Practicality and buildability is part of the requirements process.
I just commend that to you. I would suggest a summit meeting in San Jose about what are the issues and how do we improve this program.
Another opportunity--and I hate to raise the word 'joint' because it does not have a very good history in military procurement.
Eighty percent solutions instead of 100 percent.
Well, that is exactly the experience of the Air Force and to some extent the Navy of doing R&D while you are building.
I think that is very important that we do not forget those lessons, that they are embedded somehow in the formal process and in the structur...
I am a great believer that structure is policy. If you have a messy structure, you end up with a messy policy.
What about that as an option?
But I would also add to that list of items the process itself as it relates to their ability to interact with the Pentagon.
I want to emphasize on a timely basis--while protecting our taxpayers' dollars.
Resources are never unlimited, and the Air Force must make investments based on near-term risks as well as future threats.