4 ms·

> Unfortunately fixed price contracts don't work for new cutting edge defense systems. New defense systems don't actually have to be cutting edge. The cutting

> Unfortunately fixed price contracts don't work for new cutting edge defense systems. New defense systems don't actually have to be cutting edge. The cutting edge stuff is more properly deployed as upgrades to existing systems (this tightens the feedback loop that produces learning). By the time the tech is influencing newly designed systems, it shouldn't be cutting edge anymore. Anyone complaining about how this slows the adoption and deployment of new technology should take a close look at what made the F-16 and F-18 successful platforms for so long. Not only were they regularly upgraded, but in many ways their upgradability was upgraded over time, and new planes coming off the assembly line were far from being frozen in time, but rather reflected an evolution of those platforms.

nradov 5y ago
No that's not how it works in the real world. You're never going to get something like a 5th generation fighter by making incremental improvements to 4th generation systems. At some point you run out of headroom and have to start over from scratch in order to maintain a qualitative advantage over potential adversaries. This is high risk and doesn't always work but there is no alternative.
- webmaven 5y ago
  I'm not saying that incremental improvements are the sole strategy. I'm saying that before you design a 5th gen system, the tech[0] you want to use should be proven as an upgrade to a 4th gen system. I'm saying that running out of headroom is a normal part of the lifecycle, and trying to cram in the latest everything into a newly designed system in an attempt to put off the inevitable is futile and counterproductive. I'm also saying that you may not run out of headroom as soon as you think. [0] Note that I'm aware that I am drawing a distinction here between 'tech' and 'design' that isn't really so clearcut.

nradov 5y ago

No that's not how it works in the real world. You're never going to get something like a 5th generation fighter by making incremental improvements to 4th generation systems. At some point you run out of headroom and have to start over from scratch in order to maintain a qualitative advantage over potential adversaries. This is high risk and doesn't always work but there is no alternative.

webmaven 5y ago
I'm not saying that incremental improvements are the sole strategy. I'm saying that before you design a 5th gen system, the tech[0] you want to use should be proven as an upgrade to a 4th gen system. I'm saying that running out of headroom is a normal part of the lifecycle, and trying to cram in the latest everything into a newly designed system in an attempt to put off the inevitable is futile and counterproductive. I'm also saying that you may not run out of headroom as soon as you think. [0] Note that I'm aware that I am drawing a distinction here between 'tech' and 'design' that isn't really so clearcut.