BALANCING ACT
tide of skepticism from senior executives, Iacocca and his team innovated. With constrained resources for development, Ford’s “Fairlane Committee” worked through more than 18 designs. Ultimately, it was the competition amongst Ford’s design teams that produced a great outcome. Ford’s final design was a proper balance between the performance, weight (approximately 2,500 pounds) and cost (approximately $2,500). In 1964, Ford built a car that far exceeded even their own expectations—the Mustang— selling over 400,000 in the first year, and over a million in the first 18 months. Tis was proof of an optimized design that was ideally suited for the market.
FORD PHENOMENON
The Ford Mustang is a great example of a product that surpassed expectations. Sales exceeded 400,000 in the first year of pro- duction and 1,000,000 in the first 18 months. (Image by Getty Images)
TRUST IS CRITICAL TO SUCCESS For the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft, the Army is build- ing both relationships and trust while getting multiple bites at the “requirements apple,” and counting on a much more rapid development path, proving technologies early with designs that strike a balance between performance and cost. With the goal of enabling life-cycle affordability, the project office has delib- erately integrated the modular open systems approach into its requirements and sustainment strategies. Tat modular approach is the Army’s emerging set of common standards and interfaces for aircraft electronics allows for rapid, cost-effective upgrades and tailored mission systems, which ultimately drives long-term cost savings.
capability maturation and allows for early development of virtual aircraft prototypes, focusing on maintaining program momen- tum with appropriate acquisition rigor.
With mid-tier acquisition, the focus is on balancing speed with rigor: Requirements authorities and acquisition oversight are pushed down, and funding is provided for deliberate increments of capability through rapid prototyping. Ongoing technology risk reduction will continue by capitalizing on data from the flying demonstrators, test stands and wind tunnel models. Ultimately, virtual prototypes will further reduce risk to the program and set a strong foundation for future program success.
Comparatively, the automobile industry has many examples of programs and innovations that have either been successful or failed. A similar thought process of revamping traditional meth- ods came out of Ford Motor Company in the 1960s. Looking to develop a new sports car, Lee Iacocca faced multiple dilem- mas, at the heart of which was one of the biggest losses in Ford history with the development of the Edsel. Driving against the
18 Army AL&T Magazine Summer 2022
Over the past two years, the Future Long Range Assault Aircraft Project Office, along with the Program Executive Office for Avia- tion, has invited industry, government partners and academia to the architecture-collaboration working group that helped to define the framework included in the Future Vertical Lift archi- tecture framework. Tat architecture framework defines the objectives and requirements that the contractor shall uphold to execute a modular approach and deliver a product and capability that meets the new aircraft’s modular approach objectives. Te architecture framework will improve the government’s ability to use appropriate data rights by enabling competitive, contin- uous upgrade and delivery of threat-based capability through faster fielding of innovation by using common processes, tools and standards.
Leading change always presents many challenges, even in commercial industry. Lee Iacocca finally convinced Henry Ford II that a paradigm shift at Ford Motor Company would be the answer. Tere was no sports car in Ford’s portfolio. Tere were no plans to build one. Te company tried to buy Ferrari, but that attempt failed. It also led to a series of history-making deci- sions. Ford’s innovation and willingness to change its business
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122
