> On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 8:32 AM, <> wrote:
>
> I think MJ actually DOES correlate to the size of the bore and thus the
> size of the round so it's not preposterous. Just use seconds instead of 5
> second combat rounds as the baseline. Works great with the autoloaders.
> The problem, as it were, is FFS treating autoloaders as the same speed
> (when they've always been slower for big bore direct fire weapons).
> Integrating skill/task in retrospect seems obvious but that's hindsight
> for you.
MJ is definitely proportional to size of the weapon (energy it must
contain) and recoil system (energy it must dissipate), so it's good there.
But when you convert MJ into its storage medium (the round) which has
other inputs, you need to be careful about retaining MJ instead of its
storage medium. It looks like that one bit us.
> They're working through the "prototype" bugs. :D I think the JSF problem
> is interesting because it's a problem of too much mission and too many
> chiefs and not enough indians.
You caught me. I really changed the subject on that. Here's the real
problem: PPT slides. "Economies of scale," and "if we build just one
system that does everything for everyone, it will be much cheaper in the
long run," look really good on a PPT slide, and everyone falls for it. The
problem is that PPT does not have a built-in laws of physics checker to
throw those phrases out, or mark them with a little squiggly colored line
underneath. "One size fits all" never does. And it's never cheaper, it is
always more expensive, exponentially so, so that the economies of scale by
getting multiple people using it will never make up for the increase. When
you bring more players to your "one size fits all" table, they ALWAYS
bring more cost increases in requirements that must be integrated than
they bring cost savings in terms of the number they will buy to increase
the production run and lower costs.
US DoD procurement is comprehensively destroyed, broken, fraudulent,
criminal, stupid, asleep-the-wheel, the-lights-are-on-but-no-one-is-home.
But I won't let myself go any further on that one.
Dave
>
> I think MJ actually DOES correlate to the size of the bore and thus the
> size of the round so it's not preposterous. Just use seconds instead of 5
> second combat rounds as the baseline. Works great with the autoloaders.
> The problem, as it were, is FFS treating autoloaders as the same speed
> (when they've always been slower for big bore direct fire weapons).
> Integrating skill/task in retrospect seems obvious but that's hindsight
> for you.
MJ is definitely proportional to size of the weapon (energy it must
contain) and recoil system (energy it must dissipate), so it's good there.
But when you convert MJ into its storage medium (the round) which has
other inputs, you need to be careful about retaining MJ instead of its
storage medium. It looks like that one bit us.
> They're working through the "prototype" bugs. :D I think the JSF problem
> is interesting because it's a problem of too much mission and too many
> chiefs and not enough indians.
You caught me. I really changed the subject on that. Here's the real
problem: PPT slides. "Economies of scale," and "if we build just one
system that does everything for everyone, it will be much cheaper in the
long run," look really good on a PPT slide, and everyone falls for it. The
problem is that PPT does not have a built-in laws of physics checker to
throw those phrases out, or mark them with a little squiggly colored line
underneath. "One size fits all" never does. And it's never cheaper, it is
always more expensive, exponentially so, so that the economies of scale by
getting multiple people using it will never make up for the increase. When
you bring more players to your "one size fits all" table, they ALWAYS
bring more cost increases in requirements that must be integrated than
they bring cost savings in terms of the number they will buy to increase
the production run and lower costs.
US DoD procurement is comprehensively destroyed, broken, fraudulent,
criminal, stupid, asleep-the-wheel, the-lights-are-on-but-no-one-is-home.
But I won't let myself go any further on that one.
Dave