LO,
Spot on. To some large extent, the DoD operates on a 'command and control' system, where defence companies pretty much do as they are told, and 'build to print' once their designs are approved.
DoD has been trying to change away from this, basically because even the US cannot afford the massive costs of the bureaucracy involved in doing all that commanding and controlling. This has led to many 'defence acquisition transformations) that have had varying degrees of success.
In some ways, F-35 is just another of the attempts. As I've posted earlier, some of the ideas have worked, some haven't.
Bit it does mean that when countries like the UK buy a US sourced piece of kit, US companies are unused, ill equipped and usually plain unwilling to provide the level of 'performance underwriting' that UK companies are used to. Plus the ever present issue of US ITAR regulations being used to preserve the US technological lead.
These issues can, and do, lead to problems when buying from the US. Rivet Joint's a decent example. Unfortunately, very few Uk MoD acquisition personnel are fully aware of the risks involved. I hope that those people currently advocating a direct Apache buy from Boeing have got all those issues fully 'risk costed'.
But I bet they haven't.
Best regards as ever to those having to deal with Uncle Sam,
Engines