Think about airliners. After billions of dollars of development, you have to pass critical safety tests (eg evacuation time tests). What happens if you fail the test in such a way that you can't fix it without more-or-less starting from scratch? How can anyone sign off on the development schedule? Yet they do and somehow or other eventually products tend to get shipped.
Back in the day when I was a working engineer (embedded systems, telecom systems) I decided there was basically an unspoken conspiracy of silence. The pointy heads would demand a schedule. The engineering staff would provide it. There would be a generous allocation for all kinds of testing. But sometimes the results of testing would require new board layouts or other things that were basically catastrophic for the schedule (I'm thinking things like electromagnetic compatibility testing - stuff that wasn't in my wheelhouse thank god). The schedules would never factor in serious go-arounds like this yet it could and did happen and was one reason schedules were rarely met.
To me the unspoken conspiracy was that we know we can't really control the development trajectory, but we'll sign off on it anyway. Because what else are you going to do? Apologising later is more practical than seeking permission for an open-ended schedule.