(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
…no, not those. First up — Hustler Love: Over in the comments section for the Flightdeck Friday we did some time back (for VALOUR-IT), one of our visitors (blog author of Mostly Flying) left this very interesting commentary: As a young lieutenant in 1967 I had control of SAGE air defence radars across Washington, Montana,…
The Snowglobe from h311 … Give it a shake
So, um Scribe — been a little lax in posting this past few weeks, eh? What gives? Well, a little bit of: Mix in a lot of: And of course, all from the AO viewpoint: Â So yea, been a bit busy with the necessary stuff, but that said have been scribbling offline in the wee…
SECDEF accepts resignation: Gates Accepts Resignation of CENTCOM Chief Fallon By Donna Miles American Forces Press Service WASHINGTON, March 11, 2008 – Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates today reluctantly accepted Navy Adm. William J. "Fox" Fallon’s letter of resignation as commander of U.S. Central Command and request for retirement. Fallon’s resignation will take effect March…
Today, without delay, you need to read these articles. Why? Beyond being the quality writing that these blogs are noted for, the indicated articles provide compelling reads for the issues that face us today. Take this one for example. Fullbore Friday is always a great trip down the halls of naval history and usually revolves…
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.