A Defense Technology Blog
See All Posts
  • Lessons To Be Learned
    Posted by Douglas Barrie 1:52 PM on Dec 14, 2009

    blog post photo

    Depending on your perspective, BAE Systems was either caught wrong-footed or was being measured in any action in response to Charles Haddon-Cave’s criticism of the company in his report into the loss of a Nimrod MR2 in Afghanistan in September 2006, and the deaths of the 14 personnel on board.

    Haddon-Cave’s ministry-commissioned report, published at the end of October, levelled serious criticism at the Defense Ministry, Qinetiq, and BAE Systems. The ministry is expected to make a further response to the report this week, Qinetiq has already set up its own review, and now BAE is calling in Chris Elliott to lead a review into product safety.

    Elliott, a systems engineer and barrister, will work with BAE group managing director for programs and support Nigel Whitehead on the review.

    Haddon-Cave was critical of BAE’s role in the Nimrod Safety Case. He described the safety case as a “lamentable job from start to finish”. The Haddon-Cave report claimed BAE: “bears substantial responsibility for the failure of the Nimrod Safety Case.” He suggested elements were “poorly planned, poorly managed and poorly executed, work was rushed and corners were cut.”

    Tags: ar99, Haddon-Cave, Nimrod, BAE

  • Recommend
  • Report Abuse

Comments on Blog Post