Comments on: Intel, AF Sats Must Go Separate Ways: Kehler

By: DensityDuck

DensityDuck — Fri, 02 Jan 2009 19:50:38 +0000

Shadow: You don’t know what you’re talking about. You’re suggesting that a submachine gun and an anti-vehicle rifle are the same thing because they both shoot bullets at stuff.

By: Shadow

Shadow — Fri, 28 Nov 2008 05:17:36 +0000

Is the General crying publicly??? (sniff, sniff) His command isn't big enough and he's having problems smoothing relations on the other side of the fence? It's not completely his fault, but he hasn't helped any either. He's grown up in the service watching and working space programs so he's no green banana. "Congress, can you help please, for the sake of our warfighters??" Someday General you will be Commander of the Universe and all space will be yours.Separation of requirements is not a new idea. Hell - that's why many agencies come to fruition. But the contractors make twice as much money if they can double charge the govt for making 2 identical systems, but claim they serve different purposes. It's been that way for years and Kehler and Harris aren't green to that, in fact both have supported because space technology is hot, creates jobs, and new capabilities. Only thing is, you need a leader with balls that will make it happen, like Richard Branson or Warren Buffett.

By: MtnCat

MtnCat — Sat, 22 Nov 2008 21:53:41 +0000

Keeping the development and acquisitions process separate is a great idea. The requirements are definitely different, and maybe the Air Force and NRO will subsequently be able to say No! to requirements that are not affordable, without the turf battles we have now.
Maybe having one person in charge of AF and NRO capabilities with separate development is the way to go.

By: Trainwreck

Trainwreck — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 21:08:45 +0000

Rumsfeld is an arrogant @$$. It was his way or your career was over. Bush was a dumb SOB for keeping Rummy on as SecDef as long as he did. Rumsfeld, I hope you burn in he||.

By: DensityDuck

DensityDuck — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 16:11:45 +0000

Ed: The thing is, that's how everyone USED to do it. Then Rumsfeld came along and said, basically, that everything satellite should be exactly the same only some are labeled 'USAF' and some are labeled 'NRO', just like JSF was exactly the same only with "NAVY" or "MARINES" or "USAF" painted on the side. Then he put a bunch of USAF guys in charge of everything, and they immediately cancelled every intel development program because intel sats don't fly at Mach 3 and drop bombs on things.

By: Ed

Ed — Thu, 20 Nov 2008 01:12:34 +0000

unfortunately everyone will focus on the headline, not what the general really said. His basic point is we do not do requirements well. We commit to build space systems to satisfy everyone’s wishes without a clear understanding of what the spacecraft will cost. The General is suggesting doing the development planning work before committing to a program. Development planning is a process to determine what each performance requirement adds to technical complexity and ultimately cost of the program.

By: Fred

Fred — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 21:53:25 +0000

He has it right. Ever hear of ORS? That was supposed to help everyone. How bout TSAT? Warfighter needs secure data at higher speed. BASIC? These programs are getting mulled over in every budget. Let the IC folks and services build to their specific requirements, merge the requirements with software on the ground, feed the hungry at the Combat Support Agencies when required; give the warfighter what they need! Or we can just give GM/Ford and Chrysler the $25B to use in fat cat bonuses and UAW payrolls.

By: Alan

Alan — Tue, 18 Nov 2008 05:51:58 +0000

What? Rumsfeld was wrong about something? I was in Space Command and let me tell ya, integrating sucked and the sats went over budget quite a bit! Keeping them seperate with free up quite a bit of money! Good Job Gen. Kehler!

By: DensityDuck

DensityDuck — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 18:56:40 +0000

Sounds like USAF brass suddenly realize that people are actually listening to John Young. Better shut that down post-haste. They’ve got a vested interest in showing that a unified team is bad–because if a unified team is workable, the next logical step is to take space (and the associated budget) away from USAF!

By: Maddog

Maddog — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 14:50:51 +0000

We’ve got plenty of money to build whatever we want for whatever purpose. Right? Wrong! The times have gone where everyone can fund their pet projects and not have to coordinate with other agencies to get the best bang for the buck.