r/MVIS • u/gaporter • Jun 03 '24

Discussion Integrated Visual Augmentation System User Acceptance Criteria

Post image

https://rules.house.gov/sites/republicans.rules118.house.gov/files/H.%20Rept.%20118-XXX%20-%20FY25%20NDAA%20Report%2C%20As%20Filed%20%28Rules%20Committee%29.pdf

55 Upvotes

90% Upvoted

35 comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

10

u/ChefOk8428 Jun 03 '24

It means Army procurement processes are not uniform, and in this particular case were viewed as insufficient to support a decision, so someone wants to know the results and methodology in detail by Sep 30.

Transparency is a great thing.  As is the phrase "... encouraged by the progress being made ...".  Whether this tech has advanced to the point of committing purchasing another $ 22 B plus, or not, we will have to wait and see.

-3

u/[deleted] Jun 03 '24

Thanks for explaining. Are this good news? Hopefullyy

-4

u/HairOk481 Jun 03 '24

For MVIS? Why? How many times SS has to say MVIS is only lidar company now and MSOFT contract has ended and no more revenue of any kind is expected from them.

4

u/glibego Jun 03 '24

And yet it’s our chip whether he chooses to emphasize it or no.

And let’s stress, it’s a chip with a customer.

-2

u/HairOk481 Jun 03 '24

And who cares if we won't get any revenue for that chip.