Last year, when Pentagon chiefs threatened to cut funds for the F-22 Raptor, the Air Force unleashed a massive PR campaign for the jet — even flying the thing over the Super Bowl.
This year, it’s the Army’s Future Combat Systems modernization effort that could be on the chopping block. And, according to Inside Defense, “FCS supporters are taking it to the streets to make sure its program is defended… across the country, plying the time-honored trade of ensuring as many congressman in as many districts as possible are on board.“
FCS contractors haven’t made any playoff plans, yet. But they are holding a dozen conferences around the country to talk up the guargantuan, multi-faceted project.
The size of the program gives backers the opportunity to tap a large number of lawmakers for support: The FCS industry base spans 159 congressional districts over 35 states, with 363 companies on board, according to materials released by the programs industry team.
And, apparently, those contractors are using some rather odd arguments to support the program. FCS centers, in large part, around replacing the Army’s current fleet of tanks and fighting vehicles with lighter, quicker, better-networked substitutes. Which is all well and good, for fighting Iran or North Korea. Hurricane relief? That’s a bit more questionable, at least to me. But not to FCS’ industry team, which “has been advertising how well FCS could work in a ‘Katrina-like’ event,” Catherine MacRae Hockmuth reports for Inside Defense.
{ 8 comments… read them below or add one }
For a ‘katrina-like’ event I think we could get by nicely with some guard/reserve engineer companies equipped with amphib tracked vehicles, jet boats, air cushion vehicles, stuff like that. Airships might have some utility in the aftermath of these events, also.
FCS is a disaster, plan and simple. The program is clearly unmanageable. Far too large, and with far too many conflicting players. I worked on it and it was clear that it was just a well-funded sandbox for contractors. It is sad that such programs emerge and get approved. Rummy needs to kill it and tell the Army to prove they can manage ONE EASY PROGRAM properly first before they are chartered to do something larger. The schedule slips and cost growth thus far should have been enough to kill it. It will only get worse – and they should know that.
Good Morning Folks,
Things must be getting serious over at the Pentagon about FCS.
The hardball has started. Boeing out of Chicago announced that it is exploring a deal to merge with AirBus. Mean while in San Diego Boeings partner SAIC postphoned a meeting with stock holding employees this week, a prelude to going public.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
Skinner,
Again, please get your story straight. It is BAE, not Airbus, looking at the possibility of merging with Boeing. BAE would divest itself from Airbus stock before proceeding. You need to read better before crying wolf my friend…
http://forum.airwise.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-2738.html
Sorry,
Wrong link. Here is
Good Evening rey,
You had better take it up with the WSJ. A merger between Boeing and BAE doesn’t make munch sense. To the best of my knowledge BAE doesn’t make large airframes. By the way the contract that is causing this thinking is the tanker deal that is still pending. Congress has let AirBus submitt a bid on the job.
Sometime rey you may try attacking the substance of the argument instead of the person making the argument. But to do that you would have to know something about what you are talking about. What kind of detonators are they not using in Iraq now? Pressure?
In case you haven’t heard of it the WSJ is a newspaper. You bosses might not let you have material of this nature.
ALLONS,
Byron Skinner
BAE doesn’t make heavies? I would’ve thought for sure that the Nimrod (in all its variants) would qualify.
Regarding the main point of the post, the more I hear about FCS the more it sounds like a train wreck. The Army clearly needs to be have a long-range plan for modernizing but this is going nowhere fast. That’s MY money they’re wasting.
Like usual.
I’m all for modernization but I just heard that the computer in the manned vehicles will have to use chilled water supplied by the vehicle to be cooled properly, and that the thing is made up of lots of electronic boxes and weights over 200 pounds! This will never work in the feild, no way; if it can leak, it will! And what are they thinking, we are going to run the engine all the time to cool the thing? Real smart when the enemy is around and you need the computer to watch them quietly and to communicate with the rest of the platoon for hours quietly. No wonder FCS has a cost and a weight problem with solutions like this being allowed. I don’t see it ever being feilded.