Future UK Combat Aircraft (Project Tempest)

[Meriv9]

P.s. the argument or military intervention from a China attack doesn't work simple because the US would intervene not because of a few planes sold but because of a strategic need of defending Japan. Or do you really believe it would loose its beachhead on the Asian continent?

[Caribbean]

Italy buys P1, Japan buys something from us directly or from you and you end the triangle buying something from us.

You have a rather nice LHD. It would look lovely next to our two carriers. It even has the right number of towers ............

[SD67]

reasons

Luckily the US has other things to offer other that technology transfer, like actual defense.

"Dear Japan, if you buy our jets, we will defend you with our biggest navy in the world ,our biggest air force in the world and our best equipped army in the world including our nuclear weapons, love America" versus "Dear Japan, partner with us in developing new jets and if China invades, we will send you our very best wishes, love Britain P.S. if Jeremy is our PM we won't even send you that"

Ron if it were was black and white as that then the Saudis would never have bought Typhoon and Tornado. Didn’t affect the US decision in GW1. The US is confronting / competing with China in the Pacific for a host of very good strategic reasons and one fighter purchase is not going to change that.
Japan are already collaborating with us on Meteor. The sky hasn’t fallen on anyone.

Whether they’d actually be a good partner for Tempest - I have my doubts. Most likely they’re using us as leverage to get the
Operational sovereignty they’re looking for. I

On the P1 / P8 question I think the RAF should have at least held a competition. With a transparent process and a clear validated set of requirements. Funny how Boeing seems to always get waved though without a competition <cough cough> Ryanair Factor <cough cough>

We were talking about Japan and with Japan, the UK has next to no leverage compared with the US. That is my point. If you want to argue otherwise have at it. If you want to talk about Saudi Arabia, that is another discussion.

No "threat", implied or otherwise, of partnering with the Brits on Tempest will make the slightest difference to the US poistion. It's a paper tiger (see what I did there).

Collaborating on Meteor eh? Jury is still out on that one.

Regarding P1 vs P8, why have a competition when the world and his brother knows who the winner is going to be? Effing pointless.

Or as the Brit general in charge of MVRP said when asked why didn't he have a competition before choosing the American JLTV "the other companies clearly could not build a vehicle for less than twice the price so why bother?".

So whoever is in charge of the P-8 purchase might say, "the Yanks lets us train and fly their P-8's for free for however many years since Nimrod was binned on the understanding we would eventually buy P-8's, are we now going to say we've changed our minds?"

Sorry I don't get the Ryanair reference. If it's another limey whinge then I'm not interested in getting it either.

You have a competition to get a good deal.
Funny about the JLTV. In the year since that Single source decision was made the price seems to have doubled. Funny that. Generals should not be conducting these negotiations - their job is to point it at the enemy and make it go bang.
We are Boeing’s largest customer customer outside the US, yet they charge some very chunky prices don’t build anything here and bill us in US dollars. I don’t know what line of business you’ve worked in but I’ve worked for BAE Bosch GE and Siemens and out there in the real world you tender everything. The presumption is that anyone who doesn’t tender is on the take.
The fact that Trump is needing to lean on Japan shows that Tempest is getting serious transaction.
The Ryanair factor is a British joke about post service career planning

[ArmChairCivvy]

In the year since that Single source decision was made the price seems to have doubled.

Just today read about the "MRAPs in a hurry" report that the US Gvmnt/ Army may have been defrauded of $ 1.6 bn
- breaking news, let's see about the substance behind it

[Ares]

According to some domestic Japanese articles released today, the majority in the ministry of defense still prefers collaborating with the UK rather than the US. They say a government official said, "if we choose the suggestion from the US, we will be a US's duck, it's very negative on taking the lead position."

And Reuter Japan says that Britain proposed to Japan the joint development of the fighter's content-in-system and electronic devices. Without limiting the use of the intellectual property rights of a technology developed, Japan is free to design the shape of the fighter and engine. A Japanese official says 'There is a growing interest in the British proposal'.

