(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
Posted for the (junior) scriblet who has one week of freedom left. Sort of, since bandcamp was last week and that season has started – meaning YHS and the missus will have no social life for the next 4 months outside of band…
…or “Lex visits the Flight Doc for his Annual Physical“ (sorry – too hard to resist…) …and since we can take as well as we give here’s equal time for a rejoinder: … as the Scribe will get his “in the end”… as it were…
So Scribe — what do pilots and NFOs talk about when things are quiet on a flight? – Lots of stuff, but some conversations you *don’t* want to hear…
We’re in the land of lotus-eaters this week for a conference supporting the book project we previously mentioned. Busy times with trying to cram three days of stuff into two, so our time, perforce, is limited for posting until we return to Occupied Territory later this week. In the meantime – some quick thoughts: It…
Comments are closed.
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.