Interesting read. John A. Tirpak is very good at what he does! -SPbobbymike said:http://www.airforcemag.com/MagazineArchive/Pages/2016/January%202016/Launching-the-New-Bomber.aspx
bring_it_on said:It is most likely 100 calendar days since its the maximum allotted time for such protests unless an exception is made (iirc). Express decisions can be made in 65 or less days.
FighterJock said:bring_it_on said:It is most likely 100 calendar days since its the maximum allotted time for such protests unless an exception is made (iirc). Express decisions can be made in 65 or less days.
So that would be mid-February before there is anything like a decision announcement for the Lockheed Boeing protest. Another thing, I hope that they fail in their bid.
sferrin said:FighterJock said:bring_it_on said:It is most likely 100 calendar days since its the maximum allotted time for such protests unless an exception is made (iirc). Express decisions can be made in 65 or less days.
So that would be mid-February before there is anything like a decision announcement for the Lockheed Boeing protest. Another thing, I hope that they fail in their bid.
"Another thing, I hope that they fail in their bid. "
And get stuck with a bill for wasting everybody's time.
NeilChapman said:sferrin said:FighterJock said:bring_it_on said:It is most likely 100 calendar days since its the maximum allotted time for such protests unless an exception is made (iirc). Express decisions can be made in 65 or less days.
So that would be mid-February before there is anything like a decision announcement for the Lockheed Boeing protest. Another thing, I hope that they fail in their bid.
"Another thing, I hope that they fail in their bid. "
And get stuck with a bill for wasting everybody's time.
Thanks for the explanation. They pretty much have to protest, don't they? It's a public company. Stockholders would be upset if they didn't.
On the other hand, it would be nice if there was a comensurate penalty for a frivolous protest. This is costing us the taxpayer at minimum "lost opportunity" in getting this system fielded. We're talking about national security, not fleet vehicles for DOT. Perhaps they lose the opportunity to protest a bid for some period of time (5 years?) plus the cost of the protest (administrative, lost production time, etc). I'd like to see something that includes cost + a punitive piece since the $$ will just come out of shareholders pockets.
It is frustrating.
Orphic said:in this article http://breakingdefense.com/2016/01/the-terminator-conundrum-vcjcs-selva-on-thinking-weapons/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+BreakingDefense+%28Breaking+Defense%29 at the bottom Gen. Paul Selrva is quoted as saying “in development we tolerated some very early failures” in the LRSB program.
Any clues to what that meant other than the couple of sightings of aircraft that have no known designation?
Sundog said:I'm sure he is referring to all of the developmental testing they did, which means technology demonstrations, not just new airframes. I'm sure they flew many new systems on modified aircraft. Perhaps that's what some of those F-117 test flights we've seen over the past few years were for, among others.
NeilChapman said:http://receivingpayments.date/obama-8217-s-acquisition-leaders-head-for-the-doors-laquo-breaking-defense-defense-industry-news-analysis-and-commentary
Bill Laplante resigns as lead buyer for the Air Force. Any thoughts on how this affects LRS-B (or T-X).
Seems odd - Bill Laplante should have stayed on to see things through.... SP
Steve Pace said:I think we need 500-600 at least - Just my opinion. Russia's not stupid. - SP
Where's the like button?sferrin said:The key to getting (and keeping) costs down is a defined, consistent, predictable schedule. Starting and stopping, or monkeying with budgets every year, is a surefire way to keep costs high. When companies can't depend on predictability they tend to plan for the worst. That means keeping understaffed, inadequately supplied teams, who they then work as hard as possible to not slip schedule. DOES. NOT. WORK.
dark sidius said:Sferrin all the time pessimistic . B)
SteveO said:I'm guessing it's a big Switchblade ;D
sferrin said:
NeilChapman said:SteveO said:I'm guessing it's a big Switchblade ;D
"The shadow" looks much different than the early renderings we've seen or other cranked-kite designs. I didn't perceive such a long nose on the NG commercial either.
Very cool though!
dark sidius said:B-3 " shadow bomber", not easy to see on the superbowl commercial tease the real shape of the plane with just the face.