§ Sir Ian Gilmourasked the Secretary of State for Defence what is his policy concerning the use of his Department's generic acronyms by suppliers of trials equipment in describing their equipment; what action his Department generally takes to implement this policy; and if he will make a statement about how this was applied in the context of the demountable rack off-loading pick-up system.
§ Mr. Archie HamiltonThe Ministry of Defence does not normally seek to restrict the use of acronyms which it has originated, and there are accordingly few rights which MOD possesses in respect of its acronyms including copyright. One right the Ministry does retain is that of free use of an acronym it has coined in the face of third party attempts to use and to register the acronym or similar word as a trademark. The use of the acronym DROPS is not restricted in any way.
§ Sir Ian Gilmourasked the Secretary of State for Defence what were the changes in concepts, requirements or understanding which led his Department to purchase from Boughtons demountable rack off-loading pick-up system trials equipment identical to the equipments they had rejected when they were first offered by Boughtons two and a half years earlier; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Archie HamiltonThere is no record in currently available papers of the equipment referred to as having been offered by Boughtons at the time in question.
§ Sir Ian Gilmourasked the Secretary of State for Defence what is his Department's normal practice with regard to the stage in the procurement process at which a general staff target is formulated; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Archie HamiltonA staff target is the first formal definition by the Defence Staff, expressed in broad terms, of the functions and desired performance of a new weapon or equipment. Approval of a staff target will normally be followed by a feasibility study, if warranted by the size and complexity of the project in question.
§ Sir Ian Gilmourasked the Secretary of State for Defence what were the principal differences between the demountable rack off-loading pick-up system concept which emerged in 1979–80 and the ampliroll concept which preceded it; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Archie HamiltonNo "Ampliroll concept" as such was formulated comparable with the DROPS concept456W which emerged in 1979–80. The DROPS requirement involved a range of separate equipment elements to provide a complete bulk load handling system. The Ampliroll equipment purchased for trail purposes in 1976 and 1977 was relevant to part, but not all, of that requirement.
§ Sir Ian Gilmourasked the Secretary of State for Defence what priority was attached in the 1983 selection of the demountable rack off-loading pick-up system trucks to assessments of legality for use on roads; what consideration was given in the selection of the offroad MMLC truck configuration to its road-legality; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Archie HamiltonThe ability of all equipment proposals to meet peacetime construction and use regulations was an important but not paramount consideration in the 1983 assessments. There is no separate offroad MMLC truck configuration.
§ Sir Ian Gilmourasked the Secretary of State for Defence which demountable rack off-loading pick up system contractors selected in 1983 included among their range of solutions and options for low mobility demountable rack off-loading pick up system detailed designs of demountable rack off-loading pick up system trailers; if these contractors recommended the trailer option to his Department as the correct choice for LMLC demountable rack off-loading pick up system; and if he will make a statement.
§ Mr. Archie HamiltonBoth selected main contractors provided and recommended trailer options and designs to meet the LMLC requirements.