RE: CSASS....guess they dumped HK
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
Like Tree8Likes

Thread: RE: CSASS....guess they dumped HK

  1. #1
    HKPRO PREMIUM PARTNER
    Brad4065's Avatar
    Join Date : Dec 2009
    Location : That black SUV in your driveway
    Posts : 3,886
    Mentioned
    59 Post(s)

    Default RE: CSASS....guess they dumped HK

    Remember when @CoolArrowKicker said HK messed things up? Well, maybe he had some good info after all.

    https://www.fbo.gov/index.php?s=oppo...=core&_cview=0
    RegularGuy461969 likes this.
    A redneck's famous last words...."Hey everybody, watch this!"

  2. #2
    Unrepentant HKHolic
    SudS's Avatar
    Join Date : Jan 2001
    Location : Northern, VA
    Posts : 7,991
    Mentioned
    127 Post(s)

  3. #3
    HKPRO PREMIUM PARTNER
    Brad4065's Avatar
    Join Date : Dec 2009
    Location : That black SUV in your driveway
    Posts : 3,886
    Mentioned
    59 Post(s)

    Default

    Thanks for the heads up. Guess he beat me to the punch line. As I see it, HK had this locked up, given the specs for the RFP.

    Oh well. Not my circus/ not my monkey.

  4. Remove Advertisements
    HKPro.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #4
    Desperately Needs Treatment

    Join Date : Mar 2003
    Location : USA
    Posts : 1,167
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)

    Default

    This is just another box being checked. Everyone relax.

  6. #5
    HKPRO Professional
    LCSO264's Avatar
    Join Date : Feb 2005
    Location : Northwest
    Age : 44
    Posts : 3,737
    Mentioned
    14 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ITD1944 View Post
    This is just another box being checked. Everyone relax.
    @ITD1944 can you further explain. Admittedly, I do not understand the Government procurement process. I understand seeking additional manufacturing sources, such as FN manufacturing M16/M4's along with Colt. But I don't understand cutting out the contract winning company, and seeking a replacement manufacturer? Or do I have this all wrong?
    HK91
    HK94
    USC/UMP
    SL8/G36
    P7M8
    P9s .45acp
    VP70Z
    USP Tactical .45acp
    V51/HK51 clone
    HK45
    HK45c
    HK 416 10.5" upper
    GSG5PK
    P30Ls
    HK45T (OD Green)
    VP9
    CR556A1
    P30SKs
    SP5K

  7. #6
    HKPRO PREMIUM PARTNER
    dwillHK's Avatar
    Join Date : Mar 2006
    Location : South FL, USA
    Posts : 3,122
    Mentioned
    12 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LCSO264 View Post
    @ITD1944 can you further explain. Admittedly, I do not understand the Government procurement process. I understand seeking additional manufacturing sources, such as FN manufacturing M16/M4's along with Colt. But I don't understand cutting out the contract winning company, and seeking a replacement manufacturer? Or do I have this all wrong?
    I believe that in order for other manufacturers to be allowed to make M4s, the US Army had to acquire the design rights from Colt.
    Do you even HK, Bro?

  8. #7
    Desperately Needs Treatment

    Join Date : Mar 2003
    Location : USA
    Posts : 1,167
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LCSO264 View Post
    @ITD1944 can you further explain. Admittedly, I do not understand the Government procurement process. I understand seeking additional manufacturing sources, such as FN manufacturing M16/M4's along with Colt. But I don't understand cutting out the contract winning company, and seeking a replacement manufacturer? Or do I have this all wrong?
    You have it all wrong. Not going to dive too far into it, but it's basically an open call for naysayers. The government is checking a box.
    HK PDX likes this.

  9. #8
    Member
    HK PDX's Avatar
    Join Date : Dec 2002
    Location : Portland, OR
    Posts : 96
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ITD1944 View Post
    You have it all wrong. Not going to dive too far into it, but it's basically an open call for naysayers. The government is checking a box.
    So if you felt wronged by the process speak up now and don't sue us later. In a nutshell?
    ITD1944 likes this.
    P2000 40/357,USP.45ss,USPc.45,USP Tactical.45,P7M8,Mark 23,P2000SK 40/357,USC/UMP,USPCT.45,HK45, HK45C,HK4

  10. #9
    Desperately Needs Treatment

    Join Date : Mar 2003
    Location : USA
    Posts : 1,167
    Mentioned
    4 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by HK PDX View Post
    So if you felt wronged by the process speak up now and don't sue us later. In a nutshell?
    In a nutshell, yes. Basically, HK is the only company that will be able to meet the requirement, this is just a formality.
    Lamont likes this.

  11. #10
    HKPRO PREMIUM PARTNER
    Lamont's Avatar
    Join Date : Nov 2004
    Posts : 1,198
    Mentioned
    56 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ITD1944 View Post
    In a nutshell, yes. Basically, HK is the only company that will be able to meet the requirement, this is just a formality.
    ^^THIS^^.

    End Users were past tired with Knight's product, we had a DDM on contract, former Marine Scout Sniper, who failed his quarterly qualification and was slated to be sent home until "other levels" got involved and it was shown to be the weapon, not the shooter. "Shot stringing" and odd ball fliers after the first few rounds was common.

    A well qualified career SF SOTIC instructor who used to post on another board (he went from active duty to civilian contractor the day after he retired and reported to SOTIC just like he had the previous day, for what that tells you about him as a SME) stated that he felt Knight's should have been sued by the government to recoup all the money spent on a "not ready for prime time" product and that Knight's basically used all that money to continue to refine an unsuitable product. Problem is, even after they reach that point, all the previous units in play continue to be problematic and the weapon's reputation as a problem in one way or another continues. "You never get a second chance to make a good first impression" as it were. When it comes to guns you carry on a two way range, it's the kiss of death. Hence the desire for the same breed of gun, just one that can be relied on. The Knight's product cannot, it's a neat package that doesn't live up to it's billing. No one has the time or the inclination to work through every example in the arms room to find out which one's are OK and which one's are a POS.

    But people still spend stupid money on it, "because Knight's".
    "We do bad things to bad people".

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Sponsored Links

 
 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •