(click on picture to enlarge it)
So Pops — *this* was the slide you told us to post? #1 doesn’t think so but he doesn’t know jack anyway.
Do you really do this….stuff…at work? Now we know what they mean about not trusting anyone over 30.
-Steeljaw Apprentice #3
Cars, chases and guns...but not what you think (see esp. beginning at 7:34).... (h/t: SailorBob)
There's requests that are general in nature -- and then there's targeted requests. The latter are often specific, meet an urgent need and require short ...
March is Brain Injury Awareness month and the following post was provided by Chelsea Travers, a representative of CareMeridian, as part of a public service ...
Feb. 10 Strong winds and steady snowfall impede visibility on the National Mall and throughout the Washington region. Ricky Carioti-The Washington ...
...And, we're back. Didn't lose power or satellite TV, but the internet went lights out about 5 hours into this weekend's storm. Some metrics from the storm: 32" ...
Deterrence (Themes for the 21st Century Series) by Lawrence Freedman
Securing Freedom in the Global Commons by edited by Scott Jasper
Peddling Peril: How the Secret Nuclear Trade Arms America’s Enemies by David Albright
Cyber War: The Next Threat to National Security and What to Do About It by Richard A. Clarke, Robert Knake
View My Milblogging.com Profile
Archive of visitors (08/06-08/07)
Stumble It!
Stumble it!
All kidding aside, what is the decision-making process like for something which is feasible, needed ASAP, and is cost-effecitve? Would the path to a final decision still be so convoluted?
Veritas et Fidelis Semper
I think the first thing would be smelling salts for the procurement officers! I worked in the DOD world many years it’s extremely rare to find all of those in the same package. If it’s needed ASAP it normally costs more, if its feasible we still have to investigate the non-feasible alternatives (sole-source justification), and if it’s cost effective we have to investigate for some months or years to make sure it’s really what they say so that means you can’t get it ASAP. By the time it’s justified, researched and approved it’s no long feasible as there has been a work around found or a new and better technology available.
Thank you for taking the time to respond, sir. Basically, it appears that absolutely no one benefits except, of course, the………..well, I don’t really know what to call them………..paper-pushers who invent these mazes to make something which should be perfwectly clear and easy exceedingly complex!
Well, in the meantime, we “shortest path from A to B” folks must keep plugging away and not become discouraged. Either that or come into a great deal of money so that we may overhaul this process…….it could be done, and that’s not just wishful thinking.
Veritas et Fidelis Semper
The system is the system. Many different SecDef’s have tried many different methods of acquisition reform but none has had the kind of impact that would lead to a “sensible” process by your expectations. And don’t forget Congress is involved too, they have to pass TWO bills, one to authorize the budget for purchases and one to FUND that same authorization. Those bills can be seriously different. So even IF there was a fast-track process (which there sorta is but its still slow by civilian standards) the money has to be there from Congress to buy the items or has to be taken (and moved..which requires more paper) from other areas. The areas that lose the $$ can put up a fight within the system or via their CongressCritters. Case in point was body armor and up-armored HUMVEEs for the troops in Iraq, that process kicked off close to 2 yrs ago, Congress gave DoD the money pretty fast and the needs are just now getting filled. You can’t turn the Titanic on a dime.