05-10-2011, 07:34 PM
Stan,
Gene has a point -- we do need to do at least a little "red team" work in developing the notional requirements list. The value is that, if adopted, the new cartridge will be around for at least a decade, more likely 20 to 30 years to provide space for the replacement technologies to materialize and mature. This gives plenty of time for our future adversaries to develop new tricks. At the same time, we need to avoid being obsessively over-exuberant in laying on challenging requirements -- that's the fastest way to kill the project!
My sincere hope is that Tony or one of his associates has insight into the UK MoD mindset of what a new cartridge should be required to do. I will also admit that much of the discussion in his forum deals with the same notion that the current weapons are just fine thank you. With a variant of come back and talk to us after a real requirement develops (sounds like don't call us -- we'll call you.).
Gene has a point -- we do need to do at least a little "red team" work in developing the notional requirements list. The value is that, if adopted, the new cartridge will be around for at least a decade, more likely 20 to 30 years to provide space for the replacement technologies to materialize and mature. This gives plenty of time for our future adversaries to develop new tricks. At the same time, we need to avoid being obsessively over-exuberant in laying on challenging requirements -- that's the fastest way to kill the project!
My sincere hope is that Tony or one of his associates has insight into the UK MoD mindset of what a new cartridge should be required to do. I will also admit that much of the discussion in his forum deals with the same notion that the current weapons are just fine thank you. With a variant of come back and talk to us after a real requirement develops (sounds like don't call us -- we'll call you.).