Headquarters U.S. Air Force
Fly – Fight – Win
USAF
Developmental
Test – Value
Added
Maj Gen David Eichhorn
Commander, AFFTC
26 August 2010
Our Mission


The mission of the USAF is to:
 Fly, fight and win...in air, space and cyberspace.
The mission of the AFFTC is to:
 Provide safe, effective and efficient RDT&E
 First choice in RDT&E
 Invest in people and facilities
 Leverage our weather and location
 APA and EW experts
 Conduct independent,
objective assessment
Fly – Fight – Win
Engineering

Engineering Intellectual Capital
 Performance and Flying
Qualities
 Avionics
 Electronic Warfare
 Low Observables
 Armament Integration
 Hypersonics
 Reliability, Maintainability
 Human Factors
 Mechanical Subsystems
 Mission Planning
 Instrumentation
Electronic Warfare Facilities
TEMS
AFEWES
OAR
Test & Evaluation,
Modeling and Simulation
Digital Simulation
AF Electronic Warfare
Evaluation Simulator
Hardware-In-The-Loop
Open Air Range
IFAST
BAF
Benefield Anechoic Facility
Integration Facility for
Avionics Systems Testing Installed Systems Test Facility
Systems Integration Lab
EW T&E U
EW Test & Evaluation
University
Systems Under Test
FIGHTERS
TANKERS
AIRLIFT/AIR DROP
BOMBERS
UAV / UCAV
AIRBORNE LASER
HYPERSONIC FLIGHT TEST
Fly – Fight – Win
Marietta, GA
Lambert-St
Louis
Carswell,
TX
Edwards AFB, CA
Why We Do It Here…
What Gets Tested – And Where It Gets Tested
Matters!
Fly – Fight – Win
Trends in System Complexity
Avionics Cost as Percent of Fly-Away Costs
25
F-35 Estimate
F-22
F-16A
20
15
F-111F
Govt DT&E
Influence
F-46
10
5
F-15A
F-100
0
As systems get more complex
the less the Government understand them
1950
1960
1970
1980
1990
2000
2010
Growth in Demand
c.1945-1955
US: P-80, F-84, F-86, FH-1,
FJ, F-2H, F-3H, F-9F
Soviet: MiG-15/17
c.1955-1960
c.1960-1970
US: F-100, F-101, F-102,
F-104, F-105, F-106
Soviet: MiG-19/21
China: J-7
US: F-111, F-4, F-5
Soviet: MiG-23/25/27,
Su-17/20/22
Europe: Mirage F-1
China: J-8
c.1970-2000
• Sophisticated
Avionics
• Improved Precision
c.2000+
F-22A
F-35A
F-15E
• Multi-Role
• Supersonic
• On-Board Radar
• Improved Avionics
MiG-29
F-4E
• Fully Integrated
Avionics & Sensors
• First Guided Airto-Air Missiles
MiG-23
• Turbojet Engines
F-106
• Improved
Maneuverability
MiG-21
F-86
MiG-15
• Enhanced Radar
• First Precision
Munitions
• First LowObservable (F-117)
US: F-14, F-15A/C/E, F-16,
F/A-18C/E/F, F-117
Soviet/Russian: MiG-29/31,
Su-27/30/33/35
Europe: Mirage 2000,
Tornado, Rafale, Gripen,
Eurofighter-Typhoon
China: J-9, J-10, FC-1
Fly – Fight – Win
• Greater Speed &
Maneuverability
• All-Aspect,
Day/Night LowObservable (F-22)
• Network Centric
Operational
US: F-22A
Development
US: F-35A/B/C
Russian: MiG &
Sukhoi Concepts
China: XXJ Concept
High Demand / Low Density
Resources




Airspace & range assets
 Restricted Airspace
 Frequency Spectrum
Technical Personnel
 Maintenance
 Engineers
 Operators: esp. Test Pilot School Graduates
Support Fleet
 Efficient use of government assets
 Level playing field
Infrastructure
Fly – Fight – Win
Cost
Savings from Early Discovery
Technology &
System
Development

Production, Deployment, O&S
Billions saved over
weapon system lifecycle
Time
Your Return on Investment: 30-to-1 Rule
 $30 savings to weapon system programs for every
$1 invested in established T&E facilities
Fly – Fight – Win
10
Best Practices: A More Constructive Test Approach
is Key to Better Weapon Systems (GAO Report - July 2000)

“Commercial firms have found constructive ways of
conducting testing and evaluation to help them
avoid being surprised by problems late in a
product’s development.”

“However, the pressures of successfully competing
for [government] funds to start and sustain a
weapon system program create incentives for
launching programs that embody more technical
unknowns and less knowledge about the
performance and production risks they entail…a
new program will not be approved unless its costs
fall within forecasts of available funds.”
Fly – Fight – Win
Constructive Test Approach is Key to
Better Weapon Systems
•
•
“These pressures and incentives explain why the
behavior of [government] weapon system managers
differs from commercial managers.
Rewards for discovering and recognizing potential
problems early in a DoD program are few. In contrast
with leading commercial firms, not having attained
knowledge – such as on the performance of a key
technology – can be perceived as better than
knowing the problems exist. When valid test results
are not available, program sponsors can assert
projected performance.”
“Accordingly, DoD testers are often seen as
adversaries to the program.”
(GAO Report - July 2000)
Fly – Fight – Win
Doing it Right
Dr von Karman
The committee* is of the
opinion that a highly
technical Service such as the
Air Force should prepare
itself to take a more
competent role than it is now
taking in guarding the
solution of the technical
problems connected with its
weapons and techniques.
Gen Doolittle
1949 Scientific Advisory Board
(Dr von Karman, Gen Doolittle, Dr Wattendorf)
Delivery of Right Capabilities
Schedule on Budget
Fly – Fight –on
Win
13