By John Birkler
Safeguard policymakers within the U.S. anticipate that the Joint Strike Fighter will play a serious position in U.S. and allied army forces throughout the first half the century. the dept of Defense's present Joint Strike Fighter axquisition procedure is a winner-take-all festival pitting Lockeed Martin opposed to Boeing. This method has raised issues of even if pageant might be retained after Lockheed Martin or Boeing is chosen to start engineering and production improvement.
Read or Download Assessing Competitive Strategies for the Joint Strike Fighter: Opportunities and Options PDF
Best military technology books
H32 Choctaw in motion
Significant Carter explores 3 case reports that experience vital similarities: the doctrine of serious Britain's Royal Air strength from 1918 to 1938, the Israeli Air Force's process from 1967 to 1973, and the U.S. Air Force's process from 1953 to 1965. He starts via developing the theoretical historical past worthwhile for case learn research.
The M1917 Enfield, officially named "United States rifle, cal . 30, version of 1917" used to be an American amendment of the British . 303 quality P14 rifle built and made from 1917-1918. The Enfield rifle was once famous for numerous layout positive aspects. It was once designed with a rear receiver aperture sight, secure via solid "ears," a layout that proved to be quicker and extra actual than the common mid-barrel sight.
- War: The Lethal Custom
- Sikorsky S-16
- Carl A. Spaatz and the air war in Europe (General histories)
- North American P-51B-C-Mustang
- Missile Guidance and Pursuit: Kinematics, Dynamics and Control
Additional resources for Assessing Competitive Strategies for the Joint Strike Fighter: Opportunities and Options
Within the cost goals established by the government, but the way they do so is left up to them. Risk Reduction Early on, the JSF Program Office identified areas of relatively high technical and programmatic risk, and initiated programs to reduce risk. The main approach selected to manage risk was to fund numerous competitive hardware demonstration programs. One good example is the multifunction integrated radio frequency systems (MIRFS) program. The purpose of the MIRFS program was to encourage companies to develop lighter, much lower cost, active electronically scanned arrays (AESAs) for fire control radars.
Schedules also can lengthen because of the increased program complexity and increased bureaucratic involvement caused by competition. By lengthening schedules, competition carries the risk of raising program costs. Moreover, the risk of increased program length also is a disincentive to competition because there is usually a strong desire to deploy the system as rapidly as possible. During the production phase, the funding required to qualify a second, competitive source appears to pose less of a problem, at least for less-complex systems or components—perhaps because, by the time the program is in production, all major conceptual issues have long since been resolved.
The task is complicated particularly because little information or guidance can be drawn from the experience of other programs from lessons learned reports. For the most part, program managers must plan solely on the basis of their own experience. Some program managers need no more than their past experience; others’ lack of experience with the additional burden complicates planning. Competition during production introduces still other management complications. Qualifying a second producer after production has begun can be a major effort.