Re: The End of the Carrier Age?
actually, usually only at a component level you are able to do worst case scenario tests.
once you validate the component level, the system level worst case is usually mandated to be proven using validated simulations/ analysis. that goes truer and truer as the complexity of your system goes up.
Case in point is a cruise missile (can't tell you which version/what kind)
Usually the "user" (navy, again can't tell you which one) asks for a certain version or block to have certain % number that can complete a mission (hit a target with in certain deviation), given a variability in external (atmosphere conditions for example) and internal (component failure probabilities, for example) factorw.
since there is no way in hell the "user" will pay for enough missiles to establish the real failure rates through flight testing , In the end the real rate has to be established by analysis and simulation. including running millions of simulated scenarios in a validated simulation enviornment with the component failure probability established by test.
This whole process has to go through rigorous reviews by people from contracting agencies.
nothing is as simple as you make them out to be.
and please don't think the people on the other side of this arguments are all "fanboys".
not gonna argue with you anymore, for all i care you can said china is building 10 supercarrier hidden somewhere and has hundreads ASBM hidden and can take down entire worlds navy
i've been in defense industry for decade, and we always do some worst case scenario/performance/capability test. believe whatever you like. might want to ease up on your Fanboy level, its way up there.
i've been in defense industry for decade, and we always do some worst case scenario/performance/capability test. believe whatever you like. might want to ease up on your Fanboy level, its way up there.
actually, usually only at a component level you are able to do worst case scenario tests.
once you validate the component level, the system level worst case is usually mandated to be proven using validated simulations/ analysis. that goes truer and truer as the complexity of your system goes up.
Case in point is a cruise missile (can't tell you which version/what kind)
Usually the "user" (navy, again can't tell you which one) asks for a certain version or block to have certain % number that can complete a mission (hit a target with in certain deviation), given a variability in external (atmosphere conditions for example) and internal (component failure probabilities, for example) factorw.
since there is no way in hell the "user" will pay for enough missiles to establish the real failure rates through flight testing , In the end the real rate has to be established by analysis and simulation. including running millions of simulated scenarios in a validated simulation enviornment with the component failure probability established by test.
This whole process has to go through rigorous reviews by people from contracting agencies.
nothing is as simple as you make them out to be.
and please don't think the people on the other side of this arguments are all "fanboys".