Looking Rather DAPA
It would be easy to quickly dismiss the Defense Acquisition Performance Assessment (DAPA) Project as another one of those study groups hand-picked by the Pentagon and unlikely to turn the multi-billion-dollar weapons procurement process upside down.
After all, the DAPA federal advisory committee panel appears to be stacked mostly with old-guard members of the retired military and defense contractor executives who still tend to make bad comparisons between defense budgets and giving the wife the credit card.
But wait a minute. Could this be a study not destined to gather dust on a shelf in some tawdry government office building? Will this panel be able to reform the system to avert another Air Force-Boeing-Darleen Druyun tanker scandal?
Of course, it’s too soon to tell. But at its public meeting Wednesday, the panel heard some candid testimony from retired Air Force General Lawrence Farrell Jr., president of the National Defense Industrial Association. Farrell made a number of unexpected observations. Here are a few:
– Although the defense industry is plagued with merger mania, the Pentagon must find a way to keep the game competitive, which will in turn help keep costs down. “Without competition, we’re in trouble,” he said. He even suggested that this might include encouraging competition from foreign contractors or breaking up larger contracts. For instance, although there is little competition for aircraft that could be converted into tankers, Farrell said there are a number of firms who could compete for the actual modification of an aircraft into a tanker.
– The government needs to quit low-balling the initial cost estimates of acquiring multi-billion-dollar weapons systems. And Farrell said, “We need to quit adding things we can’t afford” and “we need to kill bad programs.”
– A single military chief needs to be responsible for determining what weapons the military needs and for ultimately seeing that the weapons actually work. Those functions are now “scattered,” but accountability for both functions needs to rest on the shoulders of a single authority, Farrell said.
– The government is doing a bad job of selecting and training weapons systems program managers. There just aren’t enough career acquisition managers who are carefully selected, trained and mentored, according to Farrell.
– Farrell told the panel that the F-16 fighter jet program is his notion of the model weapons acquisition program. “The F-16 was the best program the department of defense has ever seen,” he said. The program used proven technologies, stayed pretty much on target in terms of scheduling and cost, and yet created new digital avionics, and out performed the F-4 fighter, he said. (By the way, POGO’s longtime friend, retired Air Force Col. Everest Riccioni, a member of the so-called "Fighter Mafia, " is one of the men behind the development of the F-16.)
Did you know we could get MORE CARGO AIRLIFT to move the Army [www.geocities.com/cargo747airlift] if the USAF took the dozens of 747s that are sitting in the desert and modified them into KC-25 cargo/tankers.....
And oh by the way...THEY CAN CARRY FAR MORE FUEL AND GO LONGER DISTANCES than the pathetic 767 tanker only.
The web page listed above also has a report attached from Australian Aerospace expert Dr. Carlo Kopp that goes into great detail on why Cargo/Tanker 747s are far more capable than wimpy 767s.
Boeing is just trying to keep their production lines open at the expense of the taxpayers and what's BEST for America's military.
Mike Sparks
Editor
"Air-Mech-Strike: Asymmetric Maneuver Warfare for the 21st Century"
www.geocities.com/air_mech_strike/amsbook.htm
P.S. Boeing would STILL get billions of $ and keep people employed converting 747s into KC-25s IT JUST WOULDN'T BE THE WAY THEIR GREEDY CORPORATE SUPERVISORS WANT IT TO BE
Posted on: Aug 13, 2005 at 06:47 PM