Navy Net - Royal Navy Community

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

HMS Daring to be delayed until 2010

OSLO

War Hero
Bisley said:
http://www.navynews.co.uk/view-story.aspx?articleID=73

HMS Daring to be delayed until end of 2010 and cost extra £500 million.
ore money for BAE me thinks.

Would be interesting to know if this came from something that broke, something that didn't work as intended or something that the MoD decided to add at the last minute. It takes two to tango (or in this case, buy a ship): one to ask for the ship, and one to make it.
 

YouAreHavingALaugh

Lantern Swinger
No suprise at all, it happens every time we procure anything.

Who actually procures these items need to actually re assess their ability to beleive the actual costs they are told against what the real costs will be.
Add to that the so called dates they would be available is never achieved.
 

OSLO

War Hero
YouAreHavingALaugh said:
No suprise at all, it happens every time we procure anything.

Who actually procures these items need to actually re assess their ability to beleive the actual costs they are told against what the real costs will be.
Add to that the so called dates they would be available is never achieved.

Again, we don't know why the delay. There have been some projects delayed because of ineffectual suppliers, others because the MoD as the customer kept changing what they wanted, or didn't say what they wanted at the outset.
 

Oil_Slick

War Hero
Yet ANOTHER Big And Expensive fiasco…

Over £1 billion for a ship that's got hardly any weapons fit?

FFS! What are they building it out of? 24ct gold with mink lined bunks and diamond encrusted taps?

Stop buying British… PERIOD!

It's always the same, a decade late with an absolutely eyewatering price tag.

The US Navy pays £2.2 billion for a Nimitz class carrier and £550 million for an Arleigh Burke Destroyer… Someone at BAE is taking the piss with a vengence.


After this I think you can definately kiss T45 hulls 7 & 8 goodbye and probably 5 & 6 also.
 

Not_a_boffin

War Hero
When you read the NAO report, it really doesn't look good.

http://www.nao.org.uk/publications/nao_reports/07-08/070898ii.pdf

The vast majority of the escalation is due to the "Six Ship proposal" from BAEs, which unfortunately appears to be tacit acknowledgement that six is yer lot. In other words, HMT has asked them to recost their programme against six ships rather than the "required" eight. Funnily enough, the project summary sheet explicitly says number required = six, which appears to be the first offical announcement - and not even by HMG!

Some of that added cost will be BAEs putting sunk programme cost that was amortised over eight (or 12!) ships onto six. Even so, it's still taking the p1ss.

What is instructive is to look at the table showing how the cost has varied over the history of the programme, where you see the endless fiddling about with one or two million here and there and the "pretend" costs like "cost of capital" that theh beanies force the projects to apply. I reiterate - BAES are taking the p1ss, but their ability to do so is being aided and abetted by HMG/HMT and the actual values used need to be treated with caution - we just don't know what is in the costs, or how much is "real" or "beanie-induced".
 
Just a few points.

The price quoted for the Arleigh Burke above is the drive away price, not the total programme price, and there is no way HMG would be able to buy one off the slip at that price. Frome the NAO document the drive away price for the 45 is £650M a price that has gone up some 10% or so over the programme.

Once again if you look at the NAO document the BAE contract is a price limited one so every price rise has to be justified, why did the MOD agree to the rises? Yes a big chunk is due to the MOD saying to adjust the price to reflect only 6 guaranteed, as the design and engineering costs represent around 50% of the total price then perhaps after you have divied that by 6 and not 8 then it is not surprising the price goes up. Equally a lot of the rises have been due to changes in the costs of the PAAMS not something that can be laid at BAes door.

Yes I know that some of the problems are down to us in industry getting things wrong and mistakes cost money and time, but there is an at least equall responsibility of the MOD in changeing it's mind, and every time they chage their mind it costs time and money too.

US kit may look flashy and good, but remember no beer fridges and the drive away cost for Johnny Foreigner is never the same as for UNcle Sam, andyou don't get the workshop manual just the user manual.
 

Oil_Slick

War Hero
Just a few points…

£650 million isn't so good when you look at what's left off… and in the case of the T45, that's just about everything. So they charge us £700 million, even £800 million?… it's still a bargain as it packs far more firepower than a T45 in the same size hull for less than the programme cost of the T45.

And I keep hearing this bull that the Yanks will charge us more, not sell us the handbooks, yadyaya…

Lets see now, with current kit we seem to do just fine with Predator, AH-64, C-17, GR7/9, C-130, E-3D, CH-47, Tomahawk, MLRS, Paveway, Sidewinder, AMRAAM, Brimstone, Trident D5, Harpoon……

So I suppose we get rip off pricing and no handbooks with all those (and other) systems…


Evrything BAE touches turns to shit and we need to change the dealer we buy our war canoes from.
 

stumpy

War Hero
This is one area I have sympathy with thte Government. A programme is announced providing 12 ships at £500 million totalling £6 billion. But then unit price more than doubles so we only get six, still at over £6 billion for the programme... and yet people still demand 8-12.

Lets just accept 6, but they should be gold plated with everything for that price.
 
Uncle Sam doesn't always get it right either, all the Arleigh Burkes you covet are being sent back to be straitened and reinofrced to stop them bending again.

You may laugh at the US ITARS regulations, but when your back is to the wall and you want a system update fast, don't ask uncle sam, he will be to busy doing his own thing, and no one in the UK will have the data to do what you want. Taking your list well of course the missiles work but you will only get an update when Uncle Sam decided to let you have it no matter how many greenbacks you wave around, and yes we only get the user manual (Eventually the yanks let some companies have more detailed info on sidewinder but even then that was only on 'export' versions. The transport A/C are not really that much of a problem. and the GR7/9 has mainly UK systems and drimstone has UK electronics and seeker. AH64 well we had just a few little problems before we could actually use them, and predator OK till you want wa new sensor or something like that.

JSF is going to be very interesting because we are actually supposed to get the source code for that, but I am certainly waiting for data on that and there is no sign of it and no one is saying we can't have, just no one is saying when we can have it either.
 

Oil_Slick

War Hero
Maxi_77 said:
Uncle Sam doesn't always get it right either, all the Arleigh Burkes you covet are being sent back to be straitened and reinofrced to stop them bending again.

Just like all our war canoes then…
 
Oil_Slick said:
Maxi_77 said:
Uncle Sam doesn't always get it right either, all the Arleigh Burkes you covet are being sent back to be straitened and reinofrced to stop them bending again.

Just like all our war canoes then…

Quite probably, the point really is just because it looks good on paper and is nice and shiny doesn't mean it is any better than the stuff you already have.
 

Oil_Slick

War Hero
Maxi_77 said:
Oil_Slick said:
Maxi_77 said:
Uncle Sam doesn't always get it right either, all the Arleigh Burkes you covet are being sent back to be straitened and reinofrced to stop them bending again.

Just like all our war canoes then…

Quite probably, the point really is just because it looks good on paper and is nice and shiny doesn't mean it is any better than the stuff you already have.

I'd rather have 100% something that was good enough than 0% of perfect.

And last time I checked, they have nearly 60 of theirs in service, we will have exactly 0 of ours this side of 2010 at the earliest
 
Do none of you find it a coincidence that the Defence Budget has a hole in it and a major programme is "slipped". This has all the marks of an "expenditure reprofiling". Key elements don't have to fail, nothing has to change or be added and BAES doesn't have to do anything wrong. It just has to accept smaller payments over a longer period; and that will cost money. It's the in year spend that matters.

You've heard of spend to save? Well, this is save to spend or, more likely, not get.

The clues are everywhere.
http://www.number10.gov.uk/output/page13971.asp
http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2007/12/04/5003
http://www.guardian.co.uk/military/story/0,,2221531,00.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/10/28/ntroops128.xml
 

Karma

War Hero
Passed-over_Loggie said:
This has all the marks of an "expenditure reprofiling".

I think one of the issues is that ''expenditure profiling'' and ''expenditure re-profiling'' are a big part of the problem.

To make a programme ''affordable'' in the eyes of the IAB the profile has to be smoothed to the extent that the project teams can't actually invest what's needed in the early design stages, then can't buy enough of the solution to develop a critical mass.

The expenditure profiling also means that the solution doesn't meet the requirement and the good ideas clubs in the four HQs then have plenty of opportunity to inject change requests.

Vicious circle and I'm ont convinced I see a way out. Buying someone elses solution isn't really the answer anyway, endemic issues with the acquisition structure and culture will affect that in the same way. I can think of a couple of ''OTS'' buys which have been crippled as a result of it.
 

Oil_Slick

War Hero
Passed-over_Loggie said:
I think one of the issues is that ''expenditure profiling'' and ''expenditure re-profiling'' are a big part of the problem.


Nah… MOD is incapable of setting realistic goals within it's budgetary contraints. BAE promise the sun, moon and stars within said budget. MOD lacks the competence or gumption to realise they are being sold a dummy and it can't be done.
 

Karma

War Hero
Oil_Slick said:
Nah… MOD is incapable of setting realistic goals within it's budgetary contraints.

It's very easy to say ''MOD is at fault'', but it tends to oversimplify the situation. To an extent I'd agree that MOD is at fault, but that's largely because of the implementation of Smart Acquisition rather than being an amorphous blob of civil servants intent on ******* things up for plucky salt of the earth jack et al.

MOD is an organisation made up of some 400,000 people, if we include all those in uniform. The acquisition organisation is made up of Civil Servants, Uniformed personnel and a fair number of external contractors.

The acquisition system has at least three different bodies related to each project, each with competing and mutually exclusive goals. The Equipment Capability customer is interested in getting the money and will use a range of accounting devices to achieve that, the profiling that PoL highlighted and I commented on is one of those things. Personally I believe that the sleight of hand that the EC has to do in order to get the nod from the IAB is the root of most of our acquisition problems.

At the other end is the end user and their representative, in our case Fleet N7 (or whatever it's called this week). Minimal political awareness and an unrealistic expectation of what can be achieved, plus a tendency to be risk averse and not particularly interested in doing anything differently. No budget to speak of.

BAE promise the sun, moon and stars within said budget. MOD lacks the competence or gumption to realise they are being sold a dummy and it can't be done.

It's not just BAES that do that, every big manufacturing and systems integration vendor promises the earth then screws the client, it's just that BAES is in the spotlight justnow, it was EDS a year or so ago, Accenture last year with the cock up over NHS IT and I can't recall the name of the consortium lead that screwed Transport for London over the tube.

Govenrment departments in general are abysmal at managing their contracts, it's just that MOD has bigger contracts than most.
 

Not_a_boffin

War Hero
Karma

I'd agree with most of that, but you missed out the Abbeywood massive, whatever they're called now. I think you're a bit high in your estimate of numbers as well. I count just over 100000 pongoes, 40000 crabs, nearly 40000 in the mob and 28000 in DE&S, adding up to just over 200000.

There really aren't another 200000 serpents in MB or elsewhere, so I'd say MoD as a whole is somewhere well south of 225000.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Ageing_Gracefully New clasp for GSM08 for HMS Daring The Fleet 2
T HMS Daring entering Tokyo habour The Fleet 1
soleil CBBC: Newsround: "Leah Takes A Tour Around HMS Daring" The Fleet 0
soleil Sunday Mirror: On Board HMS Daring When It Arrived As Part Of Op Typhoon Haiyan The Fleet 21
T HMS Daring, just so happened to be in the Southeast Asian region Current Affairs 54
T HMS Daring in Singapore: First RN ship in the Asia-Pacific after so long The Fleet 2
T HMS Daring's Pacific highlights The Fleet 3
soleil Wirral News: "Northern RN Commander Shown Model Of HMS Daring Made In Shed" The Fleet 2
MoD_RSS HMS Daring returns from maiden deployment Current Affairs 1
MoD_RSS HMS Daring makes first port visit to Saudi Arabia Current Affairs 1
soleil Pompey News: "Secret Repairs For HMS Daring After She Suffers Breakdown" The Fleet 5
MoD_RSS HMS Daring stars in Middle East naval showcase Current Affairs 6
MoD_RSS HMS Daring joins up with US carrier groups Current Affairs 14
MoD_RSS HMS Daring becomes first Type 45 to pass through the Suez Canal Current Affairs 0
MoD_RSS HMS Daring sets sail on maiden deployment Current Affairs 8
MoD_RSS HMS Daring fires Sea Viper for first time Current Affairs 3
soleil HMS Gloucester And HMS Daring Open To Visitors - 25/26 June 2011 - Pompey Bases / Shore Est 1
soleil Sky News: "Destroyer HMS Daring Returns From US Exercise" The Fleet 0
Topstop HMS Daring damaged Current Affairs 7
soleil Pompey News: "HMS Daring Gets Tough Lesson In Sea Trials" The Fleet 1
soleil Express: "HMS Daring Ruler Of The Waves" The Fleet 39
dabbzie Building britains biggest warship HMS Daring Joining Up - Royal Navy Recruiting 3
WhiteRose Channel 4, Bank Holiday Monday, HMS Daring Current Affairs 43
soleil BBC Guernsey: "Islanders Tour HMS Daring" (Nice pics) The Fleet 1
soleil Channel 4 Programme - "HMS Daring: 21st Century Destroyer" The Fleet 4
S HMS Daring The Fleet 2
soleil HMS Daring - Commissioning Ceremony - 23rd July 2009 The Fleet 10
soleil "Royal Navy Past and Present"- HMS Daring open to the public Bases / Shore Est 2
Oil_Slick So HMS Daring REALLY IS the best ship in the Universe!!!! Current Affairs 2
soleil HMS Daring visits Liverpool this weekend The Fleet 22
soleil HMS Daring to receive Freedom of the City of Birmingham The Fleet 14
soleil HMS Daring - Mini Guided Tour - Video The Fleet 2
D HMS Daring into Pompey - phots The Fleet 39
alex123 When does HMS Daring enter the fleet? The Fleet 13
S HMS Daring - Which helicopter The Fleet Air Arm 65
Chicogiz Video tour around HMS Daring The Fleet 22
onions HMS DARING Current Affairs 3
N HMS Daring goes to sea The Fleet 72
J HMS DARING The Fleet 15
MoD_RSS HMS Audacious sails from Barrow MoD News 0
J Hms sultan start dates 2021 Joining the Royal Navy 3
Pandaplodder HMS Intrepid 1823 History 3
B Pre HMS Raleigh brief Joining the Royal Navy 13
MoD_RSS From Portsmouth to Odesa, UK and Ukraine naval cooperation on show as Ukrainian President visits HMS Prince of Wales MoD News 0
soleil BBC: "HMS Queen Elizabeth: On board The Royal Navy's New Aircraft Carrier" The Fleet 0
D HMS Raleigh Joining Up - Royal Navy Recruiting 4
soleil P. News: "Royal Navy's HMS Sultan Forced To Cancel Popular Fireworks Due To Covid-19" Bases / Shore Est 4
soleil FB: HMNB Portsmouth: "HMS Ledbury Returns Home From The Gulf" The Fleet 0
soleil Lochside Press: "Camilla Calls At Faslane To See HMS Astute" Submariners 7
soleil FB: HMS Raleigh 'HMS Raleigh Welcomes Capt Suzi Nielsen As Its New Commanding Officer' Bases / Shore Est 24
Similar threads


















































Latest Threads

New Posts

Top