A new force structure?

[Clark Griswold]

If any of that has a chance of getting done I think it's during the current administration. I'm hoping DOGE and SECDEF commit on Lockheed/Boeing/NG/Raytheon as soon as they get done culling the fed work force. 

2
That’s the next fight, new contracting rules that essentially prevent the transfer of risk back to the taxpayers and force honest-ish bidding

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ClearedHot]

4 hours ago, Clark Griswold said:

2
That’s the next fight, new contracting rules that essentially prevent the transfer of risk back to the taxpayers and force honest-ish bidding

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I COMPLETELY disagree with that statement.  Having worked in that world for a number of years now I am guessing you don't know what is really happening.  The government has been pushing a LOT of risk to industry for years then pulling the rug out from under them at the last minute, which is one of the reasons we only have three companies than can produce a new fighter.  At one point a few years ago OSD actually tried to tell industry that THEY would decide how individual companies spent their IRAD $...pure lunacy. 

I am not saying these companies are perfect, they are not, but at the end of the day they are publicly owned, failure and waste is passed on to your 401K.  For the last 10 years the government has been trying OTA contracts that push all the risk to industry.  Great in concept but when you move the goals posts these companies will stop playing the game and you will end up with one or two bidders...not the best for innovation or price.  Look at the Lite-Attack program...run under and OTA where multiple companies got a small amount of IRAD $ to develop a solution.  They ran an experiment and numerous companies spent hundreds of millions of dollars only to have the government say....never mind.  AND, they did it TWICE.  The same thing is happening with NGAD, three flying prototypes which costs HUNDREDS of millions to develop and now USAF is taking a pause to re-evaluate...those loses have a horrible impact on operations, IRAD investment and stock price. 

It is not a perfect system and we need changes but the government has to have some skin in the game as well if the want to push the innovation boundary and get the best product for the warfighter.

[Khruangbin33]

Quote

They ran an experiment and numerous companies spent hundreds of millions of dollars only to have the government say....never mind.  AND, they did it TWICE.

Is there a point where the value of the IP and retention of technical manufacturing skill for national emergencies makes this worth the outlay, or have we missed any such cost-benefit intersection entirely?

Edited February 25 by Khruangbin33

[ClearedHot]

5 minutes ago, Khruangbin33 said:

Is there a point where the value of the IP and retention of technical manufacturing skill for national emergencies makes this worth the outlay, or have we missed any such cost-benefit intersection entirely?

In recent years some have seen the impact and argued to fund some companies in order to maintain the industrial base.  Kind of scary that there is only one U.S. company than can build submarines. Even more concerning when Virginia Class subs were on the list of 17 cut exclusions because they are so integral to INDOPACOM, especially in the Defense of Taiwan scenario.

One way they government has tried to encourage innovations and growth is through (Modular Open System Architecture (MOSA), architectures where the government is not vendor locked to a single OEM software/hardware solution.  Meaning, most new systems have MOSA from the start so if someone invents a new widget that increases capability, the government does not have to go back to the OEM and pay them to integrate it.  It is supposed to be plug and play as long as they comply with ICDs.

[brabus]

@ClearedHot Regarding industry - you make valid points, but Clark’s point also has some validity. The panacea answer is somewhere in the middle. There’s a lot of “getting fucked” done to and by the gov, industry, and the only entity that purely just gets fucked is the taxpayer. Industry plays an equal part along side the gov in that and there are some screws that need to be tightened on both entities. I think it’s fair to say relative to each other, neither one is the “bigger” victim.

[Lawman]

[mention=1812]ClearedHot[/mention] Regarding industry - you make valid points, but Clark’s point also has some validity. The panacea answer is somewhere in the middle. There’s a lot of “getting ed” done to and by the gov, industry, and the only entity that purely just gets ed is the taxpayer. Industry plays an equal part along side the gov in that and there are some screws that need to be tightened on both entities. I think it’s fair to say relative to each other, neither one is the “bigger” victim.

There’s a great podcast discussing the fact we are currently today living with the results of the 90s and our attempts to restore industrial capacity in ship building and maintenance is really more impacted by the loss of skilled generational labor.

We are talking about the same issues with large armored vehicles. That’s why the plants building Stryker as much as we don’t want it aren’t immediately shuttered. The PM recognizes that in the meantime of 1-2 years developing something else for them to build the industry would have to be rebuilt from scratch adding 5-10 years to the process.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[ClearedHot]

42 minutes ago, brabus said:

@ClearedHot Regarding industry - you make valid points, but Clark’s point also has some validity. The panacea answer is somewhere in the middle. There’s a lot of “getting fucked” done to and by the gov, industry, and the only entity that purely just gets fucked is the taxpayer. Industry plays an equal part along side the gov in that and there are some screws that need to be tightened on both entities. I think it’s fair to say relative to each other, neither one is the “bigger” victim.

Understood.  I have seen malfeasance by some of the bigs and I am happy when they get caught...reference Raytheon getting fined to the tune of $950M.  I will always be in favor of stopping corruption, my concern is the universal belief that Industry is printing money off government contracts when in fact the norm is about 8% profit.  I am very concerned when these sweeping changes don't account for the 2nd and 3rd order effects that actually REDUCE competition and lower the bar on what capabilities are delivered to the warfighter.

[ClearedHot]

Heard some intel out of the five sided wind tunnel that OSD is shopping a plan to consolidate from 11 to 5 Combatant Commands...SOCOM survives as one of the five.   That would be a LOT of GOs left looking for a chair.

[brabus]

@ClearedHot What are the 5?

[Lawman]

[mention=1812]ClearedHot[/mention] What are the 5?

I’ve heard a lot of napkin theory on merging STRATCOM with Cyber/Space on the grounds that Cyber/Space represent both offensive and defensive threats/capes in line with the strategic nature of Nukes.

I think from the outside looking in it’s not a terrible idea in theory. How the commands and staffs underneath that work or overlap I have no idea.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Swizzle]

18 minutes ago, ClearedHot said:

In recent years some have seen the impact and argued to fund some companies in order to maintain the industrial base.  Kind of scary that there is only one U.S. company than can build submarines. Even more concerning when Virginia Class subs were on the list of 17 cut exclusions because they are so integral to INDOPACOM, especially in the Defense of Taiwan scenario.

One way they government has tried to encourage innovations and growth is through (Modular Open System Architecture (MOSA), architectures where the government is not vendor locked to a single OEM software/hardware solution.  Meaning, most new systems have MOSA from the start so if someone invents a new widget that increases capability, the government does not have to go back to the OEM and pay them to integrate it.  It is supposed to be plug and play as long as they comply with ICDs.

And who is the integrator in this MOSA acquisitions architecture? Because the gov't has more than proven itself inefficient and costly behind any reasonable schedule. Also with performance vs requirements.

Unfortunately, this system will break down until necessity becomes the mother of invention unto the national security imperatives; which would be an undesirable time. However, war will focus attention and productivity to its singular imperative. And so this will ebb and flow generationally. MOSA isn't the answer, prudence and discipline, the arduous path are, but humans are lazy and self-interested, even those in Command have turned this unto their favor. Thus the purge and attempt to restoration of prudence - today's trend. MOSA is a bandaid holding a hangnail. 

[Guest nsplayr]

Given the above, here’s my wild ass guess prediction:

1. AMERICACOM: merge NORTH and SOUTHCOM, invade Panama Canal Zone & Greenland.

2. CENTCOM: will last until the heat death of the universe. Maybe fold in Africa because sure. Move HQ to the new Trump Tower Gaza.

3. INDOPACOM: China. Anyone have notes on who’s actually in ASEAN they can pass to SD29?

4. SOCOM: special! But not short bus special…usually.

5. STRAT/SPACE/CYBERCOM: I don’t have a clever name here. Merging nukes space and cyber for…reasons?

Out:

- AFRICOM: dirty and brown, maybe fold into central?

- TRANSCOM: you can’t say trans anymore!

- SOUTHCOM: “our imperial sphere of influence,” no different than north. CONUS will now include Patagonia.

- EUCOM: we’re going to withdraw from NATO and hang Europe out to dry for Putin to harass. Bon Voyage!

- SPACE: cold, really far away, probably just let Elon cash all the contracts, ideally send him one-way to Mars 🤞

- CYBER: last-in, first-out. Merged with STRAT so the weird nukes guys can slap fight with the weird gamer/hacker guys.

Edited February 25 by nsplayr

[M2]

1 hour ago, nsplayr said:

Given the above, here’s my wild ass guess prediction:

1. AMERICACOM: merge NORTH and SOUTHCOM, invade Panama Canal Zone & Greenland.

2. CENTCOM: will last until the heat death of the universe. Maybe fold in Africa because sure. Move HQ to the new Trump Tower Gaza.

3. INDOPACOM: China. Anyone have notes on who’s actually in ASEAN they can pass to SD29?

4. SOCOM: special! But not short bus special…usually.

5. STRAT/SPACE/CYBERCOM: I don’t have a clever name here. Merging nukes space and cyber for…reasons?

Out:

- AFRICOM: dirty and brown, maybe fold into central?

- TRANSCOM: you can’t say trans anymore!

- SOUTHCOM: “our imperial sphere of influence,” no different than north. CONUS will now include Patagonia.

- EUCOM: we’re going to withdraw from NATO and hang Europe out to dry for Putin to harass. Bon Voyage!

- SPACE: cold, really far away, probably just let Elon cash all the contracts, ideally send him one-way to Mars 🤞

- CYBER: last-in, first-out. Merged with STRAT so the weird nukes guys can slap fight with the weird gamer/hacker guys.

Most likely close, but if EUCOM does disappear it will look suspicious to those who claim Trump is too buddy-buddy with Putin.

STRATCOM absorbing Space and Cyber along with its nuke mission is a no brainer.  Perhaps they'll split the world in two at the International Date Line and the Greenwich Mean Time making EASTCOM and WESTCOM fudging the latter's line a little?

Of course, SOCOM could always fall under STRATCOM if necessary; bringing some of the "cool kids" from Tampa to Omaha!   😆😆😆

[Clark Griswold]

4 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

I COMPLETELY disagree with that statement.  Having worked in that world for a number of years now I am guessing you don't know what is really happening.  The government has been pushing a LOT of risk to industry for years then pulling the rug out from under them at the last minute, which is one of the reasons we only have three companies than can produce a new fighter.  At one point a few years ago OSD actually tried to tell industry that THEY would decide how individual companies spent their IRAD $...pure lunacy. 

I am not saying these companies are perfect, they are not, but at the end of the day they are publicly owned, failure and waste is passed on to your 401K.  For the last 10 years the government has been trying OTA contracts that push all the risk to industry.  Great in concept but when you move the goals posts these companies will stop playing the game and you will end up with one or two bidders...not the best for innovation or price.  Look at the Lite-Attack program...run under and OTA where multiple companies got a small amount of IRAD $ to develop a solution.  They ran an experiment and numerous companies spent hundreds of millions of dollars only to have the government say....never mind.  AND, they did it TWICE.  The same thing is happening with NGAD, three flying prototypes which costs HUNDREDS of millions to develop and now USAF is taking a pause to re-evaluate...those loses have a horrible impact on operations, IRAD investment and stock price. 

It is not a perfect system and we need changes but the government has to have some skin in the game as well if the want to push the innovation boundary and get the best product for the warfighter.

Maybe transferring risk was a less than perfect choice of words but I would argue still for a new set of contractual rules that incentivize and require the contractor to identify unintentional errors, missteps, poor choices etc... by the buyer relative to the resources allocated in the deal and inform the big crazy Pentagon bureaucracy & Congress simultaneously that you are introducing costly risk, new requirements, unrealistic expectations of performance, etc… to stop acquisition disasters

new language added to an existing authority like Nunn-McCurdy requiring the contractor to tell on the military when it is getting out over it’s skis and setting up said acquisition for a breach, delay, overrun, deficiencies, etc… is probably what I’m imagining

3 hours ago, ClearedHot said:

Heard some intel out of the five sided wind tunnel that OSD is shopping a plan to consolidate from 11 to 5 Combatant Commands...SOCOM survives as one of the five.   That would be a LOT of GOs left looking for a chair.

Anything that culls the ranks of GOs is a move in the right direction, anything that destroys or culls their staff positions and all the other court jesters, royal viziers and assorted shoe clerk manufacturing positions is a touchdown 

Retire 50% GOs, 25% O-6s, 50% E-9s, 25% E-8s this FY.  Turning the page from the GWOT to GPC can not be done with the same brain trust.

[Guest nsplayr]

1 hour ago, M2 said:

Most likely close, but if EUCOM does disappear it will look suspicious to those who claim Trump is too buddy-buddy with Putin.

Lol, yea that will not only “look” suspicious but it will actually be suspicious. Just like blaming Ukraine for starting that war, just like siding with Putin over his own FBI, just like etc. etc. etc.

I hope it doesn’t happen that way. EUCOM, NATO and our alliances in Europe are key to maintaining U.S. power and influence around the globe - let’s not abandon that for nothing.

https://www.wsj.com/world/russia/donald-trump-vladimir-putin-relationship-4decfe96

[Boomer6]

9 hours ago, brabus said:

@ClearedHot Regarding industry - you make valid points, but Clark’s point also has some validity. The panacea answer is somewhere in the middle. There’s a lot of “getting fucked” done to and by the gov, industry, and the only entity that purely just gets fucked is the taxpayer. Industry plays an equal part along side the gov in that and there are some screws that need to be tightened on both entities. I think it’s fair to say relative to each other, neither one is the “bigger” victim.

Can you or CH explain how DoD is to blame for all the shit with fat amy? I can't help but want LM to burn for all the bullshit we're dealing with, but I'm not privy to what the gov is responsible for in that dumpster fire.

[brabus]

The gov is responsible for stupid requirements/requirements creep (this category is quite expansive), forcing the B model (part of requirements cat, but worthy of specific mention), establishing the JPO and giving 69 seats (hyperbole, but it’s a lot) at the table to literally vote on simple shit like what a button on the stick does, a fucked up like a football bat IOT&E program, etc.

I hate LM too, and they share in the fuckery for sure, but the gov is not innocent. And I think that was CH’s primary point above. 

[disgruntledemployee]

I say 2 commands, WARCOM and EARTHCOM.  OK, maybe 3 with space.  When the prez dispatches WARCOM, the enemy knows death and destruction is a coming.  EARTHCOM is subdivided by regions for relationships, peace management, logistics, etc.  Each command is lead by a single 5 star.

Make 5 stars great again.

[Swizzle]

1 hour ago, disgruntledemployee said:

I say 2 commands, WARCOM and EARTHCOM.  OK, maybe 3 with space.  When the prez dispatches WARCOM, the enemy knows death and destruction is a coming.  EARTHCOM is subdivided by regions for relationships, peace management, logistics, etc.  Each command is lead by a single 5 star.

Make 5 stars great again.

Nah, balls to the wall:  US Seven Heaven Command. It could oversee EARTHCOM. That would send a message. True American Exceptionalism and a new manifest destiny. Accept no substitutes.

Edited February 26 by Swizzle
Subordinate COCOM