This is an 18 August 2026 Government Executive article concerning an ill-fated Army Ammunition Plant to produce 155 mm Artillery Shells to send to Ukraine

https://www.govexec.com/defense/2026/08/artillery-plant-made-nothing/415460/?oref=govexec_today_nl&utm_source=Sailthru&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=GovExec%20Today:%20August%2018%2C%202026&utm_term=newsletter_ge_today

This brings back memories of my intern days with the Army. The program I worked on competed ammunition contracts among mobilization base producers. The most favorable price proposal received awards for greater quantities than the others. One company submitted a really low price offer. When questioned, they planned on introducing new machinery and testing equipment for efficiencies. However, the result was their new production process didn’t work, they fell way behind in deliveries, and we ended up terminating for default. The subsequent reprocurement action with charging for excess procurement costs ended up bankrupting the contractor. The contractor appealed to the ASBCA but ended up losing.

Glad the government was able to offset some of its costs in your example. I haven’t researched what type of contract it was here. Appears to be, based upon the urgency and circumstances, either cost reimbursable or fixed price incentive here.

Devil's Advocate - this is a failure which is fine.

Between Feb 2022 and Sept 2025, the Army spent $4.5 billion on dramatically and quickly expanding production of 155-mm artillery shells. As a part of this, Army tried something new and innovative and fast, but which failed. Ultimately, the cost this failure was relatively small part of the overall initiative- 11%.

If you want new and fast and innovative, as everyone in acquisition says they do, you must accept risk - which necessarily means the occasionally costly failure. This shows a system working to actually be fast and innovative, which means sometimes failing.

The easiest way to avoid failure is to avoid taking chances, to be risk averse. Just say no to innovation, speed and risk taking. If the acquisition personnel involved in this failure are punished, don't ask why 1102s are so risk averse, because this is your answer.

That said, there is plenty here that could have been done better irrespective of what I just wrote.

Edited August 20Aug 20 by General.Zhukov
fonts