Home » Air » Panel Warns Of DoD ‘Train Wreck’

Panel Warns Of DoD ‘Train Wreck’

By Colin Clark Thursday, July 29th, 2010 10:49 am
Posted in Air, Cyber Security, International, Land, Naval, Policy

“The aging of the inventories and equipment used by the services, the decline in the size of the Navy, escalating personnel entitlements, overhead and procurement costs, and the growing stress on the force means that a train wreck is coming in the areas of personnel, acquisition and force structure.”

Those are the words of the independent panel mandated with reviewing the Pentagon’s enormous Quadrennial Defense Review, which many felt failed to grasp the policy, personnel and acquisition nettles addressed above. Keeping America well enough armed and ready to manage its strategic missions will “probably require” a defense budget increase, said QDR panel co-chairman Stephen Hadley.

The top Republican on the House Armed Services Committee seized on the panel’s recommendations, saying the report “repudiates those seeking a peace dividend.,” a clear shot across the bow at some Republicans and many Democrats who are increasingly pushing for a smaller Pentagon budget to limit the budget deficit.

[We’ll update this story as the hearing progresses.]

Share |

Join the Conversation

	Dow July 29th, 2010 at 11:13 am Barry osbama’s goal — weaken america.
	sferrin July 29th, 2010 at 3:34 pm This is news? People have been warning of the procurement trainwreck for decades, both in ship building and military aircraft. Problem is the same today as it’s always been: nobody’s listening.
	William C. July 29th, 2010 at 3:52 pm Damn “progressive” idea of “progress” is keeping us using the same equipment for all eternity. We need to keep pushing the technological boundaries and building better gear for our troops.
	CharlesHouston July 29th, 2010 at 3:54 pm Incredible that in this day of huge DoD budgets — there is a train wreck coming???? Part of the problem is people like Representative Murtha (and others both right and left) that try to loot the treasury as fast as possible for their districts.
	sferrin July 29th, 2010 at 4:26 pm You might want to look at where the money is going. I’ll give you a hint, it ain’t for procurement.
	sferrin July 29th, 2010 at 4:26 pm I’ve often felt the Democratic Party was far more of a threat to America than either China or Russia.
	Drake1 July 29th, 2010 at 5:58 pm Defesnetech made this review sound like a joke…it remains to be seen I guess.
	Byron Skinner July 29th, 2010 at 3:40 pm Good Afternoon Folks, I’m with CharlesHouston on this. As long as defense contractors can buy Congress and move money into friendly districts Congress will support anything they want to make. This “pdr” is a joke. Those peculiar institutions of winers tanks must really be in a world of hurt to pull a bull sh** stunt like this. I did take delight in reading today that the profits of Boeing Military sales division is down 21% this quarter. I like the trend. ALLONS, Byron Skinner
	Formula July 29th, 2010 at 7:44 pm Defense is what…7% of the GDP??? However, if we were to get the Programs that are over budget and not on time under control, maybe we could avoid future train wrecks. What a revelation
	Carl July 29th, 2010 at 9:26 pm Obama has increased military spending beyond whatever Bush dared. I wish he would slash it to save the nation, but there are millions of selfish Americans (many in uniform) that profit from this racket.
	@7thwave July 29th, 2010 at 10:48 pm I have to agree that we need to develop new technologies to save lives and fight future conflicts, how ever, we forget the current equipment we are using is worn out and breaking. We need to replace one for one aircraft like the F15 and F16, build up the navy, and keep the current force structure of the army and marines. Right now, a good choice for defense spending would be to replace current equipment, and then sink money into R&D.
	@7thwave July 29th, 2010 at 10:56 pm Carl, I understand this is a “de-mock-racy,” but your opinions are stupid and unneeded. Its thinking like yours that kills people fighting the wars you ask them to fight. Cut, cut and cut. That s your way of thinking, right? Save the budget. Cut defense spending. Right? Well in a era of massive unemployment and needed jobs, defense manufacturing being funded by the spending that you so want to cut provides the jobs you so need. I bet you did not think of that.…right? Weapons systems being purchased currently like the F35 program have their problems. But we need to replace broken equipment, pay troops, keep current force levels, and build up what Rumsfeld and congress have gutted. So, why do you want to cut, cut cut?Wait.…I know because you work for China and you want to call our national defense policy!
