Posted on 12/07/2016 9:15:49 AM PST by Sean_Anthony
Not even for Air Force One
Defense contractors were pretty excited when Donald Trump won the election, figuring it was fat and happy time once again for defense spending. And if happy time means the Pentagon will once again be willing to fund what the nation needs for its defense, then there should indeed by plenty of smiles to go around.
As for the fat part, defense contractors are used to the idea that cost overruns are no issue with the Pentagon because whatever they order they have to have, and have right away. The cost-is-no-object approach to national security is understandable in a certain sense, but when contractors know they can go hog wild with no consequences . . . well, they’re going to go hog wild. Frequently.
Remember when Hillary was claiming he owed a lot of contractors a lot of money - I'd wager they reneged on what they contracted to do and he doesn't believe in rewarding such crap.
Does McDonnell Douglas even produce the F-16 for the U.S. military anymore?
I wish that were the case. Casino developers here in New Jersey were notorious for building these ridiculous boondoggles filled with all kinds of excessive amenities to attract customers from other casinos, then going back later and strong-arming their vendors and contractors under the threat of a bankruptcy filing by the developer/owner.
“That’s FAKE NEWS!”
Yep, Major Garret is generating fake news.
.
Obama and Hillary would have personally benefited from it.
.
.
Major Garret is minor.
I have no doubt about that. Thievery
That's why the Japanese have an aviation museum of failed attempts at muscling in on US aviation.
High level US manufacturing and integration skills.
They never did - it was Lockheed.
Lockheed owns the F-16, not Douglas (which is now owned by Boeing). By the way, these companies cannot go off on their own and set-up contracts with foreign countries on their own. Especially with anything near current technology involved. Everything is scrutinized by the government and approval/denial starts there.
My experience with Defense Contracting, particularly small batch orders, is the bulk of the “cost over runs’ are caused by the military project managers.
For some reason, excessive ego (based on rank?), the project managers are unable to keep their hands off the SOW and other contractual devices. They ignore the fact that almost every change means changes to hardware already completed plus changes to hardware on the assembly lines. That’s where the cost overruns begin.
Add to this such detailed requirements as “equal to or better than ...” and over runs are built into the system.
The final nail is there is no punishment for badly managed programs in any service. When was the last time you heard of a program manager being recalled to active duty and reduced in retirement grade because his program was so badly managed - late, didn’t meet specifications, and cost 10 times the budgeted amount? Think LCS, F-35, and the Navy’s newest destroyer.
My bad re: F-16 manufacturer. I know that these deals are pre-approved by our government but these decisions are made at the top and no matter how much national security protest emanates from the opposition the President gets his way more often than not. Just saying that I hope Trump re-examines them and puts a stop to it.
About AF1:
I'd love to be there when Trump gets his first lesson in just how Govt. accounting / cost & price analysis works...
Either the total lack of reason behind accounting for their own costs or their delusional approach to private industry accounting standards & profit.
As a businessman, Trump will likely feel like he had stepped through Alice's looking glass.
OK. Now tell Lockheed and hammer them for the mess of the F-35 program.
For some reason, excessive ego (based on rank?), the project managers are unable to keep their hands off the SOW and other contractual devices. They ignore the fact that almost every change means changes to hardware already completed plus changes to hardware on the assembly lines.
That’s where the cost overruns begin.
BINGO!
I watched that happen with almost every major acquisition. The contractors try their best to give a real bid derived from the Statement Of Work but, after the contract is signed, the military geniuses immediately start adding and subtracting items and performance specs that forces the contractors to redesign and recalculate costs.
That is also when the contractors try to pad some extra profit but the bulk is due to the huge changes the DoD asks.
Pretty much all distaff zomies are twinkies in my book.
Wasn’t there a twinkie managing the tanker program when it went pear shaped as well?
Having sat on both sides of the table, I agree with your opinion. But I would add that some contractors promise the moon on new technology and when they can’t deliver, they run into problems. Having sold the multi-billion dollar platforms on a lot of “cool” concepts, the military finds out that they can live with much less - and then the price wars begin.
That’s the difference between Bush’s privatization and Trump’s.
After cost estimates passed $13 billion for 28 helicopters, Obummer cancelled the bloated, over budget VH-71 program.
“By the way, these companies cannot go off on their own and set-up contracts with foreign countries on their own. Especially with anything near current technology involved.”
Which is why India in particular seldom buys US weaponry. We place too many restrictions on technology transfers & use. It’s not unusual for the US to cut off spare parts at precisely the time that India would need those planes. The Russians, French & Swedes tend to be more reliable partners.
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.