Quotulatiousness

October 23, 2009

Corruption quadruples the price of military transport aircraft

Filed under: Africa, Military — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 12:33

South Africa has a serious corruption problem with their yet-to-be delivered A400M military transport planes:

Yet another corruption case in South Africa. This time, members of parliament are asking why the military is suddenly paying $809 million each for eight A400M four engine transports. The price other nations are paying for the aircraft are under $200 million each. The price South Africa agreed to pay, in 2005, was about $279 million, and included training, maintenance support and some spare parts. It is believed that the price went up so that government officials could siphon off large bribes. Meanwhile, the A400M aircraft is four years behind schedule, and has not flown yet. It was originally to start deliveries to European customers this year. South Africa is supposed to begin getting its A400Ms in seven years. South Africa has already paid $400 million for its A400Ms, and more progress payments will soon be due.

Such blatant corruption is not new in South Africa, but lately the crooks have been winning. Last year, the South African parliament passed a law disbanding an elite government investigation unit nicknamed the “Scorpions.” Investigations by this unit had led to dozens of corruption prosecutions of government officials. That’s why the unit is being dismantled. Corruption is a major problem throughout Africa, and many nations are now setting up units like the Scorpions, after having realized that corruption was the major cause of the poverty and civil wars that afflict most Africans.

October 10, 2009

Where High Speed Trains can beat short-haul flight

Filed under: Economics, Europe, Railways, Technology — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 11:46

Spain has a new high speed railway (HSR) network that appears to be a huge success, according to the Guardian:

Last year’s drop in air travel, which was also helped by new high-speed lines from Madrid to Valladolid, Segovia and Malaga, marks the beginning of what experts say is a revolution in Spanish travel habits.

In a country where big cities are often more than 500km (300 miles) apart, air travel has ruled supreme for more than 10 years. A year ago aircraft carried 72% of the 4.8 million long-distance passengers who travelled by air or rail. The figure is now down to 60%.

“The numbers will be equal within two years,” said Josep Valls, a professor at the ESADE business school in Barcelona.

Two routes, from Barcelona to Malaga and Seville, opened last week. Lines are also being built to link Madrid with Valencia, Alicante, the Basque country and Galicia. The government has promised to lay 10,000km of high-speed track by 2020 to ensure that 90% of Spaniards live within 30 miles of a station. The prime minister, José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, boasts it will be Europe’s most extensive high-speed network.

While I’m always skeptical of HSR advocates’ larger-than-life claims, the Spanish system may be in a good position to permanently claim a big share of the short-haul air passenger market. The situation works to the strengths of HSR: relatively dense population corridors, short-to-medium length journeys, and government subsidy of construction costs.

HSR cannot be run on the same tracks as regular freight trains and commuter passenger trains: the signalling, degree of curvature of track, and speed differential between the HSR and ordinary trains creates too many risks. HSR must have its own right of way, which pretty much always means that governments must get involved to condemn existing properties and expropriate them for the benefit of the railway.

That HSR is, or may become, a success in densely populated European countries does not make the case for North American HSR efforts, as I’ve posted a few times before.

September 14, 2009

The RAF sets a record, but not a good one

Filed under: Britain, Military — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 07:54

The RAF‘s most expensive aircraft had just made its first flight:

The Nimrod MRA4 programme was initiated back in 1996 by TV presenter, one-time director of BAE Systems and former New Statesman theatre critic Michael Portillo, who was defence minister at the time. Under the original deal, BAE Systems would be paid a “fixed price” of £2.2bn to rebuild, rearm and upgrade the RAF’s fleet of 21 Nimrod MR2s, the last De Havilland Comet airframes left flying in the world, to the point where they would effectively be new aircraft. This would have meant a cost of just over £100m per plane. The project was then known as “Nimrod 2000”, rather optimistically as it turned out.

As time went by it became clear that the price was not fixed, and that “2000” wasn’t a good name for the project at all: it was re-dubbed Nimrod MRA4. BAE Systems has just announced that the first flight of a production-standard MRA4 took place last week, though the aircraft is not yet ready for handing over to the RAF — that will probably take place next year. Then there will be more delay before the type can be declared operationally capable.

Meanwhile the MoD now estimates the programme’s overall price tag as £3.6bn, an increase of more than two-thirds. In fact the situation is much worse than this, as the number of planes has had to be slashed to prevent even worse cost overruns. The RAF will now receive just 9 aircraft rather than 21.

As a result the cost per plane has actually quadrupled: each MRA4 will now have cost the taxpayers a cool £400m, better than $660m at current rates.

On a pure economic level, this is quite a price increase, but it’s typical of military equipment contracts: the very small number of items means that there are no economies of scale to be reaped, and all the design, test, and administration costs must be recouped over a much shorter production run. It still looks very bad . . . unless you happen to be in opposition right now, in which case it’s a great campaign talking point.

September 7, 2009

Toronto air show photos

Filed under: Cancon — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 21:40

No, no, not mine . . . while I was caught in traffic along Lakeshore Boulevard on Saturday afternoon during the Snowbirds portion of the show, I took no photos. Aside from the occasional glimpse of one or more Snowbird aircraft, I managed to get a brief look at HMCS Ville de Quebec and a Canadian Coast Guard vessel.

Chris Taylor (proprietor and chief pilot of Taylor Empire Airways), however, is an air buff, and can be depended upon to be there with camera (and charged batteries), and to take photos.

September 4, 2009

Survey of military use of UAV assets

Filed under: Military, Technology — Tags: , — Nicholas @ 08:17

There’s a useful overview of how Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAVs) are changing the tactical situation for troops on the ground in this week’s Economist Technology Quarterly section:

Drones are much less expensive to operate than manned warplanes. The cost per flight-hour of Israel’s drone fleet, for example, is less than 5% the cost of its fighter jets, says Antan Israeli, the commander of an Israeli drone squadron. In the past two years the Israeli Defence Forces’ fleet of UAVs has tripled in size. Mr Israeli says that “almost all” IDF ground operations now have drone support.

Of course, small and comparatively slow UAVs are no match for fighter jets when it comes to inspiring awe with roaring flyovers — or shooting down enemy warplanes. Some drones, such as America’s Predator and Reaper, carry missiles or bombs, though most do not. (Countries with “hunter-killer” drones include America, Britain and Israel.) But drones have other strengths that can be just as valuable. In particular, they are unparalleled spies. Operating discreetly, they can intercept radio and mobile-phone communications, and gather intelligence using video, radar, thermal-imaging and other sensors. The data they gather can then be sent instantly via wireless and satellite links to an operations room halfway around the world — or to the hand-held devices of soldiers below. In military jargon, troops without UAV support are “disadvantaged”.

Of course, it wouldn’t be a current-day Economist article without at least one gloomy caveat:

There is a troubling side to all this. Operators can now safely manipulate battlefield weapons from control rooms half a world away, as if they are playing a video game. Drones also enable a government to avoid the political risk of putting combat boots on foreign soil. This makes it easier to start a war, says P.W. Singer, the American author of “Wired for War”, a recent bestseller about robotic warfare. But like them or not, drones are here to stay. Armed forces that master them are not just securing their hold on air superiority — they are also dramatically increasing its value.

I don’t particularly credit this risk . . . as Chris Taylor pointed out in a comment on a recent post, “degrading the comm links is the easiest way to render UCAVs largely toothless. In their current incarnation they are only good for permissive environments where the other guy can’t really harm your aircraft or comms. When they get autonomous then they’ll be more practical for warfighting against advanced foes.”

Actually, go read the comment thread on that post. Between Chris and “cirby”, I think they cover the technical side very well indeed.

August 27, 2009

The only Canadian conspiracy theory

Filed under: Cancon, Military, Technology — Tags: , , , , — Nicholas @ 08:29

American conspiracy enthusiasts have plenty to choose from, but their Canadian confreres don’t have much . . . but they do have the Avro Arrow controversy:

InnovationCanada.ca spoke with Campagna 50 years after the only examples of Canada’s premier jet fighter were cut into pieces.

InnovationCanada.ca (IC): What would most Canadians be shocked to find out about the Arrow, 50 years after its demise?

Palmiro Campagna (PC): Most people don’t know that the order to destroy the Arrow did not come from Prime Minister John Diefenbaker. One theory was that Diefenbaker decided to cancel as this was a Liberal project and he had problems with A.V. Roe president Crawford Gordon. But the reports I had declassified showed that was clearly not the case.

The decision to cut the Arrows into scrap was blamed on Diefenbaker as an act of vengeance, but it was actually an act of national security. The Arrow was an advanced piece of military technology, and the Canadian government didn’t want the test planes to go to a Crown disposal group that would be allowed to auction them off to anyone in the world.

I’ve written a little bit about the Arrow controversy back in 2004:

I hate to sound like a killjoy, but everything I’ve read about the AVRO Arrow says that, while Dief was widely viewed as an idiot for destroying the . . . finished planes, it would never have been a viable military export for Canada. The plane was great, there seems to be no question about that, but it was too expensive for the RCAF to be the only purchaser, and neither the United States nor the United Kingdom was willing (at that time) to buy from “foreign” suppliers. With no market for the jet, regardless of its superior flying and combat qualities, there was little point in embarking on full production.

Also, given the degree of penetration by Soviet spies, the Canadian government took the easiest option in destroying the prototypes. That doesn’t make it any less tragic if you’re a fan, but it does put it into some kind of perspective, I hope.

August 7, 2009

No more manned fighters? This is not a repost from 1957

Filed under: Britain, History, Military — Tags: , , — Nicholas @ 08:01

Back in the depths of the cold war, the British Minister of Defence proclaimed that the end was in sight for manned fighter aircraft, and that automation was rapidly making humans obsolete in the cockpit. A few generations on, another British minister is saying the same thing, with a bit more chance of being proven correct:

In a bizarre repeat of history, a British defence minister has given it as his opinion that we are currently witnessing development of the final generation of manned combat aircraft. The comments made last week by Quentin Davies MP echo those made in a 1957 government white paper by the then Defence minister, Duncan Sandys.

Mr Davies, minister for Defence Equipment and Support, made his new “last of the manned fighters” comments at an Unmanned Air Systems exhibition held on Friday at the London headquarters of the Ministry of Defence (MoD).

“My own working assumption is that although we certainly need the manned combat aircraft, and are investing in some very good ones at the moment… that will take us through to the 2030s, but beyond that I think the name of the game will be UAVs [Unmanned Aerial Vehicles],” he said.

To be fair, the view from 1957 was not as dazed and confused as it might appear to be in hindsight. It was only 13 years after the start of the first widespread and successful cruise missile attacks (Nazi Germany’s V-1 “buzz bombs”), and in the middle of the nuclear arms race. Strategic bombing was still the way wars were expected to be won . . . and with thermonuclear warheads, it was likely to be a final war for all concerned. Flying fighter aircraft was seen to be a relic of the second world war, and an expensive relic at that.

July 29, 2009

Another lost WW2 combat aircraft discovered

Filed under: History, Military — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 20:28

This time it’s a US Navy carrier plane:

On May 28, 1945, the SB2C-4 Helldiver was on a practice bombing run from a nearby aircraft carrier. The crew members survived the emergency landing.

At the time, the Navy opted not to recover the plane.

Yesterday, Raia said she couldn’t comment on how long it will take Navy officials to decide whether to salvage the plane. Typically, the Naval Aviation Museum in Pensacola, Fla., plays a major role in the evaluation process.

One of the pilots is believed to be 90 years old and living in Michigan, but the Navy hasn’t provided his name.

“Wouldn’t that be something to fly him out here and have him standing on the shoreline when they lift the plane out?” Manville said.

That’d be cool . . . as long as they don’t make him pay for the recovery of the plane.

July 28, 2009

Boeing’s Dreamliner woes

Filed under: Technology — Tags: — Nicholas @ 12:28

The amazing sales record set by the Boeing Dreamliner (866 on order, more than any other wide-body passenger aircraft) is now being overshadowed by the technical problems holding up production:

[. . .] thanks to one technical glitch after another, the new plane is running way behind schedule. Today, it is known increasingly as the “Dream-on-liner”. Originally due in 2007, its initial delivery (to All Nippon Airways) won’t now take place until 2011 at the earliest.

The latest delay looks like the most serious yet. In May, routine bending tests in the workshop showed the wing structure to have separated from its skin (“delaminated”) at 120%-130% of the load limit. To pass muster with the Federal Aviation Administration and other certification bodies, wings have to sustain at least 150% of the load limit without rupturing.

Then, in late June, Boeing announced it was postponing the plane’s maiden flight — originally scheduled for June 30th — while it found a way to reinforce the structure where the wings join the fuselage. The 787 Dreamliner’s first flight has now been put off until this autumn or later.

Boeing declared at the time that the fix was relatively simple. Scott Fancher, the Dreamliner’s programme chief, said all that was needed was “a simple modification” using “a handful of parts”. But Gulliver thinks Boeing is in bigger trouble than it admits — and is having to rerun fresh batches of its computer simulations of the wing’s design.

The preceding advertorial is brought to you by Airbus Industries.

Okay, not really . . . as far as I know. But I’m sure it’s music to the ears of Airbus sales folks.

July 26, 2009

I’ll take his word for it

Filed under: Britain, Cancon, History, Technology — Tags: , , , — Nicholas @ 00:14

. . . but it looks like a random collection of bits to me:

Fairey_Swordfish_wreck

It may not look like much to the untrained eye, but to those of us who are Warbird afficionados, it is incredibly complete. There have been rebuilds to fly from wrecks recently dragged out of the Russian wilderness which were found in worse condition that this.

« Newer Posts

Powered by WordPress