Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Department of War just shot the accountants and opted for speed

steveblank.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 527 posts

Re: The Department of War just shot the accountants and opted for speed

#151

Post by aerostable_slug »

trenchpilgrim wrote: post #140
amluto wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The US currently produces between 30,000-40,000 155mm artillery shells a month, but Ukraine (at peak) expended 10,000 per day[1]. Wars are incredibly expensive, and the US should not be producing weapons, in peacetime, at the rate they would be expended during an active war. What we should have the ability to rapidly scale production.

> What we should have the ability to rapidly scale production. How should the US make the manufacture of, say, the primers for artillery shells "rapidly scalable" in a way that is different from building a large stockpile? Be specific. Would you nationalize factories but leave them idle? You certainly won't have time to build or retool factories and staff them during a peer conflict. How would you present this to Con…

Invest in technology that makes the facilities that manufacture primers useful for more than just that one product. One might do that by changing the nature of the manufacturing facility towards a multipurpose "forge", changing the nature of primers so they're more like commercially attractive products, or some combination. DARPA has been working pretty hard on these topics over the years.

I was working on one when we got shut down due to a political squabble resulting in sequestrations. Reminds me of our recent shutdown in many ways.

Re: The Department of War just shot the accountants and opted for speed

#152

Post by rpmisms »

netsharc wrote: post #78
Hizonner wrote: post #67

The United States does not have a "Department of War".

Funny how we can tell now whether the other person is a Kool-Aid drinker by how they refer to things. Gulf of Mexico, or Gulf of America?

Department of War is far more honest. The Gulf name doesn't mean anything, it's a joke and we all know it.

Re: The Department of War just shot the accountants and opted for speed

#153

Post by gottorf »

nradov wrote: post #146
astrange wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the ban is because an architect thinks they're icky, sent in a request to ban it, and the building code people take any suggestion to ban anything that anyone sends them. Safety regulations are written in blood, you know! https://bsky.app/profile/stephenjacobsmith.com/post/3m3xpe3n...

The ban on windowless bedroom is at least partly about fire safety. A window provides an escape route for low floors, or a means for firefighters to rescue the occupants.

The GP's point is that levelheaded cost-benefit analyses on things like that seem to escape regulators, and everything is greatly skewed towards "it's worth it if it saves even one life".

Sure, fire safety in homes is a good thing to have. But is it so good that we can't economically build buildings to meet them, and people end up with no home at all?

Re: The Department of War just shot the accountants and opted for speed

#154

Post by mauvehaus »

trenchpilgrim wrote: post #140
amluto wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The US currently produces between 30,000-40,000 155mm artillery shells a month, but Ukraine (at peak) expended 10,000 per day[1]. Wars are incredibly expensive, and the US should not be producing weapons, in peacetime, at the rate they would be expended during an active war. What we should have the ability to rapidly scale production.

> What we should have the ability to rapidly scale production. How should the US make the manufacture of, say, the primers for artillery shells "rapidly scalable" in a way that is different from building a large stockpile? Be specific. Would you nationalize factories but leave them idle? You certainly won't have time to build or retool factories and staff them during a peer conflict. How would you present this to Con…

> Would you nationalize factories but leave them idle?

Yes. Historically, these would be the national armories, Navy Yards, and Air Force plants. You know, Springfield Armory (of .30-06 Springfield fame, now a museum), Watertown Arsenal (now a fucking Home Depot, among other things), Charlestown Navy Yard(Boston, now largely a museum), Philadelphia Navy Yard (redeveloped? not my area), Air Force Plant 42 (near LA, still in use by Skunk Works among others), and others.

Having the capital idle/underutilized but maintained and a core group of people with the institutional knowledge ready to pass on during that rapid scaling up is what would make the factories able to scale up. Gun barrels (of all sizes) are relatively specialized from a manufacturing standpoint. Nobody is seriously arguing for having capacity to scale up to build 16" guns for battleships, but 5" guns are extremely common in naval use and 155mm guns are common for artillery. Being able to surge production of those without having to go through a learning curve would be a really great ability to have.

Interestingly, Goex, maker of black powder, is located on a military facility (Camp Minden) because that process remains both hazardous and surprisingly relevant to modern military use.

Re: The Department of War just shot the accountants and opted for speed

#155

Post by rpmisms »

Prima Facie: probably good. The existing system is pure and simple money laundering, the legendary $900 toilet seat is absurd and this seems to be a step away from the supply-chain-for-everything system in place currently. I believe the defense budget could be cut in half with increased capability, at least in theory. There's that much cruft.

Re: The Department of War just shot the accountants and opted for speed

#156

Post by gottorf »

tomrod wrote: post #127
tehjoker wrote: post #111

We don’t need more weapons. We also don’t have real adversaries, that’s war propaganda.

Looks like they want to add parts of South America to the hegemony, for reasons unknown.

The Monroe Doctrine goes back 200 years; the reasons are quite well known.

Re: The Department of War just shot the accountants and opted for speed

#157

Post by mrguyorama »

rkomorn wrote: post #25
M95D wrote: post #24

Remember Fat Leonard? This time there's going to be more than one. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat_Leonard_scandal

Damn. Didn't know about this until now but it looks like, at least, he sure put in the effort. "exploited the intelligence for illicit profit, brazenly ordering his moles to redirect aircraft carriers, ships and subs to ports he controlled in Southeast Asia so he could more easily bilk the Navy for fuel, tugboats, barges, food, water and sewage removal." The devil works hard but apparently Fat Leonard works harder.

"Directing the government to spend money at places you control" isn't a scandal anymore. It's how Donald Trump directing like a hundred million dollars of taxpayer money to his businesses

Re: The Department of War just shot the accountants and opted for speed

#158

Post by nateglims »

stackskipton wrote: post #112
Alupis wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The F-35 was Lockheed's entry in the Joint Strike Fighter program. The JSF has roots going back to 1996. The X-35 first flew in 2000. The F-35 first flew in 2006, and didn't enter service until 2015(!!). That's nearly 20 years to develop a single airframe. Yes, it's the most sophisticated airframe to date, but 20 years is not trivial. The F-35 had many issues during trials and early deployment - some are excusable fo…

Most of time, this delay is in peacetime, it makes sense to do a ton of testing, wait until testing results then go to full production. Your primary concern is not spending a ton of money and not getting a bunch of people killed. It's basically waterfall in fighter development. Wartime is more agile, you quickly close the loop but downside is sometimes does not work and when it does not work, there might be a people…

I think this is the crux of it. The article discusses Ukraine but they weren't making millions of drones, the private capital wasn't there and the bureaucracy that coordinates it wasn't primed until the war.

Re: The Department of War just shot the accountants and opted for speed

#159

Post by Loughla »

tomrod wrote: post #124
Loughla wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The ada.gov website has a banner that reads, "Democrats have shut down the government. Department of Justice websites are not currently regularly updated." Trump is the king. Edit: To be clear, I think it's complete and utter garbage. I'm assuming people think I think it's a good thing? It's not a good thing. At all.

No, Trump has a minor fiefdom district and some authority for services the states and their representatives agreed to let the federal government execute. He is not king.

My point was that he is acting like a king. And if he's allowed to act like a king, checks and balances don't mean anything.

Which makes him the king.

Turns out, letting government operate on a system of agreements that require appropriate behavior instead of clear consequences for this type of behavior is a bad idea.

Re: The Department of War just shot the accountants and opted for speed

#160

Post by Libidinalecon »

tehjoker wrote: post #111

We don’t need more weapons. We also don’t have real adversaries, that’s war propaganda.

You have to be completely insane to think China is not an adversary.

Personally, I think we are in WW3 right now and we have already lost.

Americans are just too lazy and insular to read anything involving Chinese military strategy. I can't think of more basic Chinese military strategy than to avoid a head-on battle with a strong enemy.

You beat the strong enemy by every means other than a head-on battle.

We are waiting for another battle of Normandy that will never come as we slowly bleed out.

Post reply on HN