Options to Improve U.S. Army Ground Combat Platform Research and Development
.
By Mel Daniels
November 23, 2020
National Security Situation: The modernization of U.S. Army ground combat platforms includes risks that are not presently mitigated.
Date Originally Published: November 23, 2020.
Background: The U.S. Army is investing in programs that remain unproven and are unlikely to provide the capabilities sought. Specifically, the Army is heavily investing in its Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle (OMFV) and remote combat vehicles[1]. These programs are predicated on optimal battlefield conditions. Firstly, the assumption exists that enemy forces will not be able to degrade or destroy the battlefield network required to operate unmanned vehicles. Secondly, the risk of the enemy developing weapons that specifically target transmissions coming from control vehicles is a factor that needs to be taken seriously in threat assessments and in planning purposes[2].
Significance: If the Army’s assumptions are incorrect and if these efforts fails to procure reliable and sustainable ground combat platforms for future operations, there will not be additional resources to mitigate this failure. Moreso, if the Army procures vulnerable systems that fail to deliver effects promised, the Army risks catastrophic defeat on the battlefield.
Option #1: The U.S. Army could reduce and spread out its R&D investments to further invest in its legacy combat forces to offset the risks associated with funding unproven and unreliable technologies.
https://www.realcleardefense.com/articles/2020/11/23/options_to_improve_us_army_ground_combat_platform_research_and_development_650681.html
