BAE Systems plc

Contains threads on equipment developed by the UK defence and aerospace industry, but not in service with the British Armed Forces.

Should BAE be nationalised by the UK?

Please note that results are sorted by decreasing number of votes received.

None of it
23
43%
All of it
14
26%
Parts of it
14
26%
Don't care
3
6%
 
Total votes: 54

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Why does the US Army need to buy smart rounds from others?
https://ukdefencejournal.org.uk/us-army ... e-systems/

Errr, their own were developed to level mud huts from a safe distance (not to take out tanks that have been dispersed, in order to safeguard against pre-emptive artillery strkes)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

BAE staying in good trim, to work on the next trident (from 2040?), from DID of today
"Trident II AWS[:] The US Navy is modifying a contract signed with BAE Systems. An additional $9.5 million are being awarded for engineering and integration services on the Trident II, SSGN attack weapon system and strategic weapon surety. The Trident II (D5) strategic weapons system is installed on US Navy Ohio-class submarines and UK Royal Navy Vanguard-class submarines"
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Ian King has contributed a good opinion piece to Sky News, on how the soon-to-be new EU Commission will need to be a countervailing power to French-German domination, rather than an errand boy. He does not mention defence industries (so I will, at the end):
"There is a growing concern among some politicians, notably Emmanuel Macron and Angela Merkel, that Europe lacks as many companies that are global leaders in their field as China or the United States. That partly reflects the fact that Europe is a more fragmented and less homogenous market than either the US or China.
But it also reflects the fact that the commission, particularly under Ms Vestager, has enforced competition rules vigorously. Mrs Merkel complained in a speech in June last year that EU competition law "does not help us sufficiently" to create global champions. Ms Vestager has refuted this, noting that EU competition law had helped facilitate the creation of European global leaders "
- BAE's plan was scuppered by a "Nein" from Merkel
- in the land domain the same kind of thing of now driven by German interests (in smaller, less visible steps)

Well, we'll have no say in making these policies... pretty soon. Nor in the selection of the Commission president... which process (with the Spitzenkandidat system) has, so far, been even more rigged than markets.
- even the previous round did not quite go as some in the UK may have wished
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

dmereifield
Senior Member
Posts: 2556
Joined: 03 Aug 2016, 20:29
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 4 times
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by dmereifield »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:Well, we'll have no say in making these policies... pretty soon. Nor in the selection of the Commission president... which process (with the Spitzenkandidat system) has, so far, been even more rigged than markets.
- even the previous round did not quite go as some in the UK may have wished
We have virtually no say now, and even less as the EU continues to move towards majority based voting. Remember that time the influential, 2nd largest EU economy, with the world's largest financial hub and EU's most/second largest armed forces, exerted it's influence during the appointment of the last Commision president....that's how influential we were in the EU

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

I remember that painfully well
"Remember that time the influential, 2nd largest EU economy, with the world's largest financial hub and EU's most/second largest armed forces, exerted it's influence during the appointment of the last Commision president....that's how influential we were in the EU"
but may be it had something to do with our fractious politics ( a majority is not a majority, it's all Oxford Union, unlike in coalition politics that are common across the Continent), our Boys' Own leaders (talking about Wunderwaffe, when the major European languages, other than English, escape them... save for what's on wine labels) - sure, now we have a different flavour, but fundamentally with the same failure of not being steeped in other cultures; more at home in the parish than on the world scene - well: what sort of campaign was "Anyone but Juncker"? - A bit like the one in the 2017 snap GE

BAE tried the first best (for their management's stock options: to demerge the company along the Atlantic divide, but forgot who holds the Golden Share);
then they tried the second best (this time following industrial logic, but they again forgot who had the "Golden Share" on the other side, i.e. the minority holding that gives the power to say "Nein").

Nicht Gut... is it? ;)
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by Lord Jim »

It has been reported that the Competitions and Markets Authority (CMA) has launched an investigation into Rheinmetall's acquisition of a 55% stake in BAe's UK based Combat Vehicles Business line in Telford as part of the Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land (RBSL) joint venture (JV). The aim is to investigate as to whether such an acquisition would still allow the requires level of competition in the UK Market for land systems.

WTF! there isn't any real competition form UK based Companies anymore, BAe's AFV business has been in a coma since completing the orders for the Armoured Engineering Platforms years ago and we currently only fit out chassis provided by overseas plants in facilities built to expedite contract already awarded. Any competition to Rheinmetall's Boxer would involved another company establishing its own production/fitting out facility to meet to contract requirements, so again there is no UK based competitor.

IS this a back door attempt to get there to be an open competition for the MIV programme? Have certain interested parties been talking to other interested parties to persuade the CMA that an investigation is warranted?

Here is the Article;
https://www.janes.com/article/87932/uk- ... nmetall-jv

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

Say no more
"WTF! there isn't any real competition form UK based Companies anymore, BAe's AFV business has been in a coma since completing the orders for the Armoured Engineering Platforms years ago and we currently only fit out chassis provided by overseas plants"
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Online
RunningStrong
Member
Posts: 800
Joined: 06 May 2015, 20:52
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by RunningStrong »

Lord Jim wrote: IS this a back door attempt to get there to be an open competition for the MIV programme? Have certain interested parties been talking to other interested parties to persuade the CMA that an investigation is warranted?

Here is the Article;
https://www.janes.com/article/87932/uk- ... nmetall-jv
I would say it has more of an impact on CR2 LEP, given that both competitors have now merged into a single business. Somewhat undermines what was supposed to be a competitive bid process.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

One is better than none?
"undermines what was supposed to be a competitive bid process."
- does this flow from the UK or from Brussels, would be nice to know
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

User avatar
whitelancer
Member
Posts: 588
Joined: 05 May 2015, 22:19
Has liked: 1 time
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by whitelancer »

Their was no competitions in the UK anyway. The only competitor's came from abroad so I fail to see what they can investigate.

User avatar
SKB
Senior Member
Posts: 7232
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 18:35
Has liked: 4 times
Been liked: 10 times
England

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by SKB »



He was the first pilot to launch the F-35 from a ski-jump ramp, and also the first pilot to perform the SRVL landing aboard HMS Queen Elizabeth.

User avatar
xav
Senior Member
Posts: 1533
Joined: 30 Apr 2015, 22:48
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 5 times

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by xav »

BAE Systems Completes P950 RIB USV Trials with MSI RWS
Image
BAE Systems has successfully completed a series of trials with the Pacific 950 unmanned surface vehicle (USV) fitted with MSI Defence's new lightweight remote weapon station (RWS).
https://www.navalnews.com/naval-news/20 ... h-msi-rws/

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by Lord Jim »

That's small enough for RN vessels to carry their own mobile waterborne harbour defence force with a reduced personnel requirement. I wonder what situational awareness this system gives the operator. I wonder if BAe is working on some sort of VR helmet for the operator, syncing all the data form both on board and other systems.

abc123
Senior Member
Posts: 2795
Joined: 10 May 2015, 18:15
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by abc123 »

Lord Jim wrote:That's small enough for RN vessels to carry their own mobile waterborne harbour defence force with a reduced personnel requirement. I wonder what situational awareness this system gives the operator. I wonder if BAe is working on some sort of VR helmet for the operator, syncing all the data form both on board and other systems.
I wonder how resilient to jamming is that thing. ;)
Fortune favors brave sir, said Carrot cheerfully.
What's her position about heavily armed, well prepared and overmanned armies?
Oh, noone's ever heard of Fortune favoring them, sir.
According to General Tacticus, it's because they favor themselves…

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by Lord Jim »

The US at least is doing a lot of work in securing its communications against hacking and we could be doing the same under the umbrella of cyber. Of course that is going to be way above the security classification we are able to be talked about here.

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

A thought that sprung to mind when Hawk was mentioned... almost a thousand produced; which was the previous British designed a/c that achieved that?

Anyway, not setting up a quiz, but rather the thought about how big business the (training) simulators are these days. All those (erm, must be well under half by now) planes in service around the world and half of the hours 'flown' in simulators
- Project Vulcan putting Ajax/ Boxer/ the 'new' Ch2 training all under the same simulator environment
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Lord Jim
Senior Member
Posts: 6428
Joined: 10 Dec 2015, 02:15
Has liked: 14 times
Been liked: 54 times
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by Lord Jim »

Project "Vulcan" may deliver something we should have had at least a decade ago.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 2342
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 5 times
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by Timmymagic »

Something you don't see very often (if ever)...

