Jump to content


The Pentagon really had money to burn...

Pentagon

  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

RAZORS_EDGE_ #1 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 18:42

    Major

  • Players
  • 31955 battles
  • 4,795
  • [A-O-G] A-O-G
  • Member since:
    06-14-2012

Was looking through one of my grandfather's old books when I came across this:

 

''In August 1983, auditors discovered that the US Air Force had paid $1,118.26 for a plastic cap to fit under a fold away stool to prevent wobbling during flight. The Pentagon later found that it had been paying the exorbitant price for the caps for the past 4 years before anyone had noticed. The estimated production cost of the caps was 26 cents each. The auditors' appetite whetted, the next 2 years of investigation uncovered a glut of financial horror stories, including the expenditure by the Army in May 1983 of $252,000 to install new boiler systems and improve car parking facilities at several bases which were due for demolition; the purchase by the Navy of $8.8m worth of uniforms it did not need; the Army's purchase of new batteries for $76m even though the existing ones could be adequately recharged with existing equipment; and the unquestioning way in which the services bought individual items for grossly inflated prices: $748 for a pair of Air Force pliers, $436 for a Navy hammer, $7,600 for an Air Force coffee pot and $640 for a Navy toilet seat.''

 

''$640 for a Navy toilet seat''

 

 

 

 



Scootaloo23 #2 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 18:49

    Major

  • Players
  • 10233 battles
  • 8,045
  • Member since:
    02-06-2012

And you thought the F-35 was a waste of money....

 

640$ for a toilet seat, it better be supersonic and/or stealth. Or solid gold.:medal:



Lert #3 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 18:53

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 44728 battles
  • 25,716
  • Member since:
    09-02-2010
Whaaaaaaaaaaat? The american military government overspending? The USA spending ridiculous amounts of money on stuff that could've been gotten much, much cheaper? Perish the thought!

RAZORS_EDGE_ #4 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 18:57

    Major

  • Players
  • 31955 battles
  • 4,795
  • [A-O-G] A-O-G
  • Member since:
    06-14-2012

View PostLert, on Apr 24 2014 - 21:53, said:

Whaaaaaaaaaaat? The american military government overspending? The USA spending ridiculous amounts of money on stuff that could've been gotten much, much cheaper? Perish the thought!

 

Nothing new, I know.



A_UselessReptile #5 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 18:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 42835 battles
  • 8,237
  • Member since:
    03-25-2011

View PostLert, on Apr 24 2014 - 13:53, said:

Whaaaaaaaaaaat? The american military government overspending? The USA spending ridiculous amounts of money on stuff that could've been gotten much, much cheaper? Perish the thought!

My favorite is the untold millions of dollars spent searching for a superior carbine/AR because why not.

 

lol HK 416, SCAR variants, etc



Desert_Faux #6 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 18:59

    Major

  • Players
  • 5085 battles
  • 3,050
  • [-DTOM] -DTOM
  • Member since:
    06-02-2013

I used to work for the military (civilian contract worker) for a few years and it was pretty sad the prices we'd have to pay for stuff through the proper channels.  What helps cause all this is the government contract bids that the government has on who'd provide what products for us. It's supposed to be the cheapest company that provides the highest quality parts that we purchase stuff exclusively through. The only problem is they are rarely cheap, or high quality. 

 

I think that the local government branch should be able to purchase from the local community. A lot of times the stuff off base was a LOT cheaper and some times similar quality if not better. Not only the government would save money, but the local economy would get a boost... but nope... 



CainAteAbelz #7 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 19:04

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 13707 battles
  • 991
  • Member since:
    01-17-2012
What's funny is that a lot corporations who win the bids for the contracts have connections to Washington... Haliburton anyone? 

ChumCreature #8 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 19:20

    Major

  • Players
  • 17372 battles
  • 4,557
  • Member since:
    12-13-2012
America has to be the best. Even if that means having pure platinum toilet seats.

Sotaudi #9 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 19:23

    First lieutenant

  • Players
  • 24827 battles
  • 860
  • Member since:
    11-13-2012

View PostScootaloo23, on Apr 24 2014 - 10:49, said:

640$ for a toilet seat, it better be ... stealth. :medal:

 

Wife:  "You are always leaving the toilet seat up!"

Husband:  "Prove it!"



3BAC #10 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 19:27

    Major

  • Players
  • 67468 battles
  • 8,598
  • Member since:
    03-31-2011
It is the cost of bureaucracy.  All those rules and regulations come at a cost.  It is not unique to the Department of Defense - the DoD just keeps better cost records than the other agencies.

