"Ressession - what ressession??", says Arms Trade
south west |
peace |
news report
Thursday May 14, 2009 14:00
by Arms Trade Watch South West
Britain is expected to decide on Thursday that it remains committed to the Eurofighter defence contract, though it wants to trim some costs related to the multi-billion dollar programme, government sources say.
Talks involving Business Secretary Peter Mandelson and officials from the Ministry of Defence, the Treasury and the prime minister's office have concluded that cancelling the contract would have too much of an impact on jobs and Britain's reputation, as well as incurring fines of up to $1.5 billion (992.5 million pounds).
The MoD said that at peak production, the Typhoon programme will help sustain 5,000 jobs atBAE Systems, 4,000 throughout aero-engine maker Rolls Royce and its supply chain and up to 16,000 in total in the UK aerospace industry.
A EADS Eurofighter Typhoon takes off
The cost of getting out, not just financially but in terms of reputation and the economy -- up to 40,000 Britons are directly or indirectly employed by Eurofighter and related aerospace contracts -- made it very likely that the government would reiterate its commitment.
However, they said that the final decision would be made by Prime Minister Gordon Brown, a former finance minister who is not regarded as supportive of massive defence spending.
One source said Britain's Attorney General, the chief government law officer, had advised the UK could be sued for damages if it pulled out. A spokeswoman declined to comment.
Britain has delayed for months over what to do with Eurofighter, concerned that the high cost of the programme, conceived nearly 25 years ago, was becoming unaffordable at a time of economic crisis and budget constraint.
Under the original deal for the aircraft -- being built by BAE Systems, Italy's Finmeccanica and EADS for Germany and Spain -- Britain was obliged to buy 232 planes.
The majority are already in service, but the third tranche, which involves a further 88 aircraft for Britain and others for Spain, Germany and Italy, has yet to go into production.
That tranche has already been split into two parts, so that Britain is now obliged to pay for and take delivery of 40 aircraft, with the remainder set aside for future production.
Britain has weighed various methods of reducing its costs, including selling some of its allotment on to other countries or altering the finance schedules. Tinkering with the numbers may reduce the total cost by a small degree, but ultimately defence experts expect Britain to go ahead with the contract.
"We have a commitment to our partners, cancellation is costly, and tranche three is the one that the airforce really wants," said Keith Hartley, a defence economist.
"Eurofighter is central to Britain's aerospace industry. The costs may be high, but it's something Britain has a strength in and needs to stay committed to."
Defence sources last month that Britain had won agreement to take just 16 new aircraft out of its allotment, by allocating the other 24 to a recent export deal with Saudi Arabia. But it came under pressure from European partners after refusing to sign up to the agreement until it had reviewed the costs.
A third batch of Eurofighter Typhoon aircraft are to be bought for the RAF, the Government has confirmed.
The Government will buy a new fleet of Eurofighter Typhoons for the RAF
Announcing the decision, Prime Minister Gordon Brown said it would strengthen Britain's defence capability.
And he said it would "create new jobs in advanced manufacturing that Britain needs to emerge stronger and fitter from this global downturn".
Defence Secretary John Hutton said: "We look forward to receiving an affordable bid from European industry that will allow us to proceed with a programme that will deliver advanced multi-role aircraft to the Royal Air Force.
"Subject to the satisfactory outcome of these negotiations, I hope that we will be in a position to sign a contract later this year."
John Hutton
The Ministry of Defence said a contract for the new jets would be signed once negotiations involving the manufacturers and the Eurofighter programme's partner nations - the UK, Germany, Italy and Spain - had concluded.
The number and cost of the aircraft are still to be determined as part of these negotiations.
The MoD said that at peak production, the Typhoon programme will help sustain 5,000 jobs atBAE Systems, 4,000 throughout aero-engine maker Rolls Royce and its supply chain and up to 16,000 in total in the UK aerospace industry.
The announcement will quell concerns that the order for a third batch of the controversial jets might be cancelled.
The other partner nations would have expected to be compensated for extra costs
if Britain withdrew from the third production run.
The Eurofighter, seen as a replacement for the Tornado, has been dogged by delays and cost over-runs.
