01-30-2018, 01:08 PM
Azgeek Wrote:Well development of new armor technology is one thing, but practical adaptation for use of it in the field is an entirely different matter. Then there is the cost for this new stuff. I'm aware of many of these new techniques and use of materials. Yawn.... The real depressing thing is how our government refuses to partner with real innovators. Give Picatinny Arsenal a call and ask them why. They are really good at suppressing technology as we have found out. The fact I'm NOT allowed to discuss our rifle round technology speaks volumes around our innovation.
AZ:
The government won't partner with innovators whose sole purpose is to get seed money. I have been there and part of my job was to see if their wild claims actually worked or if they were lying just to get seed money. Most were lying to get seed money. And most who did get the seed money failed to develop the product to the standards set by either the innovator or DoD. Then they wanted more money. And the response was normally 'no'.
If your outfit is trying to get into the system with an unsolicited proposal, you will probably fail unless you have fully developed the product and have had it evaluated at legitimate testing facilities that are accepted by DoD. Even then if your product is unsolicited, you will probably fail anyway because of the sequester and the fact that your stuff may not be what the military can afford in terms of priorities.
Personally I would avoid DoD. They can halt a program for absolutely no reason and or can stop one dead in its tracks if it doesn't make the budget cut. For small outfits, this means they generally go bankrupt.
LR55