If it meets the requirements within the budget envelope, who would argue?shark bait wrote:...still favourable configuration...
Build five and the LSS conundrum is solved too.
If it meets the requirements within the budget envelope, who would argue?shark bait wrote:...still favourable configuration...
More likely is that they can't drum up enough entrants to have a competition. For the Type 31, they leaned on Atlas Elektronik,a tiny bunch of UK based electrical engineers, to put forward a farcical 3rd entrant just to make up the numbers. The company was later rewarded with a contract for their regular products.Lord Jim wrote:Could it be that the "Piggy Bank" in the MoD is already empty even though they were supposed to proceed with the FSS by restarting the competition, and so are hoping to get some extra funding on the quite in order to support UK Ship building? It would be quite embarrassing to run the competition, choose a winner and then have to put the contract on hold as there is no money to actually order the ships!
Did they put in a serious bid? I suppose they must have met the minimum requirements, but they didn't exceed them like Babcock did ("here you go, checks all the boxes plus here's a shit load of extra space offering you better sea keeping, endurance, range, flexibility and scope for through-life upgrades").Ron5 wrote:More likely is that they can't drum up enough entrants to have a competition. For the Type 31, they leaned on Atlas Elektronik,a tiny bunch of UK based electrical engineers, to put forward a farcical 3rd entrant just to make up the numbers. The company was later rewarded with a contract for their regular products.Lord Jim wrote:Could it be that the "Piggy Bank" in the MoD is already empty even though they were supposed to proceed with the FSS by restarting the competition, and so are hoping to get some extra funding on the quite in order to support UK Ship building? It would be quite embarrassing to run the competition, choose a winner and then have to put the contract on hold as there is no money to actually order the ships!
I suspect the same problem when the Type 32 comes around. No one will bid except Babcock's. Bae is still pissed at putting considerable time and money into the Type 31 bid that was pre-ordained to go to Babcock's.
In November 2018 MoD agreed to fund three bids for the Competitive Design Phase of the Type 31e Frigate competition. Atlas Elektronik UK were one of those three bids and they received £5 million to fund detailed design work.dmereifield wrote:Did they put in a serious bid? I suppose they must have met the minimum requirements, but they didn't exceed them like Babcock did ("here you go, checks all the boxes plus here's a shit load of extra space offering you better sea keeping, endurance, range, flexibility and scope for through-life upgrades").
Don't forget that Babcock's was "helped" by the MoD/Treasury quietly telling them that the A120 was a no go against Leander, and to find another design pronto.dmereifield wrote:Did they put in a serious bid? I suppose they must have met the minimum requirements, but they didn't exceed them like Babcock did ("here you go, checks all the boxes plus here's a shit load of extra space offering you better sea keeping, endurance, range, flexibility and scope for through-life upgrades").Ron5 wrote:More likely is that they can't drum up enough entrants to have a competition. For the Type 31, they leaned on Atlas Elektronik,a tiny bunch of UK based electrical engineers, to put forward a farcical 3rd entrant just to make up the numbers. The company was later rewarded with a contract for their regular products.Lord Jim wrote:Could it be that the "Piggy Bank" in the MoD is already empty even though they were supposed to proceed with the FSS by restarting the competition, and so are hoping to get some extra funding on the quite in order to support UK Ship building? It would be quite embarrassing to run the competition, choose a winner and then have to put the contract on hold as there is no money to actually order the ships!
I suspect the same problem when the Type 32 comes around. No one will bid except Babcock's. Bae is still pissed at putting considerable time and money into the Type 31 bid that was pre-ordained to go to Babcock's.
Was the BAE offer more competitive than Babcock? Commonality of systems is one, but did they "push the boat out" so to speak, with their bid?
Fair point, but did BAE really put their backs into it? From a capability md value for money perspective, is Leander better than A140?Ron5 wrote:Don't forget that Babcock's was "helped" by the MoD/Treasury quietly telling them that the A120 was a no go against Leander, and to find another design pronto.dmereifield wrote:Did they put in a serious bid? I suppose they must have met the minimum requirements, but they didn't exceed them like Babcock did ("here you go, checks all the boxes plus here's a shit load of extra space offering you better sea keeping, endurance, range, flexibility and scope for through-life upgrades").Ron5 wrote:More likely is that they can't drum up enough entrants to have a competition. For the Type 31, they leaned on Atlas Elektronik,a tiny bunch of UK based electrical engineers, to put forward a farcical 3rd entrant just to make up the numbers. The company was later rewarded with a contract for their regular products.Lord Jim wrote:Could it be that the "Piggy Bank" in the MoD is already empty even though they were supposed to proceed with the FSS by restarting the competition, and so are hoping to get some extra funding on the quite in order to support UK Ship building? It would be quite embarrassing to run the competition, choose a winner and then have to put the contract on hold as there is no money to actually order the ships!
I suspect the same problem when the Type 32 comes around. No one will bid except Babcock's. Bae is still pissed at putting considerable time and money into the Type 31 bid that was pre-ordained to go to Babcock's.
Was the BAE offer more competitive than Babcock? Commonality of systems is one, but did they "push the boat out" so to speak, with their bid?
Bloody hell, a straight forward answer...with no riddles??? What's wrong with you? And, an opinion that aligns with mine. I'm going to go lie down...ArmChairCivvy wrote:An easy one, that: No is the answer
What are you on about? Atlas Elektronik UK's parent company is TKMS (ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems) the German defence company who have built/designed most of the German Navy's ships and submarines.RichardIC wrote:
In November 2018 MoD agreed to fund three bids for the Competitive Design Phase of the Type 31e Frigate competition. Atlas Elektronik UK were one of those three bids and they received £5 million to fund detailed design work.
We don't know what Atlas delivered for that £5 million and we won't because it is covered by FoI proof commercial confidentiality terms. But it always seemed difficult to imagine how they would overcome IP issues to support the export agenda and they never publicly partnered with a shipbuilder.
Exactly. Read what I wrote again.tomuk wrote:What are you on about? Atlas Elektronik UK's parent company is TKMS (ThyssenKrupp Marine Systems) the German defence company who have built/designed most of the German Navy's ships and submarines.
Will Babcock's be able to produce the ships at the contract price point? Hope so but the jury is out.dmereifield wrote:Fair point, but did BAE really put their backs into it? From a capability md value for money perspective, is Leander better than A140?
Fingers crossed. If they do, in your view, does that mean that A140 was the better option for the RN than Leander?Ron5 wrote:Will Babcock's be able to produce the ships at the contract price point? Hope so but the jury is out.dmereifield wrote:Fair point, but did BAE really put their backs into it? From a capability md value for money perspective, is Leander better than A140?
Assuming the role needs filling, and assuming Babcock's pulls it off: yesdmereifield wrote:Fingers crossed. If they do, in your view, does that mean that A140 was the better option for the RN than Leander?Ron5 wrote:Will Babcock's be able to produce the ships at the contract price point? Hope so but the jury is out.dmereifield wrote:Fair point, but did BAE really put their backs into it? From a capability md value for money perspective, is Leander better than A140?
I really liked the Leander, despite expecting to hate it from the outset. I reckon it could have been a credible, throwaway light frigate. Plus the whole non standar CMS and radar/sensor fit we are planning for A140 really puts me off. I think it is a mistake and I hope we correct it pronto with T32.Ron5 wrote:
Will Babcock's be able to produce the ships at the contract price point? Hope so but the jury is out.
Fingers crossed. If they do, in your view, does that mean that A140 was the better option for the RN than Leander?
Assuming the role needs filling, and assuming Babcock's pulls it off: yes
I'm just remembering that this contract is the last of 3 major ones that were decided by competition and went to the bidder that had zero experience and won based on a pile of sparkly slides, politics, and marketing promises:
1. Ajax and GD(UK) - over budget & late (although Runningstrong strongly disagrees with the first) - "British to its bootstraps"
2. Warrior CSP - over budget, late and cancelled - "Warrior doesn't need a new turret we'll use the old one"
3. Type 31 and Babcock's - "we'll export plenty of them which will further reduce costs and benefit the 3 locations where they will be built: North Devon, Northern Ireland, and Scotland".
dmereifield wrote:Fingers crossed. If they do, in your view, does that mean
Ron5 wrote:Assuming the role needs filling
This x-examination is not proceeding as they are generally meant to: you form a "V" and end up with a yes, or no.Ron5 wrote:and assuming Babcock's pulls it off
If they are not coming from Korea, the first one will not be built in a year. And you will need two to be able to retire the active Fort - though arguably, it could be around for a few more years as among other things the aviation capability would be v valuable in supporting LitMSW1 wrote: expected to be awarded within two years
quite rightly focusses on what 'integrate' means. The (minor) military fitting out done at British yards for the fleet oilers certainly would not pass that threshold, or would count as window dressing anyway.jonas wrote:UKDJ's take