USAF Developmental Test – Value Added - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

gore
usaf developmental test value added n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
USAF Developmental Test – Value Added PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
USAF Developmental Test – Value Added

play fullscreen
1 / 13
Download Presentation
USAF Developmental Test – Value Added
146 Views
Download Presentation

USAF Developmental Test – Value Added

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. USAF Developmental Test – Value Added Maj Gen David Eichhorn Commander, AFFTC 26 August 2010

  2. Our Mission • The mission of the USAF is to: • Fly, fight and win...in air, space and cyberspace.  • The mission of the AFFTC is to: • Provide safe, effective and efficient RDT&E • First choice in RDT&E • Invest in people and facilities • Leverage our weather and location • APA and EW experts • Conduct independent, objective assessment

  3. Engineering • Engineering Intellectual Capital • Performance and Flying Qualities • Avionics • Electronic Warfare • Low Observables • Armament Integration • Hypersonics • Reliability, Maintainability • Human Factors • Mechanical Subsystems • Mission Planning • Instrumentation

  4. Electronic Warfare Facilities TEMS AFEWES OAR AF Electronic Warfare Evaluation Simulator Hardware-In-The-Loop Test & Evaluation, Modeling and Simulation Digital Simulation Open Air Range IFAST BAF EW T&E U Benefield Anechoic Facility Installed Systems Test Facility Integration Facility for Avionics Systems Testing Systems Integration Lab EW Test & Evaluation University

  5. Systems Under Test FIGHTERS TANKERS AIRLIFT/AIR DROP BOMBERS UAV / UCAV AIRBORNE LASER HYPERSONIC FLIGHT TEST

  6. Lambert-St Louis Marietta, GA Carswell, TX Edwards AFB, CA Why We Do It Here… What Gets Tested – And Where It Gets Tested Matters!

  7. Trends in System Complexity Avionics Cost as Percent of Fly-Away Costs 25 20 15 10 5 0 F-35 Estimate F-22 F-16A F-15A F-111F Govt DT&E Influence F-46 F-100 As systems get more complex the less the Government understand them 2010 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000

  8. Growth in Demand c.1945-1955 c.1955-1960 c.1960-1970 c.1970-2000 c.2000+ F-22A US: F-111, F-4, F-5Soviet: MiG-23/25/27, Su-17/20/22 Europe: Mirage F-1China: J-8 • Sophisticated Avionics • Improved Precision US: F-100, F-101, F-102, F-104, F-105, F-106Soviet: MiG-19/21China: J-7 US: P-80, F-84, F-86, FH-1, FJ, F-2H, F-3H, F-9F Soviet: MiG-15/17 F-35A F-15E • Multi-Role • Improved Avionics • Supersonic • On-Board Radar • First Guided Air-to-Air Missiles MiG-29 F-4E • Fully Integrated Avionics & Sensors • Greater Speed & Maneuverability • All-Aspect, Day/Night Low-Observable (F-22) • Network Centric MiG-23 • Enhanced Radar • Improved Maneuverability • First Low-Observable (F-117) F-106 • Turbojet Engines MiG-21 F-86 • First Precision Munitions US: F-14, F-15A/C/E, F-16, F/A-18C/E/F, F-117 Soviet/Russian: MiG-29/31, Su-27/30/33/35 Europe: Mirage 2000, Tornado, Rafale, Gripen, Eurofighter-Typhoon China: J-9, J-10, FC-1 OperationalUS: F-22ADevelopmentUS: F-35A/B/CRussian: MiG & Sukhoi ConceptsChina: XXJ Concept MiG-15

  9. High Demand / Low Density Resources • Airspace & range assets • Restricted Airspace • Frequency Spectrum • Technical Personnel • Maintenance • Engineers • Operators: esp. Test Pilot School Graduates • Support Fleet • Efficient use of government assets • Level playing field • Infrastructure

  10. Savings from Early Discovery • Your Return on Investment: 30-to-1 Rule • $30 savings to weapon system programs for every $1 invested in established T&E facilities Technology & System Development Production, Deployment, O&S Cost Billions saved over weapon system lifecycle Time 10

  11. Best Practices: A More Constructive Test Approach is Key to Better Weapon Systems (GAO Report - July 2000) • “Commercial firms have found constructive ways of conducting testing and evaluation to help them avoid being surprised by problems late in a product’s development.” • “However, the pressures of successfully competing for [government] funds to start and sustain a weapon system program create incentives for launching programs that embody more technical unknowns and less knowledge about the performance and production risks they entail…a new program will not be approved unless its costs fall within forecasts of available funds.”

  12. Constructive Test Approach is Key to Better Weapon Systems • “These pressures and incentives explain why the behavior of [government] weapon system managers differs from commercial managers. • Rewards for discovering and recognizing potential problems early in a DoD program are few. In contrast with leading commercial firms, not having attained knowledge – such as on the performance of a key technology – can be perceived as better than knowing the problems exist. When valid test results are not available, program sponsors can assert projected performance.” “Accordingly, DoD testers are often seen as adversaries to the program.” (GAO Report - July 2000)

  13. Doing it Right The committee* is of the opinion that a highly technical Service such as the Air Force should prepare itself to take a more competent role than it is now taking in guarding the solution of the technical problems connected with its weapons and techniques. Dr von Karman Gen Doolittle 1949 Scientific Advisory Board (Dr von Karman, Gen Doolittle, Dr Wattendorf) Delivery of Right Capabilities on Schedule on Budget 13