Dr_Wigglespank #11 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 20:03

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9007 battles
  • 1,431
  • Member since:
    01-16-2014
I've heard that some of those figures were inflated to hide the costs of what was really being paid for: R&D of top secret projects like the F117A and B2. I'm not saying it's true but it is a possibility.

brawler1967 #12 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 20:18

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9949 battles
  • 1,897
  • [RPG] RPG
  • Member since:
    08-04-2011

The cost are inflated to cover all the underwraps black projects. Its just a colourful way of hiding expenditures and other non-sense. This is nothing new. In the 80s they had had coffee makers on B-52s costing +$2000.00 and toilet seats are always that much in every branch of the forces.

 

Here is a typical waste for you.

Canadian Snowbirds Show team has one pilot and one aviation technician per plane, 9 planes total. Total people 9 pilots and 10 technicians that do everything.

 

American Blue Angels Show team has 6 planes. Total personnel 8 pilots and 70 to 80 support personnel. And each one of those guys cannot cross jobs. Meaning a air frame guy cant fix a engine or electrical systems etc. Now where is the waste there.

 

Anybody else have any stories of waste in the Military.

 

 



Dr_Wigglespank #13 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 20:35

    Captain

  • Players
  • 9007 battles
  • 1,431
  • Member since:
    01-16-2014

View Postbrawler1967, on Apr 24 2014 - 13:18, said:

The cost are inflated to cover all the underwraps black projects. Its just a colourful way of hiding expenditures and other non-sense. This is nothing new. In the 80s they had had coffee makers on B-52s costing +$2000.00 and toilet seats are always that much in every branch of the forces.

 

Here is a typical waste for you.

Canadian Snowbirds Show team has one pilot and one aviation technician per plane, 9 planes total. Total people 9 pilots and 10 technicians that do everything.

 

American Blue Angels Show team has 6 planes. Total personnel 8 pilots and 70 to 80 support personnel. And each one of those guys cannot cross jobs. Meaning a air frame guy cant fix a engine or electrical systems etc. Now where is the waste there.

 

Anybody else have any stories of waste in the Military.

 

 

 

I think a better comparison would be to use the RCAF CF-18 demo team. What does it take to support that? Then multiply that by 6 and the numbers might be quite similar.

 

Support & maintenance of a front line fighter might be much different than that of a trainer.



RodneyDangerfield #14 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 20:40

    Major

  • Players
  • 72346 battles
  • 6,106
  • Member since:
    04-29-2011
Do these figures include all the highly payed people that had 10 meetings to decide if the wrench was worth while buying?

T2Terminator #15 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 20:45

    Major

  • Beta Testers
  • 5853 battles
  • 3,903
  • Member since:
    12-02-2010

It's ok, they can always raise taxes if they start running low on our hard earned money :eyesup:

 

btw, this isn't incompetence. It's entirely on purpose.


Edited by T2Terminator, Apr 24 2014 - 20:46.


3BAC #16 Posted Apr 24 2014 - 21:33

    Major

  • Players
  • 67468 battles
  • 8,598
  • Member since:
    03-31-2011

View Postbrawler1967, on Apr 24 2014 - 20:18, said:

The cost are inflated to cover all the underwraps black projects. Its just a colourful way of hiding expenditures and other non-sense. This is nothing new. In the 80s they had had coffee makers on B-52s costing +$2000.00 and toilet seats are always that much in every branch of the forces.

 

Here is a typical waste for you.

Canadian Snowbirds Show team has one pilot and one aviation technician per plane, 9 planes total. Total people 9 pilots and 10 technicians that do everything.

 

American Blue Angels Show team has 6 planes. Total personnel 8 pilots and 70 to 80 support personnel. And each one of those guys cannot cross jobs. Meaning a air frame guy cant fix a engine or electrical systems etc. Now where is the waste there.

 

Anybody else have any stories of waste in the Military.

Not sure where you got those numbers:

Blue Angels: 16 officers, 110 enlisted, 10 single seat F-18s, 2 two seat F-18s, 1 C-130 transport (nicknamed Fat Albert and part of most shows).

Canadian Snowbirds: 80 full time (24 make up the show team and travel), 11 aircraft.  Highly doubtful those 24 do everything, but are likely highly skilled regardless.

 

Comparible: Canadian Red Arrows: 9 pilots, 91 support personnel, 9 aircraft

 

Most inefficient use of personnel?  The USAF Thunderbirds: 12 officers, 120 enlisted, 8 aircraft.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users