Page 1 of 4 1234 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 58

Thread: The Rumsfeldian Revolution is Over !!!

  1. #1
    Banned Shipwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Jan 06
    Posts
    2,347

    The Rumsfeldian Revolution is Over !!!

    Reuters lists some of the most abject fiascos of the Bush / Rumsfeld era.

    And this is merely the tip of the iceberg.

    FACTBOX-Problems plague Pentagon arms buying
    Thu Jul 24, 2008 6:12pm EDT

    July 24 (Reuters) - The U.S. Navy's decision to cancel its next-generation DDG-1000 warship after spending $10 billion to develop and build just two ships is the latest in a spate of problems with Pentagon acquisitions.

    Following is a list of weapons programs that have faced cost overruns, schedule delays, ethical issues or other contracting difficulties in recent years:

    * July, 2008: U.S. Navy decides to halt DDG-1000 destroyer program after construction of first two ships by Northrop Grumman Corp (NOC.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) and General Dynamics Corp (GD.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz), given a shift in military needs and independent estimates that the cost of the first two ships could swell to $5 billion each from the current price tag of $3.3 billion.

    * July, 2008: Lawmakers demand firings after a congressional report found that supervisors in the Pentagon agency that audits weapons contracts used intimidation, harassment and threats to get their employees to alter audits in favor of contractors including Boeing Co (BA.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) and Northrop.

    * July, 2008: The U.S. Army announces it may cancel a $6.2 billion Textron Inc (TXT.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) armed helicopter program after finding projected costs have soared more than 40 percent above initial estimates.

    * June, 2008: Defense Secretary Robert Gates reopens a $35 billion aerial tanker competition after the Government Accountability Office found flaws in the Air Force's handling of the selection process that picked Northrop and its European partner EADS (EAD.PA: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) over Boeing Co (BA.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz). He puts chief Pentagon arms buyer John Young in charge, not the Air Force.

    * June, 2008: Gates forces Air Force Secretary Michael Wynne and Chief of Staff Gen. Michael Moseley to resign over errors in the handling of nuclear weapons and parts. The move comes amid signs of strain between the Air Force and the Pentagon over mission priorities and the F-22 fighter jet.

    * April, 2008: Wynne disciplines a top Pentagon official and four others involved with a $50 million Thunderbirds air show contract after an investigation showed the deal was "tainted with improper influence." Lawmakers question why Moseley, also named in the investigation, was not disciplined, and request a deeper probe by the Pentagon Inspector General.

    * March, 2008: Pentagon acquisition chief John Young says a new presidential helicopter program run by Lockheed Martin Corp (LMT.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz) is facing cost overruns of more than $4 billion, prompting schedule delays and a major restructuring.

    * December, 2007: Pentagon scraps Space Radar, a multibillion program to track moving targets from space. It also cuts funding by $4 billion from a planned network of laser-linked communications satellites, the Transformational Communications Satellite program (TSAT).

    * April-November, 2007: Navy Secretary Donald Winter cancels the second of two shore-hugging littoral combat ships (LCS) being built by General Dynamics, and the second of two LCS ships being built by Lockheed after big cost overruns. Analysts believe the cost of the first two LCS ships could be around $600 million, nearly three times initial estimates that the ships would cost $220 million.

    * June, 2007: Pentagon restructures $13 billion General Dynamics amphibious vehicle program, slashing planned purchases by more than 40 percent and delaying the program, after billions of dollars of cost overruns and reliability issues.

    * February, 2007: The Pentagon decides to cancel Lockheed's work on upgrades to 62 of the oldest C-5 transport planes, cutting nearly $10 billion from the program, after the cost of proposed upgrades to 111 airplanes soared to $17.5 billion from an initial estimate of $11.1 billion.

    * February, 2007: The Pentagon's internal watchdog launches audit of contested $15 billion helicopter program to see if the Air Force followed the rules when it changed requirements for the aircraft. The Air Force was forced to reopen the bidding after the GAO twice upheld protests filed by Lockheed and Sikorsky Aircraft, a unit of United Technologies Corp (UTX.N: Quote, Profile, Research, Stock Buzz). The Air Force had picked Boeing to build the helicopter.

    * September, 2005: The Pentagon terminates the Future Imagery Architecture program, a classified Boeing project to build a sophisticated next generation of spy satellites after over $4 billion in cost overruns and a spate of technological issues. Initially slated to cost $5 billion, the program's projected cost had threatened to swell to $18 billion.

    * October, 2004: Darleen Druyun, the former No. 2 acquisition official at the Air Force, is sentenced to nine months in federal prison for negotiating a job with Boeing while still overseeing billions of dollars of its contracts with the company. The former finance chief of Boeing, who hired Druyun, is later sentenced to serve five months in prison.

    * February, 2004: In a dramatic turnaround, the Army cancels its $14.6 billion Comanche helicopter program. to be built by Boeing and Sikorsky, after costs more than quadrupled, prompting six restructurings.

    * May, 2002: Then-Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld decides to cancel the Army's $11 billion Crusader gun system, saying it had been designed to fight Cold War battles and the Army needed lighter, more mobile weapons for future fights. (Reporting by Andrea Shalal-Esa; Editing by Tim Dobbyn)

    Link

  2. #2
    Banned Senior Contributor dalem's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Columbia Heights, MN
    Posts
    13,048
    How do Commanche and Crusader reflect a Rumsfeldian problem?

    -dale

  3. #3
    Official Thread Jacker Senior Contributor gunnut's Avatar
    Join Date
    27 Jan 06
    Location
    DPRK, Demokratik People's Republik of Kalifornia
    Posts
    23,818
    I thought most of them were the last vestiges of the Cold War projects/mentality.
    "Only Nixon can go to China." -- Old Vulcan proverb.

  4. #4
    Banned Shipwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Jan 06
    Posts
    2,347
    Quote Originally Posted by dalem View Post
    How do Commanche and Crusader reflect a Rumsfeldian problem?
    Donald Rumsfeld (spit, puke, gag ) was sworn in by David O. Cooke as Secretary of Defense on 20 January 2001.

    The cancellation of the Comanche helicopter program was announced on 23 February 2004.

    1. When the Comanche program was *restructured* in October 2002 :

    * R&D cost was increased from $8.9 billion to $12.5 billion (i.e. +41.2%),
    * quantities went down from 1,213 to 650 (i.e. -46.4%),
    * program unit cost went up from $32.9 million to $53.2 million (i.e. +61.9%).

    2. Actual expenditures on the Comanche program under Rummy's enlightened reign were :

    FY 2001 : $590 million
    FY 2002 : $754 million
    FY 2003 : $866 million

    Adding the termination fees paid to Sikorsky and Boeing (somewhere between $450 million and $680 million) yields a grand total in excess of $2.5 billion.

    And I am supposed to believe that there was no Rumsfeldian problem ?

    Naahhhh....
    Last edited by Shipwreck; 25 Jul 08, at 21:55.

  5. #5
    Banned Shipwreck's Avatar
    Join Date
    07 Jan 06
    Posts
    2,347
    Quote Originally Posted by gunnut View Post
    I thought most of them were the last vestiges of the Cold War projects/mentality.
    Lets' take a quick look at the GWOT-compliant replacements the Rumsfeldian revolution came up with for say Crusader and Comanche, shall we ?

    1. Bell ARH-70

    The ARH was supposed to use COTS technology and reach IOC in four years.

    Guess what ? ARH has just breached Nunn-McCurdy Caps.

    ARH Breaches Nunn-McCurdy Caps
    Jul 10, 2008
    Michael Bruno and Graham Warwick
    Aviation Week

    The U.S. Army’s Bell ARH-70 Armed Reconnaissance Helicopter (ARH) program has filed a Nunn-McCurdy cost and schedule breach, but the Army’s second-highest general asserts the program already is advancing.

    “The key performance parameters for ARH have been validated and revalidated,” said Army Gen. Richard Cody, vice chief of staff. “We have to go through this process by law.”

    Cody said the July 9 filing triggers a mandated 60-day review process among the industry team, the Army’s Program Executive Office for Aviation and the Pentagon’s acquisition, technology and logistics office. But the armed service’s need for the new helo remains the same.

    “We need an ARH,” Cody said. “We only have 340 Kiowa Warriors. We need over 368 today and we need 520 to fill out our reorganization and modernization.”

    ARH is a “key” part of the triad with Apache Block III and manned/unmanned teaming concepts, said the four-star general, set to retire this year. “We need that helicopter, and I hope we get it. We can’t build new Kiowa Warriors,” he said.

    Block III will be what Comanche would have been for Future Combat Systems, he further said.

    After a program restructuring, the first unit equipped is now planned for July 2011. A Defense Acquisition Board (DAB) meeting once scheduled for July 2 to approve ARH low-rate initial production was pushed back to June 2009 while the DAB instead was asked to bless the restructuring and approve procurement of 10 production-representative test vehicles to keep initial operational test and evaluation on track for June 2010 (Aerospace DAILY, May 5).

    Last year the Army looked at alternatives to a Bell model after problems in the program arose. But changes in management and its approach convinced the Army to continue work on the Bell Helicopter Textron model (Aerospace DAILY, Nov. 5, 2007).

    Link
    2. NLOS-C

    * The Crusader program was cancelled, partly due to its prohibitive cost ($11 billion for 482 systems, i.e. a program unit cost of $22.8 million).

    Guess what : the first 18 NLOS-C will cost $505.2 million, i.e. a unit cost of $28.1 million (in FY 2003 USD).

    * The Crusader program was cancelled, partly because it was not deployable enough. The NLOS-C was supposed to be fully compliant with the *must be C-130 transportable* lunacy.

    Guess what : at 27-ton, the NLOS-C WON'T fit in a C-130 !!!

    U.S. Army To Buy 18 NLOS Cannons Separately From FCS
    By KRIS OSBORN
    Defense News
    Posted 12/10/07 17:27

    The U.S. Army will buy its first 18 Non-Line-of-Sight (NLOS) Cannons for $505.2 million (in 2003 dollars) in a separate effort from the Future Combat Systems (FCS) program that developed the 27-ton hybrid electric armored vehicles.

    The move, which was directed by Defense Acquisition Undersecretary John Young in a Dec. 1 memo, is intended to free money for other FCS acquisitions and to meet a congressional requirement to deploy the NLOS weapon by 2010.

    “It approves a separate acquisition strategy for the cannon, which is still managed out of the FCS office,” FCS spokesman Paul Meheny said.
    Defense News obtained a copy of the memo.

    The DoD Appropriations Acts of 2005, 2006 and 2007 mandate that the NLOS-C be deployed by 2010.

    The first practical effect of the move will come in 2009, when the first large-scale production decisions are made for FCS technologies.

    “NLOS-C SpI program decisions do not constitute production decisions for FCS or for any part of the FCS program,” Young’s memo said.
    Time to come back to reality, folks : the absurd Rumsfeldian revolution is OVER !!!!
    Last edited by Shipwreck; 25 Jul 08, at 22:49.

  6. #6
    Senior Contributor Bigfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 07
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,643
    Shipwreck,

    You have clearly not been paying attention. This is all the fault of the Democrats & their evil communist allies. Sure, a Republican administration & a Republican congress for much of it, but the Democrats are to blame.

    If you think this sounds like the usual GOP dittohead BS, just look at those who somehow find a way to blame the Bush/Rumsfeld fiasco in the first few years of the Iraq war on the Democrats. Wait a couple of years, it will become recieved wisdom among the dittoheads.


    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

  7. #7
    Banned Senior Contributor dalem's Avatar
    Join Date
    24 Nov 04
    Location
    Columbia Heights, MN
    Posts
    13,048
    Quote Originally Posted by Shipwreck View Post
    And I am supposed to believe that there was no Rumsfeldian problem ?

    Naahhhh....
    Relax, I'm not claiming there wasn't, I was asking about two specific programs. Commanche had been sucking dollars an the way to the chopping for a decade before Rummy ever got ahold of it. Crusader I know nothing about except what I've read here.

    -dale

  8. #8
    Military Professional
    Join Date
    06 Aug 08
    Location
    US
    Posts
    305
    Quote Originally Posted by Shipwreck View Post
    2. NLOS-C

    * The Crusader program was cancelled, partly due to its prohibitive cost ($11 billion for 482 systems, i.e. a program unit cost of $22.8 million).

    Guess what : the first 18 NLOS-C will cost $505.2 million, i.e. a unit cost of $28.1 million (in FY 2003 USD).

    * The Crusader program was cancelled, partly because it was not deployable enough. The NLOS-C was supposed to be fully compliant with the *must be C-130 transportable* lunacy.

    Guess what : at 27-ton, the NLOS-C WON'T fit in a C-130 !!!



    Time to come back to reality, folks : the absurd Rumsfeldian revolution is OVER !!!!
    NLOS is a nightmare. The Field Artillery really jacked this one up. Just a dumb of an idea as the Crusader, that was thankfully scrapped. M777 is our latest and best idea, it's working out in the field so far. I'm not sold on the whole FCS idea. We'll see.

  9. #9
    Administrator Tarek Morgen's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Feb 07
    Location
    Kassel
    Posts
    4,417
    is there a reason why an existing system like the AS-90 or the PzH 2000 won't be bought? They don't fulfil the requirement afaik named above, but so far no one has come up with a system that did. And both systems are available and tested (and there are surely a few others I did not think of right now).

  10. #10
    Senior Contributor
    Join Date
    14 Mar 08
    Posts
    2,053
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarek Morgen View Post
    is there a reason why an existing system like the AS-90 or the PzH 2000 won't be bought? They don't fulfil the requirement afaik named above, but so far no one has come up with a system that did. And both systems are available and tested (and there are surely a few others I did not think of right now).
    Probably another case of not made here itis.

  11. #11
    Resident Curmudgeon Military Professional Gun Grape's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Mar 05
    Location
    Panama City Fl
    Posts
    9,049
    Quote Originally Posted by Tarek Morgen View Post
    is there a reason why an existing system like the AS-90 or the PzH 2000 won't be bought? They don't fulfil the requirement afaik named above, but so far no one has come up with a system that did. And both systems are available and tested (and there are surely a few others I did not think of right now).
    Barrel is to long. For logistic reasons we need a 39 cal barrel.

    If not we would have been jumping all over the PzH2000

  12. #12
    Senior Contributor smilingassassin's Avatar
    Join Date
    13 Dec 03
    Location
    Vancouver Canada
    Posts
    2,749
    Quote Originally Posted by Bigfella View Post
    Shipwreck,

    You have clearly not been paying attention. This is all the fault of the Democrats & their evil communist allies. Sure, a Republican administration & a Republican congress for much of it, but the Democrats are to blame.

    If you think this sounds like the usual GOP dittohead BS, just look at those who somehow find a way to blame the Bush/Rumsfeld fiasco in the first few years of the Iraq war on the Democrats. Wait a couple of years, it will become recieved wisdom among the dittoheads.
    ..fishing for comments from Bluesman again?
    Facts to a liberal is like Kryptonite to Superman.

    -- Larry Elder

  13. #13
    Administrator Tarek Morgen's Avatar
    Join Date
    08 Feb 07
    Location
    Kassel
    Posts
    4,417
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Grape View Post
    Barrel is to long. For logistic reasons we need a 39 cal barrel.

    If not we would have been jumping all over the PzH2000
    I though the crusader was going to have a 54 cal barrel?

  14. #14
    Senior Contributor Bigfella's Avatar
    Join Date
    12 Jan 07
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    9,643
    Quote Originally Posted by smilingassassin View Post
    ..fishing for comments from Bluesman again?
    Nah, more a response than an invitation.


    Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

  15. #15
    Global Moderator
    Devil's Advocate
    ArmchairGeneral's Avatar
    Join Date
    04 May 06
    Location
    Boston, MA.
    Posts
    4,668
    Quote Originally Posted by Gun Grape View Post
    Barrel is to long. For logistic reasons we need a 39 cal barrel.

    If not we would have been jumping all over the PzH2000
    The AS90 does come in 39 caliber. The thing is dang heavy though; 42 tons seems rather excessive to me.
    I enjoy being wrong too much to change my mind.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Jagger vs Lennon:
    By Parihaka in forum Multimedia & Jukebox room
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 10 Mar 08,, 01:38
  2. Salute the forgotten hero on his birthday.
    By globaltracker in forum International Politics
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 04 Oct 06,, 03:02
  3. Iran Cultural Revolution Urged
    By Parihaka in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 24 Sep 06,, 13:01
  4. China's Tech Revolution
    By oneman28 in forum International Economy
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 02 Jun 05,, 08:02
  5. Lebanon's Hollow 'Cedar Revolution'
    By lulldapull in forum The Middle East and North Africa
    Replies: 76
    Last Post: 09 Mar 05,, 21:34

Tags for this Thread

Share this thread with friends:

Share this thread with friends:

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •