US Defense procurement - counterfeit parts rife

Discussion in 'The Intelligence Cell' started by smartascarrots, May 23, 2012.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. From the Beeb.

    The scale is quite astonishing but I guess any organisation that gives away parts of its supply chain throws itself on the mercy of its suppliers and their priorities.

    Still, it's nice to know good old Blighty can still hold its head up proudly.

     
  2. I know those cnuts at lyrico have been supplying me with counterfit pens, the f**kers never work.
     
  3. seaweed

    seaweed LE Book Reviewer

    It's a short step from here to China insinuating fake parts into the supply chain that contain deliberate bugs or failure nodes in order to sabotage US 'Defense'.
     
  4. Seaweed, read 'Cyber War'. Supposedly, current thinking is that is has already been done.
     
  5. When I read the article, I had to wonder. Without knowing the details, I can only see two possibilities: that the customer didn't do any of their own quality control but left that instead to their suppliers; or that the fakes were of high enough quality to pass the QC measures.

    If the first, it's pretty damned complacent whereas if the latter it's more a political than technological problem.

    If it's been sent from my HTC Sensation using Tapatalk then I'm probably pissed.
     
  6. Its endemic in China. Large companies moved - or worse, outsourced - their manufacturing facilities to the Far East. In China, counterfeiting is rampant, often encouraged by the Government. And often the 'fakes' come from the same factories that produce the genuine article (!) but using cheaper components and no QC cycle.

    Blame it on MBA types putting the shareholder's thirst for bottom line profit first. US companies have always always always tried to increase profits by cutting costs and squeezing margins, rarely by increasing volume. And it is always counter-productive in the long term, not that shareholders care about that, nor the stockmarket, which is rarely concerned about long-term potential.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  7. Perhaps it's just the same reason as the British and Canadian companies i.e. there's a bigger profit to be made that way?

    Not everything's a big, scary, deliberate conspiracy, you know. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

    If it's been sent from my HTC Sensation using Tapatalk then I'm probably pissed.
     
  8. No wonder their subs a burnin!
     
  9. Have you noticed the "odd" numbered multicore processors that arrive at competative prices? Genuine parts but with one or more possibly defective cores, selected out during quality checks and sold on the strength of the remaining active cores. Not a scam, but possibly sailing close to the wind.

    B
     
  10. ugly

    ugly LE Moderator

    The UK defence companies idea of QC is appalling. I audited a big European supp;lier at the start of a project where I was embedded and they on the surface looked very good. The problem is to keep costs down the sub out all the work and accept paperwork instead of actually inspecting and testing the kit themselves. The biggest shock was when I asked their despatch department if they understood the liability behind using rubber stamps with numbers vice signing to confirm an order is fit to despatch. I actually pulled the standard which they were quoting and asked them a few questions which they couldnt answer.
    I ended up quarantining 2 years worth of production to inspect it and rejected over half on viual inspection alone.
    They didnt like me, pulled my security clearance and made life difficult. I had the last laugh as after I left they were told my costs were coming out of their margin! I wasnt cheap!
     
  11. A little confused as to how the UK can be close to China regarding the source of fake parts, we don't have any manufacturing industry left!!! I am guessing parts are bought by UK companies, and then sold on?
     
  12. All those DIIF bits n pieces, servers, switches et al. Yep - probably recording all this as we