It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Why Did DOD Order $250 Million Of Gas Masks On March 25?

page: 1
22
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 05:40 PM
link   
I didn't see this posted anywhere and thought it was an interesting story. Does it seem odd that The Department Of Defense would place such a large order for a Chemical Biological Protective Mask?


Avon Protection Systems Inc., Cadillac, Michigan, was awarded a $245,961,250 firm-fixed-price contract for production of M53A1 Chemical Biological Protective Mask systems. One bid was solicited with one bid received. Work locations and funding will be determined with each order, with an estimated completion date of March 24, 2024. U.S. Army Contracting Command, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland, is the contracting activity (W911SR-19-D-0005).

dod.defense.gov...

An article I just read, states that the M53A1 mask "provides excellent protection against traditional chemical and biological warfare agents, select Toxic Industrial Materials (TIMs) and particulate matter including radioactive dust."



The M53A1 was developed to counter multiple threats encountered on the modern battlefield. "It provides excellent protection against traditional chemical and biological warfare agents, select Toxic Industrial Materials (TIMs) and particulate matter including radioactive dust," read the M53 brochure.



This article, also brings up an interesting point:


The order comes one month after the U.S. government introduced science-based guidelines for how first responders decontaminate large numbers of Americans after a chemical-weapons attack.




"Terrorist threats and the use of chemical weapons in Syria have heightened awareness of the need for improved preparedness against chemical attacks," said Gary Disbrow, deputy director of the US Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, which prepared the guidelines. "First responders are supportive of the fact that it is evidence-based guidance, and not just, ‘We used this last time, and it seemed to work,’"


The quote above and all additional content comes from this LINK.

So, the question is...does the United States government fear that a chemical or biological attack is imminent?



+13 more 
posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 05:53 PM
link   

So, the question is...does the United States government fear that a chemical or biological attack is imminent?


Those masks are issued to soldier after soldier after soldier for years.

It's fine for them to order gasmasks. It's part of what they do. Doesn't mean something is going to happen.

Also, yes, the Pentagon does fear an imminent attack. We pay them to assume there is always an imminent attack.
edit on 30 3 19 by projectvxn because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 05:57 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Because Trump is a big Metro 2033 fan?



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 05:58 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Sounds a lot like the previous masks were not necessarily affective or at least not tested to modern standards. This particular model seems to meet or exceed modern standards.

Large acquisitions like this seem to pop up every now and then. Do you remember when FEMA bought all of those plastic coffins that would fit five or six people each? Everyone freaked out then.

It’s probably just time to buy new masks for our soldiers.

If you are really worried about it, at least you know which ones to buy.
edit on 30-3-2019 by Woodcarver because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 06:00 PM
link   
a reply to: shawmanfromny

If you or I want to buy one its $1200 a pop. I wonder if they are replacing some of their old ones. At $1200 a piece, it is about 205,000 mask. Read this article earlier on another site.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 06:00 PM
link   
Looks about right.

First, those things are not cheap. IF you could manage to purchase those at $100 a pop, that's 2.5 million units... which will be acquired over a period of several years... for all military branches; active, Guard and Reserves...

The older models will be phased out, over time as well.

(After seeing the actual price tag... this is a small order.)

Thanks Tarzan



edit on 30-3-2019 by madmac5150 because: Science!



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 06:03 PM
link   
They also can be shipped to South Korea, Okinawa and Japan for civilian use just in case North Korea starts shooting them nerve gas missiles. People worry about nukes from them, that really isn't the case in actually reality. No one uses nukes these days. Can't with all the nuclear power plants around the world.
But the chems have always been a problem with North Korea.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 06:07 PM
link   
200,000 masks over 5 years is 40,000 per year. The Army alone enlists 70,000 recruits a year. There are 200,000 army troops deployed overseas at any given time. Does that help put things in perspective for you?



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 06:08 PM
link   
Because they havent wasted enough of my $.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 06:13 PM
link   
The DOD source says it’s a 10 year contract . I’d like to know how many they’re getting overall though . The department of defense said they have a “firm fixed price “.

Those mask are going for $1000 online. I’m willing to bet the army paid way too much .

agttactical.com...



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 06:26 PM
link   



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 07:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Sounds a lot like the previous masks were not necessarily affective or at least not tested to modern standards.
.


Where are you getting that?



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 07:38 PM
link   
Government budgeting. If the departure doesn’t use up its budget, then the budget gets cut. Or ties to the gas mask company.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 07:43 PM
link   

originally posted by: KansasGirl

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Sounds a lot like the previous masks were not necessarily affective or at least not tested to modern standards.
.


