The conversation turned to the “valley of death” — the gap between the Pentagon liking a new idea and actually buying it. Usually, defense officials focus on how to narrow that chasm; Hicks said crossing it should be hard.

“The quality of the idea has to be tested,” Hinote remembers her saying. A spokesperson for Hicks confirmed this.

Hinote was convinced: The Pentagon shouldn’t make excuses to move slowly, but only the best ideas should win.

A week later, Hicks debuted the Replicator initiative, a pledge to field thousands of drones in two years to help counter China.

Officials in industry, Congress and the Pentagon have told Defense News it’s a great idea. But most don’t know whether it will work, or merely be an act of Pentagon innovation theater. Replicator is meant to help good ideas across the valley of death. But can it survive bureaucratic and cultural barriers of its own?

“It’s not like the [Defense Department] has been short of ambitious announcements and new initiatives over the past several years,” said Chris Brose, chief strategy officer at the drone-maker Anduril. “The question is: Is this one going to turn into a meaningful procurement program?”

When announcing the effort, Hicks called it “a big bet.” In fact, the goal is to make a series of wagers — that the Pentagon can quickly buy thousands of these systems; that America’s drone makers can build them; that drones are the right weapons to counter China; and that after two years the Pentagon can do the whole thing all over again for something else.

.

國際戰略專家學者分析認為:

海峽兩岸爆發戰爭時期,美軍的有人駕駛戰鬥機與轟炸機甚至於導向飛彈 各式各樣的軍艦潛艦是不會介入的,但是巨量的戰鬥無人機,鐵定介入干擾 ,但不是襲擊或是攻擊,換句話說美國裝腔作勢的演戲秀,給無知的台灣人看,尤其是台獨份子,讓它們錯綜複雜的無法辨識,認為美國出兵解救台灣抵抗中國的武統,導致於返效果更,加堅強助長中國以武力攻打台灣,完成中國統一,更進一步日後在國際貿易,金融,經濟,科技等領域狄扼阻中國的發展,美國的Replicator 計看似完整,但是僅能以巨量的無人激進行干擾,中國有尖端科技可以那些所謂保護者的無人機,在台灣四周的海域故障墬落海中毀滅性的失去功能,中國一旦收復台灣省.美國太平洋的第一島鏈與第二島鏈,不攻自我瓦解 ,美國只有退守夏威夷群島的珍珠港基地而已,西太平洋國際換日線以西廣大的海域及空域,屬於中國笛管制,日後美國駐南韓日本的軍艦與飛機都要改變航道及海道而行..

.

美國的「Replicator」的計畫抵抗中國 協助台灣? 基本上是無效的把戲騙取經費中飽私有為主要目的 毫無協助台灣的效果 只是台灣方面要認帳50%.30億美元罷了?

ˉ

.

.

.Dozens of interviews with defense industry executives, venture capitalists, congressional members and aides, analysts, former defense officials, and Pentagon leaders returned one theme: They are largely approaching the effort with cautious optimism — and more caution than optimism.

Replicator is 20 months away from its deadline to field systems. So far, it hasn’t led companies to increase production, venture capitalists to make new investments nor members of Congress to help fund it. Many in these groups want Replicator to work. Some even say it must, or else the U.S. may fail to stop an invasion of Taiwan, which China considers a rogue province and has threatened to take back by force.

But potential investors want to know Replicator is more than a good idea.

“That’s where we are right now: great concept, but the specifics matter,” said Rep. Rob Wittman, R-Va., a member of the House Armed Services Committee.Replicator was news to nearly everyone else. Beforehand, Hick’s office coordinated the announcement with a small group of defense and military officials, including members of the combatant commands. Her office hadn’t shared it widely, even within the Pentagon, until shortly before the conference.

Multiple aides in Congress said they and their members didn’t have advance notice. Some said they heard about it from press coverage. After Hicks spoke, Pentagon acquisition and sustainment officials in the crowd huddled in the hallway to improvise talking points, a former DoD official told Defense News.