View Single Post
  #52  
Old 09-21-2016, 03:16 PM
XT's Avatar
XT is offline
Agnatheist
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: The Great South West
Posts: 35,115
Quote:
Originally Posted by coremelt View Post
No my premise is not flawed, the entire US defense procurement system needs a top to bottom overhaul, and one possible solution to that is that the US government pays for research but then owns the IP and then gets manufacturers to compete. McCain's article above says that the system is broken and need an overhaul.
Your premise IS flawed, because by your own admission here that's how the system works. You are bitching about how it SHOULD be (in your opinion).

Quote:
Again, why is it wrong to simply state that Lockheed Martin should pay a price for their failure to deliver? They should pay a price in both stock value and yearly profits. In any other industry this would be the case, why should the defense industry be immune to actual performance benchmarks? No one can state that the F-35 has met the performance benchmarks on time that were implied in Lockheed Martins bid for the F-35.
Because they haven't failed to deliver by the specs of the contract. They have merely failed, in your mind and opinion, to deliver based on your perception of that contract and how you think things SHOULD be.