	@7thwave July 29th, 2010 at 11:05 pm Byron Skinner on a roll…unfortunately a roll into the ditch where he belongs. Dude,I have followed your posts on Defense Tech and here for a while. You are extreme anti military. See, its fools like you that do get people killed in war because they use broken equipment and out dated technologies all because you watch companies stock reports. If you have nothing to say that is of any importance, stop trolling and get a real job. To back up my statements I will say this.…I follow defense policy on a daily basis. I am former military. I know where the DoD is headed all because of the freak show being run by people such as your self. I do not like the prospect of a hollow military. But, there is one thing I have to agree with you on…and you need to stop buying politicians who want to gut the DoD to save a few bucks that will be thrown away else where,like the money to GM to set up jobs in China.
	@7thwave July 29th, 2010 at 11:08 pm This,is a real intelligent post. Formula, I have to agree with you. But, right now is not the time to stop thinking about not increasing the budget…we got some planes and IFVs that need replaced!
	William C. July 29th, 2010 at 11:11 pm Selfish? Your calling those men in uniform selfish? The real selfish ones are those choosing not to work and living off of those who do contribute.
	William C. July 29th, 2010 at 11:12 pm less than 4%
	William C. July 29th, 2010 at 11:22 pm Time to get what we need. F-22s, new ships, tanks, IFVs, trucks, rifles, you name it.
	billford1 July 30th, 2010 at 12:02 am CH-46 Helos armed with 3 miniguns per side, More F-22s, better tasting MREs, 7.62 SCARs with the grenade launcher option , Better more comfortable LBEs like Cabelas, Shoulder fired lightweight bazooka optically guided rocket for long shots, and oh yeah the most high end, comfortable boots that money can buy.
	Oblat July 30th, 2010 at 12:30 am Just listen to the tone of entitlement. “Bail me out bail me out not those guys, no, over here !” – Totally against bailouts of everyone except themselves.
	Byron Skinner July 29th, 2010 at 11:30 pm Good Evening Folks, May I inquire of where @7thwave served in combat that even entitles her/him to an opinion? The defense industry and their Gucci wearing highly paid lobbyists who wrote the bogus “pdq” are only after their own self interest, they could care less about the defense of the United States. This must be the arms makers Christmas Toys R Us Cat. It would seem that like all the rest of the antebellum man-boys here @7thwave has no substance to support his arguments, he/she even lacks the courage to use their name when posting so she/he has to use personal attack. Again what and when did you serve your country in combat. until you can answer that your just a nameless coward? ALLONS, Byron Skinner
	sferrin July 30th, 2010 at 6:40 am You sound like one of those who think because he pushed a mop on a ship that makes you more qualified to comment on all matters military than anyone who hasn’t. Hate to burst your bubble but it doesn’t work that way. As for “Gucci” it’s short-sighted nitwits like yourself that created the procurement trainwreck in the first place.
	roland July 30th, 2010 at 4:22 am There is a recession worldwide and this recession was affecting everything we have. It is one of the threat our country have. One way to fight recession is creating a market of our resources to our allies, that can protect them at the same time can be competative to the internatonal market. If we are going to market our resourse we need to make sure that there is a confidential agreement between us and the purchaser so it wont link to the enemy’s hands that can endanger our very own security.
	joeyd189 July 30th, 2010 at 9:52 am Good afternoon folks, looks like there has been quite some bickering and confusion in the procurement process for a long time. i currently crew on tankers(been on both in the USAF inventory). i’m working on 1957–1964 R model 135’s. although they do have a great mission capable rate due to the many modernization upgrades they have been through, it would be nice to be able to see what the replacement tanker will be. I think it’s about time to get something new in the air because these airframes are going to start showing their age and i would hate to see one tanker have an issue causing the rest of the tanker fleet to be grounded until all compliance inspections were complied with. talk about a huge hassle with air ops and the things that would dominoe effect. just some thoughts.
	LoachGunner July 30th, 2010 at 12:55 pm When I retired from the Army in 1989 the newest helicopters were the UH-60A and the AH-64. Notice that was 21 years ago. I saw a UH-1H flying overhead a couple of days ago that belongs to a National Guard unit. The last general production year for the Huey was 1973. I was a crewchief on a ’73 model in Germany in 1980. Ya think the fleet might be getting a tad old enough for you ‘cut the budget’ fiends yet? You can mod & upgrade an airframe for only so long before that airframe starts falling apart. Hey, how about we quit spending money on all the ‘sit on their a$$’ generational welfare bums and use the money to keep America safe!
	Nelson July 30th, 2010 at 3:13 pm Too many fools here. If you want to look at who is the blame for the current situation of our military, please look no further than our fearless political leaders in both Democratic and Republican camps. Then, after you’re done doing that (and please don’t hurt yourself while doing that research), take a look a who each is accepting political campaign contributions from. And here’s another shot across the bow—-when was the last time a military contractor but in a bid, won, and the bid came in on budget? Absolute BS folks. Tell me, who were the campaign contributors to all those politicians who a couple of years ago, wanted to ground all the Warthogs and replace them with F-16s? How many times has the military said “no” to a weapon system and the politicians still shoved that weapon system down their throats? And a final comment, if we all want the “best” and most “cutting edge” weapon systems, then WHO is going to pay for it? And please, none of that BS that our freedom can’t have a price! Gee, we’re at war, right? (Hard to tell though, when you look around you, and see no signs of a war, and no one seems to be personally sacrificing squat, except the boys and girls on the line). So, why don’t we have price controls in affect, why are we not telling the manufactures what profit they can make, why are we not holding them accountable for cost overruns? Good forbid we ever get into a war of attrition with, oh say, China! Gee, we’d have to build thousands of tanks, APC’s, jets, etc. And at the prices we currently pay, how long do you think we’d last? And while I’m at it, again, who pays for these weapons to keep us armed to the teeth to keep our enemies from our coasts? Last time I looked, the middle and lower classes were tapped out. Maybe it’s time we make the upper classes shoulder some of this burden of fighting the war on terror and tax them enough to pay for these wars! I have no tears for someone (or something/ a corporation) making millions/billions having to have to pay 50–75% of that in taxes. Hell, even at 75% tax rate, they’d still have millions left over! Just my two cents worth.
	HasBeen July 30th, 2010 at 11:33 am Talked to someone a few weeks ago who does a little training and sales relevant to the military. He told me he was talking to another guy who mostly sells to the military and was told that when you are selling to the DOD you mark everything up ten-fold. He said that’s just how you deal with the DOD. Point is that the DOD acquisitions process is thoroughly broken. Their vendors are happily messing them over to an amazing degree. Oh, and the inventory management is also asinine. A lot of people really need to be fired (mostly at or near the top).
	LCpl July 30th, 2010 at 4:10 pm better boots would be nice
	LCpl July 30th, 2010 at 4:12 pm Agreed
	John Patrick Cain July 30th, 2010 at 4:30 pm There is SOME justification to marking up DOD purchase prices. I worked for a company that provided wind tunnel models for aircraft testing. I can’t count the number of times I was told that the project was on indefinite hold because there was a change required by the DoD. During these hold periods, the companies have the choice of paying their workers to come in and do nothing, or furlough the workers until the project comes off hold (which is a good way to lose skilled workers). Between that and the requirements for documentation, etc make it expensive to deal with the military.
	OMGU812 July 30th, 2010 at 6:42 pm HasBeen, you are incorrect. Unless its a specialty item that has to be specifically made to militaary or DoD specs (or it just doesn’t exist yet), all pricing is done at the Most Favored Customer (MFC) or better rate. The government tracks the MFC price by watching what that same contractor is charging someone else for the same service or product. Furthermore the government doesn’t just accept any price thats out there, there is usually a lengthy negotiation process a contractor has to go through before there is an award. Contractors that are given government contracts do earn their money though, if you get a chance take a look at the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) or the (DFAR) which is the defense supplement. Sounds liek your friend is blowing a tad bit of smoke up your six if you ask me, or he has no hands on experience in the contract negotiation process.
	OMGU812 July 30th, 2010 at 6:43 pm Sorry about my spelling, I have fat fingers!
	PReece August 1st, 2010 at 9:58 pm It is worst today shipbuilding is just about shut down and with one of the main players Northrup wanting out of the game.
	Leslee Krapfl August 1st, 2010 at 8:59 pm My brother and I have been just debating this particular very topic, he’s constantly endeavouring to prove me completely wrong. Your own view on this is fantastic and just how I feel. I just now mailed my brother this page to demonstrate him your current perspective. Right after overlooking your blog site I added and will be coming back to read your messages!
	RainLeathers August 4th, 2010 at 7:59 am Hey! Not for sale!
	Robert A Schwehr August 5th, 2010 at 2:55 am Do not lose heart,it is written,“there is nothing new under the sun”.(Former Chaplain Assistant and Army Provisioning clerk,AMC).There are some good men in DOD and good women who will always put our country first,regardless of the retirement check they may eventually receive or not receive,as the case may be,and it may.Be that as it may, trust in God and serve your country, “Pro Deo et Patria“on the battlefield and in the office.Althogh most of the comments here do indicate real trouble for our DOD unless some powerful changes are able to be made.
	Ron Whittaker August 5th, 2010 at 3:07 am The situation with updating our military forces has deteriorating for years. Soon we won,t be able to afford any new technology.
	SergeantYORK August 5th, 2010 at 3:25 am There is no quitting. There is no stopping. There is no surrender for the human race of the military. The young serve in the prime of their lives risk it all and some are setback by service incurred health problems. The young work hard long dangerous hours and for the money. The value is one of the biggest bangs for the buck Uncle Sam can get. There are no 8 hour work days. The long haul of the career is not guaranteed. Your own people might be unfriendly to you. Anything can happen to end the career. An even bigger bang for the buck are the use of reserve forces called upon to augment the regular armed forces. When the pentagon is done with them; they stick them back in moth balls in their safe little wooden boxes and wait until the need for the next call up. People can difficult in the first place and the mentality; the mental acuity of people can be meandering and pegged with a horrid desire to punish people and to punish nations. Germany had the war going on for a prolonged period and when it did…it’s industrial complexes were packing up and moving to safety to rise up like The Phoenix after the fires and ashes of destruction. The game is big and dangerous. One moment peace; the next a blitz that seems utterly surreal…and deadly. Be Prepared.
	BobR August 5th, 2010 at 3:25 am The bigger concern is that the U.S. has been spending obscene amounts of wealth in the past 50 or more years on armaments, contrary to all earlier American history. Dwight Eisenhower warned us back in 1960 about the alarming growth of the “military-industrial complex,” and that growth has continued since he left office. Our defense budget in the USA, this “Judeo-Christian” nation, now equals more than the rest of the world combined. Something is wrong with our whole culture and its reliance upon brute force to maintain our “highly consuming” way of life. We must learn to live WITH the other nations on Earth and to rely more upon diplomacy and mutual respect and cooperation, instead of economic and military hegemony. As a Vietnam-era engineer officer, I am sick at our continuing growth in military expenditures. And I think that President Obama, too, realizes that our reliance upon military dominance must be replaced with a more holistic outlook upon the world we all share.
	7th Infantry Light August 5th, 2010 at 4:21 am We are fighting for the Corporations, period. As long as all our money is going to build up the military, there is no money for education. So, no one ever gets educated and the only option is military service. Except for the rich.
	William C. August 5th, 2010 at 4:29 am Our taxes should be paying for the best and cutting edge weapon systems rather than countless areas where said tax money is wasted.
	William C. August 5th, 2010 at 4:37 am Obscene? What is obscene is the ever increasing amount of entitlement spending and these bailouts/stimulus packages which have achieved nothing. Yet as the DoD budget continues to shrink as a % of the GDP, you call that spending obscene? Only a small fraction of the DoD budget goes to procurement, an amount which is simply not enough! We need to rebuild our military, not gut it. The world is a harsh place, and if we don’t have the will to pay for and serve in defense of our country, we have doomed ourselves to mediocrity and the steady erosion of what we once stood for.
	Dan August 5th, 2010 at 5:00 am Twenty years being active military tell me that this procurement problem is cyclical, no matter what party is in charge. No one wants to fix the problem because it provides very expensive jobs in home districts, very nice junkets for politicians, jobs for retire and non-retired politicians, civil serve, and military personnel. This problem will never stop until the revolving door is totally shut and the military contractors are held accountably for their greed and mismanagement.
	Io205 August 5th, 2010 at 7:47 am The ageing of the inventory is nothing to be proud of. The former administrations where terribly wrong with their plans. Now there are probably very capable aircraft (F22 and coming F35), but they are way to expensive. The DDG-1000 is doomed, the CG(X) is cancelled. The army has failing products that where under develpment. It seems all the administrations of the last 15 years got it all wrong (most of it) and now there are though discisions to be made (in a crisis, that helps!) I do not agree with the Obama administration completely, but they must cope with all the trash of the past.
	Dennis August 5th, 2010 at 8:09 am Wish I knew more about these newer systems but something that has been and will always be are the crooks in the procurement of weapons. Too much money goes’ into the pockets of these crooks and they care less about our guys and gals.
	HOPEFUL August 5th, 2010 at 4:30 am If we put together as many studies of failures in our foreign policy as we do on our military shortcomings, we would find that the train wreck occured (and is ongoing) in our diplomatic approaches. This is not a dig a Hilary, she inherited 40 years of bad decisions. It may be time to realize that this “last remaining Superpower” thing ain’t working. At least not economically, ethically or any other way.
	Leatherweatherwood August 5th, 2010 at 10:16 am Do you actually think that any President, conservative or liberal, Republican, Democrat or whatever, had, or has the goal of weakening America? Please, put forth some sort of logical argument, or back up your statement with facts, but broad, untrue statements (and implying the above is obviously not true) is a waste of electrons. Geez. The man increased the number of troops in Afghanistan, through the advice of his senior military advisors, such as the previous administrations SecDef & CJCS; where’s the goal of weakening?
	Leatherweatherwood August 5th, 2010 at 10:22 am BobR, not only the President, but many senior military leaders agree with your statement. Targeted spending, consolidation of bases, etc. Sometimes I think their views are limited (concentrating on Infantry & counter-insurgency at expense of air & maritime power), but in a limited resource environement (and we’re in one), combined with having various programs & bases shoved down their throats, they have no choice but fight the now fight, and hope that what ever is left over is enough for the future. They’re not idiots; far from it; they just have to deal with a budget that’s handed to them. NOW, it’s up to the American people to make a choice in what we want. Giant military / overseas bases (I’ve been stationed in Germany 3 times — LOVE IT! But do we need it??) / 2 major conflicts / take on anyone, anytime, anyplace? If the American people say “yes”, they need to be prepared to PAY for it! The politicians baby the people too much…
	Leatherweatherwood August 5th, 2010 at 10:30 am Mr. Skinner, I’m Brian Leatherwood, 20 years+ in the military, about to retire from the AF. Cold War, Kosovo, etc etc. I apologize for sticking my nose in this discussion, but I assume the gentlemen has the right to say what he wants to say because you and I swore to uphold his right to say what he wants to say. That’s the oath I took. Perhaps his views are wrong; perhaps he has no argument. But don’t attack his basic constitutional right to free Speech. Brian Leatherwood
	tonyd1942 August 5th, 2010 at 10:44 am I was in the army (did 35 years) when they decided to down size the military. We were stretched around the globe with all the missions handed us. However, check it out. With a much smaller military, we now have nearly 40% more missions than we had before. Is it any wonder that our military people are stretched to the breaking point. How in the world did our leadship think that we could fight wars on two fronts with the size of today’s force using a lot of out-dated weapons. And now, Mullens starts talking about strike plans against Iran. What are we going to strike them with? We are maxed out. Shame on our leadership.
	lb123 August 5th, 2010 at 11:45 am We’re also paying the taxes that pay for all this stuff. Let me assure you we all have a right to this discussion whether we served or not. I did serve, but as a taxpayer in the U.S., it all belongs partially to me.
	lb123 August 5th, 2010 at 11:48 am Dictating price controls? Well, that’s socialism.
	Tim August 5th, 2010 at 12:02 pm Carl, military pay and benefits are set by law … as of 1998 an E7 with nearly 20 years service made less than $30,000/year. Senior officers made their boodle, but again far less than what they’d get in the private sector. So, you’ll have to clarify your claims
	Tim August 5th, 2010 at 12:20 pm Nelson, you missed something there, although perhaps you have a point still … but I’m in the lower class, been here for a few years, ain’t paying diddly in taxes … fact is I’m looking for work (again) so who is paying the taxes if me and a whole lotta others either cant or wont? must be the upper classes you’re spouting off on. Tax em too hard and they’ll vote with their feet — case in point Britan after WWII, also the TEA party, also the Gault movement. Make them pay their fair share — sure, but their fair share only. The other thing that must come with it is to stop the circus — stop doling out welfare the gov’t 1. can’t afford it really, 2. stop buying up the private industry 3. stop assuming that the gov’t has any right or responsibility for anyone’s healthcare in the private sector … you want to get more taxes? Best way is to encourage the rich guy (who can afford it) to expand their businesses, to make that one more dollar — cause then they gotta hire more people, and buy more product themselves for resale or services support. Trickle-down Reagan economics works — gov’t interference does just that interferes. my 10cents (increase due to inflation)
	AdamC6 August 5th, 2010 at 1:11 pm There is nothing new about procurement of long-term items suffering during wartime. Finding a balance is very hard for good leaders: fund operational tempo, or fund future requirements? Now, when you add in the politics between services and then the disgusting politics of capitol hill. DoD has to fix its procurement process though — if it can get its own shop in order, then maybe it will have a leg to stand up to the pork barreling of its budget by congress.
	Suzannejb August 5th, 2010 at 1:28 pm it would be wise for government contractors to widen their markets
	Bill R. August 5th, 2010 at 1:36 pm The problem is that, with the exception of a few fat years under Reagan, my generation has been living with austerity our entire professional lives. Vietnam era veterans who did not serve on into the 70s have no concept of this — in their generation, it was all guns and butter. Our generation has ALWAYS been told to perform better with less. Eventually, you just run out of efficiencies. I don’t envy those on active duty and I don’t even those young people coming up who wish to serve in these conditions. They do deserve better.
	Conrad August 5th, 2010 at 1:37 pm If we can not defend ourselves with 700,000,000.00 +$ per year then we need to hire China to do it for us. They only spend 100,000,000.00 on a country twice the size of America. BTW, they have closed borders. Conrad vonBlankenburg
	Bill R. August 5th, 2010 at 1:37 pm It ain’t for R&D either.
	Bill R. August 5th, 2010 at 1:41 pm My point exactly.
	Micheal morgan August 5th, 2010 at 2:09 pm A reality check by unbiased panel — could such a panel be set up with all the paradymes people have? Especially those with executive positions, they got there by being single minded to succeed. The problems are just a sign of a systemic overall misconsetion of what really needs to be accomplished. Over extended and always over budget and late are symtoms of not having actions alligned with proper goals. Get your “vision” corrected and then develop programs and get well efforts IAW the proper “vision”. Until they do that, many more years (decades) of short of funds, over budget, obsolete weapons and tactics, and moral problems.
	Antioch August 5th, 2010 at 2:14 pm Murtha’s dead. Not that it diminishes your point in any way, but he’s porkbarrelling in heaven now.
	Reality Check August 5th, 2010 at 10:23 am It is about how the money is spent as well as how much. How many dozens of websites and programs has the military initiated to try to cut out those who are there to support the military? How much have they cost? Did they do what was the intended purpose, to save money? NOT!! The majority of government contractors do not have the sense of what to work for the military is. It’s a j-o-b to them. Who’s running this boat club?
	sogone0 August 5th, 2010 at 2:50 pm 77705256 Whether it is the Military, DOJ, Congress, etc. ONLY 1 division/department does the purchasing based upon availability and ‘OUTSIDE RECOMMENDATIONS, i.e. Senators, Congressmen, Committees, SoD, SF/SOG Rep., etc.’. This department has been under-staffed by at least 10:1 for the past 35 years. If Congress does NOT FUND something it eventually DIES!!! Overall this is a Congessional problem and “We the People” have less to say about the outcomes with every passing year! This is a perpetual train wreck by any account.
	G. Hartley August 5th, 2010 at 3:00 pm As long as there are bad guys in the world, peace on earth will continue to elude us. The need for a strong, up-dated military will have to be maintained. It is a lot cheaper to maintain a modern, up to date Military then to have to rebuild, it when it’s needed. FREEDOM IS NOT FREE.
	guest August 5th, 2010 at 5:18 pm New gear & policies with greater foresight are DIFFICULT concepts to grasp by people whose only desire is to MAINTAIN the Status Quo. This block headed mentality also extends to the meager salaries paid to those who maintain the existing systems. Maintenance personnel are often assigned duties outside their specialty &/or are poorly trained. The only system in place to ensure proficiency is shouting & threatening. When are these “managers” going to actually believe in what they preach, particularly what Admirals & Generals affectionately refer to the “High Performance Office” paradigm. Good luck in revamping the “Chain of Command” concept!
	TY_HI August 5th, 2010 at 7:22 pm And we are doing a mighty poor job of it since we failed to keep control of the panama canal and the iraqis have awarded the petroleum contracts to PRC petroleum conglomerate because we excused our firms from the contract process. Lovely
	TY_HI August 5th, 2010 at 7:30 pm Unfortunately the military still pays too much for OTS equipment. For example, in order to place a purchase order for small computers to replace out 5 and 6 year old CPUs we were required to place an order through the military bidding system. We were on a fixed budget and all the computers (Dell and HP) came in with a bid price from the venders that exceeded the online price at Dell.com. In order for us to go to Dell to make the purchase, we had to get waivers and prove the vendors could not get us our products in time (JIT purchases). Cost savings was around 20–33% for better equipped computers and time spent was over a month getting the bids / writing waivers. Not the way to streamline OTS purchases.
	TY_HI August 5th, 2010 at 7:43 pm The difference is partially due to their cheaper labor force (e.g., lower payscale for their soldiers, far less benefits, etc), less higher tech equipment, lower R&D costs for modernization (reliant on other nations tech with a smaller indigenous group to expand tech) lower cost equipment, less high cost equipment to procure maintain (e.g., Aircraft Carrier Battlegroups, B-2s, etc.), less global policing / power projection and probably the lack of a use it or lose it spending policy from the dumb ages.
	BMiller August 5th, 2010 at 8:41 pm The number of military installations around the world we stage from on our global reach requires accomodations that house the military members families,all the support personnel who maintain the installation, the military police, the Environmental Protection Team not to forget the obligation to the countries where we dump tax dollars so the area civilians can provide entertainment off post (all kinds) some not spoke of exhist so we can feel good about what we do. The facilities have hospitals and Schools for the kids and programs for the the military members spouse to keep them busy. My point is we need to build floating platforms so large no threat can harm it; the ultimate facility where families do work there making for a closer connection.
	BMiller August 5th, 2010 at 8:42 pm The Billions; hundreds of Billions each year go to rent and improving something we won’t own ever; where every nickel buys time and access, put that into a collasel platform where instead of hundreds of places around the world work together to do our will; a logistical nightmare when only tens of locations take their place making a savings at every comparison of question. We would have locations around the world; do it now before countries claim vast sections of ocean above and below the surface. Instead of Embassies taking the lead our platform (sovereign US territory/state/property), These installations are to be staging facilities of all logistical support meeting food; fuel; ammo; eqipment, and hospitals. Safe sattelite installation; just putting the one world government closer to the people.
	WayfarerX August 5th, 2010 at 10:59 pm Results of Republican fiscal policy that nearly collapsed the economy. Weaken the military more; no do what you must to save the ship.
	WayfarerX August 5th, 2010 at 11:01 pm Where’s the money? The idea is to recover and hold on to as much ground as possible.
	WayfarerX August 5th, 2010 at 11:17 pm Modernizing military equipment is not a stand alone issue. It goes hand-in-hand with economic recovery in a national strategy. We are paying the price for not having a strategy. The nation was placed in a war that had little value other than the objective of looting the treasury. We drew on the National Guard and exhusted anything that could move to play catch up. That caught up with us as the greed from the banks nearly caused a global financial collaspe. A military rebuilding in times when the policy for recovery is still unstable has to be coordinated as a growth strategy and that is not happening as long as the political posturing is going on. F-22 here, F-35’s there and tankers to support how many and for what? Yes, we have a need. The congress is just doing stuff and it is political. Who can bring a serious concern to the table and good sense prevails to solve it?
	WayfarerX August 5th, 2010 at 11:39 pm The “Dollar is mightier than the sword”. Sending those worthless dollars is a problem and that came from long term neglect. The problem is productivity, that is a private investment, manufacturing, production, service and government failure that starts at the local level. We takeoff on issues at the federal level like it’s the only place that counts. If 50 states will allow the housing market to fall, will they also sit back and let our security fall? The President has great responsibility but where does your local and state stand on the issue? Is it even an issue? No, the people having a Beverage Party are worried about the President’s birthplace and not the shipping containers that come in unchecked. If this, ship building and other problems exists, is it for the President to break away from diving to fix BP’s leak and to go to each port to shore that up? What are the states contributing to a solution? Reports show most are considered inadequate to function as 21st Century business ready and that is a problem that goes to making the stuff for the inventory, in terms of quantity, quality and cost. Have a shot of that tea while the states talk to that issue, which has much to do with the value of the Dollar.
	Steve Storey August 6th, 2010 at 12:15 am Been with DOD 37 years. Who would of thought that the government would sacrifice our men and women in the services for billions of dollars in give away programs. I’ve seen it for too long. I’m working for someone else. I might as well get paid: go to the nearess housing project and ask them how much do you need. Is there ever going to be an end? Free housing, medical, child care, drugs, etc.. is not the answer. Let’s see how much more the government can spend and when this country will simply fade away because of some power seekers in the legislature.
	toolman August 6th, 2010 at 11:31 am I used to work for DOD and one of my main self directed jobs was reeling in costs for the Navy repair program. I tried in vain to prevent the shipyards from reinventing the entire equipment lists to perform the same job over and over. Every time a ship arrives at a shipyard, for repair, the individual machine shops manufacture equipment over and over again. They refuse to use equipment already made and ready to use because another yard made them. My female group head was celebrated for anything she did expecially the wrong things because she was female in a male’s job. That was all that mattered to anyone afraid to object. I objected and proved over 1.6 million in wasted charges she supported just to make sure work was steady at Norfolk Naval Shipyard. There are warehouses full of this equipment and it grows every year never to seldom to be used again. This is for just one repair department and is one of the items that cost the tax payers so much in the DOD budget. There are thousands of departments so you do the math.
	William L. Sasman August 6th, 2010 at 1:34 pm Our military needs the best equipment and money to get by. With Obama cutting them off from the equipment and money we will go down the drain. Mr. Gates should know that but being a obama flunky he goes with the flow of the white house. Instead of us and our pals having the equipment the taliban and Al qreda have better equipment then us. When a country is fighting a war as we the military does not need to be cut down or get less equipment.
	Champ August 6th, 2010 at 1:56 pm This month’s Air Force magizine has a chart that shows the number of retired military that are recieiving pensions.. We are paying 50 billion a year for them. The chart is astonsihing that it shows that 2 million retired military are collecting retirenet checks. I would love to see another chart that shows how any aof them are pulling down their second salaries serving as civilians in the governemtn and thsoe working asa contractors on military contracts. I bet you that of the 2 million ther are probably a few hundred thousand who have jobs pulling in another 50 billion as consultants, Pms, etc. The defense bloated budgets are making them rich. I agree with Gates lets buy hardware, not hot air. Ban power point charts, consiltants, analysts, experts. The legacy way of running the cold war machine is a thing of the past. We need new blood, new ideas and less OH B.S.
	D. Marut August 6th, 2010 at 5:54 pm Dan I totally agree with you on this its about greed and which congressman or senator gets the biggest cut of the pie. Take for instance the KC-X problem and the F-35 problem these two alone are going to sink our budget farther into a black hole. thats just my opion but hey what do I know just a 21 year retired AF. And a 13 year contractor with Lockheed Martin.
	Tamara August 7th, 2010 at 9:23 am You have no idea how contracting works if you have to ask these questions…when was the last time a military contractor but in a bid, won, and the bid came in on budget? All the time…all contractors are held to specific rates, fees, etc. set forth by the government allocating the funds. There is constant under runs to every effort and the government relies on these to apply to the next effort as the defense budget continues to be cut. If there are high amount of failures on equipment then the government will ask for new builds. Yes, a lot of our equipment is older, but it is fully mission capable. Why you would be–should be screaming if our government was constantly replacing working equipment unnecessarily. Educate yourself…
	Lynn August 7th, 2010 at 5:17 pm After 8 consecutive years of Bushbuddies, you are blaiming Obama for our procurement mess? Get real! These contracts were let during previous administrations, leaving our current government officials to straighten it out. Cronyism in procurement is long standing and costs us, the tax payer, big bucks! Lay the blame squarely where it belongs on whomever negotiated and let these contracts and stop being a political hack.
	JetDoc August 7th, 2010 at 11:11 pm HasBeen the person who said that is clearly not in the DOD contracting business… I can tell you from experience that the DCAA (contracts goverment auditing agency) goes to great lengths to ensure what they call “price reasonableness”… and they nickle and dime contractors to great pains at times getting the cost of the product down.… so I would venture to guess the company that marks it up 10 fold is likely not doing business with the DOD… and we should be extremely skeptical to begin with when it is “I talked to some that talked with someone that knows…” recommend sticking to first hand knowledge and leave the hear-say to the gossip rags…
	JetDoc August 7th, 2010 at 11:14 pm Great reply OMGU812… totally agree…
	Gordon of Khartoum August 8th, 2010 at 8:11 am After 21 years DoD civilan and USMC, if you aren’t circumventing the system, you aren’t trying hard enough. The whole acquisition system is manned by people who generally know little about anything beyond its NSN while the military falls over backward for every slippery salesman. It’s a major problem, having to have a major, stnadardized technical complex with military officers at the top who have no experience in industry, science, technology or balancing a checkbook: they don’t know what’s possible or what needs to be fixed, much less how to fix it, and the DoD civilians seem, on the whole, discouraged to the point of just not caring, anymore. The remedy every CO seems to adopt, is to find new ways to punish the civilians rather fix problems he can’t even understand. I was a MArine, I used to be proud of being “on the Team” with the Army and Af until about 5 years ago, when I realized that I had too much time in to just toss it. Oh well!
	VET August 8th, 2010 at 11:51 am spoken like likea true racist who only see white, I got news for you buddy you can hate on that man all you want, but what russia and china are waiting for, is for you and people who think like you to do is make the ultimate mistake and divide this country to a point of no return, then see how much stronger America will be. IDIOT!
	Vet August 8th, 2010 at 12:00 pm You are so misinformed! Get knowledge and stop believing everything someone is telling you.
	webersgt.usmc August 9th, 2010 at 10:24 pm well said Nelson right on.