Re: What this needs is a war
Defense projects are intended to maximise the transfer of money from government to contractors. Not to deliver cost-effective solutions, quickly. To change the dynamic of weapons development requires an external stimulus to reprioritize delivery.To create weapons that are good enough, not ones that (fail to) fulfill a long and theoretical wish-list from armchair generals and civil servants.
This comment shows that you are an armchair general my friend.
You've also missed an obvious point which is that during peacetime we want to accumulate a stockpile of weapons such as Storm Shadow and NLAW which are slow to build, and which will be useful after sitting on a shelf for thirty or forty years, before promptly proceeding to blow the hell out of Russian targets despite their best defences which they've developed in that time.
During wartime then you just want a weapon which is good enough for a particular purpose and available in quantity now at the lowest possible price, and it only wants a 12 month shelf life because it's going to be used within that.
There is no point doing mass stockpiling of a weapon which is cheap and just good enough for the moment; that's basically why Russia is fucked in Ukraine. They stocked tanks which were only just good enough, we stocked anti tank rockets with enough future proofing to blow their tanks up despite any sensible level of uparmouring they could do. Result; Russian tanks die to western anti tank rockets meaning that Russian troops have to do bayonet charges on machine guns dug into trenches with barbed wire in front ala WW1.