Portsmouth News: "Falklands Fighter Ace Calls For Cost Controls Over UK’s £9.2bn F-35 Project"

#1
"Costs need to be reined in on Britain’s £9.2bn fleet of futuristic warplanes to avoid a national ‘embarrassment’ for the Ministry of Defence (MoD), a decorated fighter pilot has warned.

Harrier hero Commander Nigel ‘Sharkey’ Ward was the commanding officer of 801 Naval Air Squadron during the Falklands War, based on aircraft carrier HMS Invincible.

Flying more than 60 missions, with three air-to-air kills, he was the campaign’s leading night pilot.

But now the war hero has written to the UK’s defence committee over fears the US Air Force could cut its number order of F-35 Lightning IIs – causing costs to soar for Britain’s own fleet of the stealth jets.

https://www.portsmouth.co.uk/news/d...ntrols-over-uk-s-9-2bn-f-35-project-1-8449130
 

wave_dodger

MIA
Book Reviewer
#2
Does he not think there is a raft of people in MilCap, JFC, ACHQ and NCHQ not all working to ensure we get what we asked for at the prices we agreed?

An enviable and well deserved reputation for his service but some things he should leave alone as he has no idea how they are being addressed.
 

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#4
Oh good, The Bearded Bullshitter has crawled out from under his slate again................
Well he's commented from his luxurious villa in Grenada. His housemaid by his side polishing his AFC and DSC.
His son Kristian Nigel, who still serves, now completes the Drip Chits on his Dad's behalf
 
Last edited:

clonmel

Lantern Swinger
#5
Well he's commented from his luxurious villa in Grenada. His housemaid by his side polishing his AFC and DSC.
His son Kristian Nigel, who still serves, now completes the Drip Chits on his Dad's behalf
Kris Ward left the RN in 2012 and now flies for easyjet or similar bucket & spade airline outfit.
 

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#6
Kris Ward left the RN in 2012 and now flies for easyjet or similar bucket & spade airline outfit.
Should have written flying instead of serving although EasyJet is one of the lower orders as you see it--probably right.
One imagines that Sharkey and Kris are not on your Christmas card list. Sharkey one of our national heroes? --not in your eyes-presumably.
 

clonmel

Lantern Swinger
#7
Sharkey did a good job on CORPORATE, and was suitably rewarded by a DSC, which they don't give out easily.

However, his nudging vicious criticism of others on the SHAR fleet who did equally well, combined with his seething hatred of all things Light Blue, have left him being viewed as a bit of a spiteful idiot. He's certainly viewed in MoD Main Building as a "vexatious correspondent".

It's a real shame, as he could've used his post-Falklands legacy to act as a really authoritative voice and advocate for Naval air power. Now, when he speaks, the RN, RAF and MoD can be heard sighing from miles away.....
 
Last edited:
#8
Nothing new getting stiffed by the US. Just because the F35 price may soar doesn't mean we should get rid. And Sharkey is probably saying what all those VSOs should be saying but won't in case it affects their chances of a knighthood. To some, he might appear to be a pain in the arse but he's our pain in the arse. :cool:
 

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#9
Sharkey did a good job on CORPORATE, and was suitably rewarded by a DSC, which they don't give out easily.

However, his nudging vicious criticism of others on the SHAR fleet who did equally well, combined with his seething hatred of all things Light Blue, have left him being viewed as a bit of a spiteful idiot. He's certainly viewed in MoD Main Building as a "vexatious correspondent".

It's a real shame, as he could've used his post-Falklands legacy to act as a really authoritative voice and advocate for Naval air power. Now, when he speaks, the RN, RAF and MoD can be heard sighing from miles away.....
MOD regards Sharkey as "vexatious" that's MOD Speak for anyone with a view contrary to theirs and not particularly descriptive.
If Sharkey has some deep-seated RAF problem ( shared by many Rum Ration correspondents seemingly) then I would suggest that is more tendentious.
 

clonmel

Lantern Swinger
#10
MOD regards Sharkey as "vexatious" that's MOD Speak for anyone with a view contrary to theirs and not particularly descriptive.
If Sharkey has some deep-seated RAF problem ( shared by many Rum Ration correspondents seemingly) then I would suggest that is more tendentious.
I've never worked in MoD Main building, but from mates who have, a 'vexatious correspondent' is in simple terms someone who takes up huge amounts of staff time & effort with nugatory, single-issue, banging-the-drum, crap. And, for completeness, I find there is no corporate 'their view' across MoD.

Sharkey Ward's view of the RAF is well publicised and extremely negative; he (and indeed the ...many Rum Ration correspondents... to whom you allude) are entitled to that opinion, possibly evidence based.
 

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#11
I've never worked in MoD Main building, but from mates who have, a 'vexatious correspondent' is in simple terms someone who takes up huge amounts of staff time & effort with nugatory, single-issue, banging-the-drum, crap. And, for completeness, I find there is no corporate 'their view' across MoD.

Sharkey Ward's view of the RAF is well publicised and extremely negative; he (and indeed the ...many Rum Ration correspondents... to whom you allude) are entitled to that opinion, possibly evidence based.
You assume Sharkey's drips are not evidence based He has presumably dreamt them up?
Whether you work, or have ever worked in MOD Main Building-whatever that is- is neither here nor there. You will know that MOD's attitude to anything that they disagree with-whether right or wrong- causes them a lot of sleepless nights and is therefore vexatious--He or she keeps on about it awaiting a researched, courteous reply. They are vexatious and that's that. End of story.
 

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#13
Frivolous or vexatious - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frivolous_or_vexatious
In law, frivolous or vexatious, is a term used to deny a complaint or a legal proceeding being heard, or to dismiss or strike out any ensuing judicial or non-judicial processes. The term is used in several jurisdictions, such as Ireland and New Zealand. While the term is referenced in laws and regulations, it is often not defined ...
There is no analogy. The MOD is not a Court of Law.
 
#14
You assume Sharkey's drips are not evidence based He has presumably dreamt them up?
Whether you work, or have ever worked in MOD Main Building-whatever that is- is neither here nor there. You will know that MOD's attitude to anything that they disagree with-whether right or wrong- causes them a lot of sleepless nights and is therefore vexatious--He or she keeps on about it awaiting a researched, courteous reply. They are vexatious and that's that. End of story.
Even a cursory glance through some of Mr Ward’s various blogs, letters and articles shows that much of his opinion is not only not evidence based, it’s even factually incorrect. Moreover, some of what he’s claimed is extremely disrespectful to those that have died on operations.

In terms of the ‘vexatious correspondent’ nomenclature, having worked in MoD I can confirm that this is only very rarely awarded. When it is, it is to those most extreme of serial correspondents who bombard Centre with a constant stream of pointless, groundless and entirely vexatious FoIs and other correspondence to further their own agenda.

Let me stress that to be officially named as a ‘vexatious correspondent’ takes several years of wasting considerable amounts of staff effort. I suspect that few were more embarrassed by Mr Ward’s actions, or more relieved when he was annotated as a vexatious correspondent than the Naval Staff.

Ultimately, I have the utmost respect for what he achieved during CORPORATE. However, it’s a great shame to see what the man has become.

Regards,
MM
 
Last edited:
#15
MOD regards Sharkey as "vexatious" that's MOD Speak for anyone with a view contrary to theirs and not particularly descriptive.
If Sharkey has some deep-seated RAF problem ( shared by many Rum Ration correspondents seemingly) then I would suggest that is more tendentious.
Behave , that is mostly banter.
 

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#16
Even a cursory glance through some of Mr Ward’s various blogs, letters and articles shows that much of his opinion is not only not evidence based, it’s even factually incorrect. Moreover, some of what he’s claimed is extremely disrespectful to those that have died on operations.

In terms of the ‘vexatious correspondent’ nomenclature, having worked in MoD I can confirm that this is only very rarely awarded. When it is, it is to those most extreme of serial correspondents who bombard Centre with a constant stream of pointless, groundless and entirely vexatious FoIs and other correspondence to further their own agenda.

Let me stress that to be officially named as a ‘vexatious correspondent’ takes several years of wasting considerable amounts of staff effort. I suspect that few were more embarrassed by Mr Ward’s actions, or more relieved when he was annotated as a vexatious correspondent than the Naval Staff.

Ultimately, I have the utmost respect for what he achieved during CORPORATE. However, it’s a great shame to see what the man has become.

Regards,
MM
MOD and obfuscation? Well! Vexatious Litigants all.
Cast your mind back to the period 1951 and 1960 and beyond when the Ministry of Defence through AFO's and their Army and Air force equivalents called for volunteers for its Common Cold Research (CCRU) Unit trials conducted between its Harvard Hospital Salisbury site and Porton Down, some eight miles up the road. 30% of the 20,000 volunteers were National Servicemen. The advertisements in AFO's called for volunteers to help find a cure for the common cold. Extra Pay No work and plentiful quality food.
The guinea pigs were subjected to Sarin nerve agent and LSD.
Requests for information for details of just what went on received the usual MOD flannel and obfuscation. The requests would have been deemed Vexatious.
The truth came out in the High Court in 2004. It cost HMG dearly.
It has never been possible to contact AWE Porton Down etc. All enquiries are dealt with by MOD. Why?
 
#17
...The requests would have been deemed Vexatious...
Under current convention, the requests would probably only have been considered vexatious if a single individual had repeatedly asked the same question, or proffered wildly inaccurate data and untruths.

...All enquiries are dealt with by MOD. Why?
Because it was a Defence issue.

It also has nothing whatsoever to do with Mr Ward’s agenda.

Regards,
MM
 

ratsroden

Lantern Swinger
#18
Under current convention, the requests would probably only have been considered vexatious if a single individual had repeatedly asked the same question, or proffered wildly inaccurate data and untruths. In whose opinion are they wildly



Because it was a Defence issue.

It also has nothing whatsoever to do with Mr Ward’s agenda.

Regards,
MM
In whose opinion are they wildly inaccurate data and untruths? None ( Except Porton Down) was ever tested by a Tribunal or Court. On the one occasion it has been, MOD was made to look foolish and dishonest--- and it cost them a lot of money.
 
#20
In whose opinion are they wildly inaccurate data and untruths? None ( Except Porton Down) was ever tested by a Tribunal or Court. On the one occasion it has been, MOD was made to look foolish and dishonest--- and it cost them a lot of money.
What on earth are you on about?

At no point have I (or anyone else) ever suggested that anyone from Porton Down’s history produced ‘wildly inaccurate data and untruths.’

So please do not mis-represent my words.

Nor frankly, do I see the relevance of the Porton Down experiments to Mr Ward’s views.

Regards,
MM
 
Last edited:

Latest Threads

Top