Avatar feed
Responses: 3
TSgt Vehicle Operations
1
1
0
Why do people get tapped for positions in gov't that they know nothing about? What happened to promoting within the career field? The FBI, CIA, NSA, etc have all had top leaders that know nothing about anything that they are in charge of. Why are lawyers running the FBI instead of, oh i don't know, how about a freaking FBI agent who has the experience and years under his belt? This has been going on for decades. No offense to Pete, but he doesn't know crap about transportation or logistics.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Maj John Bell
Maj John Bell
>1 y
I don't entirely disagree with you, but at some point leading an organization is more about getting the most out of your subordinates (who are industry/field experts) and less about what you personally know. Transportation covers aviation, highways, rail, inland waterways, and blue water shipping. No one is an expert at all of those.

What you need at cabinet level is someone who:
_can determine who is and who is not good staff,
_lets their staff do their jobs,
_listens to their staff,
_can best deconflict when one staff's concern rubs against another,
_can do opportunity cost analysis
_accepts reasonable risks
_holds staff accountable, but still allows simple mistakes and oversights (They are going to happen. Over-react and you create a risk averse staff that stops working and just tries to survive.)
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
PO1 John Johnson
1
1
0
So that's what it took to get Pete to step out of the race.
(1)
Comment
(0)
SSG Environmental Specialist
SSG (Join to see)
>1 y
That is what I was thinking.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
Maj John Bell
1
1
0
Edited >1 y ago
As long as he's not connected to a position involving gun control, I could get on board.

I felt for a long time that we have missed opportunities with our rail systems. Personally I'd like to explore the possibility of diverting funds away from the highways systems and using rails almost like auto ferries for cars and long-haul trucking. If a network of high speed rail "auto ferries" connected the largest 50-100 cities we could enjoy some serious savings on energy consumption; and potentially time savings on longer trips. I understand that high speed trains are capable of speeds in excess of 200mph. Boston to Los Angeles non-stop express that's around 12-13 hours. Driving the same is 40+ hours plus breaks for gas, bathroom, meals.

I want to go from Northern Michigan to Tucson Arizona. If I drive it non-stop other than gas up and meals it is 30-35 hours, with another driver; and when I get to Tucson I need a day to recover. I drive my car to a major rail center in Michigan, the car gets loaded up. I can enjoy a dining car and sleeping car for "1st Class," or a cooler and sleep in my own car for "economy." Me and my car might change rail cars in Chicago, hopefully at some point enjoying some non-stop express along the way.

Even if it took 48 hours, I think I'm ahead. And if we get some high speed rail, computerized load plans, and well-designed terminals to get trucks and cars loaded up, maybe we could beat the conventional highway time by several hours, plus we're not burnt from the drive and rail is far safer per mile than automobile. Finally the fuel and carbon cost of rail is far less than automobile once you start to enjoy the economies of scale.

Maybe it makes sense, maybe it doesn't. Someone more in the know would have to say. It might take someone from outside the transportation industry to spitball some wild ideas to inspire some "fundamental transformation" I can get behind.

It won't happen in four years, but it could probably happen in 12-20 years.
(1)
Comment
(0)
Avatar small

Join nearly 2 million former and current members of the US military, just like you.

close