Posted on 07/14/2010 7:35:11 AM PDT by Superstu321
The Defense Department recently rewarded the Raydon Corporation over $36 million dollars to develop eleven “Virtual” Mine Resistant Ambush Protected vehicle (MRAP). While these vehicles are critical to protecting troops from IED’s and other explosives in both Iraq and Afghanistan, $3.3 million per virtual MRAP is nearly three times the amount it takes to build an actual MRAP.
From defense.gov:
Raydon Corp., Daytona Beach, Fla., was awarded on July 9 a $36,355,550 firm-fixed-price contract. This contract is for 11 Mine Resistant Ambush Protected Vehicle virtual trainers for the Army National Guard. Work is to be performed in Daytona Beach, Fla., with an estimated completion date of Nov. 30, 2011. Over 50 bids were solicited with one bid received.
It should go without saying that I want our troops to have everything and anything they need at their disposal. If this MRAP simulators are something we need, great, but would it kill the Dept of Defense to get more than one bid?
Or better yet, why not just use the money to buy 36 actual MRAP’s send 25 over to Afghanistan and Iraq and keep 11 for actual training?
(h/t to Danger Room)
(Excerpt) Read more at threefingersofpolitics.com ...
Remember when War Profiteering was a bad thing?
Wouldn’t it be a whole lot better to do what over the road truckers do, use a big parking lot?
This is not very worthwhile expenditures ... The things are just armored trucks after-all.
Or better yet, why not just use the money to buy 36 actual MRAP’s send 25 over to Afghanistan and Iraq and keep 11 for actual training?
such a silly idea...that would make too much sense....
hey i have some 600.00 hammers and a used 5000.00 toilet seat...anyone interested....
The comparison of the cost is not fair, either. What do the training missions entail? Many of the training exercises cover attack scenarios I bet. They probably would involve damaging or destroying a real unit and putting those being trained at risk of injury.
Radon makes very good simulators, and their prices have been generally less than their major competitors. I suspect that the government got a pretty good price. The problem is that Radon would have had to bid a simulator that met all of the government requirements and specifications. The tendency of the last 15 years and so has been to add lots of bells and whistles that drive up costs without improving the training quality. The government always chooses the simulator that looks neat and has the fanciest displays and now writes the requirement that way.
These simulators provide IED blast effects, and handling challenges to include rollovers that are not a good idea to do with the real vehicle, but I’m sure that a cheaper simulator could be built that meets all the training requirements - the government would never buy it.
Because that would make too much sense - and wouldn't grease the pockets of someone's buddy or political ally...
We can all be patriots here and fully support whatever it is our military deems necessary for success - but it is also important to not let our patriotism blind us from making wise fiscal decisions. Still taxpayer $ funding our troops...
Do you think you need to roll over in a simulator of a semi-truck to understand the unpredictability, and likely deadly outcome of that, and do everything to prevent it?
How about 4 wheeling, it never occurred to me to roll over my Jeep, to train that rolling over was very bad. or falling off a mountain, or driving into a really deep ditch ... Some things just fall into the realm of common sense. So we never rolled over or crashed my Jeep in years of what most would consider, yes my wife is in that category, very dangerous four wheeling.
I suspect a simple rollover simulator could handle lots of differing military vehicles. Like they do with helicopters over water. Real training would likely do more than computer simulators and simulator experience.
Simple things like vehicles don’t really need simulators. Just an expensive toys, IMHO.
Just my two sense.
“Simple things like vehicles don’t really need simulators. Just an expensive toys, IMHO.”
Was this a joke?
This article is written by another reporter who clearly knows nothing about what he is writing, but sees an opportunity (which is apparently working) for a couple cheap points. I am all for fiscal responsibility, but simulators are valuable and necessary for a range of military vehicles, which will be driven into the ground ten times over (at much MORE expense and potential loss of life) over years of training hundreds of soldiers.
Nope, just my thoughts, as stupid you may think they are.
Having a few decades of off-road driving experience to base it on. And yes that was on very frightening trails. I learned the hard cheap way, by slowly doing.
Common sense goes a long way.
Weapons simulators may be necessary but I fail to see a need for expensive truck simulators. Driving, riding, egress in accidents, bomb blasts, and computer weapons use, are different things, that was my point. Having built shipboard missile simulators, you need not build a ship simulator to simulate the weapons use.
I agree, remember this is not some vendor selling overpriced goods, this is the government demanding overpriced stuff.
Some years ago I ran an advanced research project in DoD and one of the efforts was done by what was then a small start up company - Radon. I set out to show that small, portable gunnery trainers could be built that were every bit as good as the large and elaborate ones. Radon built them at a fraction of the cost of existing gunnery trainers. The National Guard and the Marine Corps were interested and procured a number that met their requirements. The Army wasn’t interested and continued to buy the gold plated variety. That attitude continues to this day. If industry builds something that is effective but austere, they will never sell a thing.
It did sound like it was wasteful until I read up on why they did it that way. The article at my link said that the machine has the full crew compartment, so that the whole crew experiences the rollover and can practice how to get out. Presumably, this means while under fire.
Yes but — they don’t do this for training people to egress from helicopters in the water ditching. A simple rollover fixture in a mud pond would train those troops in the back about egress quite nicely. And probably do a much more real life job, in the bargain. Nothing beats the real thing to leave imprints.
My point was centered on -— There are far cheaper ways, once you realize the military budget is not infinite. And massive defense budget cuts are coming, count on it. The socialists need the money for handouts. It’s time smart took over when it comes to doing military things.
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.