From: asgard@plx.com (J.R. Stoner)
Subject: Re: What is Marrou's position on research and space exp?
Keywords: n
Organization: Heironamous Botch's Murk Works
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 01:21:02 GMT

;>Since the government
;>actually buys our defense systems from private companies, shouldn't the
;>companies be doing the research to develop technology for the
;>next-generation fighter/ship/satellite/communications systems/whatver
;>themselves instead of some bureaucratic government agency?

;They do this now, to some extent, and the incentives for that might be
;increased.  Potentially, we could set up a system where the government 
;competitively buys finished products, instead of giving detailed 
;specifications.  That might get on the Libertarian list of experiments to 
;try, but for now I don't think it's a major priority.  The major Libertarian 
;defense plank for reducing defense costs is to stop defending Germany and 
;Japan.

Maybe now is a good time to bring up an anecdote, to help crystallize
thinking on the subject of government procurement of military hardware.

The subject is the YF-20.
General Dynamics splunked down close to a billion dollars of their own money
to design and test a new single-engine figher jet some years ago.  This plane
was designed as a cost-effective advanced fighter for NATO and third-world
countries.  The money for the design program came from GD and not the US
government.  Compared with disastrous programs such as the YF-12 (and probably
the YF-22 advanced Stealth, if things keep going as they are) the YF20 proto-
types were completed ahead of schedule, and on budget.  The internal flight test
program showed that this plane, while not a match for an F-16 or possibly
the A-6, was considered a 'sweet' bird and required only minor design changes
to credibly protect against the current crop of threats like Saddam and Khadafy.
So far as I know, these birds would have sold for a lot less than the 30+
million dollars that Israel is paying for the F-16.  Only a fly-off and
final endorsement from the procurement office in the Pentagon was needed to
bring the YF-20 to market overseas.  A failure from the Pentagon would have
prevented the cost-throughs that make possible the sale of current hardware
from on-hand stocks with new procurement replacing the sale items.
The overseas buyer gets his planes more cheaply, and the manufacturer gets
more sales.  Cost-through management is mandated by budgetary and trade
restrictions from Congress.  After acceptance from flight test it is normally a
rubber-stamp process for congress to approve a plane into stocks.

At least it was for planes designed and micro-managed from Congress.
The F-20 passed flight test, but died a quiet death in Congress.

I am still not _sure_ why that was but my best guess is that the F-20 fell
prey to a serious case of Not Invented Here.  Congress has no business
interfering with market forces that generate a need, and mandate the solution.
I guess that makes companies like GD and McDD realize the 'error' of their
ways and will never again attempt to design a weapon system without
Congressional fingers in the pie.

A sufficiently Libertarian Congress would have eliminated the cost-through
requirement entirely, making the Pentagon and foreign customers true equals,
since then everybody would have to buy 'off-the-shelf.'
-- 
J.R. Stoner, DWMIT - asgard@plx.com - sun.com!plx!plxsun!asgard
Xref: sparky alt.politics.marrou:145 alt.politics.perot:1059 talk.politics.misc:35624