Critics claim it was conceived during the Cold War as a counter to the latest Russian fighters and is no longer a military priority.
make this your indymedia front page
printable version
View Comments Titles Only
save preference
Comments (12 of 12)
Jump To Comment: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12This is a multirole aircraft of extreme flexibility. To say that it was born of the idea to combat Soviet aircraft is nonsence. The original planes may have been laid down then but now far greater technology and ideas have been crosslinked into the design.
More info available here:-
http://www.eurofighter.com/
I do not expect the apologists for mankind for everything will be impressed but most of us have long since ceased to bother.
Hey Spike thanks for your comment. I found it both informative and educational.
However having visited the link you thoughtfully provided I still have a couple of questions unanswered and wondered if you could help me out?
1) What would you say is the average killing potential of non-combatants per flight?
2) What is the point to these machines in conflict resolution?
3) When money for the health service and education is hard to come buy why spend it on this form of machinery?
I look forward to your informed reply.
Difficult to answer specifically for this particular aircraft as it has not yet seen conflict or in been in service for that long so the cost per year or per flight etc is currently very high. Compare that to say the Buccaneer now out of service and the cost per flight or per year of service averaged out to a very low sum indeed. The same will happen to the Typhoon.
But in answer to your questions
1) What would you say is the average killing potential of non-combatants per flight?
Its use is more of a deterrent than aggression. After all when did we as a country last invade a country that had not previously invaded another or was guilty of human rights violations? So I would suggest that your question is loaded in that it would never be targeted deliberately at non-combatants. You reveal your true colours by suggesting that it would be.
2) What is the point to these machines in conflict resolution?
Its predecessors did well against the Argentinean Airforce where the Argentineans had invaded the Falklands, similarly the same aircraft predecessors did well against Saddams airforce when he invaded Kuwait. There was the Balkans as well where enforcement of the no fly zone stopped the bombing of civilians by the aggressive Serbs - some of which are now answering to war crimes in The Hague.
Sometimes in conflict negotiations you DO need a bigger stick than the bully. The Typhoon is a very good example of a big stick, made with a great deal of UK technology and a great deal of export potential. Its manufacture and development has employed thousands who all pay tax and NIC and that helps keep the economy going. MP's expenses not withstanding!
I would agree with anyone that the Gulf War today and the conflict in Afghanistan is of dubious merit and will cause long term problems for us. But the decision to invade was a political one born of spin and lies not what aircraft our armed forces had or did not have.
The Typhoon will be a great aircraft supporting and protecting UK citizens for many years – circa 25 years most likely. As such it is good value.
3) When money for the health service and education is hard to come buy why spend it on this form of machinery?
Actually money for the health service has not been hard to come by - this government for all its faults has massively increased spending on the NHS. But service in the NHS is little better than before it seems
In contrast the defence budget has suffered cuts.
Education is a mess I grant you - and I would support more money properly spent but we all pay our taxes and vote for leaders to spend that money wisely. I would suggest that spending money on such an aircraft is very much worth it when you look at the lessons of history and what happened to us in the past when we were unprepared.
One final point is that as a multirole aircraft, just one of these can do the job of many on the ground. As such it can save the lives of our servicemen. And surely anyone would support that.
The people on the streets to honour the homecoming of the dead soldiers is testament to how most of the country feel.
so what does this plane consume apart from unbelievable amounts of fossil fuel and oxygen?
and what comes out of this planes exhaust pipe if its not pure global-warming?
and the threat which this plane is built to combat is what exactly?
the greatest threat to life on earth is global-warming.
how is this plane going to combat global-warming?
If you want to debate Global Warming please post a new thread elswhere.
Dear spammer. most of us have known for a very long time now that the earth is not flat.
Jet aircraft atmospheric damage is unique in that exhaust emissions from such aircraft are
deposited not only in the lower atmosphere but also in the cloud-forming troposphere and higher, where resulting contrails are formed and other chemicals remain to interact for decades.
The now well recognized critical role (including by the United Nations) that air transportation
plays in climate change is raised to the highest levels of concern by the Pentagon’s report.
“Rather than decades or even centuries of gradual warming, recent evidence suggests
the possibility that a more dire climate scenario may actually be unfolding.”
Also most of us are aware that, on this planet, everything is connected.
It is no longer possible to artificially disconnect cause from effect, as you seem to do.
When people like you realise that what they do materially on this planet has a negative effect on nature, as warplanes like yourofighter do, maybe you will hopefully become a part of the environmental solution.
Modern thinking and knowledge enables most of us to realise that what capitalists and politicians and spam-spinners like you tell us has very little foundation in truth.
I sincerely hope you come to your natural senses very soon.
You have to realise that that if you shit on your land, if you shit in your water, and if you shit into your qxygen supply, you will end up eating your own shit, drinking your own shit, and breathing your own shit.
I do not care what you like to eat drink or breathe, but dont expect us to let you pollute our food water and air as you do now.
Eurogighter along with every other fossil fuelled engine contribute directly to climate-change / global-warming.
Because you as a respiring animal produce CO2 - and it is a great deal of CO2 .
You are just as much a part of the problem than anyone else.
Only your limited thinking allows you to see it otherways.
The computor you use - has a carbon footprint, as does the heating you use and the light switch you flick.
Crazy to think that you can blame just one fragment of what is happening.
Personaly I feel that the angry man screaming global warming does more harm that good. You turn people off.
Yours
turned off
Do try to stay on-topic Spike, theres a good chap!
LONDON, May 11 (Reuters)
British defence and finance ministry officials held talks on Monday to assess the financial implications if Britain cancelled part of its Eurofighter defence contract, defence sources said.
With the national budget under severe strain due to the economic crisis, the Treasury is reviewing spending on major contracts and has to give the go-ahead on all deals costing more than 400 million pounds ($586 million).
Under a long-standing agreement with Spain, Italy and Germany -- its partners in Eurofighter -- Britain is obliged to buy 88 of the aircraft as part of a third production tranche.
That number has already been reduced to an initial 40 after a compromise negotiated by Germany, with the remainder offset for a later production run, dubbed tranche 3b.
Yet even the cost of the 40 jets -- of which 24 have already been set aside for Saudia Arabia -- is proving a tough commitment for Britain. The 16 it would actually take delivery of will cost around $1.6 billion, defence industry sources say.
The Treasury is stalling on that sum, the sources say, but any cancellation of the contract would not necessarily mean a saving -- since getting out would carry its own penalties and legal fees that could more than offset the $1.6 billion.
Discussions over the contract are complicated by the fact that senior Ministry of Defence officials are divided over the necessity of Eurofighter, with some seeing it as essential to Britain's future defence role and others as surplus to need.
"The Treasury and MoD are going to have to hammer out the details," a defence ministry source said of the talks, which he said began on Monday and may continue through the week.
WHAT DEFENCE ROLE?
Britain is under particular pressure from Germany to show its commitment to Eurofighter, which is being built by Britain's BAE Systems, Italy's Finmeccanica and EADS of Germany and Spain.
Not only is Eurofighter an important symbol of pan-European cooperation, but it involves the employment of up to 100,000 people worldwide, according to its supporters. BAE has said the contract is worth two billion pounds ($3 bln) to it alone.
With Germany holding elections in September, Berlin wants Britain to show its commitment to the third tranche -- and pay up. Britain needs Germany to be committed to NATO operations in Afghanistan, where more troops are required.
The negotiations over Eurofighter cut to the quick of what combat role Britain sees itself playing as a global power -- and whether it can really afford to play that role.
Britain has a range of defence contract obligations over the next six years: the A400M transport aircraft, the building of Type-45 destroyers, tactical submarines, two aircraft carriers and the joint-strike fighter as well as Eurofighter.
While major cuts to some contracts are possible, any cuts could carry financial penalties, political costs in terms of votes, and security costs if defence were compromised.
Rather than a headline-grabbing cancellation of a major contract, Keith Hartley, the director of the centre for defence economics at the University of York, expects "trimming".
"There might be the possibility of a small reduction in numbers (of Eurofighters) without too much of a penalty," he said. "But I think we'll fiddle around with the margins, make small reductions if we can, rather than cancelling.
Who wrote this? - "MoD tries to offload fleet of 'too costly' Eurofighter jets"
The Daily Mail thats who!
More of the same from the same Daily Mail.
The Ministry of Defence is trying to offload a fleet of Eurofighter jets that it can no longer afford.
The Government is committed to buying 232 planes for the RAF but is now trying to persuade foreign states to take them instead.
The project - the costs of which have spiralled from £7billion to more than £20billion - has repeatedly come in for criticism at a time when efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan have been hampered by budgetry constraints.
The RAF's critics claim its insistence on such a huge number of advanced combat jets is a relic of Cold War thinking.
They say that Britain's military operations in reality need larger numbers of flexible battlefield helicopters and transport aircraft, of which the RAF suffers serious shortages.
To make matters worse, the jets will not be able to fly from the Navy's two new aircraft carriers.
The MoD will instead have to buy a separate fleet of 150 strike planes to serve at sea.
Any sale of the aircraft, however, will require the approval of the other Eurofighter partners. The original contract - signed with Spain, Italy and Germany ten years ago - was designed to stop any country from backing out.
Under the contract - which saw Germany pledge to buy 180 jets, with Italy taking 121 and Spain 87 - the penalties for reducing orders mean it would cost almost as much to cancel as to buy the jets.
Now the countries are negotiating as to whether those numbers can be changed, with Britain and Italy seeking ways to reduce their commitments
Analysts fear the partner countries may block Britain's plans to sell the aircraft.
MoD officials confirmed that talks are under way with the Eurofighter partner nations, but refused to comment on any discussions with other states.
Japan, Saudi Arabia and India are among countries interested in buying the planes, say insiders.
But of course, that was all written in August 2008 - before the credit crunch!
I'm pleased to see this sentance,
"Britain has a range of defence contract obligations over the next six years: the A400M transport aircraft, the building of Type-45 destroyers, tactical submarines, two aircraft carriers and the joint-strike fighter as well as Eurofighter."
I'd like to take this oppotunity to examine it's contents in more detail.
Britain has a range of defence obligations - hmm. Let me think...no we don't. At any time it can pull out - or, as is common in sticky situations - simply ignore the rules. Much like the majority of English politicians do when it comes to upholding International Hunanitarian Law. This country is the third largest arms dealler. As has recently been demonstrated, even when said arms are constiantly put to illegal use.
Over the next six years inflation maybe so great that people will demand greater spending on education, care of the elderly and infirm - energy prices, health, let alone defence against an increasingly hostile environment (weather wise).
Parts for Boeings A400M (troop carriers) are made in Bristol - and should be opposed since attempting to create an imperialistic empire only serves a few selfish, greedy, sadistic wronguns.
Destroyers - my current knowledge is limited.
Tactical subs ?! what American controlled Trident missle launchers? Yet the UK suffers from accidents surrounding these things, as just the other week there was a nuclear leak at Faslane. These - simply by threatening other nations break International Humanitarian Law.
In NO WAY could you avoid civilian casulties on truley massive scales - why do you think nobody wants North Korea or Iran to have any. (Yet Israel , with it's insecurities and it's record of bloody racism own them). But I digress...
Aircraft carriers - much like the eurofighter-its being re-timetabled, due to lack of funds (never mind,"What's the point?")
And so we return to this flying killing machine. Well even the top brass of the army question the logic. But then we know politicians know alot about nothing and never listen to those that do.
It's a sick, no sorry, A SICK COUNTRY, that choses to spend billions on a killing/maiming trade, in the name of JOBS!?! when it could invest in the postal service, the rail service, research and development of re-newable energy, better - sustainable- housing, food production, supporting minority groups, improving the quality of life for the many and not just the few.
About the information sources some on here use.
To say that the Typhoon is somehow deficient as it cannot take off from a Carrier is barmy!
It could with modifications from something the size of a US carrier. but our two new ones - thought far larger than our old ones are still too small and so the UK and US have developed the Joint Strike fighter.
http://www.raf.mod.uk/equipment/f35jointstrikefighter.cfm
reality horizon for some seems to be lets make up whatever cr*p we can just so we can criticise.