Military Recycling

Collarspace Discussion Forums

Home Login Search

Military Recycling

View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> Military Recycling

Page: [1]

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

Military Recycling - 7/24/2015 4:00:06 PM

KenDckey

Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SAQQ7kdqmlU

Sierra Army Depot tank park

Profile

Post #: 1

RE: Military Recycling - 7/24/2015 11:22:21 PM

MercTech

Posts: 3706
Joined: 7/4/2006
Status: offline

And surplus auctions can be very interesting.

I once went through one and bid $1 on every lot that caught my eye. I ended up with a jeep with "drop damage" and a large box of damaged cargo parachutes. After parting out the jeep and selling "lightweight dining flys" with a classified ad; I bought my first brand new motorcycle.

(in reply to KenDckey)

Profile

Post #: 2

RE: Military Recycling - 7/25/2015 2:50:05 AM

Lucylastic

Posts: 40310
Status: offline

What does this have to do with politics or religion?

_____________________________

(•_•)
<) )╯SUCH
/ \

\(•_•)
( (> A NASTY
/ \

(•_•)
<) )> WOMAN
/ \

Duchess Of Dissent
Dont Hate Love

(in reply to MercTech)

Profile

Post #: 3

RE: Military Recycling - 7/25/2015 6:18:14 AM

KenDckey

Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline

Lucy shows the following

1: Environmntal concerns of the military
2: Shows that the military, like us at home, doesn't want and or need new parts every time
3: Shows that the military does push back against the builders of military grade materials
4: Shows that the military, like us is concerned about budget constraints

That enough or do I need to give it some more thouht?

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Profile

Post #: 4

RE: Military Recycling - 7/25/2015 12:17:36 PM

MercTech

Posts: 3706
Joined: 7/4/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

What does this have to do with politics or religion?

Taxpayers money spent on items that end up at a recycling depot. Selling items off at below market value to police departments. Questions on whether police departments should be allowed armored personnel carriers as the already trend of militarizing police departments has gone too far.

I'd say it would be a sidebar to several issues.

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Profile

Post #: 5

RE: Military Recycling - 7/25/2015 4:22:31 PM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic

What does this have to do with politics or religion?

The politics of war and the religion of profits on materiel. (made on the sale of obviously way too much materiel)

(in reply to Lucylastic)

Profile

Post #: 6

RE: Military Recycling - 7/25/2015 6:50:58 PM

KenDckey

Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline

There are also military models of how much stuff is required in light, medium and heavy conflict. Then there is the idiot that just orders way to much stuff (seen it happen) or the wrong stuff, etc. There are battle losses, wear and tear, theift etc that is also factored in. I presume that Gulf 1 was considered probable heavy and long term contact which meant lots of extra stuff. That left tons of stuff in theater to decide what to do with. Pre-positioning of Brigade and Division kits was what I think they decided upon. This reduced the burden to maintenance/storage costs. We have pre-positioned war reserves all over the world, not just in the US. Costly, yes, Less costly than needing a tank and not having one because of one of many reasons (a hose or an essential bracket, or totaled tank, etc). What comes home must be sorted, restocked as appropriate, reissued as appropriate or scrapped. When you case the colors of a unit, you have tons of stuff from cloths hangers, barber kits, to weapons and vehicles. Sorting this out is the military doing its recycling job.

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Profile

Post #: 7

RE: Military Recycling - 7/25/2015 7:27:10 PM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

There are also military models of how much stuff is required in light, medium and heavy conflict. Then there is the idiot that just orders way to much stuff (seen it happen) or the wrong stuff, etc. There are battle losses, wear and tear, theift etc that is also factored in. I presume that Gulf 1 was considered probable heavy and long term contact which meant lots of extra stuff. That left tons of stuff in theater to decide what to do with. Pre-positioning of Brigade and Division kits was what I think they decided upon. This reduced the burden to maintenance/storage costs. We have pre-positioned war reserves all over the world, not just in the US. Costly, yes, Less costly than needing a tank and not having one because of one of many reasons (a hose or an essential bracket, or totaled tank, etc). What comes home must be sorted, restocked as appropriate, reissued as appropriate or scrapped. When you case the colors of a unit, you have tons of stuff from cloths hangers, barber kits, to weapons and vehicles. Sorting this out is the military doing its recycling job.

Well I am reminded of the late marine Gen. S. Butler's book "War is a Racket" in which he described 10's of million$ wasted in aircraft, vehicles and supplies that never even made it to France. And in WWI $$ !!

< Message edited by MrRodgers -- 7/25/2015 7:28:08 PM >

(in reply to KenDckey)

Profile

Post #: 8

RE: Military Recycling - 7/25/2015 7:39:35 PM

KenDckey

Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline

Oh yeah. Look at the F35. 4 seconds of ammo @ 50 rounds per sec. Then it is please don't shoot at me anymore in the dogfight because I am out of bullets to protect myself and need to go home now. LOL

Booked as a tank buster to replace the A10. I think it both flys to fast and doesn't have the capability.

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Profile

Post #: 9

RE: Military Recycling - 7/26/2015 6:08:06 AM

MercTech

Posts: 3706
Joined: 7/4/2006
Status: offline

Rand corporation was contracted to do a study in the 1980s of the military logistics system. The powers that be didn't like the results of the study so very few ever heard of it.
I served with a MMSC that had been part of the group working with the study and he had a copy.

How to reduce waste, fraud, and abuse in military logistics; get rid of 2/3 of the O-4 and above involved in the system was point #1.

No, they didn't like that study. <grin>

(in reply to KenDckey)

Profile

Post #: 10

RE: Military Recycling - 7/26/2015 6:21:50 AM

KenDckey

Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline

When I went to SAILS school in 1977 our instructors came from Sears. Seems the Corps level supply system was an adaptation of their system.

And I personally agree that getting rid of a lot of senior officers in the procurement and resupply system would be nice.

(in reply to MercTech)

Profile

Post #: 11

RE: Military Recycling - 7/26/2015 7:30:19 AM

MercTech

Posts: 3706
Joined: 7/4/2006
Status: offline

What always struck me as wasteful in the extreme was that a requisition only took one commissioned officer to draw an item but it took chasing all over the base for five signature to turn in unused repair parts. Such silliness led to midnight dumpster runs to get rid of excess before inspection of the repair shop.

(in reply to KenDckey)

Profile

Post #: 12

RE: Military Recycling - 7/26/2015 8:12:00 AM

KenDckey

Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline

LOL Lots of units had a truck on dispatch someplace that seemed plausable that carried all the spare stuff that they wanted back. LOL Then there is tradeing. I got lots of paint and plywood this way. LOL Once I went onboard an aircraft carrier with 2 duffle bags of discarded jungle fatigues to trade for a file cabinet that we needed. It showed up a few days later. The jungle fatigues were used by machinists mates to protect their uniforms from soiling

(in reply to MercTech)

Profile

Post #: 13

RE: Military Recycling - 7/26/2015 3:33:08 PM

MrRodgers

Posts: 10542
Joined: 7/30/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

When I went to SAILS school in 1977 our instructors came from Sears. Seems the Corps level supply system was an adaptation of their system.

And I personally agree that getting rid of a lot of senior officers in the procurement and resupply system would be nice.

We had 1000 line (command) officers that won WWII. Today and for around 30-40 years, we've had 2000. ($100-$200 million a year wasted)

Furthermore, there are two bills (one, ea. house) McCain has one, to reform military procurement. Easy one, in every case possible, go 'open market' rather than mil-spec. Save million$ at the least. Gerald R. Ford state-of-the-art carrier...$2.4 Billion in cost overruns alone.

(in reply to KenDckey)

Profile

Post #: 14

RE: Military Recycling - 7/26/2015 5:00:00 PM

KenDckey

Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MrRodgers

quote:

ORIGINAL: KenDckey

When I went to SAILS school in 1977 our instructors came from Sears. Seems the Corps level supply system was an adaptation of their system.

And I personally agree that getting rid of a lot of senior officers in the procurement and resupply system would be nice.

We had 1000 line (command) officers that won WWII. Today and for around 30-40 years, we've had 2000. ($100-$200 million a year wasted)

Furthermore, there are two bills (one, ea. house) McCain has one, to reform military procurement. Easy one, in every case possible, go 'open market' rather than mil-spec. Save million$ at the least. Gerald R. Ford state-of-the-art carrier...$2.4 Billion in cost overruns alone.

I agree and disagree with the procurement bill. Prison industries provides some stuff. I would like to keep that. Some things need to be hardened for various reasons. On the other hand, lots of things can be market priced.

the ford is different. Yeah, I know that there are cost overruns, but at the same time, it is being built so that it can be easily upgraded with the latest technology without major modifications. False floors with various restraints so that old technology can be removed and replaced with current technology by unbolting the old, runninging easily the new wiring if necessary, and bolting down the new. The old way often required months to do what they can do in days now under the Ford configuration - a major cost savings.

(in reply to MrRodgers)

Profile

Post #: 15

RE: Military Recycling - 7/28/2015 12:32:36 AM

joether

Posts: 5195
Joined: 7/24/2005
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: MercTech

quote:

ORIGINAL: Lucylastic
What does this have to do with politics or religion?

Taxpayers money spent on items that end up at a recycling depot. Selling items off at below market value to police departments. Questions on whether police departments should be allowed armored personnel carriers as the already trend of militarizing police departments has gone too far.

I'd say it would be a sidebar to several issues.

As it funny as it might sound, those police departments can acquire armored personnel carriers and military equipment. Its called the 2nd amendment. Its up to the citizen's government to establish the "...well regulated militia..." that determines whether a piece of hardware is 'OK' or not for the police to own and use.

(in reply to MercTech)

Profile

Post #: 16

RE: Military Recycling - 7/28/2015 4:40:28 AM

bounty44

Posts: 6374
Joined: 11/1/2014
Status: offline

its been pointed out to you previously that the police force are not the "militia" referred to in the 2nd amendment, yet you are suggesting somehow mayors and city councils across the country are using that in order to justify militarizing the police?

(in reply to joether)

Profile

Post #: 17

RE: Military Recycling - 7/28/2015 5:54:16 AM

KenDckey

Posts: 4121
Joined: 5/31/2006
Status: offline

As a result of the 2005 base realignment and closure (BRAC) round, the military services are required to transfer to the Defense Logistics Agency (DLA) all of their supply, storage, and distribution functions at specified depot maintenance locations that are collocated with a DLA distribution depot. These transfer actions are part of a larger BRAC recommendation, commonly referred to as the Supply, Storage, and Distribution (SS&D) recommendation, that is intended to reduce both the number of supply distribution depots and related excess capacity, while providing the Department of Defense (DOD) with a logistics base that saves money and enhances the effectiveness of logistics support to operational forces.

http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-08-121R

Just because the DOD closes a base, disbands an organization, etc, doesn't mean that all the equipment automatically goes into the "surplus" category. It goes back into stock, then a determination is made. Thus these depots are saving taxpayer dollars.

(in reply to bounty44)

Profile

Post #: 18