sferrin said:
I think the problem is they throw too much time at things which ends up costing too much money. Time is money after all. I'm all for, "measure twice, cut once" but not "measure forty-seven times, cut once, then throw the board in the garbage".
The other possibility is that UCAS-D demonstrated that the cost of meeting the UCAS/UAS ship suitability requirements (consider all of the CV segment supporting infrastructure and training costs) dominates air vehicle cost.
You can't skimp on the former so in order to meet your budget you have to reduce cost on the latter hence the descoping.
Another question is: just how much UCAS-D data was shared with the Lockheed and Boeing?
I don't recall hearing any complaints. On the contrary, Lockheed was arguing for more X-47B testing.