The shrinking Royal Navy

[jjb1970]

The elephant in the room when talking about BAE and warship construction is that it was the MoD that railroaded the BAE/VT merger as part of an official government policy to create a monopoly provider. This is another example of government ineptitude and an attitude that civil servants know more than industry imposing decisions with dire consequences and then pointing fingers at others (in this case BAE) when things go wrong. Now to be clear I am not the biggest fan of BAE but when you have a client who can't make up its mind, delays major decisions for years, refuses to accept the idea of a design freeze with the result that costs spiral and problems mount and who is incapable of managing contracts then I do have a lot of sympathy for BAE. The classic example is the WR21 engine in T45, that was not BAEs choice and it was a political decision yet it is BAEs reputation that has been tarnished (amazingly, RR seem to have escaped most of the opprobrium despite it being theirs and Northrop Grumman's engine).

Clearly, the size and complexity of warship programs makes them difficult to manage and there will almost certainly be some evolution during the build phase but things have become silly. Thankfully its not just a UK issue as I'm happy to say nobody else appears to do it any better than we do when it comes to high end military vessels. For comparison, the early nuclear program delivered HMS Dreadnought, Valiant and Warspite along with the four Polaris boats (which were far more ambitious and challenging programs than the T45, T31 or even CVF) in a ridiculously short time and delivered the boats pretty much to spec and with few problems compared to what is now just accepted. Those boats also demonstrate that project management is nothing new, the project management skills demonstrated in the Polaris and earlier nuclear hunter killer boats was superb, and without the benefit of all those modern software tools.

[jjb1970]

The four RFAs being built in South Korea held up because of wiring faults wasn't a detail that I have read before, just that they are delayed. Hope you find this interesting.

There is a very interesting story there, without going into details, the MoD should be asking some very awkward questions of a certain class society I'm very familiar with along with its own procurement people.

[jjb1970]

The Royal Navy could desperately use a leader like Hyman Rickover:

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyman_G._Rickover

 

The parallels between Rickover and Jackie Fisher are uncanny, both were technical visionaries blessed with a genius for getting things done, both were pugnacious and almost as famous for making enemies as for their technical gifts and both were sometimes considered to be borderline bonkers. They also shared a common belief that restraint in war is ludicrous. They even look not unalike. However, for all their faults it is almost depressing to compare what they achieved compared with modern naval programs.

[JeremyC]

The elephant in the room when talking about BAE and warship construction is that it was the MoD that railroaded the BAE/VT merger as part of an official government policy to create a monopoly provider. This is another example of government ineptitude and an attitude that civil servants know more than industry imposing decisions with dire consequences and then pointing fingers at others (in this case BAE) when things go wrong. Now to be clear I am not the biggest fan of BAE but when you have a client who can't make up its mind, delays major decisions for years, refuses to accept the idea of a design freeze with the result that costs spiral and problems mount and who is incapable of managing contracts then I do have a lot of sympathy for BAE. The classic example is the WR21 engine in T45, that was not BAEs choice and it was a political decision yet it is BAEs reputation that has been tarnished (amazingly, RR seem to have escaped most of the opprobrium despite it being theirs and Northrop Grumman's engine).Clearly, the size and complexity of warship programs makes them difficult to manage and there will almost certainly be some evolution during the build phase but things have become silly. Thankfully its not just a UK issue as I'm happy to say nobody else appears to do it any better than we do when it comes to high end military vessels. For comparison, the early nuclear program delivered HMS Dreadnought, Valiant and Warspite along with the four Polaris boats (which were far more ambitious and challenging programs than the T45, T31 or even CVF) in a ridiculously short time and delivered the boats pretty much to spec and with few problems compared to what is now just accepted. Those boats also demonstrate that project management is nothing new, the project management skills demonstrated in the Polaris and earlier nuclear hunter killer boats was superb, and without the benefit of all those modern software tools.

If you insist that all warships are built in UK and have multiple builders you then have to create sufficient orders to keep all of them in business; if you have only one supplier then you only need enough orders to keep that one builder going. So is it better to have multiple unviable businesses or one viable one?

