The explanation for Constellation's changing requirements begins with a mission set chosen around what seemed affordable and capable of passing Congress. In this interpretation, that initial specification understated the fleet's likely operational needs. Every expanded mission then required another alteration to the selected foreign design. Pressure grew as Arleigh Burkes carried more tasks, fleet numbers remained insufficient, and LCS failed to supply the expected flexibility. Mission creep is attributed here to inadequate assessment of future operations and an expectation of certainty about the future. The argument challenges the assumption that requirement growth must begin with greed or enthusiasm for extra equipment.
Notable Point · 38:23-40:35
Congressional affordability and the mission-creep argument
An interpretation of Constellation's design changes links its politically affordable starting requirement with operational demands that later exceeded it.