In years past the Army conducted full military qualification of its turboshaft engines for major weapon systems. However, the 1994 Perry memo put a wrinkle in that objective. The Army and its sister services have tried several different approaches to address this new policy over the years. These included combined military qualification/commercial certification programs, commercial off the shelf programs, and reduced testing in conjunction with advanced modeling. These different options will be discussed, revealing the shortcomings of each approach. For its next generation engine, the Army currently plans on conducting a traditional full scale development and qualification program. This paper will address why the traditional approach is justified, what the benefits are to the user and why cutting corners in System Development and Demonstration costs the user more in the long run