WHY CAN'T THOUSANDS OF SCIENTISTS DEVELOP PRODUCTS?

 The army pays thousands of scientist (and others) big bucks to develop needed gear for the warfighters. Then why for the past ten years has their been no significant advances in gear? Why does the army pay scientists when they don't invent anything? Is it because the scientists may have a breakthrough in the future?

Why does the army spends billions on programs at Picatinny Arsenal in NJ? Picatinny did develop the Picatinny rail for guns. What else has Picatinny developed that reached the warfighter in the past 10 years? If Picatinny was run for profit, the based would be shuttered since they is nothing to show.

If the army would embrace competition, they would not have to rely on their own people whom (most) place their careers above the needs of the warfighter. Over half of deployed troops are not issued all of the basic supplies prior to their departure.PEO Soldier and Picatinny should be held to account. Why does Picatinny support a 149 degree flashpoint lubricant (called CLP) for world-wide military operations? Answer, because they can and will not admit (by changing spec) that jammed weapons are responsible for dead troops.

If PEO Soldier worked as it was supposed too, MILITEC-1 would not be in constant demand by Soldiers and the army's combustible gun oil would not be jamming weapons in sustained gun fights.  The army has created a bureaucracy that feeds off itself and is unable to address the immediate needs of soldiers going into combat.

Since the system is designed by default to defend itself, most troops will continue to go into battle without the proper supplies needed, until fair and honest competition is allowed. The military civilians maintain their power by controlling and/or elininating competition through various in house programs.

----- Original Message -----

From: "Bradley P. Giordani" <militec@militec-1.com>

To: "Allen D Westheimer" <WestheimerA@gao.gov>; "Colin L Chambers" <ChambersC@GAO.GOV>; "Oscar W Mardis" <MardisO@GAO.GOV>; "Marilyn K Wasleski" <WasleskiM@GAO.GOV>

Cc: "lee kind" <lee.kind@militec.com>; "Richard Feeney" <Rick1655@aol.com>; "Russ Logan" <militec@militec-1.com>

Sent: Tuesday, November 04, 2008 2:43 PM

Subject: THE PROBLEM WITHIN THE ARMY

>I found an article (on body armor) in Defense review @
> http://www.defensereview.com/article828.html that I believe highlights a
> similar problem we have with the system.
>
> Pasted below(from the link above), is a paragraph that highlights the
> problems (we are having) at Picatinny Arsenal, JSSAP and AMC.
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> The problem is that the best current small arms solutions are being actively
> blocked by DoD/U.S. Army elements that control the small arms
> procurement/adoption system. This system is broken and corrupt. Elements
> within U.S. Army Materiel Command, and Picatinny Arsenal/JSSAP appear to be
> more concerned with their own careers and survival than the lives/survival
> of our infantry warfighters (our guys on the ground doing the actual
> fighting). The current small arms development and procurement/adoption
> system isn't just broken. It's terminally broken, and needs to be completely
> overhauled. To DefenseReview's knowledge, Picatinny Arsenal/JSSAP hasn't
> developed and successfully fielded a single infantry small arm since
> Picatinny took over military small arms procurement/adoption after the old
> Springfield Armory (U.S. Army, not private company currently operating in
> Illinois) was rased to the ground over 40 years ago. Picatinny Arsenal/JSSAP
> unfortunately hasn't proven itself to be any more effective than the old
> Springfield Armory, and our infantry warfighters are suffering for it.
> Unfortunately, like any organism, the current system will fight tooth and
> nail to defend itself in order to live on. But, make no mistake, it needs to
> be killed, just like the old Springfield Armory (U.S. Army's Springfield
> Armory, not the current private company in Illinois) before it.
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> I hope this article helps !
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Brad P. Giordani
> http://www.militec-1.com/
>
>