• identification of problems in operational use;

  • improvement of tactics and doctrine;

  • understanding of heterogeneity of units and performance of units in heterogeneous situations, including environment, tactical situations, etc.:

  • relating of deficiencies in performance to operational conditions;

  • understanding of training issues; and

  • generally, improving the understanding of whether the basic design is flawed, even for focused applications, thereby saving money required for retrofitting after full-rate production has begun.

When the decision rule encompasses all of these considerations, the decision-theory argument suggested here is even further complicated, since the decision rule is more difficult to analyze. To better understand how to implement the comparison of marginal cost with the value of the information gained through additional testing, a feedback system is needed, in which the service test agencies maintain records of the costs of testing and the costs of any retrofitting, along with the precise test events that were conducted and the reason why retrofitting was required. Discovered defects or system limitations might then be traced back to inadequate testing. In this way, the process of comparing costs and benefits can be improved so that similar problems do not recur. This approach should be systematically investigated.

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement