The traditional model of training system creation in the defense arena, especially the aviation space, relies on near-linear progression along a need-solicit-propose-develop-evaluate-select-field-fix continuum. This limits industry to reactionary behavior, precluding government consideration of advanced technical and or philosophical approaches, which in the absence of established funded programs, may be more immature than they would have been under a more cooperative developmental environment. Further, this technical requirements dominated approach lends more to hardware solutions than to innovative holistic solutions, such as comprehensive training programs that exploit co-evolution of technology and training concepts for revolutionary advances in training capabilities. Cooperative research and development agreements (CRADAs), and new approaches to experimentation have gained more prominence in recent years, and the intent is promising; however, industry investments rely heavily on hope that a program will eventually materialize, sharing risk with the government. It is a posture which, when programs do not materialize, suggests the status quo is perhaps more comfortable – and appropriately less costly. This paper will suggest methodologies by which industry partners can establish relationships with each other and the government to arrive at solutions in tandem with the realization of need - not fielding a brand-new legacy solution. It will outline effective historical programs where such relationships were successful, examine the lessons learned from recent experimentation activities, and evaluate possible outcomes of theoretical scenarios using a suggested cooperative approach. Finally, the paper will provide recommendations and specific examples of how such an approach will enable dramatic increases in solution acquisition and fielding efficiency, implementation of solutions at the speed of operational relevancy, and establishment of relationships critical to getting to the future faster.