[ArmChairCivvy]

Reuter Japan says that Britain proposed to Japan the joint development of the fighter's content-in-system and electronic devices.

- AKA signing up to the Pyramid part of Team Tempest's efforts (and funding )

[Ron5]

You have a competition to get a good deal.

The US had one. That's why JLTV is so cheap. The UK is getting them at the same price as the US army is getting them. Plus the cost of the unique UK bits of course.

In the year since that Single source decision was made the price seems to have doubled

Rumor not confirmed by the head of the UK program. I'm sure it has gone up, just by not that much, and I'm sure it's mostly because of the lousy UK exchange rate i.e. your fault.

Generals should not be conducting these negotiations

They do not. In either country.

The fact that Trump is needing to lean on Japan shows that Tempest is getting serious transaction.

Not Trump but yes, the US admin is applying pressure just as the UK government is applying pressure to buy UK military equipment. It's BAU. Happens everywhere.

The Ryanair factor is a British joke about post service career planning

I'm with you on "revolving doors", I dislike the practice myself. Does the taxpayer no favors.

[Lord Jim]

There are some serious pitfalls with tendering. In all too many cases, the winner has bid below what the actual cost of a programme should be and then expects the MoD to bail them out as the real cost is revealed. Things may have changed these days, but in my time at the MoD we were not allowed to include "Penalty" clauses in our contracts, but rather "Carrot" clauses where if the contractor delivered on time or early they got a bonus. Hopefully things have oved on because industry used to run rings around the MoD when negotiating contracts

[SD67]

There are some serious pitfalls with tendering. In all too many cases, the winner has bid below what the actual cost of a programme should be and then expects the MoD to bail them out as the real cost is revealed. Things may have changed these days, but in my time at the MoD we were not allowed to include "Penalty" clauses in our contracts, but rather "Carrot" clauses where if the contractor delivered on time or early they got a bonus. Hopefully things have oved on because industry used to run rings around the MoD when negotiating contracts

I admit I've not worked for the MOD, but when I was in Automotive it was like this - if there's any suspicion of the "low ball then escalate" game being played the OEMs would insist on an "open book" bid, show us where your numbers come from right down to the wage rates and overhead breakdown. We half joked that the customer knew more about our costs than we did.

The penalty clause thing - I understand they may in some cases not be legally enforceable hence as you say it's always an "incentive" rather than a "penalty" that calms the lawyers nerves.

[SD67]

You have a competition to get a good deal.

The US had one. That's why JLTV is so cheap. The UK is getting them at the same price as the US army is getting them. Plus the cost of the unique UK bits of course.

In the year since that Single source decision was made the price seems to have doubled

Rumor not confirmed by the head of the UK program. I'm sure it has gone up, just by not that much, and I'm sure it's mostly because of the lousy UK exchange rate i.e. your fault.

Generals should not be conducting these negotiations

They do not. In either country.

The fact that Trump is needing to lean on Japan shows that Tempest is getting serious transaction.

Not Trump but yes, the US admin is applying pressure just as the UK government is applying pressure to buy UK military equipment. It's BAU. Happens everywhere.

The Ryanair factor is a British joke about post service career planning

I'm with you on "revolving doors", I dislike the practice myself. Does the taxpayer no favors.

The GBP USD exchange rate is the same as it was 2 years ago. In most business the supplier hedges the exchange rate not the customer. Ok arms are different, but at the end of the day it's all taxpayer's money
I agree political pressure happens everywhere obviously, there are stories of Thatcher rejoicing back in the 80s when the US congress blocked arms sales to Saudi Arabia. The result was Al-Yamamah. We'll see what happens in Japan. The US may win but theyll have to work for it.

