Skip to main content

A Bleak Outlook for Future Combat Systems

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
US Defense Budget Outcomes
  • 180 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter provides a detailed examination of the Army’s failed and ambitious modernization program, Future Combat Systems. Despite a herculean congressional engagement strategy on the part of senior Army leaders, the program’s funding fluctuated over multiple fiscal years and was eventually terminated due to its technological immaturity, its complex management scheme, and its failure to engender sustained congressional support. Interestingly, the Future Combat Systems case suggests that the Army’s shifting priorities may be most effectively resourced through incremental funding adjustments to existing programs in the budget request, rather than large, dramatic budgetary changes.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Connor (2002), p.1.

  2. 2.

    Priest (2012).

  3. 3.

    Feickert (2009), p.2.

  4. 4.

    Feickert (2009), p.3.

  5. 5.

    Bruner (2004), p.4.

  6. 6.

    Department of the Army (2007), p.2.

  7. 7.

    U.S. House, Committee on Armed Services, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2004, Report to Accompany H.R. 1588, 108th Cong., 1st sess., H.R. 108-354.

  8. 8.

    U.S. House, Committee on Armed Services, National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2006, Report to Accompany H.R. 1815, 109th Cong., 1st sess., H.R. 109-360.

  9. 9.

    Klein (2011).

  10. 10.

    U.S. Government Accountability Office (2009b), p.2.

  11. 11.

    U.S. Government Accountability Office (2005), p.9.

  12. 12.

    U.S. Government Accountability Office (2007), p.6.

  13. 13.

    U.S. Government Accountability Office (2007), p.10.

  14. 14.

    Scully (2011).

  15. 15.

    A Science-Fiction Army (2011).

  16. 16.

    Department of the Army (2010).

  17. 17.

    U.S. Government Accountability Office (2005), p.21.

References

  • A Science-Fiction Army. 2011. New York Times, Mar 31, 2005. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/31/opinion/31thu1.html. Accessed 12 May 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bruner, Edward. 2004. Army Transformation and Modernization: Overview and Issues for Congress. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Connor, Jr., Arthur. 2002. The Army and Transformation, 1945–1991: Implications for Today. U.S. Army War College Strategy Research Project.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of the Army. 2007. System Development and Demonstration—Contract Restructuring, Future Combat Systems, Report A-2007-0227-ALA. Alexandria: U.S. Army Audit Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of the Army. 2010. Followup Audit of Key Recommendations from Future Combat Systems Audits, Report A-2010-0226-ALA. Alexandria: U.S. Army Audit Agency.

    Google Scholar 

  • Feickert, Andrew. 2009. A10-Year Retrospective of Army Modernization. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klein, Alec. 2011. The Army’s $200 Billion Makeover. New York Times, Dec 7, 2007. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/06/AR2007120602836.html?sid=ST2007120602927. Accessed 12 May 2011.

  • Priest, Dana. 2012. Army’s Apache Helicopter Rendered Impotent in Kosovo. Washington Post, Dec 29, 1999. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/WPcap/1999-12/29/014r-122999-idx.html. Accessed 23 July 2012.

  • Scully, Megan. 2011. Sen. McCain Pushes for FCS Contract Revisions. The Hill, Apr 4, 2005. http://thehill.com/business-a-lobbying/2911-sen-mccain-pushes-for-fcs-contract-revisions. Accessed 18 Jan 2011.

  • U.S. Government Accountability Office. 2009. Key Considerations for Planning Future Army Combat Systems: Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Air and Land Forces, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representatives, Statement of Paul L. Francis, Director, Acquisition and Sourcing Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Government Accountability Office. 2005. Future Combat Systems: Challenges and Prospects for Success, Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Airland, Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate, Statement of Paul L. Francis, Director, Acquisition and Sourcing Management.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Government Accountability Office. 2007. Role of Lead Systems Integrator in Future Combat Systems Poses Oversight Challenges.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2017 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Demarest, H.B. (2017). A Bleak Outlook for Future Combat Systems. In: US Defense Budget Outcomes. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-52301-9_7

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics