To many bells and whistles! Be it a ship, aircraft, weapon system, the United States military can not build anything within budget or on time. Just the opinion of an old hermit. (Oh, of course we need to spend more money on defense! How about spending the money in an efficient manner. )
One huge, understated issue; our Yankee obsession with "survivability". While Europe, nor unreasonably, says "it's a frigate, if a missile or two hit it, the crew can abandon ship. We'll eventually pick them up". Whereas the US wants the ship to take hits and preferably in good enough shape to limp home. Ideally being able to defend itself from another attack. We're then surprised how much a "smallet, simpler ship" costs.
And I question how "survivable " they are, or the standard is. Even our beloved Burkes have nothing in their description mentioning armor or even splinter protection. Beyond some likely additional compartmentalization, I dont see a whole lot of survivability built into anything since before cars cars had tailfins...
Nothing new here. To paraphrase Shakespeare: The first thing we do, let's kill all the admirals.
After all, the major difference between a flag and an O-6 is that the flag has less backbone and better oral & political skills. Note: I said oral, not verbal.
George W Bush considering the peace dividend suggested similar: design and build a few new systems see how they work....
Note he was nor re-elected, reform in acquisition is a challenge.
What would F-35 look like if all that could be built (admittedly the law says 10% limit until full production approved, so far none are limited) at first was the optec fleet? No more until fully passed!
To many bells and whistles! Be it a ship, aircraft, weapon system, the United States military can not build anything within budget or on time. Just the opinion of an old hermit. (Oh, of course we need to spend more money on defense! How about spending the money in an efficient manner. )
One huge, understated issue; our Yankee obsession with "survivability". While Europe, nor unreasonably, says "it's a frigate, if a missile or two hit it, the crew can abandon ship. We'll eventually pick them up". Whereas the US wants the ship to take hits and preferably in good enough shape to limp home. Ideally being able to defend itself from another attack. We're then surprised how much a "smallet, simpler ship" costs.
And I question how "survivable " they are, or the standard is. Even our beloved Burkes have nothing in their description mentioning armor or even splinter protection. Beyond some likely additional compartmentalization, I dont see a whole lot of survivability built into anything since before cars cars had tailfins...
A good plan today is better than a perfect plan tomorrow. ~ George S. Patton
Patton actually said: “A good plan, violently executed now, is better than a perfect plan next week.” Not sure which version is more apt…
I think that 15% design commonality figure will continue to drop and might end up in single digits.
Nothing new here. To paraphrase Shakespeare: The first thing we do, let's kill all the admirals.
After all, the major difference between a flag and an O-6 is that the flag has less backbone and better oral & political skills. Note: I said oral, not verbal.
They should have frozen the design, built a few, then incorporated improvements in future “flights.” It’s not like this is unfamiliar to them.
George W Bush considering the peace dividend suggested similar: design and build a few new systems see how they work....
Note he was nor re-elected, reform in acquisition is a challenge.
What would F-35 look like if all that could be built (admittedly the law says 10% limit until full production approved, so far none are limited) at first was the optec fleet? No more until fully passed!
Correction George H W Bush.