Edited December 5, 2016 by JeremyC

[jjb1970]

If you insist that all warships are built in UK and have multiple builders you then have to create sufficient orders to keep all of them in business; if you have only one supplier then you only need enough orders to keep that one builder going. So is it better to have multiple unviable businesses or one viable one?

That was the principle behind the merger, however if you create a monopoly then don't complain about the consequences. Modular construction is nothing new and it was used to build the CVF & T45. Now apparently this form of construction means we can spread the cash and work around different yards.

[Kickstart]

you can buy as many submarines and ships as you want , you can fill them with more guns and missiles than you ever dreamt of.... but can you get enough people to make them work???

A lot comes down to money.

 

All the best

 

Katy

[jjb1970]

Money is important, but even with golden hand shakes and various incentives the MoD has been struggling to maintain the required expertise and skills. The reasons for that are many, some of it probably is money as if you offer enough then people will consider doing most jobs, but I do not believe it is primarily about money. I know a lot of guys who have left the RN over the last decade or so and some of them were offered pretty generous incentives to stay in, others took pay reductions to get out and some were just completely demoralised by the state of the RN. This isn't just an RN thing, it is increasingly difficult to find youngsters wanting to join the merchant navy, the pay in the MN isn't bad but its not spectacular, these days it is cheap to pay your own way to see the world and working conditions on-board are often less than great relative to comparable careers on land.

[jjb1970]

Snapped arrestor gear line? That conjures up visions of cables flying around all over the place, sounds very nasty.

Having seen the consequences of a parted line when anchor handling it is not something anybody wants to see.

[pete_mcfarlane]

Snapped arrestor gear line? That conjures up visions of cables flying around all over the place, sounds very nasty.

The pilot was lucky - there was a notorious incident on a RN carrier in about 1960 where a Supermarine Scimitar wasn't fully arrested and fell off the edge of the flight deck, drowning the pilot. 

[JeremyC]

Money is important, but even with golden hand shakes and various incentives the MoD has been struggling to maintain the required expertise and skills. The reasons for that are many, some of it probably is money as if you offer enough then people will consider doing most jobs, but I do not believe it is primarily about money. I know a lot of guys who have left the RN over the last decade or so and some of them were offered pretty generous incentives to stay in, others took pay reductions to get out and some were just completely demoralised by the state of the RN. This isn't just an RN thing, it is increasingly difficult to find youngsters wanting to join the merchant navy, the pay in the MN isn't bad but its not spectacular, these days it is cheap to pay your own way to see the world and working conditions on-board are often less than great relative to comparable careers on land.

There seem to be a fair number prepared to join the MN. Problem is that companies take them on as 'tonnage tax' cadets, but won't keep them on at the end, not even for one trip, yet those same companies often still want senior British officers. I spent a short time in our office and our HR people were receiving a steady stream of enquiries about jobs from ex cadets with no experience beyond their cadetship. We actually had a number of ex officer cadets sailing as crew.

Edited December 6, 2016 by JeremyC

[Ohmisterporter]

The pilot was lucky - there was a notorious incident on a RN carrier in about 1960 where a Supermarine Scimitar wasn't fully arrested and fell off the edge of the flight deck, drowning the pilot. 

 

Perhaps this is the one you refer to, Pete. I am left wondering what would have happened if the pilot fired his ejector seat with the helicopter hovering above it. 

 

Edited December 6, 2016 by Ohmisterporter

[jjb1970]

There seem to be a fair number prepared to join the MN. Problem is that companies take them on as 'tonnage tax' cadets, but won't keep them on at the end, not even for one trip, yet those same companies often still want senior British officers. I spent a short time in our office and our HR people were receiving a steady stream of enquiries about jobs from ex cadets with no experience beyond their cadetship. We actually had a number of ex officer cadets sailing as crew.

To be quite honest I sometimes wonder how certain agencies who manage tonnage tax cadets for shipping companies can sleep at night as they're deliberately encouraging kids into a blind avenue with no job at the end of it for the benefit of a brass plaque in a tax haven. If they make if clear to the youngsters that they're there to qualify for tonnage tax then fair enough but based on my interaction with a lot of these youngsters it seems clear they're not told this.

That said, a recurring theme from an awful lot of shipping companies hiring cadets with the intention of retaining them for the long term is that they have been unable to fill their available cadet spaces due to a lack of suitable applicants. And it isn't just officers at sea, it is the chain of occupations that used to rely on merchant navy staff going ashore. One reason that most class surveyors are now products of graduate programs or non-sea going backgrounds is that the societies can't get enough suitable applications from sea going people. If you talk to P&I Clubs, insurance companies, consultancies etc you get a similar story.

[PhilH]

That was the principle behind the merger, however if you create a monopoly then don't complain about the consequences. Modular construction is nothing new and it was used to build the CVF & T45. Now apparently this form of construction means we can spread the cash and work around different yards.

But to echo Jeremy C's point above how do you ensure that multiple yards are available when you need them...I'm assuming that the MoD won't be keeping them in constant business, conversely it could be possible that they are too busy to respond when needed.

 

It does seem to be a damned if they do, damned if they don't scenario.

[jjb1970]

The shrinking navy has certainly caused a headache with respect to industrial policy. However the modular construction method that is now seen as the way out of having to have a monopoly supplier was already being used when the government decided it wanted a monopoly supplier. Whilst there are issues with the BAE situation I honestly think it is a distraction. Yes there are issues but the fundamental problem is not BAE, it is that the MoD cannot manage major warship development and acquisition programs effectively. If you look at almost all the major issues with modern RN procurement the underlying problems are not BAE (or the other suppliers) but the contractual specifications, political indecision, poor contract management and financial manoeuvring which often has dreadful consequences for overall program cost.

To take an example, Type 45, the development was very protracted, subject to several major changes, followed by variations during build and the most problematic part of the design was an engine that was specified by the MoD, not BAE. Similarly with CVF, it is almost a textbook example of how not to go about buying a pair of aircraft carriers. Carrier Alliance have carried most of the blame for cost over runs but whilst not blameless they are not the responsible party for the most serious cost over runs. And then there was Astute. In that case government attempts not to have a monopoly supplier were a disaster, they pretty much ordered GEC-Marconi to put in a bid to keep Vickers on their toes, selected the GEC-Marconi design and then expected VSEL to do the detailed design and build it.

Whether we have a monopoly in BAE or not is not the problem, the problem is we need an MoD that is capable of managing major programs.

[pete_mcfarlane]

Perhaps this is the one you refer to, Pete. I am left wondering what would have happened if the pilot fired his ejector seat with the helicopter hovering above it. 

That's the one - a few years earlier than I thought it was. I'm impressed that Victorious (which my great Uncle served on) had a massive £20m spent on its refit!  That won't buy quite as much these days.

 

Ejecting might not have been a good idea even without the helicopter, as early ejector seats weren't necessarily designed to be used at zero altitude/speed (although I'm not sure what the Scimitar had - some RN aircraft had seats which could be used underwater). 

[SwissRailPassion]

Is there a career route for civil servants whereby they hone their skills in procurement ineptitude at the DfT before moving to the really big-ticket procurement cock ups at the MOD?

[skipepsi]

Quote 'Whether we have a monopoly in BAE or not is not the problem, the problem is we need an MoD that is capable of managing major programs.'

 

That is it all in a nutshell, army navy or raf it doesn't matter we always get less quality than needed for a far higher cost than we can afford so less of them.

Edited December 6, 2016 by skipepsi

[laurenceb]

That's the one - a few years earlier than I thought it was. I'm impressed that Victorious (which my great Uncle served on) had a massive £20m spent on its refit!  That won't buy quite as much these days.

 

Ejecting might not have been a good idea even without the helicopter, as early ejector seats weren't necessarily designed to be used at zero altitude/speed (although I'm not sure what the Scimitar had - some RN aircraft had seats which could be used underwater). 

As a result of this incident and similar RN jets were fitted with barometric fired bang seats that fired automatically if the crew didnt try to eject

[Kickstart]

Money is important, but even with golden hand shakes and various incentives the MoD has been struggling to maintain the required expertise and skills. The reasons for that are many

Sorry, maybe I was a touch flippant, but not only the money as pay, but also the money required elsewhere to make the job appealing. Whether that is enough money to have enough spare crew not to have them away as much as possible, enough money for decent quarters, enough money for worthwhile training and prospects, etc.

 

All the best

 

Katy

[Ohmisterporter]

As a result of this incident and similar RN jets were fitted with barometric fired bang seats that fired automatically if the crew didnt try to eject

 

There was a documentary about naval aircraft a while back in which a pilot told the story of a jet that lost power as it was being catapulted and was fired off the deck into the sea ahead of the carrier. The 'plane sank as the carrier passed over it and the pilot watched the ship go over, sinking all the while, and ejected when it was clear. Obviously he survived to tell the tale. If the seat had automatically ejected he could have been fired too early with dire consequences. 

[laurenceb]

Think the pane has to go pretty deep, it is only to get the crew out if they are unconscious or otherwise incapacitated

[Ohmisterporter]

In the National Shipbuilding Strategy Report I found this line to be telling :-

 

"Typically an officer appointed to the MoD for a two year involvement in a project that may run for over a decade makes a change to the design, perhaps motivated by a desire to be seen to be making their mark. "

 

The italics are original but I would have added them if they had not been there. We see this in all walks of life, people justifying their their existence by changing things otherwise questions are asked, "What did that guy actually do?" All the armed forces, railways, NHS, suffer from this in the public sector but it applies equally to private enterprise. 

[Bon Accord]

In the National Shipbuilding Strategy Report I found this line to be telling :-

 

"Typically an officer appointed to the MoD for a two year involvement in a project that may run for over a decade makes a change to the design, perhaps motivated by a desire to be seen to be making their mark. "

 

The italics are original but I would have added them if they had not been there. We see this in all walks of life, people justifying their their existence by changing things otherwise questions are asked, "What did that guy actually do?" All the armed forces, railways, NHS, suffer from this in the public sector but it applies equally to private enterprise. 

 

It's something especially prevalent with the LinkedIn generation. Turn up, bring in major changes (which overall often achieve little) making a big noise but invariably alienating half the workforce, then after 2-3 years disappear off to the next managerial post with online profile suitably updated.

My employer sees a seemingly never ending conveyor of these superficial individuals, unfortunately those further up the food chain (i.e. those that employ them) are just as bad. Their belief tends to be that if you're still in the same managerial position after say 3 years then you're basically a failure.

It's made worse in the forces these days because long term career opportunities are more limited with every spending cut, therefore to ascend further up the greasy pole requires individuals to make an "impression". That and the longstanding practice of a posting lasting only 2 years, i.e. turn up and for the first 6 months be basically useless/a hindrance, after a year or so be progressing but still not really at your peak and then in your final few months finally mature into the position as a solid, reliable and competent individual just in time to be transferred to something complete different. The process then repeats.

Both situations totally work against any kind of long term strategic vision and also has the unfortunate side effect of often crushing morale.

[jjb1970]

As well as the rapid rotation of RN officers in and out of key posts there is also a problem that the civil service at Abbey Wood have outsourced an awful lot without really understanding what they have outsourced or being aware of some significant gaps. They think that class does an awful lot more than it actually does do, when things go wrong they instinctively blame class. Now to be honest class does drop the ball at times and sometimes class deserves the criticism, but in most cases class delivers the service they've been contracted to provide and the problem is that the MoD do not understand what class have been contracted to provide and assume they're getting an awful lot more than they are.

[Southernman46]

Goodbye and thank you for your service ..............

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/hms-illustrious-sets-course-for-the-scrapyard-w7d2bkm2s