One of the super super interesting things i've countered recently about .mil issues was specifically around the Freedom-class Lockheed Martin Litoral Combat Ship (LCS). The inside story of heo the navy spent billions on the "little crappy ships". Most of this is already well known but Propublica drew together the threads of the story well, with some additional references. https://www.propublica.org/article/how-navy-spent-billions-l...
Rarely have I seen such a portrayal of villainy. LM's efforts here seem nearly treasonous, with their attempts to thwart open .mil systems & to sell the American people permission or capability to use the technology they'd funded and purchased, by granting zero rights or control over that technology. The last couple of decades of Lockheed Martin retaining the technology &systems entirely should be a clear enough lesson in what America & (forgive me) anyone with an ounce of patriotic blood should never let happen again. Yet that sure sounds like what's happening here, again, even more boldfacedly.
> General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin considered much of the data and equipment on the LCS proprietary — a problem that the GAO has identified throughout the military. As a result, only their employees were allowed to do certain repairs, former officers said. This sometimes meant that contractors would go overseas to help, adding millions in travel costs and often delaying missions. The Navy recently purchased some of the data. A Navy spokesperson would not disclose the price "due to proprietary reasons."
> Watson and others spent much of their time escorting contractors while on board because so many areas on the ship were considered classified, reducing their ability to do their own jobs, according to interviews with multiple officers who had served on the LCS.
Never have I read such a corrupt inexcusable sad practice in military procurement ever. This is stagnant bullshit that prevents adaption, prevents proper response to situations. We must have open systems architecture, where the government decides how things interoperate, and acquired systems don't dictate down but provide upwards to the defenders.
And it seems like that lesson of what to never allow again has largely been learned & broadly accepted. Almost every faction of mil seems razor focused on open systems architectures, on intercompatible. It top down systems. On making sure this graft corruption & difficulty in doing anything without endless reams of permission & defense contractor hours never happens again. Not only should Lockheed not be able to charge a subscription, they should never own the software funded by & produced for American defense ever again. Open core should be the rule of the realm. It a core threat to American military might to let defense contractors own & keep the special sauce that makes weapons run, and to be the deciders for how defense technology is ongoingly used and adapted. If America pays for the development, America should own the output.
There's similar obvious revelations that have happened elsewhere in the American system. It's not always fully respected or done well. But in principle NIH for example has open access requirements. In principle Americans are entitled to the benefits of health research done by the state, and it's not just sold off or left to be controlled by whomever. Yet Lockheed Martin keeps wanting to be the owner, wants to be the decider, wants to interrupt right of first sale & be forever entailed to & in control of whatever happens next, after some defense tech hardware is purchased.
> There's similar obvious revelations that have happened elsewhere in the American system.
Yeah this is the playbook for the last half-century. Loot the nation, privatize everything. Procurement and supply are run by the same elite class in a revolving door system. Reagan was the greatest scam artist of all time, and people still worship him (though that is finally changing).
Do you have some evidence that Reagan received a major financial benefit in exchange for the policies of his administration?
The problem we have right now is that there are so many laws that the only people who know what they do are the lawyers for the industry they regulate.
So the problem is that 80% of them are inefficient and competition-destroying bad laws, but who do you ask to figure out which 80%? The people who know the answer are going to tell you to repeal the ones they don't like, which is most certainly not the same thing.
Reagan saw that we have too many bad laws we need to get rid of, but failed to solve the problem of determining which ones they are. That's the problem we still need to solve.
> We must have open systems architecture, where the government decides how things interoperate, and acquired systems don't dictate down but provide upwards to the defenders.
>> They would be working with a common architecture on existing platforms
>> Taiclet added that in this “big tent” approach to Pentagon buying services for a specified time means the commercial side needs to move away from “vendor lock”
>> He added Lockheed Martin is working with Northrop Grumman to merge their data.
Sounds like they are advocating for something like what you are talking about, not sure how you are reading it as the opposite
This article reads like Lockheed Martin has realized they have created enormous enmity against themselves & want to sound like they are singing a new tune.
But still expect to forever keep control by licensing out subscriptions to the technology they are paid to develop.
It's unclear to me what control they really intend to give up. They can give up ("merge") some data with Northrop Grumman, but are they actually allowing outside powers control over the systems? This feels like an operation to try to maintain some status quo by having nice koombaya words while not changing the actual sharing of power.
Rarely have I seen such a portrayal of villainy. LM's efforts here seem nearly treasonous, with their attempts to thwart open .mil systems & to sell the American people permission or capability to use the technology they'd funded and purchased, by granting zero rights or control over that technology. The last couple of decades of Lockheed Martin retaining the technology &systems entirely should be a clear enough lesson in what America & (forgive me) anyone with an ounce of patriotic blood should never let happen again. Yet that sure sounds like what's happening here, again, even more boldfacedly.
> General Dynamics and Lockheed Martin considered much of the data and equipment on the LCS proprietary — a problem that the GAO has identified throughout the military. As a result, only their employees were allowed to do certain repairs, former officers said. This sometimes meant that contractors would go overseas to help, adding millions in travel costs and often delaying missions. The Navy recently purchased some of the data. A Navy spokesperson would not disclose the price "due to proprietary reasons."
> Watson and others spent much of their time escorting contractors while on board because so many areas on the ship were considered classified, reducing their ability to do their own jobs, according to interviews with multiple officers who had served on the LCS.
Never have I read such a corrupt inexcusable sad practice in military procurement ever. This is stagnant bullshit that prevents adaption, prevents proper response to situations. We must have open systems architecture, where the government decides how things interoperate, and acquired systems don't dictate down but provide upwards to the defenders.
And it seems like that lesson of what to never allow again has largely been learned & broadly accepted. Almost every faction of mil seems razor focused on open systems architectures, on intercompatible. It top down systems. On making sure this graft corruption & difficulty in doing anything without endless reams of permission & defense contractor hours never happens again. Not only should Lockheed not be able to charge a subscription, they should never own the software funded by & produced for American defense ever again. Open core should be the rule of the realm. It a core threat to American military might to let defense contractors own & keep the special sauce that makes weapons run, and to be the deciders for how defense technology is ongoingly used and adapted. If America pays for the development, America should own the output.
There's similar obvious revelations that have happened elsewhere in the American system. It's not always fully respected or done well. But in principle NIH for example has open access requirements. In principle Americans are entitled to the benefits of health research done by the state, and it's not just sold off or left to be controlled by whomever. Yet Lockheed Martin keeps wanting to be the owner, wants to be the decider, wants to interrupt right of first sale & be forever entailed to & in control of whatever happens next, after some defense tech hardware is purchased.