Where are you getting that?


When I was in the military in the early 80's and deployed, we used the same gas masks that my father used in 'Nam.

New filters, of course.

But 20 years old.

So probably the military got enough money to upgrade...

For the next 20 years.



ETA... when we were out in the field we were eating C-Rations.

Most of them were made before I was born.

Got the "new" MRE's in '84... we were stoked!

Except for the chicken kiev... it was ghastly.


edit on 30-3-2019 by Lumenari because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 08:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Fallingdown

Too much compared to what?

Another thing to realize is that sometimes the government buys from vendors who make a superior product, but are not capable of producing at the rate the government needs. If they need 10,000 new masks, have decided that this is the superior product, but the company can only pop out 300 a month and they are already producing/selling 250, there are some problems that need fixing.

Perhaps they need the masks, but not urgently. Maybe they can live with delivery rates of 50 masks a month. Otherwise they need to be able to pay a premium to either help the company expand production (hire/train workers, buy raw materials, buy new machining and tooling, etc), or convince them to stop selling commercially to get all 300 masks a month. Sometimes both. Maybe they need 1,000 a month. It's a high-priorty need. They need to help the company increase production. Otherwise, the company says, "sorry, I can only provide 50-300 masks a month".

This contract is fixed-price. They may be paying a sufficient sum per unit to let the company make its business case to get loans from elsewhere. OR because of economies of scale, they might have an upfront "non-recurring" cost to pay for the expansion, and a very low (under the current $1000 commercial pricetag) unit price. The second method is always preferable, usually for both parties.

I can say, "If I had the tooling and people, I could probably crank out 1000 units a month for $500 each. But I don't. If you are willing to pay a one time non-recurring cost to cover that, I'll sell them at $500 instead of $1000, and I can get them to you a lot quicker than 50 units a month "

That helps both parties.

Sometimes economies of scale don't make enough difference. Depending on how many and how long you plan to be buying, it may not make sense to pay the non-recurring costs. Then you have hard decisions to make. Do you buy inferior products? Wait a long time to get the better ones? Etc

Those numbers above are obviously made up, but the general scenario plays out a lot.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 08:29 PM
link   

originally posted by: Fallingdown
The DOD source says it’s a 10 year contract . I’d like to know how many they’re getting overall though . The department of defense said they have a “firm fixed price “.

Those mask are going for $1000 online. I’m willing to bet the army paid way too much .

agttactical.com...



The masks themselves would be less than 200.00. What the biggest expense is are the filters. In a contaminated environment one filter would last 24hrs. So say we have 10000 troops you need 70000 filters for a week.

Biggest expense is parts each mask they buy you would want at least 3 months worth of filters for them and probably replacement lenses as well. They are probably in the range of about 50.00 per filter. I would guess each mask with parts is at around 5000.00.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 08:34 PM
link   

originally posted by: KansasGirl

originally posted by: Woodcarver
a reply to: shawmanfromny

Sounds a lot like the previous masks were not necessarily affective or at least not tested to modern standards.
.


Where are you getting that?
It’s in the bolded section of one of the quotes in the OP.


"First responders are supportive of the fact that it is evidence-based guidance, and not just, ‘We used this last time, and it seemed to work,’"


I did read between the lines a little bit.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Lumenari

I liked the beef stroganoff.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 08:48 PM
link   
a reply to: projectvxn




Also, yes, the Pentagon does fear an imminent attack. We pay them to assume there is always an imminent attack.


As long as they keep feeding story's and fear to their MSM cronies/cousins there will always "be an enemy and an imminent attack".

Circular reasoning. And then there is also the revolving door of employees between Pentagon and Suppliers.

And then there is the "stand down" order on the fighter jets scrambled on 911

Asleep at the wheel when convenient.



posted on Mar, 30 2019 @ 09:22 PM
link   
a reply to: RadioRobert

I understand your points I can tell you know what you’re talking about .

I usually look at things from a different angle. Until people get to know me it bugs the hell out of them . Lol



This BPA was competitively procured via the GSA E-Buy website among 679 vendors. Three offers were received and three were selected for award.


If I’m reading that right there were 679 potential suppliers. But they only receive bids from three and excepted those three.

They might as well have been no bid contracts and that made me wonder about the price .

I hope somebody finds out how many were ordered . Loose ends irritate me .




top topics



 
22
<<   2 >>

log in

join