The Politics and DV Engineering working group analyses current political developments in the defence sector. It provides independent facts and interpretation from the technological knowledge and experience of engineers.
The Politics and DV Engineering working group has compiled the comments and questions below on the recent letter from the Secretary of State for Defence on the water mist fire suppression system of Oceangoing Patrol Vessels (OPVs). The comments have been compiled based on publicly available documents and defence technology knowledge and experience. The comments and questions concern technological or related aspects only.
The letter makes it clear that the problems with the water mist system are complex in nature. The architect and the classification society, but also the Ministry of Defence, apparently did not have sufficient technical knowledge, skills and experience to foresee and prevent the damage that occurred during the design and construction phase. In the end, Defence had to take full responsibility and pay the costs of repair.
However, the incident at the water mist installation should also be seen in a broader perspective. This issue is not specific to safety-critical systems. Other (sub)systems from propulsion to weapon systems also require sufficient knowledge and expertise. Defence innovates rapidly and constantly applies new (the latest) technologies in naval construction. An estimated 20% of the construction cost of new ships goes to innovation. This requires not only flexibility in procurement, but above all technical learning capability.
Problems as described in the letter usually do not occur until a very long time after the (technical) decision. Even in the case of the water mist system more than 10 years after this subsystem, and its method of installation, was chosen. This is relevant for who takes responsibility, but also for measures to prevent failures in the future.
If the necessary in-depth knowledge is lacking, mistakes are made not so much in the procurement process, but long before that in the preparation of specifications and requirements. The letter's stated focus on procedures, supervision and archiving is relevant from a bureaucratic point of view, but does not lead to an improvement in results. Placing management tasks related to testing and trials with the (non-technically trained) Purchasing Directorate is not an effective solution either, in our opinion. The same goes for recruiting additional (legally trained) procurement officers. This is necessary for other reasons, but it does not prevent mistakes like this one.
Since the formation of the DMO over 10 years ago, the level of knowledge for naval construction has fallen sharply. Both the number of specialists and the depth of knowledge. We have advocated before that the inherent level of knowledge should be reinforced again to prevent technical errors. We are doing so again now. In the case of the water mist system, we are talking about design choices made 10 years ago. The DMO has not been strengthened since then and the level of knowledge may have been further weakened, while formal procedures and thus bureaucracy have been strengthened. This creates uncertainty about the consequences of choices made today.
Rebuilding knowledge by attracting young and dynamic highly skilled technical personnel is difficult and takes a very long time. The current policy of also bringing back former-experienced people is sensible.
There is no simple solution to this problem. A large number of influencing factors determine the risk of making mistakes even before tendering, which only come to light many years later.
_____________________________
The Hague, 6 November 2018
More information on the Politics and Defence Engineering Working Group can be found via this link.
Do you have any questions? Then contact the working group at E: politiektechniek@kividv.nl
Would you like to receive the working group's comments and advice by email? Then sign up for our mailing list.
Disclaimer: The facts and opinions given are based on open sources and on the knowledge and experience of working group members.
As part of the professional association KIVI, the working group is independent of political parties, governments and companies.
This is not an official position of KIVI. The association accepts no liability for anything put forward by the working group or its members.
Photo: Image at Defence
