Flawed Search for a Better Marine Rucksack

[thedrifter]

02-02-2004 <br />
<br />
Flawed Search for a Better Marine Rucksack

[thedrifter]

Lastly, the final evaluation considered operating forces’ field evaluations, biometrics testing, and price. As noted earlier, the “B” pack was dominantly favored over the “A” pack in field evaluations, but the “A+” and “B-” packs were never field-tested by Marines. The biometrics testing was neutral between the packs. In terms of price, the “A+” pack costs approximately $355. The “B-” pack costs approximately $453, including a nuclear, biological and chemical environment compatible water hydration system that the “A+” does not. Understanding the selection group’s ultimate goal and the support of the group’s chain-of-command for its goal will show how the three evaluation criteria were weighed or prioritized.



I expect that Marines will always strive to do more with less, especially in combat. Deliberately giving them fewer capabilities when it comes to available gear and relying on them to compensate for known lesser gear capabilities by doing more is simply not acceptable.



Still, I wonder why the company that had submitted a superior “B” rucksack was not given the chance to correct its redesign to provide Marines with the superior product.



I sincerely hope that time will prove that the replacement pack process and selection was not as questionable as my analysis has led me to believe.



Lt. Col. Matthew Dodd USMC is a Senior Editor of DefenseWatch. He can be reached at mattdodd1775@hotmail.com.

http://www.sftt.org/cgi-bin/csNews/csNews.cgi?database=DefenseWatch.db&command=viewone&op=t&id=349&rnd=87.31436291079674

Sempers,

Roger
:marine: