Team Infidel
Forum Spin Doctor
Wall Street Journal
June 13, 2008
Pg. 11
By August Cole
Defense contractors Boeing Co. and SAIC Inc., worried that key aspects of a $160 billion Army modernization contract known as Future Combat Systems may be in danger, are scrambling along with the Army to shore up support on Capitol Hill.
Possible budget cuts, a change of administration and the Pentagon's focus on supporting operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have ratcheted up pressure on the program just when it is showing tangible signs of progress after five years of work and almost $15 billion in taxpayer money invested.
With work on the 2009 defense budget expected to continue through the fall, the Army brought the first FCS prototypes, including a 27-ton hybrid diesel-electric, tanklike cannon and other high-tech systems, to lawmakers' doorstep this week. The White House requested $3.6 billion for the program in 2009. The Senate Armed Services Committee said it wants to fully fund FCS in order to give the program a chance to succeed. Cuts, even small ones, can have ripple effects that slow development and hurt suppliers. So far, the cuts add up to about $1 billion, Boeing says.
But the House Armed Services Committee wants to slice about $200 million from the program, just as it sought cuts last year. These lawmakers also want to curtail the companies' so-called lead systems-integrator roles once production ramps up, which would be a blow to the contractors. Congress has been moving in recent years to wind down the use of lead systems integrators because some lawmakers believe the practice puts too much authority in the hands of contractors.
"It's frustrating from our perspective because every time we have cuts we have to go restructure the program and slip the schedule out," said Gregg Martin, Boeing's head of the Future Combat Systems program. Any changes would come as the program is set for a major secretary-of-defense-level examination next year.
To win over lawmakers, the Army has been showing off the new technology with special demonstrations at Fort Bliss in Texas, where the service relies on soldiers with combat experience to help fine-tune the technology.
By displaying some of the same technology on the Washington Mall, the service gave lawmakers and their staffs a chance to see it up close without traveling. Soldiers were on hand to explain how the systems work.
Standing in front of the giant desert-tan colored cannon with the U.S. Capitol looming in the background, Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey told a crowd that the Army's 21st-century overhaul is finally taking shape. "We are finally to the point in this program where Future Combat Systems is real," he said. "I can see the power and the utility of systems like the ones you see around you here today in the hands of our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan."
Despite the progress, opposition looms. Boeing and SAIC have drawn criticism from lawmakers who want to spend money on current needs, such as body armor or bomb-proof trucks, or who see cuts as a way to curtail the defense firms' role in the program.
The Army is counting on Future Combat Systems to give it new networking and communications abilities, as well as more sophisticated ground vehicles and added firepower.
The program has 14 components, including remotely controlled aerial and ground vehicles. Some technologies are already in use while others, like bigger armored vehicles, won't be ready for a few years. The first Future Combat Systems-equipped brigade is set for 2015.
Boeing and SAIC have a central role in ensuring this work comes together as it should, in large part because the Army doesn't have the expertise or personnel to do so itself.
That cost is just one of the issues for lawmakers such as Hawaii Democratic Rep. Neil Abercrombie, who heads the Air and Land Forces subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee. He says he wants to make sure the Army is battle ready today before it spends so much money on future technology.
Mr. Abercrombie visited Fort Bliss earlier this year to see how the program was taking shape, only to come away unconvinced, saying, "There's no connection between FCS and the necessities of right now that I can see."
The program also has fierce supporters, including Republican Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, who spoke at the Wednesday event. "We need to get this cranked up, in the field, and start winning battles for us," he said.
June 13, 2008
Pg. 11
By August Cole
Defense contractors Boeing Co. and SAIC Inc., worried that key aspects of a $160 billion Army modernization contract known as Future Combat Systems may be in danger, are scrambling along with the Army to shore up support on Capitol Hill.
Possible budget cuts, a change of administration and the Pentagon's focus on supporting operations in Iraq and Afghanistan have ratcheted up pressure on the program just when it is showing tangible signs of progress after five years of work and almost $15 billion in taxpayer money invested.
With work on the 2009 defense budget expected to continue through the fall, the Army brought the first FCS prototypes, including a 27-ton hybrid diesel-electric, tanklike cannon and other high-tech systems, to lawmakers' doorstep this week. The White House requested $3.6 billion for the program in 2009. The Senate Armed Services Committee said it wants to fully fund FCS in order to give the program a chance to succeed. Cuts, even small ones, can have ripple effects that slow development and hurt suppliers. So far, the cuts add up to about $1 billion, Boeing says.
But the House Armed Services Committee wants to slice about $200 million from the program, just as it sought cuts last year. These lawmakers also want to curtail the companies' so-called lead systems-integrator roles once production ramps up, which would be a blow to the contractors. Congress has been moving in recent years to wind down the use of lead systems integrators because some lawmakers believe the practice puts too much authority in the hands of contractors.
"It's frustrating from our perspective because every time we have cuts we have to go restructure the program and slip the schedule out," said Gregg Martin, Boeing's head of the Future Combat Systems program. Any changes would come as the program is set for a major secretary-of-defense-level examination next year.
To win over lawmakers, the Army has been showing off the new technology with special demonstrations at Fort Bliss in Texas, where the service relies on soldiers with combat experience to help fine-tune the technology.
By displaying some of the same technology on the Washington Mall, the service gave lawmakers and their staffs a chance to see it up close without traveling. Soldiers were on hand to explain how the systems work.
Standing in front of the giant desert-tan colored cannon with the U.S. Capitol looming in the background, Army Chief of Staff Gen. George Casey told a crowd that the Army's 21st-century overhaul is finally taking shape. "We are finally to the point in this program where Future Combat Systems is real," he said. "I can see the power and the utility of systems like the ones you see around you here today in the hands of our soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan."
Despite the progress, opposition looms. Boeing and SAIC have drawn criticism from lawmakers who want to spend money on current needs, such as body armor or bomb-proof trucks, or who see cuts as a way to curtail the defense firms' role in the program.
The Army is counting on Future Combat Systems to give it new networking and communications abilities, as well as more sophisticated ground vehicles and added firepower.
The program has 14 components, including remotely controlled aerial and ground vehicles. Some technologies are already in use while others, like bigger armored vehicles, won't be ready for a few years. The first Future Combat Systems-equipped brigade is set for 2015.
Boeing and SAIC have a central role in ensuring this work comes together as it should, in large part because the Army doesn't have the expertise or personnel to do so itself.
That cost is just one of the issues for lawmakers such as Hawaii Democratic Rep. Neil Abercrombie, who heads the Air and Land Forces subcommittee of the House Armed Services Committee. He says he wants to make sure the Army is battle ready today before it spends so much money on future technology.
Mr. Abercrombie visited Fort Bliss earlier this year to see how the program was taking shape, only to come away unconvinced, saying, "There's no connection between FCS and the necessities of right now that I can see."
The program also has fierce supporters, including Republican Sen. James Inhofe of Oklahoma, who spoke at the Wednesday event. "We need to get this cranked up, in the field, and start winning battles for us," he said.