FabSwingers.com > Forums > Politics > Defence Procurement
Defence Procurement
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
Does buying British give our Armed Forces the best bang for our buck?
Could we get better equipment for the same or even a lower price by buying from abroad?
Does keeping manufacturing in the UK perform important strategic as well as economic functions that outweigh and cost savings/enhanced performance that we could get from buying abroad? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
Of course it does.
Firstly by buying British made equipment the the supply chain is secure. And regardless of cost the most important thing in defence procurement is security of supply. There are too many cases of military equipment client states finding their military supplies being cut in times of conflict because the country or countries that were supplying them with arms withdrew support for geopolitical reasons.
Of course if defence procurement is purely internal then that also produces more British jobs which further stimulates the British economy. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
British built is always going to be a preferred option but it has to fit three criteria:-
On Time
On Budget
Fit for Purpose.
The procurement industry is littered with expensive failures....remember Nimrod 4 ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian. "
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I believe that all the airframe jigs and fixtures are owned by the MOD."
I wouldn't have thought so. I expect Leonardo's will try and sell wildcat to all the countries that currently operate Lynx. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military? "
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
It is strange. Here we are again making the same mistakes for the same reasons and no one seems to make the connections.
Do we buy in or do we build our own?
Nothing out there suits our particular needs.
We will build our own, it needs to do this...
Part way through design, we need to add this and this so we can make it do more and save money. Start again...
Part way through build, we need to change this and this so it can also do this... Rip down start again...
Produce end result, it is now over budget, late and can not efficiently do any of the jobs it was supposed to do so fixes required.
We will do it different next time...
Do we buy in or do we build our own?
Nothing out there suits our particular needs.
We need to save money!
So we will semi buy in and convert to our spec...
Oh dear, what we have bought needs more redesigning than we thought. Rip it down and modify...
We also need it to do this and this to save money... Start over...
Produce end result, it is now over budget, late and can not efficiently do any of the jobs it was supposed to do so fixes required.
We will do it different next time...
We need to save money...
Anyone notice the constant?
Anyone notice how that constant has a two very particular recurring results? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important? "
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job? "
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"It is strange. Here we are again making the same mistakes for the same reasons and no one seems to make the connections.
Do we buy in or do we build our own?
Nothing out there suits our particular needs.
We will build our own, it needs to do this...
Part way through design, we need to add this and this so we can make it do more and save money. Start again...
Part way through build, we need to change this and this so it can also do this... Rip down start again...
Produce end result, it is now over budget, late and can not efficiently do any of the jobs it was supposed to do so fixes required.
We will do it different next time...
Do we buy in or do we build our own?
Nothing out there suits our particular needs.
We need to save money!
So we will semi buy in and convert to our spec...
Oh dear, what we have bought needs more redesigning than we thought. Rip it down and modify...
We also need it to do this and this to save money... Start over...
Produce end result, it is now over budget, late and can not efficiently do any of the jobs it was supposed to do so fixes required.
We will do it different next time...
We need to save money...
Anyone notice the constant?
Anyone notice how that constant has a two very particular recurring results?"
We modify our fleet constantly to incorporate modern technology. Its why, for example, some of our Chinooks are 40 years old. The Americans for however, just throw an aircraft away when it's systems become obsolete. This constant modification and the associated deep maintenance allows our aircraft to go on and on. And employs thousands of skilled UK engineers in the process. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences. "
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any. "
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We modify our fleet constantly to incorporate modern technology. Its why, for example, some of our Chinooks are 40 years old. The Americans for however, just throw an aircraft away when it's systems become obsolete. This constant modification and the associated deep maintenance allows our aircraft to go on and on. And employs thousands of skilled UK engineers in the process. "
Does that include the 8 chinooks that spent 20 years in storage because they were cheap but were not compatible with UK equipment and then cost over 5 times original cost (and 2 times estimated cost) for British Aerospace to strip down, and rebuild from the aeroframe up? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any. "
The Apache currently operated by the British army was assembled in Yeovil by AgustaWestland. Its really only similar to it's American cousin by it's silhouette and transmission. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We modify our fleet constantly to incorporate modern technology. Its why, for example, some of our Chinooks are 40 years old. The Americans for however, just throw an aircraft away when it's systems become obsolete. This constant modification and the associated deep maintenance allows our aircraft to go on and on. And employs thousands of skilled UK engineers in the process.
Does that include the 8 chinooks that spent 20 years in storage because they were cheap but were not compatible with UK equipment and then cost over 5 times original cost (and 2 times estimated cost) for British Aerospace to strip down, and rebuild from the aeroframe up? "
They were actually reverted back by QinetiQ Ltd. They are currently in service with the RAF flying as Mk5. So yes if you like. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"We modify our fleet constantly to incorporate modern technology. Its why, for example, some of our Chinooks are 40 years old. The Americans for however, just throw an aircraft away when it's systems become obsolete. This constant modification and the associated deep maintenance allows our aircraft to go on and on. And employs thousands of skilled UK engineers in the process.
Does that include the 8 chinooks that spent 20 years in storage because they were cheap but were not compatible with UK equipment and then cost over 5 times original cost (and 2 times estimated cost) for British Aerospace to strip down, and rebuild from the aeroframe up?
They were actually reverted back by QinetiQ Ltd. They are currently in service with the RAF flying as Mk5. So yes if you like."
By the way it wasn't 20 years!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about? "
Yes I know what I'm talking about. How many Wildcats are operated by the Italian military? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about?
Yes I know what I'm talking about. How many Wildcats are operated by the Italian military? "
Why do you think the wildcat is out of service? Is Nissan a British car manufacturer? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about?
Yes I know what I'm talking about. How many Wildcats are operated by the Italian military?
Why do you think the wildcat is out of service? Is Nissan a British car manufacturer?"
Where have I said its out of service? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any. "
You said "until" 2016. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about?
Yes I know what I'm talking about. How many Wildcats are operated by the Italian military? "
Where did i say the wildcat is operated by the Italian military? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
You said "until" 2016."
I said it "was operated soley by the Brits until 2016".
Have a think about what that means.... |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"They were actually reverted back by QinetiQ Ltd. They are currently in service with the RAF flying as Mk5. So yes if you like.
By the way it wasn't 20 years! "
Sorry so it was the US company that now owns what were the DERA establishments across the UK who did the work. and fair enough the 8 chinooks were not mothballed for 20 years. They were bought in 1995 and that last of them was entered into active service in 2012 so thats 18 not 20 years.
I guess you have proved your point I am nothing but an idiot who knows nothing and whose every comment is of the strawman type.
Good luck on saving some more money because that is what it is all about and you obviously support. Never mind how many British lives it costs you must count the pennies and nitpick anyone who points out the flaw in saving pennies.
Now come back and laugh some more, everyone will see you for what you are. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about?
Yes I know what I'm talking about. How many Wildcats are operated by the Italian military?
Where did i say the wildcat is operated by the Italian military? "
Well if its an off the shelf product, who's shelf was it sitting on then? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"They were actually reverted back by QinetiQ Ltd. They are currently in service with the RAF flying as Mk5. So yes if you like.
By the way it wasn't 20 years!
Sorry so it was the US company that now owns what were the DERA establishments across the UK who did the work. and fair enough the 8 chinooks were not mothballed for 20 years. They were bought in 1995 and that last of them was entered into active service in 2012 so thats 18 not 20 years.
I guess you have proved your point I am nothing but an idiot who knows nothing and whose every comment is of the strawman type.
Good luck on saving some more money because that is what it is all about and you obviously support. Never mind how many British lives it costs you must count the pennies and nitpick anyone who points out the flaw in saving pennies.
Now come back and laugh some more, everyone will see you for what you are."
Really what on earth are you talking about? Is this what you guys do when you're wrong? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about?
Yes I know what I'm talking about. How many Wildcats are operated by the Italian military?
Where did i say the wildcat is operated by the Italian military?
Well if its an off the shelf product, who's shelf was it sitting on then? "
Where did i say Wildcat was off the shelf? Although it is. Not many differences between army air corps version and RN. Just a bit of wiring. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about?
Yes I know what I'm talking about. How many Wildcats are operated by the Italian military?
Where did i say the wildcat is operated by the Italian military?
Well if its an off the shelf product, who's shelf was it sitting on then?
Where did i say Wildcat was off the shelf? Although it is. Not many differences between army air corps version and RN. Just a bit of wiring."
Well there are two options, it was either built for (therefore all R&D paid for) the British, OR the UK bought it off the shelf and it was already a fulling working product in use with another country and we bought it off their shelf. Which one is it? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"They were actually reverted back by QinetiQ Ltd. They are currently in service with the RAF flying as Mk5. So yes if you like.
By the way it wasn't 20 years!
Sorry so it was the US company that now owns what were the DERA establishments across the UK who did the work. and fair enough the 8 chinooks were not mothballed for 20 years. They were bought in 1995 and that last of them was entered into active service in 2012 so thats 18 not 20 years.
"
The contract may well have been signed in 1995. Although i doubt it. The airframes didn't arrive in the UK until the late naughties. They weren't in service in 2012 though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about?
Yes I know what I'm talking about. How many Wildcats are operated by the Italian military?
Where did i say the wildcat is operated by the Italian military?
Well if its an off the shelf product, who's shelf was it sitting on then?
Where did i say Wildcat was off the shelf? Although it is. Not many differences between army air corps version and RN. Just a bit of wiring.
Well there are two options, it was either built for (therefore all R&D paid for) the British, OR the UK bought it off the shelf and it was already a fulling working product in use with another country and we bought it off their shelf. Which one is it? "
Agustawestland designed and started production. An anglo italian company ( mostly Italian) that became Leonardo helicopters. An Italian company. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about?
Yes I know what I'm talking about. How many Wildcats are operated by the Italian military?
Where did i say the wildcat is operated by the Italian military?
Well if its an off the shelf product, who's shelf was it sitting on then?
Where did i say Wildcat was off the shelf? Although it is. Not many differences between army air corps version and RN. Just a bit of wiring.
Well there are two options, it was either built for (therefore all R&D paid for) the British, OR the UK bought it off the shelf and it was already a fulling working product in use with another country and we bought it off their shelf. Which one is it?
Agustawestland designed and started production. An anglo italian company ( mostly Italian) that became Leonardo helicopters. An Italian company. "
So paid for by the British....
Designed by the British....
For the British.....
Built in Britain.....
Operated by the British.....
But it's an Italian helicopter?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Really what on earth are you talking about? Is this what you guys do when you're wrong? "
Here you go...
Those 8 chinooks were Mk3's purchased in 1995 by the MOD against RAF advice because they were the cheapest option. The intention was to reconfigure them to Mk2 specifications to be compatible with UK equipment. Around 80% of the way through the conversion of the first craft it was realised that it was not possible to complete the conversion and in 1998 the 8 chinooks were quietly hidden in a hanger to rust away (I know aluminium does not rust that was figurative). Then in 2004 because of the heavy lift shortages in Afghanistan the story surfaced in the media and some 5 times the cost of buying 8 new craft and 2 times the estimated cost of remods was spent to bring those 8 craft into service the last entering frontline service in 2012.
So you laugh and claim I am lying...
What is your problem? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about?
Yes I know what I'm talking about. How many Wildcats are operated by the Italian military?
Where did i say the wildcat is operated by the Italian military?
Well if its an off the shelf product, who's shelf was it sitting on then?
Where did i say Wildcat was off the shelf? Although it is. Not many differences between army air corps version and RN. Just a bit of wiring.
Well there are two options, it was either built for (therefore all R&D paid for) the British, OR the UK bought it off the shelf and it was already a fulling working product in use with another country and we bought it off their shelf. Which one is it?
Agustawestland designed and started production. An anglo italian company ( mostly Italian) that became Leonardo helicopters. An Italian company.
So paid for by the British....
Designed by the British....
For the British.....
Built in Britain.....
Operated by the British.....
But it's an Italian helicopter? "
Which part of italy is British? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Really what on earth are you talking about? Is this what you guys do when you're wrong?
Here you go...
Those 8 chinooks were Mk3's purchased in 1995 by the MOD against RAF advice because they were the cheapest option. The intention was to reconfigure them to Mk2 specifications to be compatible with UK equipment. Around 80% of the way through the conversion of the first craft it was realised that it was not possible to complete the conversion and in 1998 the 8 chinooks were quietly hidden in a hanger to rust away (I know aluminium does not rust that was figurative). Then in 2004 because of the heavy lift shortages in Afghanistan the story surfaced in the media and some 5 times the cost of buying 8 new craft and 2 times the estimated cost of remods was spent to bring those 8 craft into service the last entering frontline service in 2012.
So you laugh and claim I am lying...
What is your problem?"
Bless you. I'm not saying that you're lying. You just don't know what you're talking about. Its not your fault. What you can do is learn and not attack me. If that's possible for you. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about?
Yes I know what I'm talking about. How many Wildcats are operated by the Italian military?
Where did i say the wildcat is operated by the Italian military?
Well if its an off the shelf product, who's shelf was it sitting on then?
Where did i say Wildcat was off the shelf? Although it is. Not many differences between army air corps version and RN. Just a bit of wiring.
Well there are two options, it was either built for (therefore all R&D paid for) the British, OR the UK bought it off the shelf and it was already a fulling working product in use with another country and we bought it off their shelf. Which one is it?
Agustawestland designed and started production. An anglo italian company ( mostly Italian) that became Leonardo helicopters. An Italian company.
So paid for by the British....
Designed by the British....
For the British.....
Built in Britain.....
Operated by the British.....
But it's an Italian helicopter? "
Btw, a quick Google will tell you Britain won't be the sole operator. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about?
Yes I know what I'm talking about. How many Wildcats are operated by the Italian military?
Where did i say the wildcat is operated by the Italian military?
Well if its an off the shelf product, who's shelf was it sitting on then?
Where did i say Wildcat was off the shelf? Although it is. Not many differences between army air corps version and RN. Just a bit of wiring.
Well there are two options, it was either built for (therefore all R&D paid for) the British, OR the UK bought it off the shelf and it was already a fulling working product in use with another country and we bought it off their shelf. Which one is it?
Agustawestland designed and started production. An anglo italian company ( mostly Italian) that became Leonardo helicopters. An Italian company.
So paid for by the British....
Designed by the British....
For the British.....
Built in Britain.....
Operated by the British.....
But it's an Italian helicopter?
Btw, a quick Google will tell you Britain won't be the sole operator."
"You said "until" 2016."
I said it "was operated soley by the Brits until 2016".
Have a think about what that means...."
Figured it out yet?  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about?
Yes I know what I'm talking about. How many Wildcats are operated by the Italian military?
Where did i say the wildcat is operated by the Italian military?
Well if its an off the shelf product, who's shelf was it sitting on then?
Where did i say Wildcat was off the shelf? Although it is. Not many differences between army air corps version and RN. Just a bit of wiring.
Well there are two options, it was either built for (therefore all R&D paid for) the British, OR the UK bought it off the shelf and it was already a fulling working product in use with another country and we bought it off their shelf. Which one is it?
Agustawestland designed and started production. An anglo italian company ( mostly Italian) that became Leonardo helicopters. An Italian company.
So paid for by the British....
Designed by the British....
For the British.....
Built in Britain.....
Operated by the British.....
But it's an Italian helicopter?
Btw, a quick Google will tell you Britain won't be the sole operator.
"You said "until" 2016."
I said it "was operated soley by the Brits until 2016".
Have a think about what that means...."
Figured it out yet? "
Oh yeah! I get it! Just seeing it from a different angle. You still haven't explained how an aircraft produced byvan Italian company is British though. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about?
Yes I know what I'm talking about. How many Wildcats are operated by the Italian military?
Where did i say the wildcat is operated by the Italian military?
Well if its an off the shelf product, who's shelf was it sitting on then?
Where did i say Wildcat was off the shelf? Although it is. Not many differences between army air corps version and RN. Just a bit of wiring.
Well there are two options, it was either built for (therefore all R&D paid for) the British, OR the UK bought it off the shelf and it was already a fulling working product in use with another country and we bought it off their shelf. Which one is it?
Agustawestland designed and started production. An anglo italian company ( mostly Italian) that became Leonardo helicopters. An Italian company.
So paid for by the British....
Designed by the British....
For the British.....
Built in Britain.....
Operated by the British.....
But it's an Italian helicopter?
Btw, a quick Google will tell you Britain won't be the sole operator.
"You said "until" 2016."
I said it "was operated soley by the Brits until 2016".
Have a think about what that means...."
Figured it out yet?
Oh yeah! I get it! Just seeing it from a different angle. You still haven't explained how an aircraft produced byvan Italian company is British though."
Paid for by the British....
Designed by the British....
For the British.....
Built in Britain.....
Operated by the British.....
British. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"I believe that all the airframe jigs and fixtures are owned by the MOD.
I wouldn't have thought so. I expect Leonardo's will try and sell wildcat to all the countries that currently operate Lynx."
Thought you might be interested in this from the UK Defence Journal:
Minister for Defence Procurement Harriett Baldwin confirmed that AW159 Wildcat work will continue in the UK.
Options had been considered to relocate the fabrication work for future AW159 helicopters orders – the export version of the Wildcat helicopters already in service with the British Army and Royal Navy – overseas.
A press release states:
“After careful joint analysis with the Ministry of Defence, Leonardo Helicopters in Yeovil has confirmed that it will carry out all future fabrication for the AW159 helicopter in the UK, with much of this work being undertaken at its Somerset facility – an agreement that will sustain 40 highly skilled jobs across the UK-based supply chain.
Wildcat is a highly versatile aircraft, capable of a wide a range of tasks over land and sea. The Royal Navy’s maritime Wildcat forms the core of the UK’s Frigate and Destroyer aviation capability and performs tasks including Anti-Surface and Submarine Warfare, force protection, transport and the vital information, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance (ISTAR) role. Similarly, the Army variant performs reconnaissance, command and control, force protection, and transport roles in a wide variety of environments.”
Minister for Defence Procurement Harriett Baldwin said:
“I am delighted that a solution for UK-based fabrication for the AW159 helicopter has been identified between the MOD and Leonardo Helicopters. An agreement that secures Yeovil as the home of AW159 and Wildcat production and maintenance in the UK.
This work has not only helped sustain 40 highly skilled jobs within the UK, but will act as a positive boost for the company and, through improved cost-effectiveness, their export customers. I would also like to pay tribute to Marcus Fysh MP, who has worked tirelessly to secure this great result.”
Over a decade ago the MoD bought, as part of the 2006 Wildcat demonstration and manufacturing contract, a number of specialised jigs and tooling for the fabrication of the AW159 Wildcat Helicopters. It is understood that These essential parts are used to ensure airframe alignment, mould, patterns and manufacturing tools and gauges. These will now be used by Leonardo to carry out the fabrication work in the UK.
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
" Buying British? Such as what?
Wildcat for example
Its Italian.
It's not an off the shelf helicopter in use by the Italian military that we have brought. It's a helicopter designed to an MOD spec and built in the UK.
Was it better to do that, or should we have purchased for example a helicopter that was already in use by another military?
Well the next gen Apache will be a U.S. aircraft built to UK spec. That will mean no new assembly work for Leonardo helicopters at Yeovil.
But it will save the government millions.
Your question is really are jobs important or is saving money important?
It's part of it, but not all of it. The apache is a great example. We brought off the shelf, and very quickly got a very capable aircraft. Like Will says above, if we had tried to build it ourselves, it would have taken years longer, been a fudge of compromises, and been way over budget.
So it's not jobs vs money, because defence procurement shouldn't be about getting what's cheapest, but about the best solution. Is it worth keeping British jobs, if the military end up with a sub-par product? Is the role of the military to protect British interests around the world, or as a customer of useless equipment as long as it keeps a Brit in a job?
We didn't buy the Apache off the shelf! It was assembled in Yeovil. It uses RR engines. Different avionics, different mission system, different radios. It cost a fortune! That's why the new one is coming straight from the states with minimal differences.
I think you are missing the point, quite possibly on purpose. You seem to be saying that the Apache is British, even though it's been in service with the US since 1986, yet the Wildcat which was operated solely by the Brits until 2016 is actually Italian, despite the fact that the Italian military doesn't own or operate any.
The Wildcat has only just come into service. Its made by Leonardo helicopters. Do you know what you're talking about?
Yes I know what I'm talking about. How many Wildcats are operated by the Italian military?
Where did i say the wildcat is operated by the Italian military?
Well if its an off the shelf product, who's shelf was it sitting on then?
Where did i say Wildcat was off the shelf? Although it is. Not many differences between army air corps version and RN. Just a bit of wiring.
Well there are two options, it was either built for (therefore all R&D paid for) the British, OR the UK bought it off the shelf and it was already a fulling working product in use with another country and we bought it off their shelf. Which one is it?
Agustawestland designed and started production. An anglo italian company ( mostly Italian) that became Leonardo helicopters. An Italian company.
So paid for by the British....
Designed by the British....
For the British.....
Built in Britain.....
Operated by the British.....
But it's an Italian helicopter?
Btw, a quick Google will tell you Britain won't be the sole operator.
"You said "until" 2016."
I said it "was operated soley by the Brits until 2016".
Have a think about what that means...."
Figured it out yet?
Oh yeah! I get it! Just seeing it from a different angle. You still haven't explained how an aircraft produced byvan Italian company is British though.
Paid for by the British....
Designed by the British....
For the British.....
Built in Britain.....
Operated by the British.....
British."
Paid for by the British....
Designed by AgustaWestland....
For the international market.....
Built in Britain by Leonardo.....
Operated by the British and other countries. (eventually)
|
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I believe that all the airframe jigs and fixtures are owned by the MOD.
I wouldn't have thought so. I expect Leonardo's will try and sell wildcat to all the countries that currently operate Lynx.
Thought you might be interested in this from the UK Defence Journal:
Minister for Defence Procurement Harriett Baldwin confirmed that AW159 Wildcat work will continue in the UK.
Options had been considered to relocate the fabrication work for future AW159 helicopters orders – the export version of the Wildcat helicopters already in service with the British Army and Royal Navy – overseas.
A press release states:
“After careful joint analysis with the Ministry of Defence, Leonardo Helicopters in Yeovil has confirmed that it will carry out all future fabrication for the AW159 helicopter in the UK, with much of this work being undertaken at its Somerset facility – an agreement that will sustain 40 highly skilled jobs across the UK-based supply chain.
Wildcat is a highly versatile aircraft, capable of a wide a range of tasks over land and sea. The Royal Navy’s maritime Wildcat forms the core of the UK’s Frigate and Destroyer aviation capability and performs tasks including Anti-Surface and Submarine Warfare, force protection, transport and the vital information, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance (ISTAR) role. Similarly, the Army variant performs reconnaissance, command and control, force protection, and transport roles in a wide variety of environments.”
