What are the three major factors which impact how a defense contract is chosen? Where do these three factors come together in a final decision and why is the defense market so unique and expensive? Are some weapons systems not able to apply to this process? Why not?
A defense contract is chosen based on cost, performance, and schedule. These come together to deliver a high-performance weapon that’s on time, but has cost overruns; to meet the schedule and cost targets, but forgoing the cutting-edge technology; or producing a high-performance weapons at a reasonable cost, but years of slow work. When it comes to developing and producing advanced weapons systems, it is very expensive. There are systematic flaws, most involve trade-offs. There is mo way that every problem can be fixed. The defense market is so unique and expensive because they supply the tool, weapon, etc. to the government and such exactly how they asked for it. In retail, that cannot be found. I’d assume that not all weapons can fit the requirements that they want simply because technology is …show more content…
This lead to defeating our adversaries during the Cold War without any combat tests. This left a “highly effective, high-tech, post-Cold War military”. After WW II, during the Cold War, the defense acquisition model shifted to the CPFF (cost plus fixed fee) contract. The government buyer covered the contractor’s costs, the firms would not lose any money if obstacles were met or cancelled. Cost escalation may increase the chances that politicians would cancel the project. This can lead to the contractor forfeiting a fee proportional to the effort not yet completed, the contractor may, in this case, control costs. I do not agree with the position that was taken in the defense industry during the Cold War. Despite the costs of the defense industry during the Cold War, I would say that it was a
A defense contract is chosen based on cost, performance, and schedule. These come together to deliver a high-performance weapon that’s on time, but has cost overruns; to meet the schedule and cost targets, but forgoing the cutting-edge technology; or producing a high-performance weapons at a reasonable cost, but years of slow work. When it comes to developing and producing advanced weapons systems, it is very expensive. There are systematic flaws, most involve trade-offs. There is mo way that every problem can be fixed. The defense market is so unique and expensive because they supply the tool, weapon, etc. to the government and such exactly how they asked for it. In retail, that cannot be found. I’d assume that not all weapons can fit the requirements that they want simply because technology is …show more content…
This lead to defeating our adversaries during the Cold War without any combat tests. This left a “highly effective, high-tech, post-Cold War military”. After WW II, during the Cold War, the defense acquisition model shifted to the CPFF (cost plus fixed fee) contract. The government buyer covered the contractor’s costs, the firms would not lose any money if obstacles were met or cancelled. Cost escalation may increase the chances that politicians would cancel the project. This can lead to the contractor forfeiting a fee proportional to the effort not yet completed, the contractor may, in this case, control costs. I do not agree with the position that was taken in the defense industry during the Cold War. Despite the costs of the defense industry during the Cold War, I would say that it was a