What Went Wrong with the Los Alamos Contract?
Physics Today, March 2016
http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/magazine/physicstoday/article/69/3/10.1063/PT.3.3103
"I can't in all good conscious say there is nothing wrong with the LANS model, because if there is nothing wrong model, we wouldn't be in a place where four [extensions] are missed", say Tyler Przbylek
18 comments:
Despite those that continue to deny it, something did go very wrong with the Los Alamos contract. How to avoid this happening again is the more urgent discussion, and has not yet forced DoE to action. Maybe DoD can step up and take over the contract competition?
Whether there is or is not something wrong with the model, the 0-4 record unambiguously points to something wrong with the LANL leadership.
If you want a question that has a much shorter answer:
What Went Right with the Los Alamos Contract?
April 28, 2016 at 11:16 AM
The outsiders were OK, it was the UC holdovers that spoiled the result.
The outsiders were OK, it was the UC holdovers that spoiled the result.
April 28, 2016 at 11:28 AM
Other way around, the outsiders destroyed the lab.
Maybe DoD can step up and take over the contract competition?
April 27, 2016 at 7:17 AM
Why would they want to? Almost no one in the Pentagon wants anything to do with nukes anymore. Or research in general, for that matter.
All that the LANS contract did was allow the companies such as Bechtel, URS, and BWXT a chance to get a look at the millions that could be made from LANL. Now we have another contract competition and we can expect that the companies URS (now called something else), Bechtel and BWXT to submit independent bids. Another thought is that they came here to define how to carve up the lab so we can have LANL and "pits are us" as separate and independent entities. Wonder where the money pit called LANSCE would end up...
Can anyone cite a single benefit to the American taxpayer of the so-called LANS model?
Who cares about the LANS contract? Nobody.
Correct. but plenty of people care about LANL, more on this blog than care about LLNL.
Can anyone cite a single benefit to the American taxpayer of the so-called LANS model?
April 29, 2016 at 4:48 PM
The managers that work for LANS are American taxpayers and they have financially benefited greatly...as for the the rest of the American taxpayers not so much.
Tyler got a fat job out of the whole deal...
"Correct. but plenty of people care about LANL, more on this blog than care about LLNL.
April 29, 2016 at 7:27 PM"
Oh there are plenty of LLNL employees who care about LLNL, they just can't get a word in edgewise with all of the LANL gum flapping on this blog.
Try posting. It works fine for us LANL folks.
LANL owes Julian a round of applause for running our blog for us, and deleting all of those trash-talking posts from LLNL misfits.
LLNL and misfits is an oxymoron.
Dear anonymous (April 30,2016 2:39,
Please let me know what fat fob I got out of the LANL and LLNL competitions? I recognize that I am a C student fron. Tier 3 school, but I think I would have the fat job.
At the risk of actually proving that I am a C student from a tier 3 school let me reiterate what I intended to say in my earlier post:
Dear anonymous (April 30, 2016: 2:39:
Please let me know what fat job I got out of the LANL and LLNL competitions? Even though I am a C student form a tier 3 school, I think I would have known that I got a fat job.
Post a Comment