Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

US Navy's $700 Million Mine-drone Won't Hunt (cnn.com)

Posted by Soulskill on from the have-you-tried-turning-it-off-and-on-again dept.

New submitter ripvlan writes: CNN reports that a $700 million mine hunting system created by Lockheed Martin doesn't perform as expected. From the article: "The Remote Minehunting System, or RMS, was developed for the Navy's new littoral combat ship. But the Defense Department's Office of Operational Test & Evaluation says the drone hunting technology was unable to consistently identify and destroy underwater explosives during tests dating back to September 2014. ... In theory, the drone is deployed from the LCS towing sonar detection into suspected underwater minefields. The drone should then identify mines and communicate information about their whereabouts to the ship in real time so the explosives can be avoided or destroyed. But the program has come under fire from lawmakers after a series of testing failures, including continued performance issues and "RMS mission package integration challenges," according to the Defense Department's Office of Operational Test & Evaluation's 2014 annual report."

9 of 92 comments (clear)

  1. RMS by Fire_Wraith · · Score: 5, Funny

    Of course it won't hunt - they named it RMS, so it's refusing to operate until all of its software is completely free and open. Guess they'd better start working on GNU/Mine Hunter.

  2. Question by IWantMoreSpamPlease · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Is that 700 mil taxpayer money? If so, here is a solution: Don't pay the contractor a penny until they produce a working production sample. Then buy them for the original contacted price, not any additional "cost overruns"

    --
    So rise up, all ye lost ones, as one, we'll claw the clouds.
    1. Re:Question by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Hell, I've ben a victim of Navy acquisitions (we foolishly bet that they could build a radar). Their entire program is post-contract customer changes, because their initial requirements docs and RFP were composed of science fiction, typographic errors, and a rejection of physics. They got particularly bent out of shape when (Northrop in this case) built a 90% solution of what they spec'ed, though it was obvious to everyone that what they spec'ed could not possibly fit in the airplane. I thought the contractors were slimy shitbags until I realized that it's really a "fuck you fee" for dealing with the financial fallout from the military's shenanigans. There's a reason that the "next generation bomber" is being built from "existing capability" but bid out of the "Rapid Capabilities Office" which has an exemption from acquisitions law so that it can buy and field high risk new technology.

    2. Re:Question by Minupla · · Score: 3, Funny

      Yes because we do so well in private industry...

      Here's a hint:

      'No results found for "on time and budget sap delivery"' :)

      Min

      --
      On the whole, I find that I prefer Slashdot posts to twitter ones because I don't get limited to 140 chars before
  3. I worked on this pile of poo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I worked on this project for a few years. It is the epitome of government waste
      the hardware is 20+ years old and due to bureaucracy, upgrades are rare and expensive to initiate. There are a few alternatives that work! This project is not getting cancelled because I suspect someone is getting paid big money to keep this alive. All the LM team I worked for was/is incompetent.

  4. Re:Sigh by cez · · Score: 4, Funny

    If it was C LITTORAL, they definitely would not be able to find the underwater explosives

    --
    Walk with Music;
  5. damn contractors by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Disclaimer: I am an R&D EE for the US NAVY, which is why I'm posting as an AC.

    If I could only tell you all about how many projects fucking contractors screw up you would be amazed. Raytheon couldn't find their ass with both hands taped to it and Lockheed isn't any better. the last project I worked on with a contractor (Raytheon) had more than 15 engineers and 30 support personnel on it, and they STILL couldn't get it done right. 20 Million+ later the NAVY finally yanked it and we did it with 4 engineers and 1 Tech for less than 1 million. It's now being used by both the NAVY and the Coasties.. Contractors are leeches. contractors are clues (for the more part). Contractors just suck.

  6. It performs *exactly* as expected by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It transferred nearly a billion dollars of taxpayer public money into private hands.

    But socialism is terrible if it's for medical care for everyone. Greasing up a slick billionaire's rectum, though, perfectly fine!

  7. Lockbleed by midifarm · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Imagine that, another multibillion dollar Lockheed project that doesn't perform as ordered. And people complain about the $500/mo that a single mom gets in welfare.