From reading the replies there is evidently a wealth of project management experience here. One wonders how many billions could be saved in defence procurement if this knowledge was distilled and taught to would-be programme managers.
Thank you
Camlobe for expanding on the E-3D differences.
Lonewolf_50's 'Perish the Thought' video link
is far too painfully close to the truth of the average project meeting that I've attended.
Tucumseh's point that if one group are left to get on with it with the minimum of outside interference, then a better product usually results. This is backed up by what
Tornadoken said about the Hawk.
Perhaps the problem is the sales people want to offer the earth, and the customers are only to happy to buy what they are offered. When it comes to actually producing a new aircraft with all the new engines, sensors, weapons and other hardware there are just too many unknowns. Maybe we should be more willing to accept mid-life or even quarter-life updates from the word go, rather than insisting on every part of the system being ready at the intended entry into service?
Is part of the problem that too many programmes are put in the hands of, or at least influenced by, 'high-flying whizz kids' who have only had superficial contact with earlier programmes, and don't have the depth of understanding to appreciate the implications of their decisions?
Taped to a desk I saw the following:
The Cowboy Proverb:
Good judgment comes from experience, and a lot of that comes from bad judgment.
As Tornadoken says:
Customer left industry to get on with it. So that's the A to what is the secret.
This seemed to work for General Atomics with the Predator A. Make a product that works and you know the customer will need, put it out there, and when they have a burning need they will come banging on your door. It just takes the financial resilience to be able to wait until they need it.