Yes I agree with you that it wont work, this is not the 19th century anymore, information flows like water, its not possible to hide an idea anymore and whats worse is that if you can think of it, so can your competitors, if you choose not to develop it, then you just get left behind.
That was a good article that point out many problems and the current reality, but the 3 advice the author point to the end of the article are not solutions.
Use less technology or focus effort into fewer sectors of technology won't stop Chinese progress, it will only stop yours.
China is way ahead of US in this one, US has deindustrialized its manufacturing base to China, how do you plan to bring back the supply Chain when its already in China, and they will be more efficient than you and innovate faster? Not to mention China is aware of US's mistake and won't easily give it back to you.
Again, this is a non-solution, China probably suffer from the same problem in its own development, but that does not prevent them from innovating, at best it makes it more efficient, but still won't be a killer advantage over other nations.
My personal recommendation are the following.
1. Have more accountability for US defense contractors, there is a lot of corruption in weapon procurement, so many company inflate cost with no punishments, sign clear contract on weapon requirements and have clear deliver stage goals, have more US military oversight and involvement in those weapon developments. And when overtime and over budgets happens, everyone should share responsibly, not just the government and taxpayers.
2. Manage project scope better, one of the problem with F-35 is that they keep pushing new sifi star war tech on the jet, which are very expensive and experimental and thus result in very high costs and a lot of problems. For example they replace the HUD with those helmets, but those helmets have so much problems, a few years ago they said were unusable because the images became a blur when pilot move their head or make high maneuvers and it also cause nausea as well, and just few weeks ago another report says those helmet's night vision don't work in a ....
Technology like are good, but they should have a low budget but long period development in lab to get mature first then use for military applications, but they literally draw up the requirement for it from paper, and give it a very high budget and limited time to make it for F-35.
3. Strive for efficiency, not for politics, one reason F-35 costs so much because it has factory in 48/50 States in US, this is means its supply chains are totally starch out and not efficient, they did that because they want to make the plane to provide jobs as much States as possible to make it hard to kill in congress. This is pretty stupid, its like you like the hospital food, and to stay in hospital, you shoot your self in the foot.
That was a good article that point out many problems and the current reality, but the 3 advice the author point to the end of the article are not solutions.
First, the United States can start by adopting strategic pragmatism in picking its areas of technology deployment
Use less technology or focus effort into fewer sectors of technology won't stop Chinese progress, it will only stop yours.
Second, the United States should partner with industry to better understand a fast-changing global supply chain and the industrial base that supports it. Bolstering coordination between private-sector investment and defense-industrial base objectives is especially important
China is way ahead of US in this one, US has deindustrialized its manufacturing base to China, how do you plan to bring back the supply Chain when its already in China, and they will be more efficient than you and innovate faster? Not to mention China is aware of US's mistake and won't easily give it back to you.
Finally, the Pentagon needs to rethink the “valley of death” — the gap between technology innovation and implementation. Many lament this gap, arguing that too many technologies make it through the basic R&D phase but don’t survive the acquisition/integration process.
Again, this is a non-solution, China probably suffer from the same problem in its own development, but that does not prevent them from innovating, at best it makes it more efficient, but still won't be a killer advantage over other nations.
My personal recommendation are the following.
1. Have more accountability for US defense contractors, there is a lot of corruption in weapon procurement, so many company inflate cost with no punishments, sign clear contract on weapon requirements and have clear deliver stage goals, have more US military oversight and involvement in those weapon developments. And when overtime and over budgets happens, everyone should share responsibly, not just the government and taxpayers.
2. Manage project scope better, one of the problem with F-35 is that they keep pushing new sifi star war tech on the jet, which are very expensive and experimental and thus result in very high costs and a lot of problems. For example they replace the HUD with those helmets, but those helmets have so much problems, a few years ago they said were unusable because the images became a blur when pilot move their head or make high maneuvers and it also cause nausea as well, and just few weeks ago another report says those helmet's night vision don't work in a ....
Technology like are good, but they should have a low budget but long period development in lab to get mature first then use for military applications, but they literally draw up the requirement for it from paper, and give it a very high budget and limited time to make it for F-35.
3. Strive for efficiency, not for politics, one reason F-35 costs so much because it has factory in 48/50 States in US, this is means its supply chains are totally starch out and not efficient, they did that because they want to make the plane to provide jobs as much States as possible to make it hard to kill in congress. This is pretty stupid, its like you like the hospital food, and to stay in hospital, you shoot your self in the foot.
Last edited: