(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
Third Sub has been hauled down, mast held and NJP duly administered:
Some interesting end-of-year numbers from www.pingdom.com: Email 1.3 billion – The number of email users worldwide. 210 billion – The number of emails sent per day in 2008. 70% – The percentage of emails that are spam. 53.8 trillion – The number of spam emails sent in 2008 (assuming 70% are spam). Internet users 1,463,632,361…
So — go vote today, let the blogsphere/media hyper-focus on every jot/tittle/nuance of this micro-trend or that and await the divisions of lawyers to be deployed in the expected post-election challenges. Because on Nov 12th there still will be a Marine in Balboa missing a hand;A Soldier in Brooke Army Hospital with an amputated arm;A…
Take this quiz at QuizGalaxy.com ‘What will your obituary say?’ at QuizGalaxy.com h/t: Curt
Make a joyful noise unto the LORD, all ye lands. Serve the LORD with gladness: come before his presence with singing.  Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture.  Enter into his gates with thanksgiving, and…
diet coke and mentosBusby Berkley’s got nothing on these guys…just wonder if an environmental impact statement was filed in the making of this flick 😉
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.