cbd@iham1.UUCP (deitrick) (07/29/85)
>> Face it. The defense contractors have been charging all that the market >> can bear, viewing the DoD budget as a bottomless pit into which they >> could throw invoices for everything and anything. >> > > Before you get too worked up, you should know the cost breakdown >of the $1288 ashtray, or the cost of any other outrageously priced part. >You will find that the Dept. of Defense is itself responsible for most of >the cost. > > (Stuff) > > Most of the blame lies with the DoD. They have NO incentive to >perform well and efficiently. > > (More stuff) > > Conclusion: Abolish the civil service system. > My first job when I graduated from college was as an Air Force officer, managing development projects in advanced computer technology. The Air Force does most of it's R&D through contracts with the aerospace industry. I spent a lot of money for the Air Force and DARPA and want to put my two cents worth in. DoD doesn't really care what something costs as long as it falls within the budget. The reason for this is that most decisions about costs are made by inexperienced people who simply have no idea what something should cost: Quick! Is X dollars/hour a reasonable price for engineering services? What's a reasonable rate for overhead expenses? How about computer charges? Don't know? Well, then don't expect a 24-year old lieutenant to know either. When faced with such a question (which would take several years of research to answer) and also enormous pressure to GET! IT! DONE! RIGHT! BY! GOD! NOW! the normal response is to throw up your hands, say "Fuck it!" and buy it at the contrac- tor's price. The bureacracy DoD and Congress have put together contributes to the headache. An example: If you don't spend all the money in this year's budget, Congress figures you don't need all that you're asking for for next year. So if it looks like you'll have money left over at the end of the fiscal year, you ask the contractor to commit this years budget by buying something he'll need next year. Don't worry much about the cost of it, just protect the budget. Further complicating the situation is an incredibly complex web of agencies & departments & bureaus to handle the accounting and checking and cross-checking for all contracts. Instead of trusting people to do right and firing those who abuse that trust, the machinery, like most government organizations, is meant to prevent mistakes in the first place. So the people actually running the con- tract assume someone else is watching the numbers and don't worry about it. Products have to work under the worst possible conditions: desert heat, arctic cold, vibration, EMI, EMP, shock, vacuum, dirt, radiation, dust, and a whole bunch more. Making sure that products work as expected in those conditions requires special design work, horribly rigorous testing, and screening until the world looks flat. This costs a lot of money and makes the resulting product cost more. While I have my own opinions about whether DoD's practices are proper, I put all this together to give you all some data on which to base an opinion. Carl Deitrick ihnp4!iham1!cbd ********************************* The opinions expressed herein are entirely my own and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of AT&T Bell Laboratories *********************************
ray@rochester.UUCP (Ray Frank) (07/31/85)
> > My first job when I graduated from college was as an Air Force officer, managing > development projects in advanced computer technology. The Air Force does most > of it's R&D through contracts with the aerospace industry. I spent a lot of > money for the Air Force and DARPA and want to put my two cents worth in. > > DoD doesn't really care what something costs as long as it falls within the > budget. The reason for this is that most decisions about costs are made by > inexperienced people who simply have no idea what something should cost: > Quick! Is X dollars/hour a reasonable price for engineering services? What's > a reasonable rate for overhead expenses? How about computer charges? Don't know? College graduate huh? Hmmm. > Products have to work under the worst possible conditions: desert heat, arctic > cold, vibration, EMI, EMP, shock, vacuum, dirt, radiation, dust, and a whole > bunch more. Making sure that products work as expected in those conditions > requires special design work, horribly rigorous testing, and screening until > the world looks flat. This costs a lot of money and makes the resulting product > cost more. > Boy that makes me feel better, now I understand why ashtrays cost $1200.00 and toilet seats cost $700.00. Just think, if there's a war, I'll never have to worry that my ashtray will be unusable or my toilet seat won't fit. A place to butt my stick and stick my butt. And gee, how about that $8000.00 coffee pot that was purchased for military planes. It was determined that the plane could crash, kill all aboard, and the rescuers would have hot coffee when they arrived on the scene, A WEEK LATER! It's good to the last drop, from 50,000 feet. But seriously folks, I realize that due to mil specs, some critical parts demand more diligence in manufacturing and performance. But $500.00 hammers and $100.00 allen wrenches must stop. I'll tell you what Uncle Sam, if one of your nephews breaks your hammer while building a latrine, I'll sell you mine for ten bucks, no questions asked.