That was quick, Nimrod disposal
Discussion
Airframes in the final stages of completion have already started being cut up and disposed of.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12291372
only in the UK could we build an absolute world beater of an aircraft then once it is within a year of completion have to pay an extra £200 million to have them cut up. Sure the project was massivly overbudget and many years late but i feel this is a capability the current government and future governments will regret.
Rory
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12291372
only in the UK could we build an absolute world beater of an aircraft then once it is within a year of completion have to pay an extra £200 million to have them cut up. Sure the project was massivly overbudget and many years late but i feel this is a capability the current government and future governments will regret.
Rory
Politcs aside, why oh why do they have to scrap airframes? Such a criminal waste....If they can cut em up, shirley they could dismantle them and let some museum take em away? I know the transport costs would be high but not THAT high?? Hell, I'd have conjured up a couple of dozen rich(ish) mates to do the job for them! 
I suggest you get on the phone to BAE tomorrow then!
Museums have been offered Nimrod MRA4 airframes - albeit more complete ones than the ones being scrapped on the BBC footage. The costs of dismantling, transport and reassembly along with the space issues of housing such a large airframe have meant that not one museum has been able to say yes. If you were offering to deal with transport etc. for one of these museums it could well be that you'd be responsible for saving one of the more complete airframes. He who dares and all that...
Museums have been offered Nimrod MRA4 airframes - albeit more complete ones than the ones being scrapped on the BBC footage. The costs of dismantling, transport and reassembly along with the space issues of housing such a large airframe have meant that not one museum has been able to say yes. If you were offering to deal with transport etc. for one of these museums it could well be that you'd be responsible for saving one of the more complete airframes. He who dares and all that...
roryfizz said:
Airframes in the final stages of completion have already started being cut up and disposed of.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12291372
only in the UK could we build an absolute world beater of an aircraft then once it is within a year of completion have to pay an extra £200 million to have them cut up. Sure the project was massivly overbudget and many years late but i feel this is a capability the current government and future governments will regret.
Rory
Sure it was a world beater, but we could have had something perfectly adequate for a lot less if we'd bought in. Ditto the Lynx Wildcat vs. the Black Hawk. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12291372
only in the UK could we build an absolute world beater of an aircraft then once it is within a year of completion have to pay an extra £200 million to have them cut up. Sure the project was massivly overbudget and many years late but i feel this is a capability the current government and future governments will regret.
Rory
As our imperial ambitions have rolled back, we've not realised that the massive reduction in armed forces size this resulted in meant we couldn't support an entirely homegrown military/industrial infrastructure. We should have concentrated on a couple of areas where there wasn't much competition. For example, we should have given up a lot of things to keep pushing forwards with the Harrier.
roryfizz said:
Airframes in the final stages of completion have already started being cut up and disposed of.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12291372
only in the UK could we build an absolute world beater of an aircraft then once it is within a year of completion have to pay an extra £200 million to have them cut up. Sure the project was massivly overbudget and many years late but i feel this is a capability the current government and future governments will regret.
Rory
The fact that it is being done behind screens suggests that 'they' fear a lot of people agree with you.http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-12291372
only in the UK could we build an absolute world beater of an aircraft then once it is within a year of completion have to pay an extra £200 million to have them cut up. Sure the project was massivly overbudget and many years late but i feel this is a capability the current government and future governments will regret.
Rory
having been lucky enough to have a crawl around a pretty much completed one of these in the summer the ones being cut up look like the ones that were still being re-built and barely a shell.
If you think this is bad - and it is - wait 'til you see some of the ones further down the production line that will be getting scrapped
If you think this is bad - and it is - wait 'til you see some of the ones further down the production line that will be getting scrapped
davepoth said:
but we could have had something perfectly adequate for a lot less if we'd bought in.
Like what exactly?Given that the Spams binned the P7 project in 1990, the Kawasaki P1 hasn't entered service, and the P8 (IMO) will never make an effective MPA platform.
The fact is that there isn't a MPA currently in the world that could compete with Nimrod MR2, let alone MRA4.
Whether you believe (or not) that we should have a MPA, the fact is that we have an International Requirement to provide SAR cover of the UKAOR out to 30 West, which is why, up until the demise of MR2, there was always a jet on 60 minutes SAR Standby 24/7/365.
Furthermore, I would warrant that survivors of things like the Fastnet disaster, Piper Alpha, and countless LR SAR events were rather pleased that UKPLC had a LR MPA asset.
Many threads on PH about this. The decision is madness. There is nothing that could touch it for capability, which makes it's scrapping rate alongside that of the TSR2. The MRA4 is being binned to get them off the books and out of sight ASAP, before it is realised we actually need it. I believe Cosford os to get an MR2 delivered by road.
The £200m figure is bandied around alot, It was a BAe figure, I.E. highly likely to be a least double that and another two years away.
None were flightworthy.
BAe have a lot to answer for here, late and over budget again. by many years and many millions.
If they had delivered as promised, the Nimord would be flying still. Perhaps in future they will think twice before treating taxpayers as the f
king perpetual cash point and actually do something they have said they can do. anonymous said:
[redacted]
Look, the simple truth is that the prime contractor in this project had missed so many deadlines, blown through so many budget estimates, and generally taken the taxpayer for a multi-decade ride that there was no faith left that they could actually deliver a functioning operational fleet.The claim that the £200m cancellation cost was equivalent to the 'estimated' cost by the contractor to bring the project to an operational state is fanciful - the contractor has no credibility left to say that they know what the eventual costs might be, because they have failed dismally over many years to provide any credible estimates of costs or delivery times.
If this system had actually proved itself - or even shown the potential - to be the world beating product some claim it to be, then there would have been a packed export order book. The fact is, in the cold light of day, no other nation wanted to touch it with a barge-pole. That in itself is telling. As is the fact there were still 1000 or so R&D staff engaged on the project. If you have a viable, production-ready system you don't need a huge R&D effort. If you have a buggy, permanently unfinished, job-for-life product then you need to retain that sort of manpower.
It is a crying shame, but if you want someone to blame, first take a look at the piss-taking prime contractor and the spendthrift administration who let them get away with it.
Edited: Gargamel got there first.....
Edited by eharding on Thursday 27th January 00:17
All of this BAE bashing is getting rather tiresome. Whilst i truely agree that they have shown incompetence at points it must also be considered the impact of the MOD and RAF's decision making. For example the cutting for airframe numbers from 21 to 9 had a dramatic impact on the unit cost of the project whilst not making the massive savings assumed by most. Also a larger problem was the MOD's decision to use refurbished old airframes which had all previously been hand built, these shells were reused to "save" money which in the end was no cheaper than new build. This however proved to be folly as it had been proposed to use new airframes and it was this decision that also completly ended the US interest in the project as after their cancellation of the P7 they had seriously been considering a Nimrod buy.
The main thing though is all of that is HISTORY and all of the contracts and aircraft have been paid for, the first one had been delivered with number two almost on its way. Whilst it is a very shoddy example of procurement policy, that should not be reason enough to cut up the aircraft which were in the process of being delivered. This was again a government decision not from BAE, this is a purely political decision to cut costs without any concept of military capability.
The main thing though is all of that is HISTORY and all of the contracts and aircraft have been paid for, the first one had been delivered with number two almost on its way. Whilst it is a very shoddy example of procurement policy, that should not be reason enough to cut up the aircraft which were in the process of being delivered. This was again a government decision not from BAE, this is a purely political decision to cut costs without any concept of military capability.
Edited by roryfizz on Thursday 27th January 00:32
roryfizz said:
Whilst it is a very shoddy example of procurement policy, that should not be reason enough to cut up the aircraft which were in the process of being delivered. This was again a government decision not from BAE, this is a purely political decision to cut costs without any concept of military capability.
They were not in the process of being delivered, they were still in the process of being developed, with no realistic prospect of completion. Making a couple of airframes airworthy and slinging them over the fence does not imply a functional product.Damn right it wasn't a BAe decision though - it *was* a political decision based on the basis of the business analysis that BAe had lost any credibility that they would deliver.
Ginetta G15 Girl said:
davepoth said:
but we could have had something perfectly adequate for a lot less if we'd bought in.
Like what exactly?The most likely plane now would be the P-8, given that it's just about in production, and available for export. A look around the internet suggests the unit cost to be around $265m which was what 8 were sold for to India.
Edited by davepoth on Thursday 27th January 01:00
Edited by davepoth on Thursday 27th January 01:03
eharding said:
roryfizz said:
Whilst it is a very shoddy example of procurement policy, that should not be reason enough to cut up the aircraft which were in the process of being delivered. This was again a government decision not from BAE, this is a purely political decision to cut costs without any concept of military capability.
They were not in the process of being delivered, they were still in the process of being developed, with no realistic prospect of completion. Making a couple of airframes airworthy and slinging them over the fence does not imply a functional product.Damn right it wasn't a BAe decision though - it *was* a political decision based on the basis of the business analysis that BAe had lost any credibility that they would deliver.
Along with
"To date the Ministry of Defence (MOD) has taken delivery of: the training simulator and building (approximate value £150 million); one production standard aircraft (approximate value £90 million); various rigs (approximate value £100 million) and various spares (approximate value £10 million)." from the same source.
http://www.thinkdefence.co.uk/2010/11/more-on-nimr...
roryfizz said:
From Peter Luff a conservative mp working in defence equipment whilst discussing the Nimrod, "One Nimrod MRA4 aircraft has been delivered, three aircraft are over 90% complete and the remaining five aircraft are over 40% complete."
Bolting the thing together, and actually have it in a state do a reasonable job of work, are two completely different things. It was still years away from being something you could actually rely on.roryfizz said:
one production standard aircraft
The single airframe may have been airworthy, but the systems which were the whole point of getting airworthy were of not of production quality, and far from it.Sooner or later, you have to do the decent thing and shoot a white elephant in the head, and put it out of everyone's misery.
What I thought to myself the other day and it worried me, is that since Nimrod has been grounded. It has not affected my quality of life one bit. Raised blood pressure aside. If the forces keep getting cut and we have these "capability holidays", and it doesnt impact on the quality of life of the majority of the UK population, is it the right choice?
Obviously theres the what if scenarios, but by the very nature of things these may not happen and without the capability we as a country will be more likely to stay out of situations that we would require them.
The lack of proper SAR cover in the UK worries me though and is far more likely to affect me.
Obviously theres the what if scenarios, but by the very nature of things these may not happen and without the capability we as a country will be more likely to stay out of situations that we would require them.
The lack of proper SAR cover in the UK worries me though and is far more likely to affect me.
TVR Moneypit said:
Perhaps a very nieve comment on my part, but why scrap as opposed to sending them to that plane graveyard in the states?
They are all in pieces you'd have to finish them to fly them..As for museums
Museums like small pretty aircraft with history, these aren't and don't
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff