Project Hyperion

Project Hyperion is a complex Defence change programme designed to collocate and integrate the two main Army Headquarters Headquarters Land Command (currently based at Wilton) and Headquarters Adjutant General (currently based in Upavon).

I'm intending to apply for the post of Non-Executive Director on the Programme Board. I'd be grateful if anyone could direct me to any open source material on the Web relating to this project: 'googling' the project name of itself or similar combinations has returned very few hits.

Thanks in anticipation...

Most of the stuff's on the Army's Intranet (although it's a b*gger to find there, too). See if a Serving pal can find you some UNCLAS material there.

At £550 a day for 10 days work a year (Jobs page in the Telegraph at the weekend I think), pretty sure I could cope with this.....
Murielson said:
So is this a secret?

Or anyone got any additional info?
Not a secret but defo a nominee for bullshit bingo championship: all quotes from the intranet site...

Project HYPERION aims to rationalise, integrate and co-locate HQ Land Command (currently based at Wilton) and HQ Adjutant General (currently based at Upavon). Our aim is to create a modern, fit for purpose, HQ, with better working practices and a better working environment. The project will be far reaching and affect a wide range of individuals and organisations in different ways.
The initial Business Case (BC) submitted to the Defence Estates Committee (DEC) in Dec 04 outlined a number of possible site options for collocation of the 2 HQs. The 2 preferred options were co-location at Andover with the DLO and a commercial site within the normal daily travelling distance to work for most of the current workforce. Additionally, Wilton was selected as a fallback. The DEC accepted the BC recommendation that these 3 options should be pursued and MOD Centre has subsequently agreed this.

It is important to note that moving the HQs away from Wilton or Upavon does not mean the sites will close. Other Defence uses might be found.

Co-location at Andover would be dependent upon the number of DLO staff who may vacate the site, and the timing of their departure. This is primarily a matter for the DLO, but the aim is for any move to be completed by Apr 09. This would entail a rebuild of Building 200 and the use of Building 300 (following minor refurbishment). These buildings would provide a mixture of open plan and cellular office space.

If it proves impossible to meet the new HQ requirements at Andover or on a greenfield site, the fall-back solution would be for the HQs to co-locate at Wilton. Any such move would be complete by 2010. Until the size of the new HQ has been established, however, it is not yet clear whether occupation of the Wilton site would involve the use of existing accommodation (with some refurbishment), or a mixture of refurbished existing accommodation and a new build.
Commercial Site:

It may be possible to co-locate on a commercial site, within the current travel to work area, utilising either a Private Finance Initiative or a rental lease arrangement. The plan would be to occupy a mixture of open plan and cellular office accommodation that would offer the new HQs full operational capability by Apr 09. A number of potential sites are currently being examined

Q.What will the new integrated headquarters be known as?

A. Probably HQ Land Forces (HQLF), although at the moment, you will probably hear it referred to as the iHQ.

Q. Will the integrated headquarters be pan-Army?

A. It will provide the headquarters for some 90% of the Army - however, it will not be the Army HQ because CGS remains personally accountable to S of S for the command and performance of the Army as a whole.

Q.When will we know the new headquarters structure and staff numbers?

A. We now plan to have the higher-level structure and desk level structure ready for TU consultaion in June 06. The iHQ support structure (e.g. registries, reprographics etc) is unlikely to be announced before Oct 06, and so we will not have the full iHQ picture until then.

Q. Have the ‘do nothing/minimum’ options been considered?

A. Yes. The do minimum option will form the baseline for the investment appraisal in the Business Case, which will be submitted for approval in Dec 05.

Q. Are we learning lessons from other projects

A. Yes -we are keeping a very close eye on what the Navy and RAF are doing. As their integration projects started before ours we are in a good position to learn from their experiences. Any number of lessons and examples of best practice have come out of such diverse areas as PJHQ, Project HOME and the Met Office. And we are not confining ourselves to the public sector. In the commercial world, we are in touch with industry leaders such as Shell and British Airways (the latter are widely acknowledged as being field leaders in advanced working practices).
So in short it will be a huge cake and arrse party, with multi-million overspends, will actually be ready in 2050 and will not do the job it was designed for because of several key design requirements being overlooked. i.e. stairs, windows or the front door.
chocolate_frog said:
So in short it will be a huge cake and arrse party, with multi-million overspends, will actually be ready in 2050 and will not do the job it was designed for because of several key design requirements being overlooked. i.e. stairs, windows or the front door.
Choc; you cynical bugga you!

Are you saying the formidable organisations within the MoD are not able to put together an integration???

It will be completed on time, not only will it be under budget, but will save the tax payers a fortune in the long term and be adaptable enough to cope with any future change or challenge!

Nurse! My medication please, I seem to talking bollox again! :D

How I'm sure with adequate government involvement there will be a state of the art multimillion pound computer/phone system that will either not be used or ffuucckk all use what so ever! (Then again, if it does work, bet there's no ccuunntt there to answer the phones or turn the PCs on!) :D :D :D

I don't have any information on the project but I wonder how many senior people (mil & civil service) read those documents without correcting the single word on which the whole document hangs?

Please delete "co-location" and insert "collocation"!

From Microsoft's Reference Collection:

Noun: the placing of something together with something else; the habitual placing together of one specific word with one or more other specific words (linguistics); the group of words so formed (linguistics).
[Latin collocare, -atum, from col-, and locare to place]

How can we expect soldiers to care about reading and writing, if our senior staff cannot be bothered to pick up a dictionary?

I despair!

Alas, there has been a deafening silence to my 'all-singing', 'all-dancing' CV. Need to change my deodorant, maybe...

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads