Gates Calls for Cuts to High-Tech Weapons Programs - Page 3 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

cmbdiesel · #31 04-12-2009, 11:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LUVMBDiesels

Gates is also cutting the Joint Tactical Strike Vehicle (the Humvee replacement) How is that helping the boots on the ground? Our current rescue helos are reaching the end of their useful lives. We need replacements.While I hate all the waste I have seen one of the biggest reasons for the overspending - a government that 1) Cannot get easily understandable specifications to the contractors during the RFP phase 2) Constantly changes the specs after the contract is awarded. 3) Changes the number of units being produced constantly causing the price per unit to go up and 4) Mismanages the contracts execution letting the contractors get away with murder...

Just purchasing computers turned into a fiasco that 1) Cost much more than originally thought (like 100 MILLION MORE!) 2) has been the subject of three prostests in Congress by people who were not awarded the contract (and they have a valid point to protest on) 3) Has taken over a year and a half to write and 4) has crippled the organization that now is using outdated equipment (if it is available or has people SHARING outdated equipment as there arenot enough computers to go around!

Multiply this contract by the enormous amount of contracts especially in DOD and you can see how billions are lost each year. If we cleaned up our procurement process things would be much easier and cheaper. Oh and the $5000 hammer , which was more like a $3000 hammer was designed to be part of a rescue kit put in B1b bombers. It is a special shape, lightweight, made of titanium and was only made in a run of 100. It was not something you could get at Home Depot... I just saw an airconditioner made for the Army that runs on 200V 400cycle AC. It is a 12000 BTU unit and cost aout $5000! If the Army had spec'ed 120v 60Hz units they could have picked up units at any Walmart for under $300...

All I am saying is that Gates could fix the process and save $$ without cutting projects...

Some excellent points. But, Gates would have to be God to fix some of those issues himself. Within his purview, he is doing a good job in a tight spot.

I am not familiar with the Joint Tactical Strike Vehicle, but does it take billions to develop an armored dune buggy? If there is a major difference, please enlighten me.

Also, the helicopter situation does need remedying, just ask anyone in the Coast Guard. They are the bottom feeders, flying copters that would not be allowed in the sky by FAA standards. (not their fault BTW, budget restrictions) The VH-71 project is a virtual poster child of the boondoggles of our current system.

We all want our military to be amply equipped, lacking naught. It just is a case of fiscal responsibility. If we could get the defense contractors to operate like legitimate businesses, and Congress to quit playing politics with the contracts, we could have F-22's, body armor, really cool jeeps, whatever we thought we needed, and still be on budget. Unfortunately that comes back to having God-like powers or the patience of Job. I think it will be the long way, and I just hope that this step being taken by Gates is followed up by the next Secdef. And the next, and the next. The real responsibility to see that it happens lies with us, the voting public.

cmac2012 · #32 04-12-2009, 12:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Botnst

What, you want our pilots to be in a "fair" fight? Fork that, I want any fight involving any of our forces to be as lopsidedly unfair in our favor as possible.

At some point, having around 10 or 20 times the firepower of any possible adversary becomes a white elephant. Way expensive to build and maintain and meanwhile countries that don't spend such a huge chunk of their infrastructure on such gee gaws are running circles around us in consumer goods, the real backbone of any economy.

Eventually the contest between nations becomes lopsidedly unfair in the sustainable economy category.

Kuan · #33 04-12-2009, 12:49 PM

I'm quite sure all the possible scenarios have been through multiple simulations.

cmac2012 · #34 04-12-2009, 12:57 PM

It's the impossible, the unexpected scenarios that we have to worry about.

Botnst · #35 04-12-2009, 02:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cmbdiesel

I'm not sure how that relates to the topic.

Big government interventionists, you mean like the huge defense contracts, awarded to the states of the party in power, that only get fulfilled on one side, the payment? ......

I mean exactly what I wrote.