Industry criticizes UK defense procurement for lack of ‘deadline mentality,’ investment

BELFAST — Two leading industry officials today accused the UK’s defense procurement arm of not implementing internal deadlines when executing lucrative contracts and bemoaned a lack of “upfront investment” to prevent programs from faltering.

Speaking to lawmakers at a defense committee hearing today, Chief Executive of Lockheed Martin UK Paul Livingston indicated that while industry is held to an especially high standard when pitching for new contracts, including sometimes hour-specific deadlines for proposals, no such structure exists once the next phase of procurement begins — an oversight that leads to delayed programs.

“There isn’t a deadline mentality for the rest of the system,” he said, referring to post-proposal acquisition phases managed by the UK’s procurement arm, Defence Equipment and Support (DE&S).

Livingston added that industry competitors have no choice but to send proposals “out the door” in rougher shape than they’d like, rather than being “finessed” with more time, due to deadlines involved with the Invitation to Negotiate (ITN) or Request for Proposal (RfP) phases of defense contracting often set by DE&S.

“The rest of the process that goes on until somebody gets awarded a contract does not operate to that deadline mentality mindset,” said Livingston. “That would be a really key improvement that could be made.”

Procurement authorities should also be “allowed” to approve “upfront investments” ahead of new acquisitions beginning, according to Herman Claesen, managing director future combat air system at BAE Systems.

“Programs go wrong at the start, not at the end” he added, underlining the case for why additional funding should be offered to industry before procurements enter manufacturing phases.

Even so, Claesen appeared to concede that BAE Systems does, on occasion, fail to disclose to customers certain potential problems connected to a piece of equipment on offer or that could arise during a multiyear program, once an agreement has been reached.

“Sometimes the risk is suppressed to be competitive, especially with competitive proposals,” he said. “In unlocking the potential of digital systems we are now able to have a much better understanding of how that manifests itself.”

Type 26 Frigate Issues

Picking up on selected acquisitions led by BAE Systems and Lockheed Martin UK that have been troubled by delays or technical problems, one lawmaker claimed that the Royal Navy’s Type 26 frigate program had suffered a “ludicrous” gearbox issue.

“To my surprise, I read that [Type 26] hulls were closed and had to be cut open to slide the engine of the gearbox in [to the ship],” said Richard Drax, MP. “That seems to be ludicrous, and obviously someone responsible for the project should have thought ‘don’t close the hulls until we have the gearbox.’”

Claesen declined to comment on how BAE Systems let such a concerning situation develop, saying he could not “specifically” talk about the ship. “I know we’ve had our challenges there,” he said.

A total of eight Type 26 frigates are to lead the Royal Navy’s future anti-submarine warfare surface fleet with construction of all vessels set for the mid 2030s.

Elsewhere in the hearing Livingston briefly discussed ongoing delays with Lockheed’s Crowsnest carrier-based airborne early warning radar program due to supply chain issues with subcontractor Thales. “It can be harder to get clarity on what’s going on in the supply chain when your supplier is another big prime, as opposed to perhaps a smaller medium sized enterprise,” Livingstone said.

As of December 2022, Lockheed, other Crowsnest suppliers and the Royal Navy had been in discussions on how to address additional “specifications” for the radar but an entry to service date had not been confirmed, according to Livingston.