The classification barrier that prevent discussion.
Well this one never fails to amaze and make me cringe.
Typical military forum discussion. I presented calculations and methods to predict estimated cost of certain item. One forum member complained that my estimates was off by large margin... comparing it with data from DOD.
The problem is that... When asked about what likely value i need to adjust/reinput to my calculations (as my formula is correct) He simply said "Im sorry i have no access to xyz. The item in question has its budgetary/price info classifed for competitiveness reason"
I was like ..."Are you fucking serious m8 ?" How the fuck exactly you can call someone wrong Yet unable to to show the correct value or at least better way to do the thing ? How a discussion could even be start...
The DOD data was nice BUT it does not contain what needed to improve my calculations. If i were to trackback based on it. What i would find is even weird number, which basically does not match everything published so far (Granted that my source material could be dated but well...).
In case you guys ever curious on what am i workin for. This is the discussion in question.
forum.keypublishing.com/showth…
Since i make the calculation.. naturally i would expect anyone criticizing the work to have at least "the right value" to make it right. If no then what am i supposed to do ?
Unfortunately tho most information regarding design and especially cost for Transmit Receive module for Active Phased Array radar is indeed classified or proprietary. However open source estimates does exist which what i use now. I could always try made my own but then.. When i discussed about it and hit yet another classification barrier... what you guys think i should do.
Cost of a Radar is basically calculated as follows :
Cost=Ca*Na+Cp*Np+Constant
Where Ca is aperture cost per square meter and Na is aperture area. Cp is cost of output power produced by the radar (in U$/Watt) and constant is probably the "investment factor" of the radar.
That equation was developed further by RAND to take account of Modules. The one that coming from RAND is the one i use.
Another way to estimate is of course finding data on cost break down, which i managed to found. One problem is that selling price of the radar could be different for customers and there are no real way to take account of module performance (power etc) Naturally i expect to work downward from prediction of module cost instead of working from selling price. But well what can i do...
Typical military forum discussion. I presented calculations and methods to predict estimated cost of certain item. One forum member complained that my estimates was off by large margin... comparing it with data from DOD.
The problem is that... When asked about what likely value i need to adjust/reinput to my calculations (as my formula is correct) He simply said "Im sorry i have no access to xyz. The item in question has its budgetary/price info classifed for competitiveness reason"
I was like ..."Are you fucking serious m8 ?" How the fuck exactly you can call someone wrong Yet unable to to show the correct value or at least better way to do the thing ? How a discussion could even be start...
The DOD data was nice BUT it does not contain what needed to improve my calculations. If i were to trackback based on it. What i would find is even weird number, which basically does not match everything published so far (Granted that my source material could be dated but well...).
In case you guys ever curious on what am i workin for. This is the discussion in question.
forum.keypublishing.com/showth…
Since i make the calculation.. naturally i would expect anyone criticizing the work to have at least "the right value" to make it right. If no then what am i supposed to do ?
Unfortunately tho most information regarding design and especially cost for Transmit Receive module for Active Phased Array radar is indeed classified or proprietary. However open source estimates does exist which what i use now. I could always try made my own but then.. When i discussed about it and hit yet another classification barrier... what you guys think i should do.
Cost of a Radar is basically calculated as follows :
Cost=Ca*Na+Cp*Np+Constant
Where Ca is aperture cost per square meter and Na is aperture area. Cp is cost of output power produced by the radar (in U$/Watt) and constant is probably the "investment factor" of the radar.
That equation was developed further by RAND to take account of Modules. The one that coming from RAND is the one i use.
Another way to estimate is of course finding data on cost break down, which i managed to found. One problem is that selling price of the radar could be different for customers and there are no real way to take account of module performance (power etc) Naturally i expect to work downward from prediction of module cost instead of working from selling price. But well what can i do...
Comments8
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Log In
The Keypublishing forum is a battlefield between the Sino-Russian fanboys and NATO fanboys. The attitudes of TR1 and such proves my statement.
Yeah, the nuances of unit cost for military equipment is a minefield. Perhaps one thing you can take from the criticism is to work backwards when talking about fictional designers. Find a piece of real equipment of similar design and function, go through the process that you were doing, but then come around and see if the difference is a believable one.
Is the Department of Defense the only source of test data? I feel like this would be a better question to place before your fellow contractors, or even an institution such as this one: www.nationalelectronicsmuseum.…
My dad says my weener is huge
this is really boring.
It is. but sometime it's kinda important.
...Nobody said there'd be math... 