Quote Originally Posted by Entropy View Post
I had not heard before that OODA was originally designed for air combat. That surprises me. Air combat is too fast-paced and fluid for pilots to be going through such mental checklists.

The way to shorten the OODA loop is not through study of OODA or any other artificial construct, but through training and practice - something I believe is true for any military enterprise.
The majority of Boyd's theories originated with his ideas regarding air-to-air combat. Where he (IMO) got into serious trouble is when he started expanding those ideas into a "one size fits all" theory for conflict in general. Boyd also wasn't much of a believer in missiles in air to air combat. He was a gun dogfighter pure and simple, and (again IMO) OODA reflects this.

Wilf, I think you might benefit from taking a step back and looking at OODA as more of an "after the fact" description of a thought process, which is where I feel it is most useful (that or breaking the AI of some computer games and possibly timed chess matches...anything where there is a finite time limit known to both participants). Note that I don't say it's perfect, or even much of a planning tool. To me it's more someone trying to explain something that can't necessarily be explained...but once the tools got their hands on it everything went south in a hurry. One could actually say the same thing about ol' Carl.