe is trotted out so we spunk gazzilions up the wall inventing LAV Mk Whatever that's going to be umpteen times better than LAV III …
    and what do we end up with LAV Mk Nothing and a Billion quid out of pocket.
    .

    Wash, rinse, repeat - MOD 'procurement' in a nutshell.
     
  7. This reads like the Army's Chinook debacle.

    FV430 is a bit small isn't it. We need something with a large internal volume so we can have a proper battlefield ambulance and a C2 wagon.
    Enter MRAV.
    Former CGS - "yes, but it won't fit on a C130 will it".
    Lots of head scratching across the Army (ships are faster) and £ signs flashing up in the eyes of contractors as our requirements change.
    Everyone realises the C130 weight envelope is unrealistic, and so it changes to A400M.
    Lots of head scraching across the Army (no, ships really are faster) and £ signs flashing up in the eyes of contractors as our requirements change.
    Iraq and Afg reinforce the point that no, really, no amount of network enabled bollocks is going to help you dodge an RPG.
    'Trials of Truth' held for a big f off 8x8. MRAV takes part. Trials aren't truthful.
    8x8 shit canned.
    Reprioritise (again?), now we want tracks first.
    ARTEC Boxer (MRAV) enters service with German and Dutch Armies.
    We peg our hopes on a legacy platform, conceived in the 90s, that is already in service with the Austrian and Spanish armies.
    Try to convince everyone it's new.

    Moral - Never trust an equipment programme with 'Future' in the title, or a late PARA CGS who wants everything to fit into a C130!
     
    • Like Like x 1
  8. Much as pouring petrol on Defence ministers and laughing as they burn is Fun and should alway be encouraged :)

    This isn't even TCH's fault.

    crapspy has it right look at something Foreign that works then decide we need some unique britsh capability? the flying tanks and apcs is a bollocks idea not having airlift even in raf fantasy land to support the flying armoured column.
     
  9. I'm sorry but that's bollocks. You can easily make a vehicle that a Herc can carry which has the same armour protection and firepower as a Chally 2. If you give BAe or GD enough money they'll even draw you some pretty pictures of one coming down the ramp of a Herc to prove it.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  10. CrapSpy, at the risk of being pedantic, I think that you mean the RAF's Chinook debacle. ASCOD/FRES SV will never see the light of day - when my local MP, the Sec of State,was speaking at RUSI yesterday, one of the few things that he can cut to save another billion quid will be FRES SV. The Warrior refit/refurb is as good as it is going to get for the time being. You are absolutely right, 16 AA Bde do not need the ability to carry 8x8 armoured vehicles in a C-130 or even an A400M - that is what sealift is for.
     
  11. I won't even pretent to understand how the powers that be arrange contracts. but it seems abit backwards.

    where I work, if a customer places and order based on cost, if the project goes over this, the company picks up the difference.
    If the project goes beyond the delivery date, the company can cop a fine. And its the same detail if the kit we sold/delivered commisioned phucks up.

    So, where the hell to those that that are supposed to know better, find the muppets that agree these contracts?

    It stikes me these are bot bright people, and should have been given a plastic bag to play with as a child.
     
    • Like Like x 3
  12. Boldnotold

    Boldnotold LE Book Reviewer

    When your customer places an order, does he or she know what they want?Military procurement is full of 'customers' who 'place orders' which are then changed several times throughout the life of the project. Each change adds to costs. To the helicopter example above can be added the Empty Aircraft Carrier disasters, and just about every IT Project you could name.Of course the suppliers/contractors involved are laughing all the way to the bank. They start off with an over high estimate and charge more and more as a succession of officers/leaders/consultants change the spec.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Are any of us really surprised? I know I'm not. Shocked that they pissed away 1 billion pounds (say it slowly, it sounds even worse), but not surprised to hear that they've once again wasted our money.
     


  14. Now imagine a situation where your buyer is also looking to leave your company and work for the vendor once the contract to buy has been signed…

    Exhibit A: Snr MOD wonk who declares that a fixed price contract offer to sell us 72 Sikorsky UH-60's with training and support was not as good as the offer Wastelands were offering to sell us 62 Lynx Wildcats.
    Once contract to buy 62 Wildcats is signed, leaves MOD and promptly turns up on the board of Wastelands and feigns surprise as the actual cost of Wildcat promptly rockets through the roof leaving us with teenie weenies that cost not far off what a Wokka costs, and in the case of the armies ones, will be armed to the teeth with a single GPMG.
     
    • Like Like x 1