Similar Posts
Happy 233rd Birthday Marines!
  “That two battalions of Marines be raised consisting of one colonel, two lieutenant colonels, two majors and officers as usual in other regiments, that they consist of an equal number of privates with other battalions; that particular care be taken that no person be appointed to office or enlisted into said battalions, but…
No Vet Left Behind
Times are hard these days, and for those living on fixed incomes, many of them being our disabled veterans, they are indeed perilous. Over at Lex’s place comes a request from one such who is seeking advice. Stop by, ponder and offer your wisdom, your experience — your assistance. Thank you. – SJS
Weekend Planning
“245 PM EST WED FEB 3 2010 .WINTER STORM WATCH IN EFFECT FROM FRI MORNING THROUGH SATURDAY EVENING. THE NATL WEATHER SVC IN STERLING VA HAS ISSUED A WINTER STORM WATCH.WHICH IS IN EFFECT FROM FRI MORNING THROUGH SAT EVENING. * PRECIPITATION TYPE.SNOW. * ACCUMULATIONS.THIS STORM IS LIKELY TO PRODUCE 12 OR MORE INCHES OF…
A Little FITREP Humor From Out West
“LT X’s body of work stands for itself in his chosen field of work” (shot outside of Cody, WY)
Cockpit Conversations
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…
(Censored) Working Under the (Censored)Hood…(Censored)
6/21 UPDATE: Well — much tinkering and unsubstantiated guessing later (and no thanks to a certain host) we *think* we’ve reached a solution and in the process, deploying a new theme. So, we’ll give it a try and see if there is any more wanking from out their way. You undoubtedly have noticed a change…
5 Comments
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.