(Land) Future Combat Systems

[Turin]

<!-- m --><a class="postlink" href="http://www.defensetech.org/">http://www.defensetech.org/</a><!-- m -->

Futures

Man, I wish Noah were around to comment on this one, from Inside the Army:

The Future Combat System successfully cleared its initial preliminary design review, marking the end of the program's "PowerPoint" phase and the beginning of more tangible progress, program officials said last week.
...
UPDATE, 5:06 EST (from Axe): Since Noah's not around, I'll say it: FCS is too expensive, too ambitious, technologically and operationally unsound and destined for the kinds of cuts and stretches that turn even useful programs into multi-billion-dollar embarassments. Only here we're talking a trillion dollars, if the Army FCS-izes the entire force.

The CBO is all over this one (PDF!), as I reported earlier:

In 2011, planned FCS costs would account for about 6 percent of the Army's $21 billion procurement budget, CBO estimates; by 2015, that share could rise to almost half and remain at or above 40 percent through 2025. (For purposes of comparison, in the mid-1980s, at the height of the Reagan defense buildup, the Army dedicated at most 20 percent of its procurement funds to buy combat vehicles.)

Kill FCS now!

Bingo. Jeder, der sich ansatzweise für FCS interessiert, sollte die verlinkte PDF runterladen und lesen. Ein ziemlich umfassendes Papier zu diesem "Projekt".
Wenn man sich mal durchliest, was die Verfasser sich allen Ernstes als Ersatzfahrzeuge für MBT, Artillerie, MTW etc. vorstellen, dann kann man nur noch den Eindruck gewinnen, dass hier das größte Finanz-Grab in der Entwicklungsgeschichte der US-Streitkräfte entsteht. Dagegen werden sich Comanche, Crusader und DD(X) in ihrem Scheitern marginal ausnehmen.