Delete comment from: Elements Of Power
Your points about concurrency in general are well taken but I don't believe it is statistically correct to say that concurrency in general works all right so therefore concurrency must be OK for one specific program.
The F-35 program's published costs are all based on a very aggressive production ramp to very high production rates of very standardized planes, thus maximizing production efficiencies and learning curve benefits BUT . . . this only works if you have a valid design that can be locked in.
Otherwise you see hugely expensive re-work both of the individual planes and the supply chain that builds them and you lose the learning curve benefits and production efficiencies that are critical to the program. This is exactly what we have been seeing and, with the latest service life failures, continue to see.
This means that the program is extremely vulnerable to the effects of changes found during concurrent production and R&D, therefore there must be less concurrency to reduce risk BUT . . .
The F-35 is already failing at its stated program goal of filling the fighter gap. Both the US and allies are buying new 4th gen planes and SLEPing old planes because of the F-35's delays (costs of which should be charged to the F-35 program) therefore the program must have more concurrency . . .
There is no way to reconcile the design evolutions of a fast, high concurrency project, the need to build planes right now and the need for mass production of a fixed design inherent in the program's cost estimates.
Sep 20, 2011, 9:46:56 PM
Posted to Congressional Bloviation On The 'Concurrency Bogeyman'