Defense Tech: "Future Combat": Cuts, or More Cash?
“They are looking to slip it to the right or kill it,” said a source familiar with FCS options advanced by the Pentagon's office of program analysis and evaluation.This is bad for robotics. The benefit of an automated security force is huge. While budgeting issues are serious, the biggest push for robotics shouldn't be cut so quickly.
Army officials are working to convince Pentagon leaders, including England, to reconsider cutting or even terminating FCS, the service's only major new-start development program.
Army Chief of Staff Gen. Peter Schoomaker is scheduled to meet Friday with England and again make the case for the program, a briefing that is expected to discuss FCS' relevance to today's challenges.
posted by Ivan | 10:44 AM
2 Comments:
I thought that sort of thing can cripple an industry...
Long-term research has benefits that far outweigh the costs. Governments and many companies, should and do partake.
This is more about re-tooling out current military. There are very few who would say the government shouldn't spend money on defense. I am of the opinion that defense robots are very valuable. Also $160M over budget in a $500B budget isn’t that big of a deal.
Perhaps we should invest in another manned fighter or better camo. Maybe we should not spend the money at all. These are all good opinions with the right case. I disagree.
Post a Comment
<< Home