U.S. weapons upgrade faces big hurdles (Future Combat Systems)

MSNBC/WASH POST ^ | 04/08/2008 | Alec Klien

[TCats]

WASHINGTON - The U.S. Army is in the early stages of developing the most expensive weapons program in its history, but the project could already be in jeopardy because it largely depends on three separate military programs that have been plagued by cost overruns, immature technologies and timetable delays.

At stake is what the Army calls its most ambitious modernization since World War II -- Future Combat Systems, a new generation of weapons, combat vehicles, robots and sensors connected to a wireless network.

[TCats]

It seems to me these weapons would be vulnerable to jamming. The same is likely true of weapons that depend on GPS - Chicom/Rusiian Satellite Killer weapons could interfere. What are the backups if anyone knows?

[MarineBrat]

Wireless networking is delicate on a good day. :)

[JasonC]

This is the Borg. It is worth every penny, and all that it happening here is the green eyeshade types who hate money being spent on anything are siding with their leftist friends in congress, getting ready to gut it for baksheesh for their domestic supporters, if Obama gets in.

The satellite part is what makes it nearly unjammable. The idea is to use the same dynamic rerouting used by the internet to send packets from A to B by the fastest open route, to select which satellite streams the message to which receivers. You'd have to take down the whole thing to stop communications. Can a single node at the bottom be cut off sometimes? Sure, but it is all a web. As soon as one other nearby ground relayer (any AFV, pretty much) or open sky window reappears, contact will come back.

And what will be coming through the redundant and well encrypted, frequency-agile and therefore hard to jam, web of comm links, is a tactician's fantasy - anything one can see, all can see. The Borg.

[TCats]

Thanks.

[LoneStarGI]

Same tired BS that's been plaguing FCS since the beginning. The program's ‘total’ budget through the entire length of the development amounts to less than 5% of the Army's ‘yearly’ budget. The Army has been trying to modernize since the end of the Korean War. They've added some new systems here and there and new weapons, but there has not been a comprehensive, force-wide modernization in over 50 years. Basically, the current foundation of the military is based on Korean war technology that was later upgraded to fight cold war style battles. New age, new enemies folks, the military has to modernize. Every time the military has tried to do this, the politicos on the hill have done everything in their power to scuttle it. There is always risk with new technologies, don't let these people convince you this is just some big waste of money.

[agere_contra]

Excellent post.

But now someone has to post a picture of Summer Glau.

[agere_contra]

Don't ask me why. It's like a law of the universe or something.

[Myrddin]

I recall the nearly total shutdown of all black (SDI) projects upon the arrival of Clinton just after January 1993. It was astonishing to see all the vacant offices in just a matter of 60 days. If Obama or Clinton get elected, people in DoD contract positions should be looking for alternative sources of work for the duration.