Yesterday I posted a few thoughts on what the collapse of the Transformational Satellite program would mean for the Army's gajillion-dollar modernization project, Future Combat Systems. The Army's vision hinges on the ability to move shedloads of data at light speed. The reasoning is simple: Information superiority -- seeing the enemy first -- means that future Army troops won't have to hunker down under tons of heavy armor.
That's where TSAT comes in: The laser-linked satellites are supposed to provide secure, high-bandwidth satellite communications for future forces. Problem is, the whole enterprise is in major trouble. It now looks like the new constellation won't be in orbit until at least 2020, long after the first FCS units are in the field.
Not a problem, responds the Army. Its wireless, battlefield network program,
Warfighter Information Network-Tactical, and its digital radio project, the Joint Tactical Radio System, will fill the gaps, the service swears. The FCS program office sent us a fact sheet that is supposed to assuage these concerns.
To translate the Pentagonese: We'll get by. Paul Mehney of the FCS program office writes: "As you can see, we are not as reliant on TSAT as some have claimed. Yes, it will allow FCS brigades to share large amounts of information (increases our bandwidth) but FCS
will also rely heavily on JTRS and WIN-T for sensor data flow and network capability."
Fair enough. But I also have to point out that both JTRS and WIN-T have had serious developmental problems. JTRS (pronounced "jitters"), a massive, multibillion-dollar effort to develop an array of next-generation voice and data radios, has been plagued by delays, restructuring and cost overruns; WIN-T, which will enable digital command posts, busted its budget (a so-called "Nunn-McCurdy breach") in late 2006. Back to you, Army?
[Image: Northrop Grumman]
ALSO:
- Satellite Collapse Threatens Army's 'Future'
- Army Struggling to Sync Next-Gen Techs
- McCain Campaign Called for 'End' to Army 'Future'
- Army's Familiar 'Future'
- Good News for Army's Troubled 'Future'
- Three Programs Making Things Worse for FCS
- $190 Billion for "Modular Army"
- French Army "Future": Bad Idea?
- Army Defends Its 'Future'
- Army's $200 Billion Reboot Fizzles
- Army Future's Software Overload
- Congress Pulls Plug on Shady Defense Deals
- Future Combat Systems: Point, Click, Shoot
- Army "Future" vs. Insurgent Superbombs
- New Name for Army "Future"
- Old-School Army "Future"
- Army "Future": Invade Azerbaijan
- Guess Which Country We Invade in Army's "Future"
- Boeing Defends Big Price Tag for Army "Future"
- More Bucks for Army "Future"
- Army "Future" Flickering Out
- Army's Future Combat System Going, Going, But Not Quite Gone
- Shady Contract for Army "Future"
- Army "Future" Pricier, Lamer by the Second
- Son of Crusader
- How to Salvage Army's "Future"
- Hovering Drones Rushed to Iraq
