14.1 |
Military equipment (post-conflict)
870.
The DEC’s
proposal would “relieve some of the pressure” on the Phoenix Out
of
Service
Date (OSD) but there was a risk of a capability gap between the
Phoenix OSD
and the
Watchkeeper ISD:
“An
analysis of the availability of Phoenix for future operations
(whatever they may
be) when
considered in light of the introduction of Watchkeeper, has
indicated that
there is a
risk of a capability gap developing. We will not be able to
quantify this
fully until
the repair situation on Phoenix is better understood. However, work
is
in hand to
look at options for mitigating this risk, including re‑opening the
Phoenix
production
line …”
871.
AM Stirrup
warned Lord Bach that the DEC’s update must be “put in
context”,
noting the
“considerable success” of UAVs during combat operations and
indicating
that the
capability gap had arisen because UK forces had entered a new phase
in
operations.
872.
On 25 June,
the House of Commons Defence Committee took evidence from
Lord
Bach,
Sir Peter Spencer and Lt Gen Fulton on the progress
of the MOD’s Equipment
873.
Asked why the
Watchkeeper programme could not be accelerated, Lord Bach
said
that “some
elements” would be in service by “late 2005”. Concern was expressed
by the
Committee
that the MOD should not put its “head in the sand”, delaying the
introduction
of
Watchkeeper to the extent that “by the time it comes out, the
concept has already
moved
on”.
874.
The Chairman
finished the line of questioning by saying that the project
should
be watched
closely “because the military requires it and requires it to be
done pretty
damned
quickly”.
875.
In its
subsequent report, the Committee stated that the Watchkeeper and
FRES
programmes
both exemplified the MOD’s efforts to “bring important new
capabilities into
service
more quickly”. They also highlighted that, in conflict with the
desire to speed up
progress,
the MOD had maintained a cautious approach in both with a view to
reducing
project
risks. That demonstrated that the MOD was still finding it
difficult to balance
“increased
agility against decreased risk”.
876.
On 26 June,
the DMB endorsed a paper from Mr Colin Balmer, MOD
Finance
Director,
on investment priorities for 2004’s Equipment Programme
(STP/EP04).463
Network‑enabled
capability and deployable ISTAR were two areas of “vital
ground”
that Mr Balmer
suggested that the DMB should protect.
462
Eighth
Report from the House of Commons Defence Committee, Session
2002‑03, Defence
Procurement,
HC 694, para
18 and evidence session from 25 June 2003.
463
Paper
Finance Director [MOD], 20 June 2003, ‘Defence Strategic Audit and
Guidance for STP/EP04’;
Minutes, 26
June 2003, Chiefs of Staff meeting.
149