You have to add Congress to the mix.
Matter of fact, I blame Congress for most of the Acquisition ills as they wrote the rules.
(and I blame AFSOC for the CSAR-X Fiasco)
A sad day for the soldier/seaman/airman on the ground.... (A-10/CAS Discussion)
- Thread starter Kraut783
- Start date
Matter of fact, I blame Congress for most of the Acquisition ills as they wrote the rules.
(and I blame AFSOC for the CSAR-X Fiasco)
Proposed changes are made by the DAR Council and the CAA Council. According to FAR 1.201-1
(a) Subject to the authorities discussed in 1.103, revisions to the FAR will be prepared and issued through the coordinated action of two councils, the Defense Acquisition Regulations Council (DAR Council) and the Civilian Agency Acquisition Council (CAA Council). Members of these councils shall --
(1) Represent their agencies on a full-time basis;
(2) Be selected for their superior qualifications in terms of acquisition experience and demonstrated professional expertise; and
(3) Be funded by their respective agencies.
(b) The chairperson of the CAA Council shall be the representative of the Administrator of General Services. The other members of this council shall be one each representative from the--
(1) Departments of Agriculture, Commerce, Energy, Health and Human Services, Homeland Security, Interior, Labor, State, Transportation, and Treasury; and
(2) Environmental Protection Agency, Social Security Administration, Small Business Administration, and Department of Veterans Affairs.
(c) The Director of the DAR Council shall be the representative of the Secretary of Defense. The operation of the DAR Council will be as prescribed by the Secretary of Defense. Membership shall include representatives of the military departments, the Defense Logistics Agency, the Defense Contract Management Agency, and the National Aeronautics and Space Administration.
(d) Responsibility for processing revisions to the FAR is apportioned by the two councils so that each council has cognizance over specified parts or subparts.
(e) Each council shall be responsible for --
(1) Agreeing on all revisions with the other council;
(2) Submitting to the FAR Secretariat (see 1.201-2) the information required under paragraphs 1.501-2(b) and (e) for publication in the Federal Register of a notice soliciting comments on a proposed revision to the FAR
(3) Considering all comments received in response to notice of proposed revisions;
(4) Arranging for public meetings;
(5) Preparing any final revision in the appropriate FAR format and language; and
(6) Submitting any final revision to the FAR Secretariat for publication in the Federal Register and printing for distribution.
Those making these changes are seasoned contracting professionals. The sad part is that a few (probably more than a few) have been out of execution for so long that they really have little to no knowledge any more about the actual contract writing process other than what is listed in CFR Title 48 Chapters 1 and 2. Yes, they are all SME's on the FAR and DFARS, but you tend to forget things and see how they actually work when you aren't active in execution. It is not a knock on them, it happens to everyone in just about every subject that you work in. However, it those of us in this career field do our jobs properly and contractors didn't try to play the system, there wouldn't be as much fodder to cut through to get to the meat.
Was going through old photos today and found this. I took it at the Gary, Indiana Air Show roughly 8 years ago.
Red Flag 1
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2010
- Messages
- 7,580
An excellent review of what the A-10 is, how it works, and why it is such a perfect tool for CAS. Makes you wonder why the current administration wanted to take it out of service?
Backstory.
Produced by the AF (Combat Camera, etc).
AF held (stopped) release when they figured that this video wouldn't help justify retiring the A-10.
Video was "leaked" to a blogger (John Q. Public) who has released it via Youtube, his blog and Facebook pages.
The new USAFE-AFRICOM "commercial" on AF starts with shots of the A-10 refueling, taxiing, and making gun runs.
Sad.,just sad. Use it for propaganda while actively working to cut the very program you're touting? Nicely done, AF leadership. Nicely done.
Sad.,just sad. Use it for propaganda while actively working to cut the very program you're touting? Nicely done, AF leadership. Nicely done.
Grunt
Verified Military
- Joined
- Oct 14, 2010
- Messages
- 4,966
Yep...that shows a certain level of willful stupidity in action.
I know a few of us advocate/d the A-29 as a CAS platform or even an A-10 "replacement," and this article makes a pretty compelling case. It also contains some infuriating bits of history.
I won't angrily wax poetic except to say it is heartbreaking.
The WWII-Era Plane Giving the F-35 a Run for Its Money
I won't angrily wax poetic except to say it is heartbreaking.
The WWII-Era Plane Giving the F-35 a Run for Its Money
The last paragraph made me almost vomit.
AT-6B is a waste of tax dollars, but my guess is supplying Iraq was the bribe to stop another GAO Contract review.
Originally a Navy project, AF pilots were added when it became an obvious success.
RumInt says SecDef or CentCom denied SOCOM's request to deploy it (I feel ACC omnipotent presence in the decision).
I supported Super T's in Colombia, and freely admit my bias towards the plane. It's a no-shit poor man's A-10.
It is not however, a WW II era plane. It's a modern attack fighter, and I am willing to bet Embraer would be offended if they knew it was being referred to as a WW II fighter.
The thing that kills me about the Super T debacle is when you stack it against the MC-12 and various AFSOC U-xxx airframes. We fielded a/c when they were needed, but the Super T program never went anywhere? If ACC didn't have a hand in that I would be stunned.
The AF has sold its soul (and airmen and capabilities and....) for the F-35.
The AF has sold its soul (and airmen and capabilities and....) for the F-35.
No, Robert Gates (a texan) sold the AF/Navy/Marine Corps souls to a Texas Company.
He killed the one fighter we really need now because he had no vision, or was just a corrupt bastard.
I was anti F-22 until coming here. That thing is a beast and we should have more of them. Those poor bastards are basically doing 6 months on, 6 off. The AF's personnel cutting measures haven't helped either, but that's probably another discussion. Bottom line: we could use more F-22's but that ship has sailed.
Red Flag 1
Verified Military
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2010
- Messages
- 7,580
The Raptor is a game changer in the air combat arena. The downside of that is that there are not enough around. I'm not sure the F-35 is as capable as the Raptor. With all the Raptor's avionics, and magic, maintainers will have their hands full. If one were to look at the big picture, meaning POTUS after Bush, it is pretty clear that the drawdown is a little dangerous right now.
ThunderHorse
Verified Military
Planes in the air tend to be like boots on the ground, you still need to be able to hold real estate and if you don't have enough air frames someone else will be able to knock you out. Like who came up with the random number of 187...
Funny you mention that.And another AFN commercial on the A-10 deployment to Europe, this one showing A-10's conducting austere field operations with CCT's from Mildenhall. I guess that's something the F-35 can do as well as the A-10?
AF touted dirt field ops when we first fielded the A-10, but we never really did them.
Fast forward to this year and Big Blue is running A-10's through the dirt strip at Hunter-Liggett as fast as they can, these events are not random occurrences.
Well, someone in government finally listened to all those voices out there, pleading with them to keep it in service in order to continue protecting those who need it more than anyone.
A-10 Retirement Indefinitely Delayed
A-10 Retirement Indefinitely Delayed
