Todos
← Back to Squawk list
Are F-35s fit for combat? Pentagon doesn't know
The Pentagon's testing office questioned the strategy and legality of buying the fighters in bulk (www.cnn.com) Más...Sort type: [Top] [Newest]
Perhaps things should happen the old way. Layout the specs, builders build to the spec and don't get paid until the job is done. Mission creep is a well known problem in the military, and constant changes to the specs is mission creep in a different light. Manufacturers won't add do-dads if they are on the hook for the cost if the do-dads fail.
I'm not sure if mission creep is the culprit necessarily. I do recall articles indicating several times where performance specs have been relaxed since the plane wasn't able to achieve them (little stuff, like climb rate, Turn and G-Force, speed,- you know stuff fighters don't have to worry about -note sarc). Its more like 'mission descope'.... Cant meet the performance specs, well then simply lower the specs ! I wish programs I'd been on over the past 30+ years had that luxury. Generally we have had our feet held to the fire for each and every aspect of the system's performance we'd signed up for (and usually even a bit more, the mission creep to which you speak).
Whatever it takes to get the generals' retirement job with LM cinched.
Sounds like aircraft affirmative action.
Dr. Gilmore has been arguing the value of developmental testing for years. Once systems become operational problems are a lot more expensive to fix.
Not to mention the bully pulpit sales job they jammed our allies with.
The foreign sales aspect could well be the overarching reason this fiasco will not be terminated.
The foreign sales aspect could well be the overarching reason this fiasco will not be terminated.