Avatar feed
Responses: 4
SGM Legislative Liaison
3
3
0
Ultimately these self-licking ice cream cones don’t get a real evaluation. Lobbyists get NDAA language inserted that requires these studies or programs and the equipment gets funded regardless of the benefit. The same is true for underperforming or obsolete legacy programs that continue siphoning funds away from the Department’s true needs.
(3)
Comment
(0)
MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D.
MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D.
>1 y
I've certainly seen that.
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
Lt Col Charlie Brown
3
3
0
Command rarely listens to the user and that wastes lots of money
(3)
Comment
(0)
MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D.
MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D.
>1 y
Big time!
(1)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small
MAJ Roland McDonald
1
1
0
I remember in the early 80's the military took troops that had been in the army 3 or more years and used them them to provide feedback on effectiveness, ease of use, is it really necessary, and recommendations that make improvements all in the prototype phase. This lead to the communications equipment fielded on the battlefield today. As the groundwork on what is needed came from the users of the system and it evolved from there. Testing of prototypes needs to be done by the actual future users. Then recommendations can happen prior to fully fielding. This used to be done by troops for basic items such as boots at Aberdeen proving ground. Thanks for the share MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D.
(1)
Comment
(0)
MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D.
MAJ Dale E. Wilson, Ph.D.
>1 y
You're welcome.
(0)
Reply
(0)
Avatar small

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

close