Tuesday, 24 February 2009

Plymouth University and BAE Systems

BAE Systems have sold equipment to Indonesia, Saudi Arabia, Zimbabwe and - more specifically - the software for 236 F-16 Fighters to the Israeli state. In February 2007 it was announced that BAE contracts in 6 countries were under investigation by the Serious Fraud Office for "suspected international corruption."

In September 2003, The Sunday Times reported that BAE Systems hired a private security contractor to collate individuals working on the Campaign Against Arms Trade and their activities. They did this again in February 2007.

The USS (Universities Superannuation Scheme) is the UK's second largest pension scheme, in terms of fund size. Members are academic and academic-related staff in many UK universities - Plymouth University included. USS holds £164.4 Million worth of shares in BAE Systems.

BAE Systems also awarded a grant of £22,500 to Professor D.J. Mapps, Associate Dean of the Faculty of Technology at Plymouth University for research in micro sensors.

Martin Tomlinson - professor in fixed and mobile communications - has carried out consultancy work for BAE via University of Plymouth Research and Innovation.

Both BAE Systems Land Systems and BAE Systems Airbus are listed as clients of the University of Plymouth - as well as Rolls Royce plc, QinetiQ and Siemens.

How is it so easy for Plymouth Students to get jobs within BAE?

1 comment:

  1. A few points:

    BAE System does not make or sell F-16s this is a product of U.S. defense contractor Lockheed Martin.
    BAE produce a subsystem for more recent F-16s this clearly is your basis for claiming BAEs involvement however you have taken this entirely out of proportion claiming BAE sell these multi-million $ aircraft, something your oracle of information did refrain from doing. http://www.caat.org.uk/issues/israel-suppliers.php
    Reliable information on the sale of F16 fighter jets to Israel can be found at http://www.f-16.net/f-16_users_article7.html in case you would like to check and correct your facts.

    You discussions on consultancy work to and grants from BAE Systems shows how little you understand the defence industry and indeed a more general relationship between academia and industry, needless to say singling out 2 individual cases when you don’t understand the context or content of the research/work carried out is a weak argument and seems to be coaxing attack towards these individuals.

    Finally "How is it so easy for Plymouth Students to get jobs within BAE?" This very statement is offensive to those graduates who have left the university with the skills and experience to get a job in a highly competitive environment, undermining the Universities reputation for producing those skilled, sought after individuals, and is completely unfounded on any factual level. The USS that you presumably argue makes it 'easier' for Plymouth students to get a job with BAE would apply to many more universities, providing no advantage to anyone.

    Stick to something that's understandable and true, i.e. "war is bad". Stay away from speculative questions that insinuate that there's some kind of corruption between the UoP and BAE. Its the effort put in by students and indeed the staff that teach them that's the reason for the success of UoP students.