Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!asuvax!ncar!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!think.com!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!apple!veritas!amdcad!amdcad!military From: lenochs%drcoa1.decnet@drcvax.af.mil (DRCOA1: :LENOCHS) Newsgroups: sci.military Subject: Re: Why Lockheed? Message-ID: <1991May3.063531.5861@amd.com> Date: 2 May 91 13:26:00 GMT Sender: military@amd.com Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. Lines: 49 Approved: military@amd.com From: "DRCOA1::LENOCHS" In Volume 7 : Issue 14, Steve Bellovin sez: >Call it meta-logistics: Lockheed got the contract because >Northrop already has a big contract, for the B-2. And CDR replied: >[Not an argument I'd buy Well, folks, I beg to differ. In the world of military contracts, AF has been trying for years not to get into the same fix the Navy was in with submarines - tied to a single contractor (i.e., the GD/Rickover problem). In addition to having multiple sources of engineering expertise and multiple groups of hi-tech assemblers, the competition keeps prices *somewhat* in line. Look at the surface Navy's recent procurements from Newport News Shipbuilding as a case in point. NNS has been using the fact of their contracts with the Navy in advertisements for world business (as well as their on-time delivery). Another benefit is derived from competition - new ideas. When the F-16 and F-17 had their fly-off, the loser became the F-18 (the first new airplane the Navy has gotten/will get for quite some time). As other contributors have pointed out, these are not the only concerns. The judgement against Northrop would (IMHO) have played a major role in selection. Also, Northrop has no recent experience in successfully building a military aircraft (F-5 was their last good airplane deal; F-20 was stillborn; B-2 is a fiasco). Lockheed, on the other hand, has proven it's capability of giving the AF what it wants: F-104, U-2, SR-71, F-117A. In the last three cases, Lockheed not only delivered the aircraft on time, they kept quiet about it for significantly long periods of time, and at a business disadvantage. (When the ATF was still on paper, Lockheed complained that they could not realistically compete with Northrop for the contract because they could not talk about their most recent success story - F117A - while Northrop was plastering the walls with B-2 photos. AF agreed and the news from Tonopah started.) So, the awarding the ATF contract to Lockheed makes much more sense than to Northrop from a variety of viewpoints. [ Yes, I'll certainly believe this reasoning. --CDR] Loyd M. Enochs - Dynamics Research Corp