2 bits of good news on UK Torpedo's..the Spearfish upgrade had been delayed by a shortage of submarine time for the test programme, looks like it will complete soon. Then the (tenatative) very early next steps for a new Lightweight Torpedo. Stingray is already on Mod 1 so hopefully the decision will lead to a full replacement, rather than upgrade, in time which would keep torpedo design expertise in the UK (plus the world could do with a new advanced LWT). Torpedos take a loooonnnngggg time to develop, so even if they made a decision to go with new tomorrow you wouldn't be seeing it in service for 10-15 years. Hopefully, once the Spearfish upgrade is done and dusted attention will also move to its next upgrade or replacement to keep the teams busy.




User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

RE " the world could do with a new advanced LWT" the new one from Saab was just tested both with a surface launch and from a sub
- but, yes, agree: we should not lose the expertise
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 6329
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United States of America

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by Ron5 »

Stick some wings on it for the P-8's...

Image

Add a rocket booster and you've got a longer range ASROC...

Image

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 2342
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 5 times
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by Timmymagic »

"RE " the world could do with a new advanced LWT" the new one from Saab was just tested both with a surface launch and from a sub
- but, yes, agree: we should not lose the expertise"

Problem with the Swedish gear is that a lot of the times its, quite rightly, developed specifically for their anticipated area of operations. And thats great for them, but its not always appropriate elsewhere. I'd expect the Torped 45 and 47 to be the best littoral torpedoes on earth, but their open water performance will be lacking.

Timmymagic
Donator
Posts: 2342
Joined: 07 May 2015, 23:57
Has liked: 3 times
Been liked: 5 times
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by Timmymagic »

Looks like the Ukrainian Fast Attack Craft sale is a done deal....good news for BAE (I presume, as the inheritors of Vospers). Where are the 2 ships for the UK going to be built though? Thought Govan would be pretty busy with T26. Can they squeeze 2 in? Appledore?

Must say I'm surprised at the choice of boat. Vosper's made very good ships, particularly seaworthy FAC's and Patrol Ships. But for £1.25 billion for 8 you're not far off the cost of a similar, or just slightly smaller, number of Khareef Class. It's still a capable ship though... be interesting to see what the Ukrainians want it fitted with. The Qatari ones are mini battleships...76mm Oto Melara, 30mm Goalkeeper, Mistral SAM's and 8 Exocet. Plus the usual machine guns..all on 600 tonnes...

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-brita ... KKBN26S1SM

https://www.savetheroyalnavy.org/britai ... r-ukraine/

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

This, I guess, was a formality
"CMA launched an investigation into Rheinmetall's acquisition of a 55% stake in BAe's UK based Combat Vehicles Business line in Telford as part of the Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land (RBSL) joint venture (JV)"

and totally not cognisant of what is going on in the global market place, where that level of consolidation in Europe was well overdue:
"After its first contest to replace the Bradley fighting vehicle fell apart, the Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle do-over competition appears poised to have more than one bidder. Germany’s Rheinmetall is partnering with Textron Systems and BAE System is partnering with Elbit Systems of America. General Dynamics Land Systems — the only company to submit an eligible bid in last year’s contest — is also expected to bid.

What’s new: Rheinmetall, which created a joint venture with Raytheon to enter the last competition, is now teaming with Textron Systems. Raytheon remains part of the Rheinmetall team"
- from DefenceOne of yesterday
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Ron5
Donator
Posts: 6329
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:42
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United States of America

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by Ron5 »

ArmChairCivvy wrote:This, I guess, was a formality
"CMA launched an investigation into Rheinmetall's acquisition of a 55% stake in BAe's UK based Combat Vehicles Business line in Telford as part of the Rheinmetall BAE Systems Land (RBSL) joint venture (JV)"
From the UK government website ..
The CMA investigated and cleared the proposed acquisition by Rheinmetall Defence UK Ltd of BAE Systems Global Combat Systems Ltd.
Published 15 April 2019

User avatar
ArmChairCivvy
Senior Member
Posts: 15912
Joined: 05 May 2015, 21:34
Has liked: 0
Been liked: 0
United Kingdom

Re: BAE Systems plc

Post by ArmChairCivvy »

"was a formality"
Ever-lasting truths: Multi-year budgets/ planning by necessity have to address the painful questions; more often than not the Either-Or prevails over Both-And.
If everyone is thinking the same, then someone is not thinking (attributed to Patton)

Post Reply