Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Senators to probe Air Force’s $1 billion failed software
Stars & Stripes ^ | January 25, 2013 | Tony Capaccio

Posted on 01/25/2013 7:01:48 PM PST by Rabin

. Computer Sciences Corporation’s performance on a failed $1 billion software project for the Air Force, a major objective of departing Defense Secretary Leon Panetta.. An additional $1.1 billion would have been required to fix the system and put it in operation by 2020 -- eight years after the planned date.. “I can understand the senators’ frustration,” Air Force top uniformed acquisition official Lieutenant General Charles Davis.

(Excerpt) Read more at stripes.com ...


TOPICS: Heated Discussion
KEYWORDS: airforce; leonpanetta; levin; usaf
Mo Larry, Curly. 4 years down, now only 4 to go.

Rab

1 posted on 01/25/2013 7:01:57 PM PST by Rabin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Rabin

As an ERP system practitioner, this subject is near and dear.

There are several off the shelf products that would do 90% of what the Airforce wanted. The mistake likely centered around doing too many things, with too many people involved, at once.

Scale it down, make it work, then scale it up.

You know, like testing the new fighter plane. Push the performance envelope in small increments.


2 posted on 01/25/2013 7:37:17 PM PST by cicero2k
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rabin
In March, the Air Force had terminated a fixed-price contract for the system with Computer Sciences after paying the Falls Church, Virginia-based company $527 million, according to the service.

Fixed price contract.
For $527 million.

And the Air Force lost $1 billion on this package.

Pretty much tells you everything you need to know about how broken our acquisition system is.

3 posted on 01/25/2013 7:39:00 PM PST by ClearCase_guy (Nothing will change until after the war.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ClearCase_guy

The Air Force acquisition program is EXCEPTIONALLY broken.

I don’t even bother writing proposals for the air force or DOD anymore.


4 posted on 01/25/2013 7:44:10 PM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Rabin

Just another brilliant idea of Panetta’s, thank God he’s leaving, maybe we will get lucky and he will get lost in the Bermuda Triangle or Hillary’s butt and we will never have to hear from him again.


5 posted on 01/25/2013 7:56:14 PM PST by Mastador1 (I'll take a bad dog over a good politician any day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rabin
“I can understand the senators’ frustration,” Air Force top uniformed acquisition official Lieutenant General Charles Davis.

Ya think??? Heads should roll starting with yours.

6 posted on 01/25/2013 7:58:02 PM PST by Uncle Chip
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rabin
That money would have been so much better invested in one of Ubama's crony's green-energy scams.
7 posted on 01/25/2013 8:18:25 PM PST by E. Pluribus Unum (TYRANNY: When the people fear the politicians. LIBERTY: When the politicians fear the people.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rabin

This is one of the reasons that the DoD budget can be trimmed.


8 posted on 01/25/2013 8:19:01 PM PST by Blood of Tyrants (There is no requirement to show need in order to exercise your rights.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rabin

What is wrong with out of the box, Microsoft air to air and Microsoft air to infidel? Why reinvent the wheel?


9 posted on 01/25/2013 8:57:28 PM PST by deadrock
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rabin

I rarely have anything good to say about the Chinese government, but to their credit, if they spent a billion dollars on military software, had “essentially nothing” to show for it, and the company asked for another billion dollars to fix it, the heads of that software company would be executed.


10 posted on 01/25/2013 9:04:06 PM PST by Steel Wolf ("Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master." - Gaius Sallustius Crispus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rabin

That performance is only allowed if you’re working a “Green Energy” contract.


11 posted on 01/25/2013 9:09:31 PM PST by Rides_A_Red_Horse (Fair is a place you go to eat cotton candy and step in monkey poop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DEADROCK

Not Invented Here


12 posted on 01/25/2013 9:49:44 PM PST by satan (Plumbing new depths of worthlessness on a daily basis.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Blood of Tyrants
This is one of the reasons that the DoD budget can be trimmed.

Absolutely. I never saw so much waste first hand as when I was in the military. God bless our heros on the front lines, but as an organization the military is just as bloated and inefficient as any other agency of the government.

13 posted on 01/25/2013 10:06:14 PM PST by TexasKamaAina
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
I was involved in flight test for 12 years, in 2000 I was selected by AF TE as the AF Contractor working Test and Evaluation for 1999.

Yes, the AF acquisition system is broken, but not all parts. Those “black” programs and those high speed programs that are out there work fairly well. Why? because each successive program manager is NOT allowed to make minor, mainly cosmetic, changes to put his personal stamp on the effort. IMHO, the second reason the system is broke there is no penalty for failure.

If you want to see what can be done go look into a program called Creditable Sport also known as YMC-130. In 1980 it took us less than six months to modify three C-130 aircraft for a SpecOps mission. The required minimum performance was to land and then take off from an open soccer stadium without any ground based assistance. The time-line was less than six months. Every critical mission requirement was achieved including the time-line. It was successful because there was NO change in the management team, there was no time to spend on conferences and risk avoidance, and it was impossible to spend all the money given the program.

But, every acquisition professional out there would never attempt such a program today. I will not comment on why.

14 posted on 01/25/2013 10:07:26 PM PST by Nip (BOHEICA and TANSTAAFL - both seem very appropriate today.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Rabin

Now someone needs to look at Space Command’s Electronic Schedule Dissemination (ESD) fiasco.


15 posted on 01/25/2013 10:08:36 PM PST by Hootowl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nip

Its sadly ironic you went back 33 years for an example of how it went well.

Today the AF is lumping requirements into these 5 or 10 yr programs worth multiple billion dollars. They are killing off competition as the losing companies have no hope of getting any business for those 5 or 10 yrs. The sheer size of the programs makes them unmanageable.

I say this as a SDVOSB who has been working with federal agencies for the last 9 years.


16 posted on 01/26/2013 3:54:02 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Uncle Chip

He’ll just retire and be sole-sourced a sweet-heart deal.


17 posted on 01/26/2013 3:55:40 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Steel Wolf

In China that would happen regardless of whether it was actually the companies fault.

In many cases these fiasco’s are due to changing customer requirements or their simple ignorance/arrogance.


18 posted on 01/26/2013 3:58:03 AM PST by driftdiver (I could eat it raw, but why do that when I have a fire.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: DEADROCK
What is wrong with out of the box, Microsoft air to air and Microsoft air to infidel? Why reinvent the wheel?

Several years ago I was working for a contract mfg. co. We were approached by a major navy contractor to manufacture a cooling system to be used in nuclear subs. After looking over the engineering drawings I suggested a cost saving idea.

There was an off the shelf system that sold for less than $100.00. it would have needed the addition of two air flow switches in order to meet the navy's requirement. Total cost: less than $200.00.

The navy rejected my idea. We built the unit to their engineering drawings. Cost: $25,000.00

19 posted on 01/26/2013 6:50:34 AM PST by dearolddad (/i>)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: cicero2k
You know, like testing the new fighter plane. Push the performance envelope in small increments.

Sounds "agile".

20 posted on 01/26/2013 6:52:14 AM PST by Sirius Lee (All that is required for evil to advance is for government to do "something")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Rabin

If my home network was as bad as the AF network, I’d fire myself and hire someone who knew their stuff..too much centralization with too few smart techs.


21 posted on 01/26/2013 7:14:53 AM PST by trebb (Allies no longer trust us. Enemies no longer fear us.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: driftdiver
Today the AF is lumping requirements into these 5 or 10 yr programs worth multiple billion dollars. They are killing off competition as the losing companies have no hope of getting any business for those 5 or 10 yrs.

Heck, the DoD has been doing it for years.

I worked with some 8a companies in weapons RDT&E. We did great things with the small contracts we had and the COTR's and the actual war fighters were pleased.

The DoD started combining all efforts into those huge omnibus contracts headed by the biggies: SAIC, BAH, etc... The contracts stated there had to be 8a companies partnered with the lagre corporations and those smaller firms had to get a piece of the work. The 8a's would each get a three week task order for $30K about twice per year and the corporations would do the rest of the work, covering their huge overhead.

There were other parts of those contracts that allowed the large corps to really rip off the DoD through the personnel requirements.

I saw a couple dozen excellent small companies go out of business because of that.

22 posted on 01/26/2013 7:50:52 AM PST by OldMissileer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Rabin

Wonder which Senator/relative/friend is involved with Computer Sciences Corporation.
I’d bet there is an inside connection.


23 posted on 01/26/2013 7:57:53 AM PST by Vinnie (A)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Rabin
I can understand their disappointment: I'd have been willing to royally screw up the program and its schedule for only HALF that much...

Cheers!

24 posted on 01/30/2013 9:03:33 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Vinnie
Wonder which Senator/relative/friend is involved with Computer Sciences Corporation.

I’d bet there is an inside connection.

Post of the thread, but I bet there is also the explicit (though clandestine) funneling of intelligence directly to the Chicoms and others.

NO cheers, unfortunately. The DC crew is guilty of mass treason.

25 posted on 01/30/2013 9:06:42 PM PST by grey_whiskers (The opinions are solely those of the author and are subject to change without notice.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Smoky Backroom
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson