|The recent slag-fest between FS, Herald and Bluewings re the Aster missile started me wondering why and how the UK came to select Aster.
Firstly, does anyone know why we chose to get involved in the Horizon project (which effectively meant we had to go with the Aster) rather than the much looser collaboration with the Germans/Dutch/Spanish (who all chose the Aegis/Standard combo)?
Secondly, it seems odd to me that, after withdrawing from the Horizon project, the UK chose to stick with Aster even though it offered our industry very little benefit, particularly when we could have bought an existing system off the shelf from the US. Also we could have used Mk 41 launchers (manufactured under licence in the UK) which are compatible with Tomahawks instead of the Sylvers (which aren't). Anyone know why this happened?
All we seem to have done is waste a lot of time and incur a lot of unnecessary expenditure. I'd guess we could have had Aegis/Standard equipped destroyers in service by the end of the 1990s ie ten years earlier than the T45s, and we could have afforded more of them.
Is this yet another clasiic MoD -up?
(BTW I was thinking of starting a "your nation's worst ever procurement decision" thread (I felt like a rant)- has this been done before?)