"Harry Andreas" wrote
"Tarver Engineering" wrote:


The usual process since the early 90's.

You are way behind the power curve Harry. Have a look at the fleet
numbers
for reliabilty for the F/A-18E vs the F-14s. Think about how the F-22's
target number compares.

Ummm, let me check....yep, one of my radars is on the F/A-18E/F, and it
uses COTS parts. Oh, and the new AESA radar is on the F/A-18E/F, and it
uses COTS parts, too.
Digging a little deeper; yep, I worked on the F-14D's APG-71 and that
one uses Mil-spec parts.
And, of course, I worked on ATF and F-22 back in the day.
And JSF currently.

You're trying to teach me what exactly?

Been there, done that, doing it presently, with COTS and high reliability.
BTW, the current system I'm working has a reliability number higher
than the airframe life.

I doubt we could build AESA and associated
systems_without_commercial-heritage parts. The USG just doesn't have that
kind of money. My company builds fiber-optic and other high speed serial
networks for avionics and space and there is no way to build them without
commercial heritage Serializer-Deserializers and switch chips as an example.
The die are repackaged and screened to meet military quality requirements
but we live with the temperature limits. The reality of the relative size of
the commercial semiconductor industry and the military electronics
business-guarantees-that most die used in military systems will be built on
fab lines whose primary business is the commercial market.