Comments on: Flightdeck Friday: V/STOL Dreams http://blog.usni.org/2009/06/11/flightdeck-friday-vstol-dreams/ The Naval Institute’s taken its independent forum to a new level - with you in the middle of it. Fri, 10 Feb 2012 21:43:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Andrew http://blog.usni.org/2009/06/11/flightdeck-friday-vstol-dreams/comment-page-1/#comment-115960 Andrew Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:53:26 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=3031#comment-115960 SJS, Agree on both counts. I would argue that a traditionally expansive requirements document is an easier place to hide a lack of rigor that a tightly written document. Clearly there are two issues: image over substance on the one hand and bureaucracy verses innovation on the other. You'll notice that Spangenberg's first slide includes the acronym "LWF" for lightweight fighter, putting the F-16's origin in the same category as the rest, yet Energy Maneuver Theory and accompanying analysis that supported the LWF requirements was perhaps the most technically rigorous analysis performed on a fighter aircraft. -Andy SJS,
Agree on both counts.
I would argue that a traditionally expansive requirements document is an easier place to hide a lack of rigor that a tightly written document.
Clearly there are two issues: image over substance on the one hand and bureaucracy verses innovation on the other.
You’ll notice that Spangenberg’s first slide includes the acronym “LWF” for lightweight fighter, putting the F-16′s origin in the same category as the rest, yet Energy Maneuver Theory and accompanying analysis that supported the LWF requirements was perhaps the most technically rigorous analysis performed on a fighter aircraft.

-Andy

]]> By: SteelJaw http://blog.usni.org/2009/06/11/flightdeck-friday-vstol-dreams/comment-page-1/#comment-115839 SteelJaw Mon, 15 Jun 2009 08:29:32 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=3031#comment-115839 Andy: 'twasn't the prototype process <i>per se</i> that I have trouble with, rather the lack of intellectual and engineering rigor up front in the requirements definition process, something that is still very much extant today. w/r, SJS Andy:

’twasn’t the prototype process per se that I have trouble with, rather the lack of intellectual and engineering rigor up front in the requirements definition process, something that is still very much extant today.
w/r,
SJS

]]> By: Andrew http://blog.usni.org/2009/06/11/flightdeck-friday-vstol-dreams/comment-page-1/#comment-115784 Andrew Sun, 14 Jun 2009 23:06:38 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=3031#comment-115784 I would remind you that the same prototyping program resulted in the YA-10, the YF-16, and the YF-17, all of which became mainstays of our modern fighter force. Perhaps it was NAVAIR's pessimism, cynicism, and conservatism that prevented them from defining requirements with sufficient minimalist elegance and freedom to allow creative solutions. Critical to the Lightweight Fighter program that resulted in the F-16, was eliminating the requirement for the AIM-7 missile and the associated weight penalty of it's fire control system. Perhaps the STOVL FV-12 would have had a chance had it been pared down in its requirements. -Andy I would remind you that the same prototyping program resulted in the YA-10, the YF-16, and the YF-17, all of which became mainstays of our modern fighter force.
Perhaps it was NAVAIR’s pessimism, cynicism, and conservatism that prevented them from defining requirements with sufficient minimalist elegance and freedom to allow creative solutions.
Critical to the Lightweight Fighter program that resulted in the F-16, was eliminating the requirement for the AIM-7 missile and the associated weight penalty of it’s fire control system.
Perhaps the STOVL FV-12 would have had a chance had it been pared down in its requirements.

-Andy

]]> By: Sea Links « New Wars http://blog.usni.org/2009/06/11/flightdeck-friday-vstol-dreams/comment-page-1/#comment-115481 Sea Links « New Wars Fri, 12 Jun 2009 09:49:53 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=3031#comment-115481 [...] V/STOL Dreams. (US Naval Institute) [...] [...] V/STOL Dreams. (US Naval Institute) [...]

]]> By: SteelJaw http://blog.usni.org/2009/06/11/flightdeck-friday-vstol-dreams/comment-page-1/#comment-115348 SteelJaw Thu, 11 Jun 2009 20:23:08 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=3031#comment-115348 @DSB: Well, *virtually* it is in the part of the world I'm presently emeshed... :) - SJS @DSB: Well, *virtually* it is in the part of the world I’m presently emeshed… :)
- SJS

]]> By: Mike M. http://blog.usni.org/2009/06/11/flightdeck-friday-vstol-dreams/comment-page-1/#comment-115341 Mike M. Thu, 11 Jun 2009 19:20:43 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=3031#comment-115341 That being said, there a lot to be said for development programs with simple specifications. We tend to specify everything...and wind up with uninspired designs. Better to have a handful of "must have" characteristics and let the design team sweat the details. That being said, there a lot to be said for development programs with simple specifications. We tend to specify everything…and wind up with uninspired designs. Better to have a handful of “must have” characteristics and let the design team sweat the details.

]]> By: Defense Springboard http://blog.usni.org/2009/06/11/flightdeck-friday-vstol-dreams/comment-page-1/#comment-115339 Defense Springboard Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:59:59 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=3031#comment-115339 (But...just gotta say it...It ain't Friday yet.) :) (But…just gotta say it…It ain’t Friday yet.) :)

]]> By: Defense Springboard http://blog.usni.org/2009/06/11/flightdeck-friday-vstol-dreams/comment-page-1/#comment-115338 Defense Springboard Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:58:32 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=3031#comment-115338 Just keep churnin' out the good stuff, Steeljaw! I mean, OK, it's not the LCS barfightin' goin' on down the way here, but I'm really digging the historical context work you're providing. Keep it up! Just keep churnin’ out the good stuff, Steeljaw! I mean, OK, it’s not the LCS barfightin’ goin’ on down the way here, but I’m really digging the historical context work you’re providing. Keep it up!

]]> By: UltimaRatioReg http://blog.usni.org/2009/06/11/flightdeck-friday-vstol-dreams/comment-page-1/#comment-115334 UltimaRatioReg Thu, 11 Jun 2009 18:36:31 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=3031#comment-115334 "The hard lesson (not) learned was the necessity for solid requirements going into the design process. The lack of rigor and forethought in the development of requirements..." NAVAIR ought to have leaned over and whispered that to NAVSEA. Yesterday's "Harvard Graphics Ranger" is today's Power Point Ranger. Thirty-five years ago was it a Drafting Table Ranger"? “The hard lesson (not) learned was the necessity for solid requirements going into the design process. The lack of rigor and forethought in the development of requirements…”

NAVAIR ought to have leaned over and whispered that to NAVSEA. Yesterday’s “Harvard Graphics Ranger” is today’s Power Point Ranger. Thirty-five years ago was it a Drafting Table Ranger”?

]]> By: Mike M. http://blog.usni.org/2009/06/11/flightdeck-friday-vstol-dreams/comment-page-1/#comment-115282 Mike M. Thu, 11 Jun 2009 16:47:13 +0000 http://blog.usni.org/?p=3031#comment-115282 Yup. NAVAIR had a long record of pessimism and cynicism...and of being proven right in the end. Unfortunately, the kool-aid drinkers have gotten traction of late. Yup. NAVAIR had a long record of pessimism and cynicism…and of being proven right in the end.

Unfortunately, the kool-aid drinkers have gotten traction of late.

]]>