Message posted by Duke on September 20, 2020 at 8:57:53 PST:
I'm sure that's the general approach whoever came up with is acq strategy is envisioning, but as I said it looks to be an upgunned variation of the leader/follower concept of the 70s/80s. That strategy was abandoned due to habitual legal problems between contractors and config management issues. It's not natural to count on rivals competing for the same contract to share information, even if the government owns the level 3 drawing package. It's interesting a somewhat similar approach was used during WWII when aircraft manufacturers (and others like General Motors) were assigned production of competitors a/c, primarily as a function of available production capability. As a result you had Lockheed built B-17s, GM built Wildcats and Avengers, and Brewster built Corsairs. While this strategy worked fairly well, it was more about the government effectively nationalizing the industry during WWII.
In Reply to: Re: Probably the most important read about 'NGAD' on the internet posted by Mark on September 19, 2020 at 19:18:45 PST:
Replies: