More Flexible Electronics Testing Needed

Having "new, needed gear" that fails under real world pressure and then can't be repaired in the field may cause more damage than not having the "new, needed gear".

I am a system test engineer for the US Department of Defense. I was accustomed to then old pass/fail absolute criteria used in Defense testing when I was a contractor to the DOD, and it took some adjustment of my thinking to allow me to test in the current "trade space" model.

The commander may not have expressed the details well, if at all, but our methodology, as applied, still responds to requirements. But rather than all requirements being hard-and-fast pass/fail, some are allowed to be flexible, by virtue of being established as threshold/target values. Requirements are also categorized as "critical" and "desirable", as opposed to all being critical. Further, we define even desirable abilities as "militarily useful" (i.e., does the warfighter think it is useful/need it/want it, and is the military sponsor, without whose agreement it doesn't get built, willing to apply HIS budget funds to its development/deployment/maintenance?). The result is a series of development, integration, and operations tests, which, if the item/system/etc. fails critical requirements, does not advance to the next stage, and faces complete cutoff of any further funds/work/etc.

What the commander was referring to, though, is the ability to advance a product into further development based on its ability to achieve a "threshold" (i.e., it DOES meet the minimum capability, and clearly CAN be improved by further development, with final approval being based on either meeting the TARGET value, which is the best it is expected to get, with anything further being "gravy", or military utility of reaching the previous target value is not found, and the target value is moved closer to, or even equal to, the previous threshold).

The result is that while critical requirements (field supportability, reliability, others to be defined by the requiring agency) must be met, the combatants are able to look at what else the item, or system, is capable of doing, and choose to field then item/system on that basis, and with the knowledge that development toward then target values will continue, with improved versions of then item showing that advancement.

And yep, it does mean we do a lot of regression testing to make sure "new and improved" does not mean "won't work with the old models".

All in all, with 25 years in DOD T&E, I LIKE the current methods and models. We build/buy/create far fewer expensive failures, and put newer, better tech in the hands of our warfighters MUCH earlier in the cycle, allowing us to keep the US military a whole lot closer to the tech-edge while still keeping reliable, safe (For the user. Safety for the enemy is NOT an option!) in the hands of the ultimate users.

And that is a mission worth fighting for, and working for!

You are quite right. And you only have to look at the original 'goals' of the 50 cal sniper rifle verses the 'adapted use', to realize that every 'product' put in the market, finds innovative application never dreamt of by the 'brief writer'.

Listening to the market is vital, but watching what then evolves needs to be embraced, not rejected as "No! that's not what we thought it was good for".

Armoring up Hummers being a good example of the latter thinking, combined with techno geek motor-head mine (improvised or not) memory lapse.

I.e. the same 'market evolution' applies to the opposition.

The more adaptable will win.

While drugs undergo severe test and used after years of experimenting, operations are done on the table on the spot. Defence, can also adopt on the spot available technology to get rid of problem. 9/11 like trouble will not give time so something is available to use then use it immediately is what defence operations are all about. Regular defence research can go the way it is but in emergency field trials of only available option which may give right possible solutions can be evaluated on the spot. If not used the available technology then disaster will happen anyway.