When you open with “firm lessons” or an equivalent you are (unintentionally) suggesting surface level actions of a lessons learned program will heal the Navy. Your readers are smart, they know better, and deserve better.
Or you I, the Navy’s lesson learned (program) capability has been broke forever. To suggest in any way that lessons can be learned hides the real set of Navy problems. In essence, this line of thought drags out and clouds the real problems. Why is the Navy’s lessons learned capability broke?
While I’m in favor of maintaining the industrial base as a strategic asset, I’m not in favor of supporting programs that are obvious failures. We have neither the time or the money to continue supporting failed programs. I’m sincerely hoping the Constellation class FFGs are the equal to the Perry FFGs for longevity, usefulness and toughness
Sal, you really, really, really need to drop the “lessons to be learned” narrative.
What do you mean?
When you open with “firm lessons” or an equivalent you are (unintentionally) suggesting surface level actions of a lessons learned program will heal the Navy. Your readers are smart, they know better, and deserve better.
That still makes no sense to me. I think you are misreading me.
Or you I, the Navy’s lesson learned (program) capability has been broke forever. To suggest in any way that lessons can be learned hides the real set of Navy problems. In essence, this line of thought drags out and clouds the real problems. Why is the Navy’s lessons learned capability broke?
This has nothing to do with the Navy lessons learned program. You don't need a LL program to learn lessons. Indeed, you may be better without one.
While I’m in favor of maintaining the industrial base as a strategic asset, I’m not in favor of supporting programs that are obvious failures. We have neither the time or the money to continue supporting failed programs. I’m sincerely hoping the Constellation class FFGs are the equal to the Perry FFGs for longevity, usefulness and toughness