These things are stupid expensive because they plug into the outlets on cargo planes, and each one contains its own small heater for keeping coffee and tea drinkably warm.
“The item in question is a specially manufactured electronic water heater that plugs into aircraft systems,” she wrote. “Because it connects to the aircraft, replacements require FAA airworthiness certification. The Air Force has purchased 391 of these items since 2016 at a total cost of $326,785.”
On the one hand, $835 is stupidly expensive for a self-heating mug. On the other hand, if a pilot buys a $20 uncertified one from amazon that starts a fire or interferes with the aircraft's...
Because it connects to the aircraft, replacements require FAA airworthiness certification.
On the one hand, $835 is stupidly expensive for a self-heating mug. On the other hand, if a pilot buys a $20 uncertified one from amazon that starts a fire or interferes with the aircraft's electrical systems, the loss of life and millions of dollars in equipment suddenly makes $300k seem really cheap.
See, I notionally agree with your point—this mug should not interfere with aircraft systems. However, I think it stands to reason that the engineering/materials/administrative effort to rework...
See, I notionally agree with your point—this mug should not interfere with aircraft systems. However, I think it stands to reason that the engineering/materials/administrative effort to rework this component to improve reliability while maintaining safety would likely cost less than what the USAF has spent thus far in procuring new items.
When one of them slips out of someone’s hands and hits the floor, the plastic handle on the side has a tendency to split. Conveniently, the manufacturer doesn’t offer any kind of replacement handles, so the Air Force shrugs its collective shoulders and places an order for a new one.
I can, offhand, suggest three solutions, in order of likely feasibility and expense:
Improve the material used in the current construction. A plastic which splits may be able to replaced with a plastic that is less brittle.
Revise the component to have replaceable/USAF serviceable handles, and sell the handles as an additional component.
Rework the entire component thus that the only component requiring certification is a hot plate which connects to the aircraft, so any user can use an off the shelf metal/ceramic mug. If such affordance is required, the component should be designed for mug stability during turbulence. (Sadly, no photo of the original mug was posted, so it's hard to know if it was actually a mug or a tumbler.)
Well, if only I had actually read further before starting this comment:
On the even brighter side, she told Grassley that the Air Force Rapid Sustainment Office is trying to figure out how to use a 3D printer to produce its own replacement handles for each broken mug. She said that each handle that was printed in-house would cost the Air Force—and, by extension, the US taxpayer—around 50 cents each.
This is a better idea than any of mine, really. It's somewhat like my 2nd option, but moves the sourcing in-house, removing the costs of expensive layers of contractors which are a scourge on the US's defense budget.
How do I get one of these military contracts? Seriously though, how do they justify costs like this when there are literally vets that don't receive the help they need, like housing and mental health.
How do I get one of these military contracts?
Seriously though, how do they justify costs like this when there are literally vets that don't receive the help they need, like housing and mental health.
Because it is literally impossible to transfer that money into the VA. Congress sets the VA's budget, so when ever you see the head of the VA get pulled up in-front of congress with hat in hand...
Because it is literally impossible to transfer that money into the VA.
Congress sets the VA's budget, so when ever you see the head of the VA get pulled up in-front of congress with hat in hand give testimony because it takes forever to get some service for Vets , or that they where unprepared for the influx of new veterans to the system. It is always done w/ a wink and a nod, because congress knows why it isn't getting done and who is responsible. It is those who controls the purse. If you look at every yearly report from the VA, it will say they need more money because of some knowable future event is coming down the pipe.
The head of the VA would love to spend more on providing services to Vets, hell if they are career and not a political appointment, they have spend their whole adult life trying to do just that. If it is an appointment, then the person under them is career gov employee who is advising the appointee and steering much of their decisions.
The other great thing about those Air Force/military spending, they are working with use it or lose it budget, so if they don't use their budget they lose it for next year.
Thanks for taking the time to respond, but I was being cheeky. I've worked for companies that bid for military and oil/gas contracts. (I actual choose to never work on military contracts and am...
Thanks for taking the time to respond, but I was being cheeky. I've worked for companies that bid for military and oil/gas contracts. (I actual choose to never work on military contracts and am very explicit about that when I'm interviewing for my work).
At some point, I just want the people in charge to admit the current spend it/loose it system is wasteful and ineffective. And the idea that the money are in different "pools" and can't be transferred fails to address that the original distribution of funds was wrong to begin with.
Of course, there's also the whole, a lot of innovations in the military eventually get used by the public too things (but that's a whole other conversation).
Like most government agencies, if you know how to work the system you can get what you want/need. There are opportunities for getting help, but the red tape and hoops are enough to keep a huge...
Like most government agencies, if you know how to work the system you can get what you want/need. There are opportunities for getting help, but the red tape and hoops are enough to keep a huge population at bay.
On the one hand, $835 is stupidly expensive for a self-heating mug. On the other hand, if a pilot buys a $20 uncertified one from amazon that starts a fire or interferes with the aircraft's electrical systems, the loss of life and millions of dollars in equipment suddenly makes $300k seem really cheap.
See, I notionally agree with your point—this mug should not interfere with aircraft systems. However, I think it stands to reason that the engineering/materials/administrative effort to rework this component to improve reliability while maintaining safety would likely cost less than what the USAF has spent thus far in procuring new items.
I can, offhand, suggest three solutions, in order of likely feasibility and expense:
Well, if only I had actually read further before starting this comment:
This is a better idea than any of mine, really. It's somewhat like my 2nd option, but moves the sourcing in-house, removing the costs of expensive layers of contractors which are a scourge on the US's defense budget.
How do I get one of these military contracts?
Seriously though, how do they justify costs like this when there are literally vets that don't receive the help they need, like housing and mental health.
Because it is literally impossible to transfer that money into the VA.
Congress sets the VA's budget, so when ever you see the head of the VA get pulled up in-front of congress with hat in hand give testimony because it takes forever to get some service for Vets , or that they where unprepared for the influx of new veterans to the system. It is always done w/ a wink and a nod, because congress knows why it isn't getting done and who is responsible. It is those who controls the purse. If you look at every yearly report from the VA, it will say they need more money because of some knowable future event is coming down the pipe.
The head of the VA would love to spend more on providing services to Vets, hell if they are career and not a political appointment, they have spend their whole adult life trying to do just that. If it is an appointment, then the person under them is career gov employee who is advising the appointee and steering much of their decisions.
The other great thing about those Air Force/military spending, they are working with use it or lose it budget, so if they don't use their budget they lose it for next year.
Thanks for taking the time to respond, but I was being cheeky. I've worked for companies that bid for military and oil/gas contracts. (I actual choose to never work on military contracts and am very explicit about that when I'm interviewing for my work).
At some point, I just want the people in charge to admit the current spend it/loose it system is wasteful and ineffective. And the idea that the money are in different "pools" and can't be transferred fails to address that the original distribution of funds was wrong to begin with.
Of course, there's also the whole, a lot of innovations in the military eventually get used by the public too things (but that's a whole other conversation).
Like most government agencies, if you know how to work the system you can get what you want/need. There are opportunities for getting help, but the red tape and hoops are enough to keep a huge population at bay.
You make campaign contributions to one or all of the relevant committee members.