Replicator: if You're Explaining, You're Losing

we just need to say clearly, consistently, what we want ... & bring money to it

At some point, the US DOD will return to clarity. For what I assume was the best intentions, we continue to follow the advice of a few overconfident PAO’s, those who watched too much Mad Men, and more often than not, a leadership that became too much OF DC, as opposed to just being IN DC. They picked up the resident contempt for clarity, a patronizing view of their fellow citizens who in their insecurity were viewed as lesser intellects, and the habit of thinking clever words and bandwagoning are a substitute for superior performance.

It becomes so cringe, but because people in power don’t see the cringe - only their own cleverness - the cringe is made flesh.

We enter the 21st Century … so we HAVE to have an SSN-21, a B-21, IT-21, etc. We managed to avoid F-21 only because the Kfir jumped on that in the 1980s before the Boomers started to get significant positions of control. For some reason we skipped hundreds of hull numbers to make the White Elephant Zumwalts DDG-1000 to DDG-1002.

You get the idea, we could go on and on - but let’s focus on the latest example of the too-clever-by-half naming convention that, with each iteration, erodes confidence in our military among the people, their elected representatives, and industry.

Words matter.

Before the end of the year, let’s look back four months ago when we first commented on “Replicator.”

Remember this?

This is playing out to be another unnecessary own-goal because we cannot seem to get out of our own way.

First of all, when you read what the DEPSECDEF stated just a few months ago in the above screen-cap, it looks like either we’ve solved all the problems recently described a couple of weeks ago on Geopolitics Decanted - or our senior leaders are not fully up to speed with the truth on the ground. If you haven’t already, give it a listen;

That is bad enough, but then we have this in Politico last week.

In early November, Hicks attempted to publicly clear the air on what exactly the initiative intends to do.

“The reality is, Replicator is removing kinks in the hose of the system that is innovation in DOD,” Hicks told reporters. “There are a multitude of programs that already exist in the department that need help to get from where they are to delivery at scale. That is where Replicator is focused.”

“It’s not a program,” she added. “It’s a process for improving our ability to scale.”

Here we go again. We can’t even keep our story straight for a few months.

So, we’re not going to “replicate” a whole bunch of drones in the next - what is now 14-20 months - but instead try to trick our way around our self-designed acquisition system?

Kind of like NAVAIR fooled everyone into thinking the “Super Hornet” was just a new upgrade to the F/A-18 and not a completely new aircraft? That kind of farcical self-delusion?

Why is the reputation of the US military in freefall among the citizens it exists to protect? Simple, it keeps speaking non-truth and spin to the public to the point nothing said by anyone of any seniority is taken at face value.

As we don’t yet live in Salamanderland, I’m willing to cut the DEPSECDEF some slack; she is just trying to get something to work inside our accretion-encumbered Ottomanesque acquisitions system that thinks it is the supported entity, not the supporting. The process is the product and there is no greater skill than problem appreciation.

So, we don’t have something - implied by its name - that will magically create things that will displace water or make shadows on ramps. No. It appears we will train ChatGPT to make “happy” into “glad” and to trick the existing system in to not getting in its own way.

Excellent.

We could just, oh I don’t know, create a new system - couldn’t we?

Let me commit a crime against the internet and quote myself. From my September post on DEPSECDEF’s speech;

The snarky Executive Summary is that on balance this whole “Replicator” effort smells of another flash in the pan to eat up time and money while distracting us from the very real and required hard work of building a Navy ready to meet the challenging growing west of the International Date Line.

That is how it looks from the cheap seats.

Let’s go back to the Politico article. Rep. Mike Gallagher (R-WI) is smelling the same thing;

Gallagher said he’s more confident the program is “moving in the right direction” after a classified briefing with Hicks and meeting with DIU Director Douglas Beck. But the Wisconsin Republican said he still has questions about meeting the timeline, and funding for the program is still a mystery.

“My biggest concern remains, if they’re saying they don’t need any new funding, OK, well are they going to cannibalize funding from, like, critical munitions, which are the things we should be replicating more than anything else?” Gallagher said in an interview. “We don’t need all these new widgets. We need, like, maximum production of Long Range Anti-Ship Missiles and things like that.”

Bingo. I trust his take on what happened in the classified briefing - but we’ve all been through the bluff and befuddle in the SCIF as we have in the open.

We’ll see.

Institutionally, this has a whiff of a characteristic we see on a personal level. We all know a person who is surrounded by incomplete projects. He gets halfway through one thing, gets tired of how hard it is, and then has a flash of brilliance on another project that is more interesting and worth his time and money. Years later they are only surrounded by clutter and more debt.

OK, that might be me, but let’s not get distracted by that at the moment. I’ll put that on my self-care list for the new year.

On the sidelines of the event, one defense industry insider shrugged when asked about the program, pointing out that the Pentagon had yet to release any details to industry or invite companies to toss their hats in the ring.

Despite its issues, Hicks seemed optimistic about Replicator’s future, the tech executive and leader said. But there was no timeline discussed at the meeting on Tuesday.

Another issue with the program: There’s no process for the tech companies to apply for it, according to the tech executive and leader. When Replicator was announced over the summer, there were few details about how the program would work — and not much has changed since.

DEPSECDEF Hicks is not known as someone who lacks drive, intelligence, or bureaucratic skill - just the opposite. However, here she is with a lot of personal and institutional capital sitting on the table as she is slowly being strangled by our acquisition system and the military-bureaucratic-political nomenklatura that exist mostly to continue to exist.

Regulars of the Front Porch know where I’m going next.

There is something I wish someone like Hicks would dedicate her time and effort to. Downside, it will most likely consume much of what is left of her tenure and of her relief’s. It will be years after that until you will see the fruits of it - but like pruning a long-neglected apple tree - it will be hard, and look harsh, but when the seasons turn, it will result in a vibrant bounty for years to come.

Of course, I’m talking about the root-and-branch replacement for our present acquisition system. It was created by people, it can be replaced by people. Sure, if done correctly it will break a lot of rice bowls and throw the scraps into the harbor, but it must be done.

I know of no uncompromised person who things we have a healthy, effective, or efficient system. Enough kludges on top of kludges. That won’t fix what needs to be fixed. Rip it up and start anew. Make enemies doing it. Send a huge number of GS, SES, and contractors to pursue excellence elsewhere.

Want to really make your mark? As we approach the end of the first quarter of the 21st Century - that is where you make it.