I read recently in The Washington Post about the US Army’s $200 billion modernization program, Future Combat Systems. Future Combat Systems is comprised of high-tech ground combat vehicles, unmanned air, ground, attack, and sensor systems, and employs the doctrine of net-centric warfare by using state-of-the-art Command, Control, Communications, and Intelligence (C³I) technology to increase battlefield effectiveness.
Sounds nice, but I have several concerns.
First off, I don’t think it’s wise for the Army to be spending $200 billion dollars on a new weapons system while we are embroiled in Iraq and are having trouble just putting troops on the ground. I really don’t see how the Army can spend that much money in that fashion when they are outsourcing things like providing food and water to troops to companies like Halliburton and KBR. There have been continuous equipment problems, ranging from a lack of body armor for soldiers to armor for Humvees. Secondly, I can understand the unmanned vehicles and sensors being introduced by Future Combat Systems, but it seemed to me like many of the new manned vehicles of the Future Combat System are unnecessary, seeing how we already have vehicles that can do the job. Do we really need a new mounted combat system—also known in layman’s terms as a tank—when the M1A2 Abrams tank, a vehicle that has never in its entire history been destroyed or lost a crew member to enemy tank fire, works just fine? The same goes for the M109A6 Paladin and the M2A3/M3A3 Bradley, both of which are superb fighting vehicles and have many years left of service in them. We don’t need a new tank, infantry fighting vehicle, or self-propelled artillery piece right now. Looking at the manned vehicles of Future Combat Systems, I noticed many of them have a very high profile, which would make them ideal targets for anti-tank weapons, helicopters, and other armored vehicles.
The project has also seen major increases in cost coupled with doubt about whether it will live up to what the military and the defense industry has made it out to be.
If I can say anything, it is this: Army, continue with the unmanned sensors and vehicles component of Future Combat System, but hold off on the vehicles—the ones you have right now are some of the best in the world.
-Gregory Proulx
Tankers of the 1st Armored Division drive an M1 Abrams tank through the Taunus Mountains north of Frankfurt during Exercise Ready Crucible on February 14, 2005.
Related Links:
U.S. Army’s ‘Future Combat Systems” Program Remains Under Fire
News & Analysis: Future Combat Systems
No comments:
Post a Comment