View Single Post
Old 04-07-2013, 07:15 PM   #13
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: East Coast
Posts: 760
My Ride: is a ///M
Originally Posted by NOVAbimmer View Post
"Requirement" from an acquisitions definition, meaning "this is what we'd like". Some acquisitions person forgot their performance/schedule trade space on some heroin binge and said "we can make this do everything everybody wants within cost!"
Having spent some time in the DOD acquisition community when I was active duty, I am familiar with requirements and the relationship between cost, schedule, and performance and trade offs amongst them.

That said, as I'm sure you know, the JSF was the DOD's attempt to provide an aircraft to meet all the service's needs, including international partners. However, due to unique requirements laid forth by each of the services, namely the Navy and the Marines, different variants of the aircraft had to be produced. The Navy needed an aircraft that could perform and handle the stresses of carrier based operations. The Marines needing a VSTOL aircraft to be able to operate off of LHDs and perform in amphibious operations and be expeditionary in nature.

Do I agree with this aircraft? I don't know - especially with the cost and delays associated it with it. It seems hardly worth it anymore - maybe not even necessary. But it's continued development, as with most high priced DOD platforms, has become political and emotional with a lot of people's time and money vested in it. Additionally, politicians and their constituents have a part to play as well - especially when hundreds of jobs are on the line that depend on this aircraft.

So going back to the original comment, irregardless of this aircraft, I do think VSTOL is a capability that is necessary and is not outdated. It may not be a requirement for the rest of the US services, but from an amphibious and expeditionary perspective, it most certainly is.

Last edited by MDydinanM; 04-07-2013 at 07:18 PM.
MDydinanM is offline   Reply With Quote