Monday, December 12, 2016

Little Crappy Ships; a Synopsis (With an Update)

This is a pretty good writeup of the debacle that the program has become.

At this point, if Donald Trump and Gen. Mathis take a meataxe to Ft. Fumble, I will do little more than cheer them on. All across the board, the services can't run programs worth a fuck. The Army has made a hash of the M9 pistol replacement program and they so fucked up the M4 replacement that the decision was made to stick with that little carbine. The Tri-Service F-35 has been a serious clusterfuck. The Air Force's KC-46 program has been a horror show. The F-22 program was so delayed and so over-budget that the planned buy went from 650 airplanes down to 187 airplanes. The B-2 went from 132 airplanes to 21. The Navy's fuckups (LCS, LPD-17, USS Zumwalt, USS Ford) are the stuff of legend.

Here's one example: The initial design requirement specs for the F-22 took up almost 90 pages in the 1980s. The Army's design requirement specs for the replacement pistol ran 357 pages.

Much of this is basically embedded dishonesty bordering on corruption. The services and the contractors lowball the program costs and far underestimate the time it will take to design, test, make and deploy the gizmos. They do that because Congress essentially lets them get away with it. Then when the inevitable 250%+ cost overruns take place and it takes five times as long to get the gizmos into service, Congress is shocked, shocked.

Both the Congress and the press pretend, each time, that it's epic mismanagement and failure to control costs. They blithely ignore the plain truth that the system is working exactly the way that the services and yes, the Congress, intend it to function.

So at this point, one might well conclude that poorly-managed procurement programs are not a bug, but a feature.

UPDATE: "Alleged warship"-- pretty damning, and accurate.

5 comments:

  1. The Polaris method worked great. Throw whatever money it takes, but there is a time limit.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Here's a possible solution to cost overruns,

    1. You, Mr. Contractor submit a very, very careful estimate. Unless you don't think the project is doable, in which case you submit nothing.

    2. The Gov-mint put 25% down on signing, pays another 30% when the project is deemed half completed, the balance when you deliver the contracted-for weapons in full. No delivery, no money. And if you fail to deliver after a predetermined date, the government claws back its pre-payments.

    Works for home construction and repairs, sewers, automobile repairs, and so on. Ought to work for a pistol. I'm just saying.

    Yours very crankily,
    The New York Crank

    ReplyDelete
  3. The "alleged warship" link is slashdotted...

    ReplyDelete
  4. Take a simple approach. Specs are to replace "X". Competition will be held between "X" and all submitted designs, using tests based upon intended use, no stipulations, the testers will comprise a group of persons select to cover 80% of standard body sizes. Every submitted design shall have a price per unit, fixed for 5 years of production at "Y" units per year...if you can make it cheaper in that time, you make more money, costs more, you eat it.

    Anyone involved in judging the tests shall be prohibited from enployment in any related industry for 10 years.

    ReplyDelete
  5. USS Zumwalt isn't doing any better marooned in Panama.

    ReplyDelete

House Rules #1, #2 and #6 apply to all comments. Rule #3 also applies to political comments.

In short, don't be a jackass. THIS MEANS YOU!
If you never see your comments posted, see Rule #7.

All comments must be on point and address either the points raised in the blog post or points raised by commenters in response.
Any comments that drift off onto other topics are subject to deletion.

(Please don't feed the trolls.)

中國詞不評論,冒抹除的風險。僅英語。

COMMENT MODERATION IS IN EFFECT UFN. This means that if you are an insulting dick, nobody will ever see it.