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

Navy cancels ship briefings after damning internal report

politico.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 67 posts

Re: Navy cancels ship briefings after damning internal report

#11

Post by nradov »

ungreased0675 wrote: post #2

>But today, the version being built at a shipyard in Wisconsin shares only 15 percent commonality with the original design How is this in any way acceptable? The procurement strategy was to buy an existing design in order to speed up the process. I would bet tradeoffs were made doing it that way instead of a clean sheet design. Now, after the fact they throw away the design and make something new? The Navy is likely…

Part of the reason is that the only way to get the acquisition of a major new weapons system approved by Congress is to drastically underestimate the cost. This gives Congresspeople political cover to vote aye. Everyone involved knows that costs will explode later, and by that time the program has become too big to fail. Everyone knows we need a new frigate and it's too late to start over from scratch without endangering national security.

The other reason is that this program is constantly chasing a moving target. The national security establishment is getting increasingly freaked out about the risk of a naval war with China. The original inexpensive European frigate design was largely designed for lower threat environments, mainly European coastal defense against Russia plus gunboat diplomacy in Africa and the Middle East. Now the US Navy needs something that can fight and survive against a superior force in the Western Pacific, so many of the combat systems are getting upgraded. And even with those upgrades it's still dangerously short of VLS cells. If Navy leadership knew in 2018 what they know now then they might have chosen a different approach.

Re: Navy cancels ship briefings after damning internal report

#12

Post by Solvency »

SignalM wrote: post #8

Worked in one. They are safety nightmares. They give safety bonuses if “nothing is reported” so nothing gets reported. Working conditions suck.. you spend your time begging for AC in a metal can in 100 degree heat (outside) on top of that the craziest thing was how subcontractors made money. I was in test so we wondered why certain runs of cable were way out of spec. Turns out subcontractors are paid by the foot to i…

so why does the government/navy incentivize such bloated inefficiency, slop, and misuse of resources/time/money/energy?

Re: Navy cancels ship briefings after damning internal report

#13

Post by alephnerd »

Solvency wrote: post #12
SignalM wrote: post #8

Worked in one. They are safety nightmares. They give safety bonuses if “nothing is reported” so nothing gets reported. Working conditions suck.. you spend your time begging for AC in a metal can in 100 degree heat (outside) on top of that the craziest thing was how subcontractors made money. I was in test so we wondered why certain runs of cable were way out of spec. Turns out subcontractors are paid by the foot to i…

so why does the government/navy incentivize such bloated inefficiency, slop, and misuse of resources/time/money/energy?

PPBE, though now that's changing with the new Defense Resourcing System [0]

[0] - https://ppbereform.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/Com...

Re: Navy cancels ship briefings after damning internal report

#14

Post by Retric »

Solvency wrote: post #12
SignalM wrote: post #8

Worked in one. They are safety nightmares. They give safety bonuses if “nothing is reported” so nothing gets reported. Working conditions suck.. you spend your time begging for AC in a metal can in 100 degree heat (outside) on top of that the craziest thing was how subcontractors made money. I was in test so we wondered why certain runs of cable were way out of spec. Turns out subcontractors are paid by the foot to i…

so why does the government/navy incentivize such bloated inefficiency, slop, and misuse of resources/time/money/energy?

It’s really difficult to impose efficiency on outside contractors without them cutting corners.

Congress doesn’t want the government to do anything in house.

Re: Navy cancels ship briefings after damning internal report

#15

Post by alephnerd »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #7
fblp wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm also wondering how incentives / leadership structure were setup to make this "scope creep" possible.

> how incentives / leadership structure were setup to make this "scope creep" possible It’s partly a function of use it or lose it funding. If the Navy gets budget, it’s incentivised to start spending it aggressively. Planning only burns so much cash, so there is a built-in incentive to jumpstart production alongside design and then patch everything with costly retrofits.

If the DRS is adopted the "use-it-or-lose-it" dichotomy should shift away due to a faster budget cycle

Re: Navy cancels ship briefings after damning internal report

#16

Post by sudosysgen »

nradov wrote: post #11
ungreased0675 wrote: post #2

>But today, the version being built at a shipyard in Wisconsin shares only 15 percent commonality with the original design How is this in any way acceptable? The procurement strategy was to buy an existing design in order to speed up the process. I would bet tradeoffs were made doing it that way instead of a clean sheet design. Now, after the fact they throw away the design and make something new? The Navy is likely…

Part of the reason is that the only way to get the acquisition of a major new weapons system approved by Congress is to drastically underestimate the cost. This gives Congresspeople political cover to vote aye. Everyone involved knows that costs will explode later, and by that time the program has become too big to fail. Everyone knows we need a new frigate and it's too late to start over from scratch without endange…

Arguably, the root cause is just that the marginal economics of antiship missile defense are now unfavorable (historically the idea was that you would shoot down the planes carrying them and deny targeting, but that's not very realistic now).

That's not a problem against traditional opponents, but against an economic peer, it means you have great pressure in your quantity of antiship defences. The problem is that for every VLS cell the US can float, the Chinese can build 4-5 more missiles, so the problem will remain.

Re: Navy cancels ship briefings after damning internal report

#17

Post by Solvency »

Retric wrote: post #14
Solvency wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

so why does the government/navy incentivize such bloated inefficiency, slop, and misuse of resources/time/money/energy?

It’s really difficult to impose efficiency on outside contractors without them cutting corners. Congress doesn’t want the government to do anything in house.

my job has me managing multiple contractors/vendors at a time. you employ checks and balances, contractual obligations, smart project plans and requirements, and regular oversight.

how is this any different.

Re: Navy cancels ship briefings after damning internal report

#18

Post by metiscus »

Solvency wrote: post #17
Retric wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s really difficult to impose efficiency on outside contractors without them cutting corners. Congress doesn’t want the government to do anything in house.

my job has me managing multiple contractors/vendors at a time. you employ checks and balances, contractual obligations, smart project plans and requirements, and regular oversight. how is this any different.

You see, these contractors tend to hire retired admirals and generals directly out of acquisitions positions and onto their boards. The contracts are written in ways that make it hard to punish shoddy work in a way that doesn't make the government side look bad too, so they tend to let slide what is kept out of sight. After all, if someone makes enough noise, then your contract may end up on the news or even worse, on the hill. If that happens, contracts get yanked, people get reassigned or lose their chance at a kushy spot on a board in a few years. It varies by contract and organizations, some are much better run than others and tend to deliver good quality.

Re: Navy cancels ship briefings after damning internal report

#19

Post by jki275 »

SignalM wrote: post #8

Worked in one. They are safety nightmares. They give safety bonuses if “nothing is reported” so nothing gets reported. Working conditions suck.. you spend your time begging for AC in a metal can in 100 degree heat (outside) on top of that the craziest thing was how subcontractors made money. I was in test so we wondered why certain runs of cable were way out of spec. Turns out subcontractors are paid by the foot to i…

None of that is accurate other than the fact it might be hot if the AC isn't running, and there are a lot of perfectly legitimate reasons why the AC might not be running.

We actively encourage reporting of all incidents, and cable runs are not determined by subcontractors trying to find the longest route. Cable runs are determined by drawings done by the Navy and they're installed in accordance with the drawings or people don't get paid. That's definitely one of the most absurd things I've ever heard.

I spent nine years on CVNs and many of those years in the yards installing, deinstalling, and maintaining equipment.

Re: Navy cancels ship briefings after damning internal report

#20

Post by jki275 »

ungreased0675 wrote: post #2

>But today, the version being built at a shipyard in Wisconsin shares only 15 percent commonality with the original design How is this in any way acceptable? The procurement strategy was to buy an existing design in order to speed up the process. I would bet tradeoffs were made doing it that way instead of a clean sheet design. Now, after the fact they throw away the design and make something new? The Navy is likely…

the world changes. The contracts are written, ten years later the equipment available to put on the ship when it's actually being built changed three times already and the original contractor for half of it went out of business.
Post reply on HN