Lappy, FYI;To Design A Cheap New Fighter, The U.S. Air Force Should Embrace This Boondoggle
To come up with a cheap and effective fighter, the Air Force should fund not one but several design teams, each with a small budget and a hard—and fast—deadline for finishing its work. “Small team, short schedule and tight budget—not a day or dollar more,” Ward said.
Officials should be okay with some—or even most—of those teams failing. If after a couple of years, a design team discovers it has engineered itself into a corner, cancel its work and shift resources to the teams with viable concepts.
Build prototypes. Fly them against each other. Pick one or several and light up the factories. “It’s totally doable,” Ward said.
Some Air Force officials already have acknowledged the wisdom of this approach. In 2019 Will Roper—then the Air Force’s top weapons-buyer—called on the service to return to the design philosophy that produced the century series.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/davidaxe/2021/02/24/to-design-a-cheap-new-fighter-the-us-air-force-should-embrace-this-boondoggle/?sh=163a252a67ca
Raider
- Forums
- Political Debate
- What cost $2.3Trillion and has 900 design flaws?
What cost $2.3Trillion and has 900 design flaws?, page-2
- There are more pages in this discussion • 61 more messages in this thread...
You’re viewing a single post only. To view the entire thread just sign in or Join Now (FREE)
Featured News
Featured News
The Watchlist
I88
INFINI RESOURCES LIMITED
Charles Armstrong, CEO
Charles Armstrong
CEO
SPONSORED BY The Market Online