WASHINGTON (Sputnik) — The main problem is not with the original definitions of new weapons and other systems when they are first agreed upon, but with all the minor costly upgrades that creep into the programs afterwards, the GAO investigation found.
“Most current and former military service chiefs and vice chiefs GAO interviewed from the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps collectively expressed dissatisfaction with acquisition program outcomes.”
Most service chiefs told the GAO they were concerned that after weapon system requirements are decided, during the construction process “requirements are changed or added… increasing the capabilities and cost of the system,” the report explained.
Moreover, some commanders told the GAO they were not always involved in the acquisition process.
“Current and former chiefs agreed that [they] should be more involved in programs, but their views varied on how best to achieve this,” the report said.
The GAO analyzed requirements for all 78 major defense acquisition programs and found that creep — or growth — in the high-level requirements is rare.
However, thousands of lower-level requirements are defined after the programs start, the report noted.
In the study, the GAO interviewed 12 current and former military service chiefs and vice chiefs as well as other current and former Defense Department leaders.
