marinheiro 352 Posted March 17, 2018 Share Posted March 17, 2018 https://www.passagemaker.com/trawler-news/pmy-lessons-learned-from-navy-tragedies?utm_source=passagemaker-enewsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_content=morelink&utm_campaign=enewsletter-031518 scary, the people driving the grey boats are supposed to have the best training. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Dambo 44 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 Are you familiar with the term "military grade"? People seem to think it means 'tough' or 'good' but it actually just means 'made by the cheapest bidder'. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
erice 732 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 ^ Cheapest bidder? There used to be stories of the $2000 hammer Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Rats 28 Posted March 19, 2018 Share Posted March 19, 2018 Forget the two thousand dollar hammer why don't you pay for the five ships you have built twice! Note: GAO is the US Govt Accounting Office. their job is to review the billions spent and discover the stupid spending done and by whom. If you Google GAO and enter any arm of the military in the states you will be astounded at the waste....... Quote: What GAO Found For five of the six Navy and Coast Guard ships GAO reviewed, guarantees did not help improve cost or quality outcomes. While the type and terms of each contract determine financial responsibility for correcting defects, the government, in most of the cases GAO examined, paid shipbuilders to repair defects. For the four ships with fixed-price incentive type contracts and guarantee clauses, the government paid the shipbuilder 89 percent of the cost—including profit—to correct these problems. This means the Navy and Coast Guard paid the shipbuilder to build the ship as part of the construction contract, and then paid the same shipbuilder again to repair the ship when defects were discovered after delivery—essentially rewarding the shipbuilder for delivering a ship that needed additional work. Navy officials stated that this approach reduces the overall cost of purchasing ships; however, the Navy has no analysis that proves their point. In contrast, the warranty on another Coast Guard ship—the Fast Response Cutter (FRC)—improved cost and quality by requiring the shipbuilder to pay to repair defects. The Coast Guard paid upfront for the warranty, which amounted to 41 percent of the total defect correction costs. End quote No wonder they are short cutting proper naval training. Quote Link to post Share on other sites
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.