FCS is not living upto expectations

looks like FCS is not living upto expectations....AS I suspected it would.

High teck = High Risk = High cost.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Quote]


National Defense Magazine


October 2004
Future Combat Systems Technologies Not Keeping Pace With Expectations
by Sandra I. Erwin



When the Army kicked off its largest-ever weapons modernization program in 1999, expectations were enormous.

The Future Combat Systems would bring revolutionary change to the Army in many ways. It would, for the first time, connect every vehicle in the Army in a single network. Most significantly, it would allow the Army to become gradually less dependent on fossil fuels, gunpowder-based weapons and heavy armor.

The discussions were dominated by visions of an all-electric, laser-firing fleet of fast-moving tank-like vehicles unburdened by the weight of conventional armor.

Five years later, reality has set in, and the expectations are somewhat tempered, although the fundamental nature of FCS�a family of 17 ground and air vehicles�has not changed.
[/Quote]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

www.nationaldefensemagazine.org...

Spectre found the link ...thanks for that!


humm I would like to see "Thunder Run" done again with FCS type AFVs

[edit on 29-9-2004 by psteel]

Originally posted by psteel
High teck = High Risk = High cost.

No...it's even higher cost.

It took surprising long for them to make reality check in those certain areas... like these lightweight "tanks".