Comments on: Spy Satellite Agency Head Resigns http://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/ Online Defense and Acquisition Journal Tue, 16 Mar 2010 21:16:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Typical Politicshttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7391 Typical Politics Sun, 19 Apr 2009 01:40:32 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7391 Mr. Clark, Your ability to draw conclusions from "unnamed e-mail sources" doesn't taint Mr. Large, it taints you and your ilk for BS "journalism". Stay on a blog. You are certainly not ready for prime time. Mr. Clark, Your ability to draw conclusions from “unnamed e-mail sources” doesn’t taint Mr. Large, it taints you and your ilk for BS “journalism”. Stay on a blog. You are certainly not ready for prime time.

]]> By: Been there Done Thathttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7356 Been there Done That Fri, 17 Apr 2009 14:54:57 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7356 I was on the FIA Requirements Definition team for a while at the beginning. The AFSPACE guys insisted on a series of Senior Warfighters Forums (SWARFS) that prevented us from locking the requirements. Boeing - Launch Director is right - was struggling designing the Hubble follow-on - which was also cancelled later. They low-balled the price, got the contract, failed to meet any major decision points for a lot of reasons. One of them was the Government (me and my guys) failed to keep the requirements locked and stable, so they crept way beyond the initial design Boeing and Lockheed bid on. So if Government is disappointed in FIA, I'd suggest we look in the mirror for at least a major co-conspirator.If I were Scott, I'd be looking for ANY parking space at Lockheed. This, ladies and gentlement, is an Industrial Base issue. If we fail to build this next set of satellites, the USG will be out of the business for building and owning EO or EO-like satellites - we'll be leasing them. Not sure if that is a bad thing or not. BTDT I was on the FIA Requirements Definition team for a while at the beginning. The AFSPACE guys insisted on a series of Senior Warfighters Forums (SWARFS) that prevented us from locking the requirements. Boeing — Launch Director is right — was struggling designing the Hubble follow-on — which was also cancelled later. They low-balled the price, got the contract, failed to meet any major decision points for a lot of reasons. One of them was the Government (me and my guys) failed to keep the requirements locked and stable, so they crept way beyond the initial design Boeing and Lockheed bid on. So if Government is disappointed in FIA, I’d suggest we look in the mirror for at least a major co-conspirator.

If I were Scott, I’d be looking for ANY parking space at Lockheed. This, ladies and gentlement, is an Industrial Base issue. If we fail to build this next set of satellites, the USG will be out of the business for building and owning EO or EO-like satellites — we’ll be leasing them. Not sure if that is a bad thing or not. BTDT

]]> By: rbrenzelsrhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7344 rbrenzelsr Fri, 17 Apr 2009 03:27:48 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7344 I feel for our next generation (if there is one). Successful new systems aren't particulary recognized as such untill long in service (AWACS "the system with no mission". The "expensive" and over designed" F-15". My hope for NRO is that John McCain doesn't learn about it. His "indignation" of Boeing getting a $5.Bil sweetheart deal on Tankers has kept us from new tanker and incurred probably $50.bil more in cost to re-re--re-bid these 8 years. I feel for our next generation (if there is one). Successful new systems aren’t particulary recognized as such untill long in service (AWACS “the system with no mission”. The “expensive” and over designed” F-15″. My hope for NRO is that John McCain doesn’t learn about it. His “indignation” of Boeing getting a $5.Bil sweetheart deal on Tankers has kept us from new tanker and incurred probably $50.bil more in cost to re-re–re-bid these 8 years.

]]> By: Philliphttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7282 Phillip Thu, 16 Apr 2009 11:44:08 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7282 Maybe other organizations operate differently, but we still adhere to OPSEC in the Army's Munitions Command.Sometimes I wonder if the people who like to talk really know any true information at all; or just wish they did. Maybe other organizations operate differently, but we still adhere to OPSEC in the Army’s Munitions Command.

Sometimes I wonder if the people who like to talk really know any true information at all; or just wish they did.

]]> By: Launch Directorhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7220 Launch Director Wed, 15 Apr 2009 16:37:45 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7220 DD is right on, and the VH-71 is a shining example. So is ACS, lest we forget. The SBIRS mission did more than creep, it was expanded markedly. Both the contractor and the customer stepped-up and took 50% of the blame, and moved on, albeit sometimes painfully, to execution. The SBIRS HEO payload, by all press accounts, is performing very, very well on orbit today.All sides, contractors, Mr. Gates, the GAO admit the procurement process is broken. That is the true cause of these meltdowns. Contractors must over promise to win, and then are rarely allowed to build what they over promised -- the customer adds new requirements before the ink is dry, and keeps right on adding them.FIA is in a totally different category JF -- it is highly, highly classified! There are no public hearings or press reports. While I think it was incredibly naive to think that Boeing could pull such a complex new system out of their hat, they sold themselves better than the incumbent Lockheed. Very few folks had oversight, and fewer still really knew the true complexities and engineering impossibilities of what Boeing promised until $10B and 7 yrs. was gone. Scott Large should have known, but did not. DD is right on, and the VH-71 is a shining example. So is ACS, lest we forget. The SBIRS mission did more than creep, it was expanded markedly. Both the contractor and the customer stepped-up and took 50% of the blame, and moved on, albeit sometimes painfully, to execution. The SBIRS HEO payload, by all press accounts, is performing very, very well on orbit today.

All sides, contractors, Mr. Gates, the GAO admit the procurement process is broken. That is the true cause of these meltdowns. Contractors must over promise to win, and then are rarely allowed to build what they over promised — the customer adds new requirements before the ink is dry, and keeps right on adding them.

FIA is in a totally different category JF — it is highly, highly classified! There are no public hearings or press reports. While I think it was incredibly naive to think that Boeing could pull such a complex new system out of their hat, they sold themselves better than the incumbent Lockheed. Very few folks had oversight, and fewer still really knew the true complexities and engineering impossibilities of what Boeing promised until $10B and 7 yrs. was gone. Scott Large should have known, but did not.

]]> By: JFhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7207 JF Wed, 15 Apr 2009 09:54:37 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7207 on SBIRS:Wasn't it a replacement to DSP? If so, the mission would be at least ICBM launch detection - but with the emerging nuclear threat from cruise missiles, I think it’s fair to say the DSP replacement had to detect those too? I thought that requirement was in place at the beginning of the program (?).I think we all should have known a NEW satellite system is going to cost and take CONSIDERABLY more than the recurring cost and development timeline of the previous generation. When we all start believing we can do a new system as fast and about the same cost as a previous system, we set up false expectations. Later, perceptions (people do not know what they are doing, bad prime, etc) about the program set in because of cost growth and schedule slippage (I believe there is some truth to the perceptions, but maintain this was always the case for previous space programs as you could always find something wrong). I think if you looked at the original cost/schedule of SBIRS and compared it to the last generation buy of DSP, you’ll find this to be true… on SBIRS:

Wasn’t it a replacement to DSP? If so, the mission would be at least ICBM launch detection — but with the emerging nuclear threat from cruise missiles, I think it’s fair to say the DSP replacement had to detect those too? I thought that requirement was in place at the beginning of the program (?).

I think we all should have known a NEW satellite system is going to cost and take CONSIDERABLY more than the recurring cost and development timeline of the previous generation. When we all start believing we can do a new system as fast and about the same cost as a previous system, we set up false expectations. Later, perceptions (people do not know what they are doing, bad prime, etc) about the program set in because of cost growth and schedule slippage (I believe there is some truth to the perceptions, but maintain this was always the case for previous space programs as you could always find something wrong). I think if you looked at the original cost/schedule of SBIRS and compared it to the last generation buy of DSP, you’ll find this to be true…

]]> By: DensityDuckhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7205 DensityDuck Wed, 15 Apr 2009 04:37:12 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7205 JF: Ah, no. SBIRS was, if anything, a victim of requirements creep. (In a way, it was a preview of what happened to VH-71 and LCS.)We have plenty of ability to team up between government and industry. We've just decided that we can't trust people to do their jobs properly, and so we need four layers of paperwork and two entirely different oversight teams to "monitor" things.It is very seldom that problems with execution kill a program. It's generally more a matter of cost increases--and those are pretty evenly split between unanticipated technical risk, and requirements growth. If the GAO wants to figure out why defense contracts cost so much, it should look for the guys who, e.g., decided that SBIRS ought to be able to spot and track multiple cruise missiles in addition to watching for ICBMs... JF: Ah, no. SBIRS was, if anything, a victim of requirements creep. (In a way, it was a preview of what happened to VH-71 and LCS.)

We have plenty of ability to team up between government and industry. We’ve just decided that we can’t trust people to do their jobs properly, and so we need four layers of paperwork and two entirely different oversight teams to “monitor” things.

It is very seldom that problems with execution kill a program. It’s generally more a matter of cost increases–and those are pretty evenly split between unanticipated technical risk, and requirements growth. If the GAO wants to figure out why defense contracts cost so much, it should look for the guys who, e.g., decided that SBIRS ought to be able to spot and track multiple cruise missiles in addition to watching for ICBMs…

]]> By: paulhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7194 paul Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:16:34 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7194 One satellite isn't going to change a thing! Its the humans and denial of sin!Hence our economy is creating 50% of our enemies itself. One satellite isn’t going to change a thing!
Its the humans and denial of sin!Hence our economy is creating 50% of our enemies itself.

]]> By: JFhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7190 JF Tue, 14 Apr 2009 22:05:49 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7190 can't, sorry.But I note in alphabetical order: Boeing - FIA LM - SBIRS NG - NPOESThere are other programs like NG: JWSTNo Prime is batting well these days. There are many similarities in the programs listed. I find it a shame how we no longer seem to have the ability to team up between Government and Industry partners.Space is hard (rocket science) + we (Govt and Industry Base) oversell on what we deliver. This statement is true throughout time. A shame we don't take the time to understand how we got into trouble. We just keep quoting the seniors - like they really know what happened... can’t, sorry.

But I note in alphabetical order:
Boeing — FIA
LM — SBIRS
NG — NPOES

There are other programs like NG: JWST

No Prime is batting well these days. There are many similarities in the programs listed. I find it a shame how we no longer seem to have the ability to team up between Government and Industry partners.

Space is hard (rocket science) + we (Govt and Industry Base) oversell on what we deliver. This statement is true throughout time. A shame we don’t take the time to understand how we got into trouble. We just keep quoting the seniors — like they really know what happened…

]]> By: Launch Directorhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7182 Launch Director Tue, 14 Apr 2009 18:25:38 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7182 Really? Those are not my statements, those are press reports --- reports that were widely distributed. So, if that ain't the "truth", please enlighten us all.... Really? Those are not my statements, those are press reports — reports that were widely distributed. So, if that ain’t the “truth”, please enlighten us all.…

]]> By: DensityDuckhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7156 DensityDuck Tue, 14 Apr 2009 00:45:54 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7156 JF: Right back atcha. JF: Right back atcha.

]]> By: JFhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7154 JF Tue, 14 Apr 2009 00:26:17 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7154 Launch Director - you have no idea how far from the truth you are in your statements. Launch Director — you have no idea how far from the truth you are in your statements.

]]> By: Launch Directorhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7144 Launch Director Mon, 13 Apr 2009 17:32:43 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7144 Only 2 facilities on earth can build this kind of satellite. One has done it successfully for decades, the other wasted $10B and go nowhere. Sole source it to Lockheed and be done with it. It will save much money in the long run...."Boeing’s initial design for the optical system that was the heart of one of the two new satellite systems was so elaborate that optical engineers working on the project said it could not be built,"“The F.I.A. contract was technically flawed and unexecutable the day it was signed,” said Robert J. Hermann, who ran the National Reconnaissance Office from 1979 to 1981 and in 1996 led the panel that first recommended creation of a new satellite system. “Some top official should have thrown his badge on the table and screamed, ‘We can’t do this system at this price.’ No one did.”"After spending $10 billion on FIA, including about $4 or $5 billion in cost overruns -- the government finally had enough, taking the project away from Boeing, and giving it to Lockheed. In a final act of chuztpah, Boeing demanded $500 million in termination fees for ending the contract." Only 2 facilities on earth can build this kind of satellite. One has done it successfully for decades, the other wasted $10B and go nowhere. Sole source it to Lockheed and be done with it. It will save much money in the long run.…

“Boeing’s initial design for the optical system that was the heart of one of the two new satellite systems was so elaborate that optical engineers working on the project said it could not be built,”

“The F.I.A. contract was technically flawed and unexecutable the day it was signed,” said Robert J. Hermann, who ran the National Reconnaissance Office from 1979 to 1981 and in 1996 led the panel that first recommended creation of a new satellite system. “Some top official should have thrown his badge on the table and screamed, ‘We can’t do this system at this price.’ No one did.”

“After spending $10 billion on FIA, including about $4 or $5 billion in cost overruns — the government finally had enough, taking the project away from Boeing, and giving it to Lockheed. In a final act of chuztpah, Boeing demanded $500 million in termination fees for ending the contract.”

]]> By: DensityDuckhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7138 DensityDuck Mon, 13 Apr 2009 15:04:57 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7138 Frankly, I'm surprised that it took this long for heads to roll over FIA. I am not joking when I say that people need to be in jail over that sorry affair. I'll always argue against the notion of DoD-contractor collusion, and outright illegal influence applied on behalf of favored sons...but, quite frankly, I can't see any other explanation in this case. Frankly, I’m surprised that it took this long for heads to roll over FIA. I am not joking when I say that people need to be in jail over that sorry affair. I’ll always argue against the notion of DoD-contractor collusion, and outright illegal influence applied on behalf of favored sons…but, quite frankly, I can’t see any other explanation in this case.

]]> By: JFhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7131 JF Mon, 13 Apr 2009 01:34:41 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7131 Pehaps the truth of everything has not come out...How many time will FIA be used as a red herring to "explain" things? Pehaps the truth of everything has not come out…

How many time will FIA be used as a red herring to “explain” things?

]]> By: Colin Clarkhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7130 Colin Clark Mon, 13 Apr 2009 01:02:35 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7130 Chantilly Chap,I have absolutely no "venom" for Boeing. My comments are reflective of comments that senior DNI and NRO officials have made to me over the last four years. FIA, in the words of of one of the most senior IC officials, "crippled" the NRO and scarred the classified sat world so badly that they could not get approval for the way ahead on EO as of a year ago and had trouble getting anything new approved because policymakers were so skeptical of the NRO's ability to start and executive large programs. Chantilly Chap,

I have absolutely no “venom” for Boeing. My comments are reflective of comments that senior DNI and NRO officials have made to me over the last four years. FIA, in the words of of one of the most senior IC officials, “crippled” the NRO and scarred the classified sat world so badly that they could not get approval for the way ahead on EO as of a year ago and had trouble getting anything new approved because policymakers were so skeptical of the NRO’s ability to start and executive large programs.

]]> By: JFhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7127 JF Sun, 12 Apr 2009 20:31:46 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7127 A few thoughts: 1. Leadership vs. Management; there is a difference. 2. Read his Bio; it wasn't just FIA. 3. Recognize Kerr for his "contributions". 4. A few others need to "resign". 5. A required change - long over due. A few thoughts:
1. Leadership vs. Management; there is a difference.
2. Read his Bio; it wasn’t just FIA.
3. Recognize Kerr for his “contributions”.
4. A few others need to “resign”.
5. A required change — long over due.

]]> By: DensityDuckhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7125 DensityDuck Sun, 12 Apr 2009 19:58:23 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7125 Oh, and "oh snap" is a contemporary slang term for "expression of amused dismay and/or appreciation regarding the extremely negative statment or situation which recently occurred!" Oh, and “oh snap” is a contemporary slang term for “expression of amused dismay and/or appreciation regarding the extremely negative statment or situation which recently occurred!”

]]> By: DensityDuckhttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7124 DensityDuck Sun, 12 Apr 2009 19:56:56 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7124 If nothing else, this thread is showing that DODbuzz is getting some high-profile readership.I know that just about everyone at work was watching the liveblog of Gates's speech last Monday! If nothing else, this thread is showing that DODbuzz is getting some high-profile readership.

I know that just about everyone at work was watching the liveblog of Gates’s speech last Monday!

]]> By: Chantilly Chaphttp://www.dodbuzz.com/2009/04/08/spy-satellite-agency-head-resigns/comment-page-1/#comment-7103 Chantilly Chap Sat, 11 Apr 2009 20:07:32 +0000 http://www.dodbuzz.com/?p=5533#comment-7103 I take offense to your "former intelligence official's" statement that suggested Mr. Large had a an "utter inability to manage and lead the NRO". In fact he led the organization in more positive ways, in a very short tenure, than any other Director in recent history. He not only consolidated the organization in ways that would have been unimaginable just five years earlier but he did it under very difficult circumstances. His vision to transform and streamline the organization, of course ruffled some feathers, and possibly your former intelligence official, but what drastic management decision hasn't. If it were not for his leadership the NRO would be dire straits similiar to DoDs AFSPC and its space acquisition arm, Space and Missile Command. It's a fact, the NRO has had setbacks, ITS ROCKET SCIENCE, and I feel your venom for Boeing, but there are only three primes out there right now, so pick your poison. If you want to truly understand Mr. Large and his opinions you should re-read his recent speech to the National Space Symposium (http://www.nro.mil/PressReleases/space-symposium.pdf) or GEOINT 2008. There you will see the right vision, leadership and character that is lacking in government today. I take offense to your “former intelligence official’s” statement that suggested Mr. Large had a an “utter inability to manage and lead the NRO”. In fact he led the organization in more positive ways, in a very short tenure, than any other Director in recent history. He not only consolidated the organization in ways that would have been unimaginable just five years earlier but he did it under very difficult circumstances. His vision to transform and streamline the organization, of course ruffled some feathers, and possibly your former intelligence official, but what drastic management decision hasn’t. If it were not for his leadership the NRO would be dire straits similiar to DoDs AFSPC and its space acquisition arm, Space and Missile Command. It’s a fact, the NRO has had setbacks, ITS ROCKET SCIENCE, and I feel your venom for Boeing, but there are only three primes out there right now, so pick your poison. If you want to truly understand Mr. Large and his opinions you should re-read his recent speech to the National Space Symposium (http://www.nro.mil/PressReleases/space-symposium.pdf) or GEOINT 2008. There you will see the right vision, leadership and character that is lacking in government today.

]]>