The A400M has been delayed, but it is far from being an exception. According to a report by the National Audit Office (belonging to the UK Parliament), published in December 2008, which examines the expenditures of the UK’s Ministry of Defence on behalf of the Parliament, the delay of the Airbus A400M is not an isolated case. Of twenty or so projects examined, “eleven exceeded the deadline set by the contracting parties and a delay of 483 months was noted”. And, while the report welcomes the progress made by the ministryover the past ten years, it nevertheless estimates that performances remain variable, reflecting the complexity of acquiring such technology and the very unpredictable operational conditions.

NO NIMROD BEFORE 2010

Topping the report’s list are the Nimrod Maritime Reconnaissance and Attack Mk4. In fact, this new patrol aircraft for reconnaissance and attack has accumulated a total delay of 92 months compared with its original agenda. In its third report for the 2008-2009 session, the House of Commons regrets this delay. Concluded in 1996 with BAE Systems, the agreement anticipated putting the aircraft into service in April 2003 so as to replace the Mk2 aircraft currently in service. But at present, there is still no patrol aircraft in sight and today there is talk of December 2010 as being the latest deadline. The report by the National Audit Office points the finger at the technical problems brought to light during tests, which postponed the lead time by three months in 2008, and the increase in costs resulting from it of GBP789 million (€899 million) compared with the initial budget. Therefore, the series of tests carried out in 2008 demonstrated that five safety criteria had still not been reached, ie the capacity to counter maritime terrorism, that of search and detection (above all, water), mission accomplishment, submarine attacks and the possibility - in the long term - of carrying out operations in hostile environments. Temporarily, the Mk2 currently in service will be able to fill the gap - although it is becoming more and more obsolete - subject to some modifications, the Ministry of Defence planning to use the MK4’s processors to improve navigation systems and the transfer of data.

54-MONTH DELAY FOR TYPHOON

The Eurofighter Typhoon (EF2000) comes second in the classification of delays, far behind the Nimrod but with a delay of 54 months nevertheless. This multi-function aircraft, which appeared on the military market in 2007, is the result of a collaboration between Germany, Italy, the United Kingdom and Spain; four nations eager to obtain air superiority, with very specific ground attacks.

But while this eagerness made it possible to begin feasibility studies for the project as early as 1984, and for a contract relating to its development to be signed four years later, it did not, however, make it possible to avoid delays. Scheduled for 1998, the Royal Air Force only received its first ‘multi-function’ aircraft in 2003. On one hand, this was due to an additional 32 months being required to meet the (very complex) technological requirements originally established. On the other hand, a change of direction in the development phase (in response to pressure from the four nations) as well as the additional time required to sign a memorandum of understanding for the production and support phase, extended the delay by an additional 22 months. This delay was not without cost: in total, close to GBP214 million (approximately €250 million) must now be added to the GBP16.671 billion contract. And the National Audit Office recalls that the situation could have been worse “if the period of entry into service of the Typhoon had not been planed”.

The NAO’s 220-page report also points the finger at other military projects that are prey to the tribulations of the calendar, in particular the Astute Class Submarine (a delay of 47 months), the Type 45 Destroyer (42 months), the Stingray Torpedo Live Extension and Capability Upgrade (42 months) or the Terrier (39 months). And it concludes by identifying four points on which the Ministry of Defenceand its trade partners should be more attentive: more specifically identifying key dependencies, more accurately estimating costs and delays in order to deal with emerging problems, thoroughly playing the part of the intelligent client and, lastly, being more realistic from the start.