GovernmentExecutive.com

Return to Article: Air Force concedes mistakes in tanker cost estimates

• 52788
  

  I can speak from experience that no contracts person and no person willingley screws up something of this magnitude. While it won't end your career, it will effectively end your upward mobility. Heads are rolling on this one and I would imagine this is a very uncomfortable spot to work at right now.

  The Air Force will not officially comment because it's career limiting. I don't know any military office of rank that will comment until he gets his ducks (answers) in a row. When they go in front of the media, they will be lambasted, so time for some fact finding and egg off face recovery.

  This was a mess up all the way round. The only way to redeem the govt's position is to cancel the award and recompete. Then make sure your evaluation panel is filled with different members then last time. Answer the American people honestly when you go in front of the media. No spin.

  a contracts person Posted June 20, 2008 11:12 AM
• 52678
  

  Is this strategic incompetence? Did AF intentionally screw this up in apparently obvious ways so that Boeing could effectively protest the contract award? Is this why AF has remained silent while Boeing and Grumman have waged a public war of words over this? Am I that paranoid? If Boeing had won up front given the history would anyone believe it was fair and square? Why do I only have questions? Will Congress have any of the same questions?

  mike Posted June 19, 2008 10:03 AM
• 52673
  

  How in the world did "Reuters reported that Boeing told auditors that the Air Force said the long term costs would be lower" turn into "Air Force concedes mistakes"? Long term cost was only one element of the tanker evaluation. And nowhere do I see any Air Force official's name tied to this statement. GovExec can certainly do better than a "he said they said she said" rumor mill story on such a critical issue.

  K D Posted June 19, 2008 9:42 AM
• 52333
  

  The acquisition process (esp. for weapons systems) has gotten so complex, the system itself may collapse under its own weight, not just the weapons. It is not wonder there were mistakes made. And now they want to apply the principles of the DOD 5000 series to services. hmmm, let's see. It is really messing everything up on systems, let's expand it to services. cool!

  jennifer Posted June 13, 2008 5:06 PM
• 52329
  

  Yeah, mistakes happen. In all the facts and views since the top-level Air Force purge last week, botched procurements did not register much, if at all. Nate Robinson's comment above is directionally correct. There have been too many FUBAR'd procurements. It shouldn't have to get to the point of criminality (Druyun, etc.) for people to be held accountable and fired. Taxpayers need to trust that in the tanker case, there will be disclosure of who made such errors, both government and perhaps any support contractors involved. It isn't enough just to leave this at Ms. Payton's door. BTW, what did she know and when did she know it? No matter how this works out, the Dept. of the Air Force has just bought itself a triple helping of Congressional and other oversight. Why should the Congress, or for that matter, OMB, trust proposed budgets and spending plans, cost studies and other information coming from the Air Force?

  MICHAEL LENT Posted June 13, 2008 4:24 PM
• 52328
  

  Mccain sure did us a good job on this one. Delayed the project, cost us more money, got us an overseas airplane, and probably hurt the quality of the product. He is wonderful. We need more like him. Oh, I forgot, we have more like, the whole congress, all 535 of them.

  David Schow Posted June 13, 2008 4:15 PM
• 52292
  

  If you take a measure of politics and mix in Billions of Dollars and cook it up for many days, what do you get? A mess, that is what you get.

  charles Posted June 13, 2008 11:12 AM
• 52288
  

  Boeing shold work for the National enquirer. You can try and slant anything but you can't deliver on your contracts. Way over cost way behind schedule is the Beoing way. They want everything but consistantly fail to deliver on their bid.

  Alex Posted June 13, 2008 10:57 AM
• 52267
  

  Please, report the facts and don't show the bias. "Boeing told auditors.." is NOT the same is "Air Force concedes" !

  M Onger Posted June 13, 2008 8:44 AM
• 52266
  

  Life cycle? Make sure those Korean wings don't fall apart. Boeing has been using a buy American pitch on this contract. FAA report AV-2008-026 dated February 26, 2008 takes a critical look at the parts content of their airplanes. It also addresses the quality controls on the American and foreign parts. 99% of the suppliers were not checked/audited to make sure defective parts were being used. Almost half of the suppliers who were audited had deficiencies in calibration of tools and employee training. As has been the case for the past decade for most agencies, the FAA is lacking the funding and staff to conduct necessary audits and inspections.

  Anthony Weishar Posted June 13, 2008 8:25 AM
• 52257
  

  This is atrocious ... it's time to remove more people and purge the process. It's sad as an Air Force retiree and tax payer.

  Nate Robinson Posted June 13, 2008 7:08 AM