Minister for Defence Procurement Harriett Baldwin said:
“I am delighted that a solution for UK-based fabrication for the AW159 helicopter has been identified between the MOD and Leonardo Helicopters. An agreement that secures Yeovil as the home of AW159 and Wildcat production and maintenance in the UK.
This work has not only helped sustain 40 highly skilled jobs within the UK, but will act as a positive boost for the company and, through improved cost-effectiveness, their export customers. I would also like to pay tribute to Marcus Fysh MP, who has worked tirelessly to secure this great result.”
Over a decade ago the MoD bought, as part of the 2006 Wildcat demonstration and manufacturing contract, a number of specialised jigs and tooling for the fabrication of the AW159 Wildcat Helicopters. It is understood that These essential parts are used to ensure airframe alignment, mould, patterns and manufacturing tools and gauges. These will now be used by Leonardo to carry out the fabrication work in the UK.
"
40?! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"I believe that all the airframe jigs and fixtures are owned by the MOD.
I wouldn't have thought so. I expect Leonardo's will try and sell wildcat to all the countries that currently operate Lynx.
Thought you might be interested in this from the UK Defence Journal:
Minister for Defence Procurement Harriett Baldwin confirmed that AW159 Wildcat work will continue in the UK.
Options had been considered to relocate the fabrication work for future AW159 helicopters orders – the export version of the Wildcat helicopters already in service with the British Army and Royal Navy – overseas.
A press release states:
“After careful joint analysis with the Ministry of Defence, Leonardo Helicopters in Yeovil has confirmed that it will carry out all future fabrication for the AW159 helicopter in the UK, with much of this work being undertaken at its Somerset facility – an agreement that will sustain 40 highly skilled jobs across the UK-based supply chain.
Wildcat is a highly versatile aircraft, capable of a wide a range of tasks over land and sea. The Royal Navy’s maritime Wildcat forms the core of the UK’s Frigate and Destroyer aviation capability and performs tasks including Anti-Surface and Submarine Warfare, force protection, transport and the vital information, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance (ISTAR) role. Similarly, the Army variant performs reconnaissance, command and control, force protection, and transport roles in a wide variety of environments.”
Minister for Defence Procurement Harriett Baldwin said:
“I am delighted that a solution for UK-based fabrication for the AW159 helicopter has been identified between the MOD and Leonardo Helicopters. An agreement that secures Yeovil as the home of AW159 and Wildcat production and maintenance in the UK.
This work has not only helped sustain 40 highly skilled jobs within the UK, but will act as a positive boost for the company and, through improved cost-effectiveness, their export customers. I would also like to pay tribute to Marcus Fysh MP, who has worked tirelessly to secure this great result.”
Over a decade ago the MoD bought, as part of the 2006 Wildcat demonstration and manufacturing contract, a number of specialised jigs and tooling for the fabrication of the AW159 Wildcat Helicopters. It is understood that These essential parts are used to ensure airframe alignment, mould, patterns and manufacturing tools and gauges. These will now be used by Leonardo to carry out the fabrication work in the UK.
"
I knew that I'd read somewhere about the MOD owning the airframe jigs and tooling.
My memory isn't as bad as I thought!  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"I believe that all the airframe jigs and fixtures are owned by the MOD.
I wouldn't have thought so. I expect Leonardo's will try and sell wildcat to all the countries that currently operate Lynx.
Thought you might be interested in this from the UK Defence Journal:
Minister for Defence Procurement Harriett Baldwin confirmed that AW159 Wildcat work will continue in the UK.
Options had been considered to relocate the fabrication work for future AW159 helicopters orders – the export version of the Wildcat helicopters already in service with the British Army and Royal Navy – overseas.
A press release states:
“After careful joint analysis with the Ministry of Defence, Leonardo Helicopters in Yeovil has confirmed that it will carry out all future fabrication for the AW159 helicopter in the UK, with much of this work being undertaken at its Somerset facility – an agreement that will sustain 40 highly skilled jobs across the UK-based supply chain.
Wildcat is a highly versatile aircraft, capable of a wide a range of tasks over land and sea. The Royal Navy’s maritime Wildcat forms the core of the UK’s Frigate and Destroyer aviation capability and performs tasks including Anti-Surface and Submarine Warfare, force protection, transport and the vital information, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance (ISTAR) role. Similarly, the Army variant performs reconnaissance, command and control, force protection, and transport roles in a wide variety of environments.”
Minister for Defence Procurement Harriett Baldwin said:
“I am delighted that a solution for UK-based fabrication for the AW159 helicopter has been identified between the MOD and Leonardo Helicopters. An agreement that secures Yeovil as the home of AW159 and Wildcat production and maintenance in the UK.
This work has not only helped sustain 40 highly skilled jobs within the UK, but will act as a positive boost for the company and, through improved cost-effectiveness, their export customers. I would also like to pay tribute to Marcus Fysh MP, who has worked tirelessly to secure this great result.”
Over a decade ago the MoD bought, as part of the 2006 Wildcat demonstration and manufacturing contract, a number of specialised jigs and tooling for the fabrication of the AW159 Wildcat Helicopters. It is understood that These essential parts are used to ensure airframe alignment, mould, patterns and manufacturing tools and gauges. These will now be used by Leonardo to carry out the fabrication work in the UK.
I knew that I'd read somewhere about the MOD owning the airframe jigs and tooling.
My memory isn't as bad as I thought! "
Kind of a blackmxxl i guess. "You can sell wildcat internationally, but we own the jigs so your building them here!" Shrewd move! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"I believe that all the airframe jigs and fixtures are owned by the MOD.
I wouldn't have thought so. I expect Leonardo's will try and sell wildcat to all the countries that currently operate Lynx.
Thought you might be interested in this from the UK Defence Journal:
Minister for Defence Procurement Harriett Baldwin confirmed that AW159 Wildcat work will continue in the UK.
Options had been considered to relocate the fabrication work for future AW159 helicopters orders – the export version of the Wildcat helicopters already in service with the British Army and Royal Navy – overseas.
A press release states:
“After careful joint analysis with the Ministry of Defence, Leonardo Helicopters in Yeovil has confirmed that it will carry out all future fabrication for the AW159 helicopter in the UK, with much of this work being undertaken at its Somerset facility – an agreement that will sustain 40 highly skilled jobs across the UK-based supply chain.
Wildcat is a highly versatile aircraft, capable of a wide a range of tasks over land and sea. The Royal Navy’s maritime Wildcat forms the core of the UK’s Frigate and Destroyer aviation capability and performs tasks including Anti-Surface and Submarine Warfare, force protection, transport and the vital information, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance (ISTAR) role. Similarly, the Army variant performs reconnaissance, command and control, force protection, and transport roles in a wide variety of environments.”
Minister for Defence Procurement Harriett Baldwin said:
“I am delighted that a solution for UK-based fabrication for the AW159 helicopter has been identified between the MOD and Leonardo Helicopters. An agreement that secures Yeovil as the home of AW159 and Wildcat production and maintenance in the UK.
This work has not only helped sustain 40 highly skilled jobs within the UK, but will act as a positive boost for the company and, through improved cost-effectiveness, their export customers. I would also like to pay tribute to Marcus Fysh MP, who has worked tirelessly to secure this great result.”
Over a decade ago the MoD bought, as part of the 2006 Wildcat demonstration and manufacturing contract, a number of specialised jigs and tooling for the fabrication of the AW159 Wildcat Helicopters. It is understood that These essential parts are used to ensure airframe alignment, mould, patterns and manufacturing tools and gauges. These will now be used by Leonardo to carry out the fabrication work in the UK.
I knew that I'd read somewhere about the MOD owning the airframe jigs and tooling.
My memory isn't as bad as I thought!
Kind of a blackmxxl i guess. "You can sell wildcat internationally, but we own the jigs so your building them here!" Shrewd move! "
Almost as though it's a British helicopter |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Bless you. I'm not saying that you're lying. You just don't know what you're talking about. Its not your fault. What you can do is learn and not attack me. If that's possible for you. "
Thank you for your blessing, I will treasure it.
So I am not lying...
Therefore what I say is the truth but I don't understand and need to learn from you.
Now what could you teach me? Maybe that those 8 Mk3-47A Chinooks were part of a US Marine canceled order, manufactured by Boeing Rotorcraft Systems at Ridley Park, Pennsylvania. sold at a knockdown price and delivered to the MOD in 1995 with a 3 year conversion timetable (that failed)? Nope I already know that.
Maybe you think you can teach me about the Official Secrets Act...
I doubt it, if you could I am sure that Constable Plod would have already visited me to have a word in my shell like. But considering I am always very careful to never speak about anything that is not already in the public domain it cant be that. Or maybe you think by passing comments about your superiority you will teach me my place, again I am sorry to disappoint you but all you do is make me laugh and look for opportunities to further humiliate you.
You do realise that every time you pipe up on military matters i end up humiliating you with everyone who reads our posts objectively. Because I quote approximate dates and timeframes knowing that people like you will latch on to the small error and neglect to address the underlying issues I am addressing.
You really need to go back to school and learn the art of critical comprehension, because I am not the only one that does this to you and you never seem to notice. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Bless you. I'm not saying that you're lying. You just don't know what you're talking about. Its not your fault. What you can do is learn and not attack me. If that's possible for you.
Thank you for your blessing, I will treasure it.
So I am not lying...
Therefore what I say is the truth but I don't understand and need to learn from you.
Now what could you teach me? Maybe that those 8 Mk3-47A Chinooks were part of a US Marine canceled order, manufactured by Boeing Rotorcraft Systems at Ridley Park, Pennsylvania. sold at a knockdown price and delivered to the MOD in 1995 with a 3 year conversion timetable (that failed)? Nope I already know that.
Maybe you think you can teach me about the Official Secrets Act...
I doubt it, if you could I am sure that Constable Plod would have already visited me to have a word in my shell like. But considering I am always very careful to never speak about anything that is not already in the public domain it cant be that. Or maybe you think by passing comments about your superiority you will teach me my place, again I am sorry to disappoint you but all you do is make me laugh and look for opportunities to further humiliate you.
You do realise that every time you pipe up on military matters i end up humiliating you with everyone who reads our posts objectively. Because I quote approximate dates and timeframes knowing that people like you will latch on to the small error and neglect to address the underlying issues I am addressing.
You really need to go back to school and learn the art of critical comprehension, because I am not the only one that does this to you and you never seem to notice."
I dont understand why you turn into an angry child when you're wrong. Sometimes its ok just to say "I don't know". |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"I believe that all the airframe jigs and fixtures are owned by the MOD.
I wouldn't have thought so. I expect Leonardo's will try and sell wildcat to all the countries that currently operate Lynx.
Thought you might be interested in this from the UK Defence Journal:
Minister for Defence Procurement Harriett Baldwin confirmed that AW159 Wildcat work will continue in the UK.
Options had been considered to relocate the fabrication work for future AW159 helicopters orders – the export version of the Wildcat helicopters already in service with the British Army and Royal Navy – overseas.
A press release states:
“After careful joint analysis with the Ministry of Defence, Leonardo Helicopters in Yeovil has confirmed that it will carry out all future fabrication for the AW159 helicopter in the UK, with much of this work being undertaken at its Somerset facility – an agreement that will sustain 40 highly skilled jobs across the UK-based supply chain.
Wildcat is a highly versatile aircraft, capable of a wide a range of tasks over land and sea. The Royal Navy’s maritime Wildcat forms the core of the UK’s Frigate and Destroyer aviation capability and performs tasks including Anti-Surface and Submarine Warfare, force protection, transport and the vital information, surveillance, target acquisition, and reconnaissance (ISTAR) role. Similarly, the Army variant performs reconnaissance, command and control, force protection, and transport roles in a wide variety of environments.”
Minister for Defence Procurement Harriett Baldwin said:
“I am delighted that a solution for UK-based fabrication for the AW159 helicopter has been identified between the MOD and Leonardo Helicopters. An agreement that secures Yeovil as the home of AW159 and Wildcat production and maintenance in the UK.
This work has not only helped sustain 40 highly skilled jobs within the UK, but will act as a positive boost for the company and, through improved cost-effectiveness, their export customers. I would also like to pay tribute to Marcus Fysh MP, who has worked tirelessly to secure this great result.”
Over a decade ago the MoD bought, as part of the 2006 Wildcat demonstration and manufacturing contract, a number of specialised jigs and tooling for the fabrication of the AW159 Wildcat Helicopters. It is understood that These essential parts are used to ensure airframe alignment, mould, patterns and manufacturing tools and gauges. These will now be used by Leonardo to carry out the fabrication work in the UK.
I knew that I'd read somewhere about the MOD owning the airframe jigs and tooling.
My memory isn't as bad as I thought!
Kind of a blackmxxl i guess. "You can sell wildcat internationally, but we own the jigs so your building them here!" Shrewd move! "
Its something I see quite a lot these days. This tooling would be very expensive, but could be written off as a capital cost by the bean counters.
And as you say, the MOD holds all the good cards in the Wildcat project. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *LCC OP Couple
over a year ago
Cambridge |
"Fucking hell, is there anything some of you won't argue about  "
No, we love arguing on here. My favourite ridiculous argument so far is when I said that toddlers don't care what Michael Gove says, and the other poster was adamant that toddlers did indeed care what Michael Gove says! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *ercuryMan
over a year ago
Grantham |
"Fucking hell, is there anything some of you won't argue about
No, we love arguing on here. My favourite ridiculous argument so far is when I said that toddlers don't care what Michael Gove says, and the other poster was adamant that toddlers did indeed care what Michael Gove says! "
Is this the 5 minute arguement, or the full half hour?
You have to be of a certain age to get that! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
