The phrase "a radical attempt" is correct and usable in written English.
It can be used to describe an effort or endeavor that is extreme or significantly different from the norm, often in a transformative context.
Example: "The organization launched a radical attempt to overhaul the education system, aiming for innovative solutions to long-standing issues."
Alternatives: "a bold effort" or "an extreme endeavor".
Long blocks became standard this year at Calhoun, as part of a radical attempt to alter the structure of the school day and school year.
Even in its pristine form, the idea as it is originally propagated by Mahathir could be read as a radical attempt at power politics.
Malaysia Airlines could change its name in a radical attempt to rebrand and rebuild itself following two disasters in the past four months that have left the business on the brink of collapse.
MARK HAMILL In a radical attempt to get out from the shadow of Luke Skywalker, Mr. Hamill also took over the role on Broadway for three weeks of performances.
This is a radical attempt to break down barriers, but it takes the Lib Dems far from the old left's dream that private education will one day be banned or dwindle through lack of demand.
The London conference is a radical attempt to refocus the efforts of the international community on saving lives in Syria, and preventing refugees from risking their lives in despair.
The Big Society was not cover for cuts, this MP argued, it was a fairly radical attempt to decentralise a very centralised country and inject competition into public services.
A more radical attempt to improve compression ratio is to group the reads with suffix-prefix overlaps close together.
WASHINGTON ― While the debate over Obamacare repeal focuses on insurance subsidies, coverage equity and tax cuts, a far more radical attempt is quietly underway to end the Medicaid program as we know it.
Afraid of any radical attempts at political or social engineering when the global economic crisis looms large, the electorate has chosen the well trodden middle path.
Indeed, Mr. Barron and Mr. Lederman had produced a definitive denunciation of such reasoning, co-writing a book-length, two-part Harvard Law Review essay in 2008 concluding that the Bush team's theory of presidential powers that could not be checked by Congress was "an even more radical attempt to remake the constitutional law of war powers than is often recognized".
