... and this is a major reason for the problem:
Seven different definitions for "cost" are in use with the DoD. I observed flyaway cost, weapon system cost and life cycle cost very often in discussions and articles. Half-informed participants of many such discussions didn't know about the differences and the result was a mess.
S O
.
All well and good to redefine it to appease the bean counters - but how do you define the final cost without having had the unit in service for some time? ... do you include upgrades and refits - or are they new aircraft? if budget is spent developing aircraft that do not end up progressing through the full process set out ,, and they end up cheaper but are never fully optimized for use and therefore are not as useful as they might be , but are cheaper .. is that better??
ReplyDelete