Sponsor Message:
Military Aviation & Space Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
US Auditer; Mil. Programs Over Budget And Late...  
User currently onlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5319 posts, RR: 30
Posted (5 years 3 weeks 2 hours ago) and read 4303 times:

While so much focus has been on the A400, (and deservedly so), it is not much of a surprise that is not the only military program causing grief. Budgetary concerns may mean program cuts.

http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/090330/usa/us_military_budget

Quote:
WASHINGTON (AFP) - Many major US weapons programs are running over budget and lagging behind promised production schedules, a report by an independent US auditor said Monday.
ADVERTISEMENT

The cost of the 96 largest defense programs reached 1.6 trillion dollars in fiscal year 2008, 25 percent higher than planned under initial budgets, said the Government Accountability Office (GAO), the investigative arm of Congress.

For these weapons projects, "the average delay in delivering initial capabilities has increased to 22 months," the GAO report said.

The cost overruns and delays were partly due to older weapons programs, with newer projects tending to operate more within planned budgets and production schedules, it said.

The report comes as President Barack Obama's administration seeks to scale back some costly weapons programs in the vast US defense budget, the world's largest.




What the...?
11 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineKingairTA From United States of America, joined Feb 2009, 458 posts, RR: 0
Reply 1, posted (5 years 2 weeks 6 days 20 hours ago) and read 4257 times:

No surprise.

When was the last weapons contract that was ever delivered on-time and under budget?


User currently offlineEBJ1248650 From United States of America, joined Jun 2005, 1932 posts, RR: 1
Reply 2, posted (5 years 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 4202 times:



Quoting KingairTA (Reply 1):
No surprise.

When was the last weapons contract that was ever delivered on-time and under budget?

True enough. This isn't news so why even make the point? Someone trying to present the image that he's doing his job?



Dare to dream; dream big!
User currently onlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5319 posts, RR: 30
Reply 3, posted (5 years 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 4198 times:



Quoting EBJ1248650 (Reply 2):
True enough. This isn't news so why even make the point?

Can you imagine what the over runs would be if someone wasn't watching over these procurements?



What the...?
User currently offlineMCIGuy From United States of America, joined Mar 2006, 1936 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (5 years 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 4187 times:

What you're seeing is only one side of the story. Delays and cost overruns are are often caused by the customer, not the OEM. Congress will often slow funding for a project and then turn around and bitch when the cost per unit goes up. The military brass will change the specs and/or requirements of a new weapon platform while it's in development, sometimes when it's nearing the end of developement. I'm not saying the OEMs are never to blame, but definitely not always.


Airliners.net Moderator Team
User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8204 posts, RR: 3
Reply 5, posted (5 years 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 4180 times:

If it is known that the military tolerates delays, then it becomes SOP. Unless you actually threaten to not pay overages, then why would they come in on budget? Do they look stupid?

Any project with a properly designed contract will often come in on time and under budget. This only suggests the Pentagon is not competent in that area. Shame because this is an important component of warfighting.

For being experts at nuclear strategy, the Pentagon seems pretty weak at this other kind of strategy.


User currently offlineTGIF From Sweden, joined Apr 2008, 276 posts, RR: 0
Reply 6, posted (5 years 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4138 times:



Quoting JoeCanuck (Thread starter):

The cost overruns and delays were partly due to older weapons programs, with newer projects tending to operate more within planned budgets and production schedules, it said.

Am I interpreting this correctly when I come to the conclusion that founding, let's say, KC-X, F-22, F-35 and NGB is better spent money than re-engining KC-135, extending life on F-15/F-16/B-52 etc? The politicians actions makes in that case little sense, but then again, that often seems to be the case so I'm not that surprised...


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8204 posts, RR: 3
Reply 7, posted (5 years 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4136 times:



Quoting TGIF (Reply 6):
but then again, that often seems to be the case so I'm not that surprised...

Repair jobs are more politically palatable because they seem to be thrifty. Even if new build is more economical, it does not look that way politically. So contractors know how to capitalize on that. Not an evil thing, just a way that govt differs from a private group. Maybe we are comparing 2 huge evils, and buying new is a little worse. Both are being done badly.


User currently onlineJoeCanuck From Canada, joined Dec 2005, 5319 posts, RR: 30
Reply 8, posted (5 years 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4126 times:

I took 'older projects' to mean projects started longer ago, not recent projects. I had just assumed 'improvement' projects could be termed as recent.

Now I'm confused...still, the article did mention 96 projects...some must be working out.



What the...?
User currently offlineSv7887 From United States of America, joined May 2008, 1025 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (5 years 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 4120 times:



Quoting Flighty (Reply 7):

Quoting TGIF (Reply 6):
but then again, that often seems to be the case so I'm not that surprised...

Repair jobs are more politically palatable because they seem to be thrifty. Even if new build is more economical, it does not look that way politically. So contractors know how to capitalize on that. Not an evil thing, just a way that govt differs from a private group. Maybe we are comparing 2 huge evils, and buying new is a little worse. Both are being done badly.

Isn't that how they got funding for the Super Hornet even though it was practically a new plane? It's interesting how that works, and whether that will set the stage for the F-15 SE that we saw a few weeks ago.

I am wondering: We used to field new aircraft pretty quickly, maybe every few years. It seems like these days everything is dragged on and on. Has the military acquisition historically been like this? I'm thinking of programs like AWACS, the KC-135, F-14,15,16, etc.

I've read plenty about the F-111. That had more to do with McNamara, General Dynamics, and of course the brass not wanting the thing.


User currently offlineLMP737 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 10, posted (5 years 2 weeks 6 days 11 hours ago) and read 4094 times:



Quoting KingairTA (Reply 1):
When was the last weapons contract that was ever delivered on-time and under budget?


The F-14D program. However in the bizzaro world that is Dick Cheney the program was axed.


User currently offlineFlighty From United States of America, joined Apr 2007, 8204 posts, RR: 3
Reply 11, posted (5 years 2 weeks 6 days 8 hours ago) and read 4058 times:



Quoting Sv7887 (Reply 9):
Has the military acquisition historically been like this?

We needed new tech back then to win wars / beat the Russians. Maybe that lit a fire in everyone's belly. Today, the benchmarks are mostly imaginary it seems like. Harder to define, with no real deadlines.

Or maybe today's process is more defined by money, and less by military objectives. Example is the president's helicopter. It's about money. Or the Osprey. It's wasn't needed to win a war, but it still kept the smokestacks going for a while?


Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic US Auditer; Mil. Programs Over Budget And Late...
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Military aviation related posts only!
  • Not military related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
Why US Not Offer Iran Retired F-14 And Spares? posted Tue Jun 6 2006 20:34:42 by AirRyan
Us Spy Drone Missing Over Iraq posted Tue Sep 11 2001 13:36:35 by Fireblade
Obama - Cut FY10 DoD Budget Over 10% posted Sun Feb 1 2009 12:39:03 by TropicBird
Dems To Cut US Defense Budget 25%? posted Fri Oct 24 2008 23:55:06 by KC135TopBoom
US-Russian Programs At Risk? posted Wed Aug 20 2008 10:44:06 by Bmacleod
A-10 And The US Marines posted Sat Mar 29 2008 19:25:44 by Red329
US Police And Parapublic Aviation And Homeland Sec posted Fri Mar 28 2008 09:34:22 by Jackonicko
US Alert Over Russian Bombers posted Mon Feb 11 2008 15:05:23 by Swiftski
US Satellite Out Of Control And Earthbound posted Sat Jan 26 2008 13:42:36 by Kaitak
US Considers A380 As AF1 And C-5 Replacement! posted Wed Oct 17 2007 04:08:39 by LifelinerOne

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format