New Destroyer

[777 fixer]

Didn't this program originate under Clinton?

Yes and no. The program from which the Zumwalt Class Destroyer descended from started under Clinton. That program, DD-21, was cancelled in 2001 in favor of a scaled down version which became DDG-1000.

 

[777 fixer]

Obama is such a moron for letting this go forward. The Navy did not want it. It already appears it has so many short comings (Another B1?). Cancel it and put the money where it is needed. Too many politicians have their hands in the till for that to every happen.


Cutting-edge Navy warship being built in Maine

Those three destroyers were already funded when Obama took office. Trying to kill those three would have been difficult. All Congress would have had to do was to fund it anyway. Something they have done on numerous occasions.

 

[777 fixer]

A simple look at some of the systems procured by the military should be adequate for most to see the idiocy in it. Sgt York gun, B1, Seawolf class sub to mention a few. Military and the builders never met a toy they did not like. Sell it with some patriotism and a few American flags and the chicken hawks are all over it.

There's any number of problems with the way the defense procurement system operates. There is the issue of contractors underbidding of what a system will actually cost. Then there's the issue with programs that involve cutting edge technologies end up costing more due to the unknown. The DOD might ask for changes in the program along the way which raises costs.

Of course politics play a part. When an administration tries to kill a program still in the test phase or end a mature program Congress often steps in and funds it. The V-22 and C-17 are examples of this respectively.

You mentioned the Seawolf submarine. That program was killed because it was designed with an enemy in mind that no longer existed. The only problem was that its successor ended up costing more than the navy thought. The USN might have been better off just sticking with the Seawolf. It won't be the first time something like that has happened

 

[777 fixer]

Key word being "Union" ! Why do you think Nobama backed it ! :blink:

Because those those ships were already funded and he knew if he killed it outright Congress might have put money back in the program.

If he had managed to kill the prgram before the first keel was laid you probably be saying that Obama wants to hand the country over to Al Queda.

 

[Ms Tree]

I'll defer to your statement. I am not that familiar with the way procurement works other than the system is flawed in favor of the contractors.

 

[777 fixer]

I'll defer to your statement. I am not that familiar with the way procurement works other than the system is flawed in favor of the contractors.

It's a flawed system that's of the governments own making. Unfortanetly there are those in Congress who seem to think that all we have to do is spend more money on defense. The amount is not the problem, its how its spent is the real issue.

 

[SparrowHawk]

It's a flawed system that's of the governments own making. Unfortanetly there are those in Congress who seem to think that all we have to do is spend more money on defense. The amount is not the problem, its how its spent is the real issue.

When you're 16 TRILLION in debt the amount of money does matter.

This is yet another example of Crony Capitalism at its finest. Defense spending and the Military Industrial Complex.

 

[tech2101]

It's a flawed system that's of the governments own making. Unfortanetly there are those in Congress who seem to think that all we have to do is spend more money on defense. The amount is not the problem, its how its spent is the real issue.

Do you want the low bidder, or someone who can do the job? We are our own worst enemy. We (the public) demand transparency.

Look at some of the work in Iraq and Afghanistan. There were very few people who could have mobilized and provided what we needed over there on short notice. Yet everyone was up in arms about no bid contracts.

Maybe we should have given the contract to the small, disadvantage business startup?

If government was allowed to make decisions based on sound business principles, half of the electorate would be dragging all the decision making officials through the courts and inspector general process because they didn't use their favorite contractor.

It's a no win situation. All I can say is run for office and change it. You will be soundly hated by at least half of the people who voted for you in short time, and you will have people like us second guessing every decision made.

 

[SparrowHawk]

Do you want the low bidder, or someone who can do the job? We are our own worst enemy. We (the public) demand transparency.

Look at some of the work in Iraq and Afghanistan. There were very few people who could have mobilized and provided what we needed over there on short notice. Yet everyone was up in arms about no bid contracts.

Maybe we should have given the contract to the small, disadvantage business startup?

If government was allowed to make decisions based on sound business principles, half of the electorate would be dragging all the decision making officials through the courts and inspector general process because they didn't use their favorite contractor.

It's a no win situation. All I can say is run for office and change it. You will be soundly hated by at least half of the people who voted for you in short time, and you will have people like us second guessing every decision made.

Well said! All of the above in many ways points to why Dr Paul IS different. I don't desire to drag him into this except for the fact the topic and point you raise is one of the cornerstones of his message.

This whole thread has been about what government spends money on and the way it which it spends it. All the time we hear debate on what to "Cut". But NO ONE ever asks "Why are we even thinking about this?" "Can we afford it?" My filter I use is simple for myself but I think it's a good path for government to take.

Is it "nice" or Necessary?

 

[delldude]

Do you want the low bidder, or someone who can do the job? We are our own worst enemy. We (the public) demand transparency.

Look at some of the work in Iraq and Afghanistan. There were very few people who could have mobilized and provided what we needed over there on short notice. Yet everyone was up in arms about no bid contracts.

Maybe we should have given the contract to the small, disadvantage business startup?

If government was allowed to make decisions based on sound business principles, half of the electorate would be dragging all the decision making officials through the courts and inspector general process because they didn't use their favorite contractor.

It's a no win situation. All I can say is run for office and change it. You will be soundly hated by at least half of the people who voted for you in short time, and you will have people like us second guessing every decision made.

Dude comes out the closet in favor of Cheney, Bush and Haliburton.

 

[Ms Tree]

I wonder how it would work if the contractor had to honor the bid? If they bid $100 and it costs them $150 too bad. You quoted $100 so you better figure out how to build it for the price you quoted. You say you can deliver by Apr 15 but ends up you cannot do it till 6 months later? There will be a fine for every day you are late? How about we hold them accountable then we can start dealing with the cost of all this BS and determine whether or not we need the toys.

 

[tom barry]

According to you I'm a racist Republican.

You ever consider starting drinking again?

I've always wondered about you(meaning) I knew you to be pro labor.
But the "lean" toward the GOP, and spinning true story's about hate crimes for being what they ARE(Oklahoma), I have to admit, puzzle's me.

 

[tech2101]

I wonder how it would work if the contractor had to honor the bid? If they bid $100 and it costs them $150 too bad. You quoted $100 so you better figure out how to build it for the price you quoted. You say you can deliver by Apr 15 but ends up you cannot do it till 6 months later? There will be a fine for every day you are late? How about we hold them accountable then we can start dealing with the cost of all this BS and determine whether or not we need the toys.

You can hold contractors accountable. It is called liquidated damages. They can be assessed for being late, etc. However the contractor can protest that the government hindered their ability to get the product or service done in a timely fashion.

Google Federal Acquisition Regulations. If you have a spare year of your life you could learn some of it....

Here, I did it for you. Enjoy. It is a dark world you are about to enter.

 

[delldude]

Nice ship, but one must wonder, countries like Iran have cigarette boats outfitted with Chinese or Rusky missiles which could ,make for a bad day in the tub.

Astutely and very covertly, Van Riper armed his civilian marine craft and deployed them near the US fleet, which never expected an attack from small pleasure boats. Faced with a blunt US ultimatum to surrender, Force Red suddenly went on the offensive: and achieved complete tactical surprise. Force Red's prop-driven aircraft suddenly were swarming around the US warships, making Kamikaze dives. Some of the pleasure boats made suicide attacks. Others fired Silkworm cruise missiles from close range, and sunk a carrier, the largest ship in the US fleet, along with two helicopter-carriers loaded with marines. The sudden strike was reminiscent of the Al Qaeda sneak attack on the USS Cole in 2000. Yet, the Navy was unprepared. When it was over, most of the US fleet had been destroyed. Sixteen US warships lay on the bottom, and the rest were in disarray. Thousands of American sailors were dead, dying, or wounded.

If the games had been real, it would have been the worst US naval defeat since Pearl Harbor.

Link

 

[777 fixer]

Do you want the low bidder, or someone who can do the job? We are our own worst enemy. We (the public) demand transparency.

When it comes to big ticket items like tactical aircraft it's more of a question of who has the better design and cost. The three remaining companies that can design and build a fighter Boeing, Lockheed and Northrup Grumman all have the capability of doing the job. But as we have seen politics and unforeseen technical difficulties end up adding to the cost.

Another big problem is that there is very little competition anymore for contracts for things like fighters, subs, aircraft carriers etc. There's only one shipyard in the US that can build aircraft carriers. No other company is going to make the investment necessary to compete for something like that. Why, the only way you could get a return would be to charge a price that the DOD would not pay. Not when Newport News is already building them at a known price