More F-35 Style Cost Scrubs Coming

More F-35 Style Cost Scrubs Coming

The Pentagon’s top weapons buyer said industry and taxpayers should expect more independent cost scrubs like the one recently done on the Joint Strike Fighter.

Ash Carter, undersecretary of defense for acquisition, technology and logistics, made it clear there is more blood to be squeezed from the acquisition stone at a lunch put on by the National Aeronautics Association. “There are too many programs that resemble the Joint Strike Fighter in the sense that they are not performing the way we expect them to,” he said. Asked which programs he would identify as ripe for closer looks, Carter declined to name any programs, but he said he’s got lots to choose from: “I don’t know where to start. There are so many.”

Overly optimistic cost and schedule estimates from the JSF program office have clearly left Carter, Defense Secretary Robert Gates and others with some lasting scars.  Carter said he didn’t “like to find things out the way the way I found them out with JSF,” noting what he called a “huge gulf” between what the PEO and the contractor were telling senior OSD leadership and what they were hearing from the Joint Estimating Team.


Program managers must be watching all this with bug eyes given what happened to the leader of the Pentagon’s top program, the JSF.  Maj. Gen. David Heinz was, as everyone learned on budget day, canned. And the climate of fear engendered by that action is unlikely to change any time soon. I hear a senior Air Force general was recently threatened with firing if he pressed hard for a course of action he thought best. Let’s hope enough acquisition and operations officers have the courage to stand up and deliver honest opinions based on their best military advice when needed.

Join the Conversation

“I hear a senior Air Force general was recently threatened with firing if he pressed hard for a course of action he thought best.”

Come on, Colin, you’ll have to do better than that. Can you be a bit more vague?

I got what I got on condition I keep it vague. So I did.…

Only sycophants are needed for team-Gates.

There is nothing vague about what is going on; the Administration has claimed that their new acquisition policy would enhance competition and lower costs; the focus clearly is not on buying capability; hence reversing what the Clinton Administration started and was confirmed by the Bush Administration; capabilities count; not the price of single point platforms; so no competition on tanker; no competition coming on some USCG systems; and the littany will go on; no bids; means reduced industrial base; and reduced support to the military; the chilling effects of the Gates Pentagon on the military are evident; ranging from ROEs in Afghanistan which are costing lives to the cancellation of the F-22; to the non-existant bomber to be replaced by a “system of systems” or yet another briefing chart program; yet the only thing that briefing charts kill are the audience;

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again.…Gates has got to go. Heinz was a scapegoat. I have not heard Gates say once that he takes any responsibility. Gates has been the SecDef for several years and Heinz was Program Manager for one year.….the JSF Program did not get in the position it is today in one year…it took several years and Gates was part of it all. He was told by the GAO and others years ago that this program was heading into troubled waters. Gates needs to stepdown so the entire Program can get back on its feet and head in the right direction. Also like “rlaird” says above, we need to focus on enhancing competition which will help reduce costs.

Why does every SecDef become Robert Strange McNamara (& the Wiz Kids) once they take office? Gates is just like Rumsfeld, he knows everything (at least he thinks he does). The arrogance and ignorance that they simultaneously display is amazing to watch.

Hey ELP, keep making records and leave the defense stuff to the professionals. If you’re going to be a partisan, go somewhere else. If you’re going to insult the man’s character, at least throw a little information or clarification with your feces.

Could one of the Anti-Gates geniuses who post on this website please explain to me your beef with Secretary? Seriously! This has to be the first SecDef in my lifetime who not only talks about reform and accountability, and DELIVERS. He’s not only taken on the pork barrel Congress and insider lobbyists, he’s even managed to bring the Pentagon’s focus from Rice Bowl resource fights to the war we’re fighting. In his short tenure he’s ended wasteful and bureaucratic processes, cut underperforming programs, all while appropriating hundreds of billions for much needed equipment for our men and women in theater. But all I hear from many of you on this website is pissing and moaning about everything he does.

Look, these gripes make no sense. The majority of people in the US have determined that we do not want to give Defense a blank check, or be extorted to finance overruns and POSs that don’t work, or even put service members in harms way, e.g., Osprey. Enough is enough. Gates is doing the right things. And there are a lot more flags and SESs who need to be canned out of program manager positions. They should be thrown out of their real jobs for the waste, not just given new assignments. And those who lie or withhold the truth from Congress or federal investigators need to be brought to justice. We have enough money for defense if we would only spend it wisely, not pursue the self-interests and satisfy the conniving of certain parties, including some of the large contractors.

Pennst98, as you probably are a genious as you call that people with opinion that differes from yours, try to do some homework on Robert Gates and F-35. He knew the program is in troubles, but never abated in his support — at the cost of killing F-22, and trying do the same with F/A-18E, thus leaving US air power with no options but to keep F-35 on life support. His statements are either irrelevant (“I can´t imagine US not having this (F-35) plane-good advice, based on what?”, or misinformed, possibly false (pick one, but as a SecDef he must have known what was saying: “F-35 will cost 77 million USD” (back in 2008, and we are early 2010 and ooops it went up 40 million)). Either way, he doesn´t give impression of a somebody who knows what he is talking about, plus has a strong alergy to people with different opinions, as firing of USAF leadership clearly demonstrated.

Add gag orders, rush orderds of thousands of MRAPs that can´t go off road (ooops), mismanaged tanker selection, aging fighter fleet with no solution in sight but so far so good, obsession with UAVs (sorry, RFPs, to speak proper Gates) based on what analysis, last-war ities mindset and on and on. Does US NAVY want a piloted F/A-XX plane? What the heck, stuff them with UCAS as HE knows the best. No dicussions, no rigorous analysis, no RFIs, screw all usual pre-selection procedures, just go for UCAV or forget it, as HE KNOWS. It will take years to clean up after him. This is no reform, but a mess with PR cover. And on the contrary, my business booms under this Afpak/IQ adventure, and I have never seen so much money wasted on things with no real use, overpriced, obsolete, unneeded, half-cooked stuff, that I feel ashamed. If there is a reform going on, please tell me which floor and office, I might give it a visit:-)

I get it, you don’t like the President! But what does that have to do with Gates?? I mean is he really part of a conspiracy when he cancels programs that are behind schedule, didn’t work, or were COMPLETELY irrelevant to the two ground wars we’ve been fighting for nearly a decade? How can someone scream fiscal irresponsibility, while championing programs which were the poster child for it??

I get that many of you, like myself are part of the defense industry, and these decisions/cuts often come at the price of jobs; but if we can’t hold contractors accountable on RELEVANCE, PROGRAM PERFORMANCE, & COST……what the hell can we hold them to??

I dont understand all the hate towards Obama except for having Gates as SecDef (really, he had the worst job in the world coming to power when he did and building everyones hopes with that speech when there was some bitter pills to come). Firefox below makes some valid points as to why Gates fails. He ensured that the U.S. was solely dependent upon the F-35 for airpower and with such a critical program, under his leadership and ultimate responsibility it is in the state that it is in. Its funny though, just like most of the idiot GMs/CEOs that got us into the GFC and by and large avoiding responsibility, Gates is doing the same. It seems responsibility is that of who it can be apportioned to and in the F-35 case, Heinz et al.

You have me on the sacrasm, I merely mean that everyone is an expert here, even when they seem to know next to nothing about that which they speak. I do not mean to imply that the Secretary is blameless here, but let’s be real here.….….you’re telling me the man was going to kill FCS, F-22, C-17, etc AND the replacement program (which at that point was purported to be ok) all at the same time???

Once again Firefox, fair points. I would only point out that the MRAP’s worked for the environment they were procured for, and got there in time for the fight.…..unlike most of the things that dominate the DoD budget. As for the Navy; I agree with what you’re saying. This is definitely more about trying to bide time and keep them busy until so can really review the outrageous plans they have for a 1000000 ship fleet.

As for your latter point; I do not doubt your honesty or analysis, I cannot believe my friends and former colleagues in uniform are still shipping out with the PoS M4/M16, and SAW’s all of which have proven operational and performance problems from underpowered caliber to poor design.

Let me apologize for the Geniuses comment, as it was rather disrespectful. (please take this as sincere) Rather than argue, I just ask one simple question: Is this ALL Secretary Gates fault, or are many of these problems just symptoms of a dysfunctional and inept bureaucracy we call the Pentagon/DoD? It isn’t that I think the man is some genius for war, however I think in a world where the DoD gets it 90% dead wrong, he’s getting it about 60–70% right. While I won’t name a kid after him, I think people should focus on what they’re mad about, not throw the man under the bus because he’s the face on the problem.

Amen brother!

seestherubs, I think you have a valid point on the F-35; but considering Gates was sworn around 2006, I hardly think that he’s at fault for the F-35 program becoming the center of the world. That was a decision made over two administrations ago and hardly can be laid at his feet. While the current program difficulties seem like a failure, WE ONLY KNOW about them because of the review of the program and the hard questions from the OSD.

Well, its on the streets now. The Netherlands cannot afford 87 JSF’s. The budget is now covering only 50 aircraft, and with the current price (over 100 milj.) it could be even less.

So much for the Dutch Airforce.…..

Pennst98–you sound like some sort of apologist for the mfgs. The MRAPS got there years late, thanks to Marine and Army dithering on spec and contracting. Hundreds of deaths and thousands of wounds are attributable to that slothfulness on the part of some flags, other uniformed officers and civil servants. All with flag pins on their blazers, too. When is the acquisition community going to look at itself and learn that time is lives. The M-I complex needs more than a kick in the pants. Some firings, criminal indictments, courts martials, and contract terminations for default. Oh, and lest we forget, some competion. Bend over, taxpayers and warfighters, Boeing is going to build a tanker.…slowly and not on a FFP basis.

Pennst98 and Firefox are having a decent conversation about what’s really going on in the Pentagon. Gates is just the most recent in a long line of SECEF’s who don’t focus on getting the right toys and them getting them in bulk. Based on my experience, every toy the Pentagon buys costs more because the Pentagon (not just defense contractors) low-balls their own estimates when approving the programs approved by Congress. Otherwise, they couldn’t load up their budgets with their wish lists. And the standard pattern is that as procurement costs rise when they discover their toys cost more, they wind up buying less than half the toys. Blame? How about all those generals, admirals, program managers and SES “decision makers” who do not speak up about what it really costs to develop and field the weapons our warfighters needed yesterday!

Taxpayer is right, but with one more additional thought. The citizen-taxpayers of the United States recognize other urgent priorities, besides national security. All the waste in DoD, DHS, and intel and their contracors doesn’t help the business or political cases for these activities. We have little things like healthcare and rebuilding infrastructure, to fund. And they actually affect the national security of the country. There needs to be an end to the blank check, an end to fenced money for national security. Defense items, many of them, are just as discretionary as anything else, and and they need to be weighed accordingly. That will enable us to force the wastrels to surface and make their own cuts.

If you use the criteria that most commentors use to declare a program “successful”…then there has NEVER been a SINGLE successful defense program in the history of the United States.

Seriously. Go on. Name one–and I’ll point out all the ways that it didn’t meet spec, didn’t meet performance, unexpected failures in service, shortfalls in capability, difficulties in maintenance, excessive fuel usage…

“reform” and “accountability”? Really? Cutting a bunch of programs doesn’t represent “reform” any more than switching to diet soda represents “weight control”.

If Gates wants to reform acquisition, he can start with his own house. The DoD side of acquisition will spend five dollars to track the flow of fifty cents. And you can ALWAYS ask for more testing; after all, who can argue that testing doesn’t make things better? (And so AEHF goes back in the oven for another six months. Then the USAF bitches about how it’s behind schedule and over budget.) New technology? No sir, we aren’t having any of that, because some guy at The Aerospace Corporation thinks that now is a PERFECT time to enforce some new environmental standards that he just thought up.