[ArmChairCivvy]

insist on an "open book" bid

Weren't the carriers done on open book?
Before the carrier era I was working with companies that copied the practice, they said, from the MoD; it was a disaster. One can always compound a disaster by adding micromanagement: We would like to have several suppliers working together... no one will be the Prime ( as in my name is Gordon and Amyas will be my Project Director - but he'll only do contracts and after the fact auditing of 'open' books )

[Ron5]

You have a competition to get a good deal.

The US had one. That's why JLTV is so cheap. The UK is getting them at the same price as the US army is getting them. Plus the cost of the unique UK bits of course.

In the year since that Single source decision was made the price seems to have doubled

Rumor not confirmed by the head of the UK program. I'm sure it has gone up, just by not that much, and I'm sure it's mostly because of the lousy UK exchange rate i.e. your fault.

Generals should not be conducting these negotiations

They do not. In either country.

The fact that Trump is needing to lean on Japan shows that Tempest is getting serious transaction.

Not Trump but yes, the US admin is applying pressure just as the UK government is applying pressure to buy UK military equipment. It's BAU. Happens everywhere.

The Ryanair factor is a British joke about post service career planning

I'm with you on "revolving doors", I dislike the practice myself. Does the taxpayer no favors.

The GBP USD exchange rate is the same as it was 2 years ago. In most business the supplier hedges the exchange rate not the customer. Ok arms are different, but at the end of the day it's all taxpayer's money
I agree political pressure happens everywhere obviously, there are stories of Thatcher rejoicing back in the 80s when the US congress blocked arms sales to Saudi Arabia. The result was Al-Yamamah. We'll see what happens in Japan. The US may win but theyll have to work for it.

As it should be.

Good news on the exchange rate thanks to you guys getting the right answer on Thursday

[Ron5]

insist on an "open book" bid

Weren't the carriers done on open book?
Before the carrier era I was working with companies that copied the practice, they said, from the MoD; it was a disaster. One can always compound a disaster by adding micromanagement: We would like to have several suppliers working together... no one will be the Prime ( as in my name is Gordon and Amyas will be my Project Director - but he'll only do contracts and after the fact auditing of 'open' books )

I think single source contracts under MoD rules require open book but, of course, open book is only useful if the customer can read the language it is written in.

But in the case of the carriers, the UK seems to have gotten a great deal even with the billion or so flushed away for nothing by one fiscally illiterate Gordon Brown in delaying the delivery in order to save (then) in year expenditure. A financial genius in his own mind who seriously thought he was a candidate for president of the world bank. Good grief.

I firmly believe, with no evidence whatsoever, if the new chancellor removed the Brown/Osborne/Hammond colored glasses from the Treasury, he would find that with exactly the same Type 26 program expenditure over a shorter time span, more ships could be built and delivered by Bae by allowing them to capitalize on productivity improvements and speed of build such that later units would come off the line quicker than earlier. The consequent savings in paying off Type 23's earlier would be significant let alone the decrease in demand on seagoing manpower.

Sorry for thread creep.

[serge750]

long term financial thinking helps so much rather than short term savings.

[Timmymagic]

I admit I've not worked for the MOD, but when I was in Automotive it was like this - if there's any suspicion of the "low ball then escalate" game being played the OEMs would insist on an "open book" bid, show us where your numbers come from right down to the wage rates and overhead breakdown. We half joked that the customer knew more about our costs than we did.

The penalty clause thing - I understand they may in some cases not be legally enforceable hence as you say it's always an "incentive" rather than a "penalty" that calms the lawyers nerves.

We've moved to KPI's now and delay payments if milestones are missed. With benchmarking built into contracts for any change management. There are companies out there who have a reputation of doing the profit via change management route and they are dying on their arse as a result. I've personally been involved with shafting one of the most notorious of those companies recently, a name that is probably the best known in outsourcing for Government, with a reputation to match. The look on their face when they realised what was happening was a sight to behold. Some of them will go under....and not a moment too soon. I genuinely think that most cannot adapt to the new way of getting paid for delivering on time and spec and getting hammered when they don't.

[Lord Jim]

That is really good to hear, but it does put a lot of emphasis on getting the original contract right.

[ArmChairCivvy]

We've moved to KPI's now

How is that different from KURs?
- ok, that is US Speak
- but KPIs, in mgt speak, normally relate to on-going performance

[Timmymagic]

- but KPIs, in mgt speak, normally relate to on-going performance

You also use them in development programmes, Milestones tend to be fewer in number but you can use them to measure and mark any performance. Truth is they don't like it up 'em.

[SW1]

https://www.leonardocompany.com/en/pres ... technology

Leonardo UK has demonstrated the performance of a new radar receiver/warner technology as part of its on-going development work for Tempest, the next generation combat air project which will see the UK, Italy and Sweden working closely together. In a laboratory demonstration for the UK Ministry of Defence and other Team Tempest partners, the new sensor demonstrated a direction finding performance of four times what is possible with a typical radar warning receiver while being just 1/10th the size of a standard system.

Leonardo UK is one of the four founding members of Team Tempest, which was brought together by the UK MOD to develop a next generation combat air system for the UK and partner nations: since the team was contracted to begin development work in 2018, Italy and Sweden have announced their intent to work with the UK on this project. Leonardo’s UK role in the team is to develop Tempest’s sensor package and integrate these sensors into the platform’s mission system. The ambitious timescale for the Tempest project, which is working towards seeing a new aircraft in-service with the RAF in 2035, means that Leonardo in the UK is already hard at work developing some of the advanced technologies which will be needed to face the threats of the future.

[Ares]

Another delta-wing joins the party

[inch]

Sorry ares can't read it ,who's new design?

[Lord Jim]

It will be interesting to see what the RAF's (and FAA's) fast jet fleets will look like towards the end of the next decade.. Being optimistic I can see the RAF have the Typhoon in service with six squadrons including an OCU/OEU, being stationed at Conningsby and Lossiemouth. To this we could have four smaller squadrons of F-35Bs operated by both the RAF and FAA, again including the OCU/OEU and all stationed at Marham. I cannot see any further squadrons as this would probably mean the re opening of a forth RAF Station and al the cost that would go with that.

In the above scenario, if we bought more F-35s these would probably replace the Typhoons at RAF Conningsby with the Typhoon force being concentrated at Lossiemouth with three or possibly four squadrons,, and two or three squadrons of the former moving in to the former station.

This could mean the RAF and FAA Fast Jet fleet stabilising around ten to eleven squadrons over three RAF Stations, and that would mean we would end up purchasing sufficient "Son of Tempest" airframes to re equip the Lossiemouth Wing, say between seventy and eighty planes in total, unless the older F-35s at Conningsby were also replaced bringing the requirement up to a possible total of one hundred and twenty.

[Ares]

Sorry ares can't read it ,who's new design?

It's a newly emerged domestic design from Japan's MoD FY2020 revise budget document released yesterday.
The government decided to start the development of its own design of fighter with spending ¥28 billion next year.

[SW1]

This could mean the RAF and FAA Fast Jet fleet stabilising around ten to eleven squadrons over three RAF Stations, and that would mean we would end up purchasing sufficient "Son of Tempest" airframes to re equip the Lossiemouth Wing, say between seventy and eighty planes in total, unless the older F-35s at Conningsby were also replaced bringing the requirement up to a possible total of one hundred and twenty.

Being optimistic I would suggest manpower means we can only have 8 operational sqns 6 typhoon 2 f35. The choice going fwd really will be follow the German lead and have a heavily modified typhoon or develop a manned platform out of tempest or buy more f35. Personally I see f35 numbers not getting above 52. So it will be one of the first two options.

[Lord Jim]

From what I have read it seems the F-35B Squadrons will only have eight aircraft available each at any one time with around twelve in the OCU/OEU so the number already agreed would match with the idea of three frontline Squadrons and the training/evaluation unit. This still allows the deployments of twelve aircraft, but these will be from multiple units rather than individual Squadrons.