You're right, this is always the tension because we're assuming risks either way. My half-serious CH-47 proposal, in particular, is probably the extreme version

You're right, this is always the tension because we're assuming risks either way. My half-serious CH-47 proposal, in particular, is probably the extreme version of "fighting the last war." I think the consensus within the DoD by the mid to late-2000s was that the pendulum had swung way too far in the direction of technologically advanced but small and expensive, and there was a cultural revolution to swing things back in the other direction. Senior DoD and service leaders today are really a product of that. I read a fresh opinion piece just yesterday arguing that we're still erring on the side of being too small and expensive, with which I tend to agree: https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2024/01/pentagon-has-been-learning-wrong-lessons-three-decades/393765/ https://www.defenseone.com/ideas/2024/01/pentagon-has-been-l...