Competition like the tanker affair? Yeah, because that worked out so well.

WHAT?! Apologist.….I’m simply asking why GATES is the center of all these tin foil hat rants, and not the Generals/Admirals, etc?!

Ditto on the “fire the generals!” Until someone is jalied, retired as a private, etc.….there will be no reform. As long as contractors profit BY or FROM (deliberately or accidentally) screwing the pooch on contracts and obligations, we can have TALK reform until we’re blue in the face, nothing will change.

Duck, Jawaralal, et al; I’ll go further and say the reason we have the problems and mismanagement we have is BECAUSE of the Pentagon. We have 20,000 people and 20 agencies and commissions between the guy in the field and the guy who signs contracts and we somehow expect good decisions to be made. Even if it was staffed with good and competent people, it would still take 10 years to get anything done.

It takes too many compromises of integrity and WAY too many years to rise to a position where you have any real say over things like doctrine or equipment. I don’t know how we expect senior leaders to think proactively and creatively after effectively labotomizing them for 20 years of being soley judged by how high they jump when commmanded.

How about this, Pennst98…

As a cost savings and management improvement initiative, we have the boss and his/her deputy of every organization in the Pentagon flip a coin. No matter who wins the coin toss, the end result is that every other person in the chain of command (political appointee, general, admiral, SES, civilian, contractor) is immediately fired (the coin toss determined whether it’s the boss or their deputy who gets fired to start the process) until you find the first worker bee making something real. It’s a start!

I agree that the military should justify what it needs money for and is open to the same scrutiny as any other government program; however, why do we “have to” fund healthcare? The Constitution explicitly states the existence of the military.

Hey, Weapon — D –Head: WTF are you talking about.…or do you even know? Can you NAME something that you are getting your nuts off over?? Rther than spewing your whiny azzed comment, do some research and get some ‘palatable’ facts.….as

I agree with you, at least in the last three decades, no program was successful by those measures, although some of the systems and weapons and platforms were usable, even if a tremendous ripoff and years late.

Pick up your tea bag at the counter, madame.

Agreed. Suggest implementation of a random firing system, with all mil and civ and contractor positions at all levels and all geographies in scope. Set the firing mechanism for, say, 1/3. Randomly fire, and I do mean leave the organization, one-third, and things will work much better.

Just my opinion as someone who see’s our great military at work every day,

I’m tired of the wasteful spending in this country. If a program doesn’t meet expectations, don’t reward it with more money.

The U.S military is all about meeting deadlines, on time and correctly. Why does that same ideal not apply to equipment acquisition? If I didn’t do something on time, my commander would take the appropriate action to ensure I don’t miss a deadline again. I believe if we didn’t allow politics to decide what actions to be taken, this country would be much better off. Don’t give me the plane that brings the most money to a certain company (U.S based vs Europe), give me the best plane.

I know I’m not as eloquent and informed as many of you, but that is the opinion of someone in the field without going through 20,000 people and 20 agencies.

Reform,.…Ha! The services are so saddled with “OSD oversight” that adds cost and schedule while bringing little to the warfighter it is pathetic. They tout MRAP as the great DoD success but behind closed doors they sharpshoot that it needs more testing. OSD is only empowered to say NO!

I’m in. I mean how many people and how long does it take to change a lightbulb. The answer in Washington is 1,000,000 and 10 years only after JCIDS, 20 commissions, a note from someone’s mother, and 400 technology insertions to really muck up a simple concept.……

“The U.S military is all about meeting deadlines, on time and correctly. Why does that same ideal not apply to equipment acquisition? ”

Because the people responsible for program management, on the DoD side, know that if they just hang around for two years then they’ll be shuffled off to a different assignment and the whole thing will be Someone Else’s Problem.

*required

NOTE: Comments are limited to 2500 characters and spaces.

By commenting on this topic you agree to the terms and conditions of our User Agreement