Good Enough 4 Government Work - The GE4GW Standard

#1
Hello, everyone. My first post on this excellent organ, so beg pardon for any egregious errors or etiquette.

I've been looking back at some of the ideas we had a decade and more ago, which gave rise to some of the shiny new toys we are getting today. Is it me, or is most of the stuff we buy just a load of old tat, compared with what we were told we would get?

I can't help thinking that the Office of the Defence Procurer General (or whatever ludicrous title is appended to the bod in charge of Defence Procurment is) must be working under the false assumption that "Good Enough for Government Work" really means that "second grade is close enough for Jack, Royal, Tommy and Biggles."

I suggest that we refute this dreadful spin, and be a little more "John West" (accept only the best) when doing trials, rather than "John Wayne" (cowboy).

Has anyone out there got a specific instance of some shiny stuff that just does not work as intended?

Let the world of ARRSE know, and maybe we can stop wasting such huge amounts of money on toys that don't work.

Egremont Russet
President of the GE4GW Reform League
 
#4
I have to disagree, a lot of kit works well considering the problems. The main issue is that the kit is meant to come in at year XXXX and due to messing around comes in during year xxxx + 20
 
#5
Egremont_Russet said:
Hello, everyone. My first post on this excellent organ, so beg pardon for any egregious errors or etiquette.

I've been looking back at some of the ideas we had a decade and more ago, which gave rise to some of the shiny new toys we are getting today. Is it me, or is most of the stuff we buy just a load of old tat, compared with what we were told we would get?

I can't help thinking that the Office of the Defence Procurer General (or whatever ludicrous title is appended to the bod in charge of Defence Procurment is) must be working under the false assumption that "Good Enough for Government Work" really means that "second grade is close enough for Jack, Royal, Tommy and Biggles."

I suggest that we refute this dreadful spin, and be a little more "John West" (accept only the best) when doing trials, rather than "John Wayne" (cowboy).

Has anyone out there got a specific instance of some shiny stuff that just does not work as intended?

Let the world of ARRSE know, and maybe we can stop wasting such huge amounts of money on toys that don't work.

Egremont Russet
President of the GE4GW Reform League
If you don't understand Defence Procurement, then don't gob off about it. Simple really.
 
#6
Any truth in the old chestnut that SA80 is called the "civil servant" as it doesn't work & can't be fired?
 
#7
foxs_marine said:
Any truth in the old chestnut that SA80 is called the "civil servant" as it doesn't work & can't be fired?
No you're thinking of STAB Tiffies :wink:
 
#8
Egremont_Russet said:
I can't help thinking that the Office of the Defence Procurer General (or whatever ludicrous title is appended to the bod in charge of Defence Procurment is) must be working under the false assumption that "Good Enough for Government Work" really means that "second grade is close enough for Jack, Royal, Tommy and Biggles."
Do you have a clue what you are talking about? :roll:

If you have a specific point to make then make it, don't make self evidently uninformed comments.
 
#9
Oneshot said:
I have to disagree, a lot of kit works well considering the problems. The main issue is that the kit is meant to come in at year XXXX and due to messing around comes in during year xxxx + 20
Not to mention cost £+100%
 

Goatman

ADC
Book Reviewer
#11
foxs_marine said:
Any truth in the old chestnut that SA80 is called the "civil servant" as it doesn't work & can't be fired?
You are a complete Kent and I will not bite - being both a working snivel serpent AND one who is looking for a job AND who has had the pleasure of firing both the A1 and the A2..... :x
 
#12
Kitmarlowe said:
I would say that AS90 and CR2 work pretty well...Any comments from tankies or dropshorts?
I've been in an AS90 fitter section for over 2 years now and I can definately say that AS90 is a piece of shite, far too over engineered and without slagging the RA off, far to complex for the average gunner to look after correctly, hence why we are trying to backload the whole fleet.
 
#14
Kitmarlowe said:
I would say that AS90 and CR2 work pretty well...Any comments from tankies or dropshorts?
Thats because the CR/Shir programme was started back in the days when it was considered a good idea to keep vehicle design in house in government.

Although much maligned, Civil Servants included some very talented engineers in MVEE, who's management had no shareholders to impress.
 
#15
I thought CR and AS90 are the way they are because they were designed by private enterprise and not through the system?

CR was originally developed as the Shir for pre-revolutionIran (as was Tracked RAPIER if I remember aright), and wasn't AS 90 designed by Vickers as an export system that turned out to be so good the MoD had little choice but to buy it?

Or did I dream all this?

We got the Reynolds Bowden through the system though. Are they still all VOR or has that problem been fixed now? A fabulous truck it is. Sadly of little use to any units who require airportability, so we had to buy the Pinzgauer as well...........
Why didn't we just get Pinzies in the first place?
 
#16
And how many Pinzgauers are currently sat at Ashchurch?

msr
 
#17
FluffyBunny said:
I thought CR and AS90 are the way they are because they were designed by private enterprise and not through the system?

CR was originally developed as the Shir for pre-revolutionIran (as was Tracked RAPIER if I remember aright), and wasn't AS 90 designed by Vickers as an export system that turned out to be so good the MoD had little choice but to buy it?

Or did I dream all this?

We got the Reynolds Bowden through the system though. Are they still all VOR or has that problem been fixed now? A fabulous truck it is. Sadly of little use to any units who require airportability, so we had to buy the Pinzgauer as well...........
Why didn't we just get Pinzies in the first place?
Shir/CR was designed at Chertsey, which I believe at the time was called MVEE, later metamorphosing into DRA then DERA.
 
#19
FluffyBunny said:
My mistake about CR/Shir then :)

Perhaps I meant to say that we only got them because they were built and the Shah couldn't take them due to the revolution? Or were we going to buy CR anyway?
The MoD was working on the Anglo-German MBT project at the time, which went the way most international collaborations go - especially when they involve Johnny Boxhead.

The biiiig problems with procurement at the moment seem to be:
a) 'Brochure engineering'
b) Not enough groundwork at the start of the project
c) Political agendas
d) Senior staff officers in IPTs mving post, just when they are beginning to get the hand of it
 
#20
Goatman said:
foxs_marine said:
Any truth in the old chestnut that SA80 is called the "civil servant" as it doesn't work & can't be fired?
You are a complete Kent and I will not bite - being both a working snivel serpent AND one who is looking for a job AND who has had the pleasure of firing both the A1 and the A2..... :x
Goatman,

I too am an employee of the State. There was no intent to impugn, I didn't make it up, but it goes to show what people as a whole think, that we're all Sir Humphreys on huge salaries & knighthoods coming up with the rations.

Alas I must take issue over being labelled a complete Kent. I live among them, but I am in fact 100% Cornish.

You have the advantage over me ref the A2, but I always felt that the A1 was a fine rifle but over complex for what was asked of it, a theoretical solution to a practical requirement. Let's not resurrect the old debate over the fact that it was chosen over the M16 to keep the moribund UK manufacturer going.
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads