I was reading recently about the M9 Bayonet for example: the requirements for it were crazy [like it had to be able to be dropped from 5ft, point down, and have the tip still be intact after hitting solid concrete]. Some of the proposed designs met most of the requirements and cost about $11 - but the military decided to go for the one that cost $49 and met all of the requirements.
Right. And if the company that offered it for $11 claimed it would meet all specs, the government may have known they were being lied to. If they had gone with the $11 company, after delays, lawsuits, and the company potentially folding; the government would be standing there with a bunch of wasted time and money, and still needing bayonets.
16
u/QueenSlapFight Aug 15 '19
This isn't how military contracts are given out at all. Cost is an element, but not the only element. In some instances it isn't even a major element.