Extended interventions are bad for force structure spending

ARTICLE: High Costs Lead Navy to Cancel Lockheed Coastal Vessel, By Renae Merle, Washington Post, April 13, 2007; Page D04

Excerpt:

The contract cancellation also reflects an environment of budget
tightening as the cost of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan continues to
rise, industry analysts said. Over the last few years, "it's been such a
permissive budget environment, programs got away with failures for
longer than they should have," said Brett Lambert, a defense industry
consultant. "That is changing. The realities are coming home."

More proof that extended interventions are bad for force structure spending--an inescapable reality.

Thanks to Peter Johnson for sending this.

Comments

[Chuck]

Extended interventions may indeed be bad for force structure spending, but perhaps the budget crunch is not really to blame. Perhaps some people have simply had enough....

"The blank check they were getting, the cost-plus contracts, the overruns, the wasted money, the wasted time, are not going to be accepted. The biggest contractors, it's fair to say, do a lot things for our nation; if we don't have enough leverage in one area to get their attention... [we should] get their attention in other areas. Don't think... that the work you're doing in missiles is safe if you're going to turn around and abuse us in ships." (Danger Room)

Apparently the Secretary of the Navy had had enough and fired a shot across contractor's bows, to "get their attention".

"Winter demanded that the second LCS contract be renegotiated. The old one was a "cost-plus" deal that paid out big bucks, no matter how the firm did its job. Winter wanted a firm price for his ship.

That was something Lockheed refused to accept. So Winter pulled the plug on the Lockheed's second LCS. It's the strongest sign yet that Winter intends to wrestle control of the U.S. fleet away from contractors, and put the Navy back in charge of the shipbuilding process." (Danger Room, again)

Now what can I do to get the Secretary of the Air Force to think the same way..... Wait I forgot, the Air Force leadership actually wants to buy gold plated systems while atrophying personnel and training.

[ry]

Um, not to be a constant contrarian when I comment, but didn't the doubling of cost of the LCS(wasn't it the LCS3 being built by GD?) have something to do with it? There's a pretty big write up in this months Proceedings.

The LCS is a troubled program. As is DDG-1000. Not as bad as the CG's Deepwater fiasco, but bad. It's good that Winters did this. Better for the long term health of the Navy to deal frankly with over-runs and diseased programs.