Posted on Jan 11, 2014
Where should the Pentagon be spending its devlopment dollars?
2.31K
3
6
0
0
0
So the defense budget is going to be getting tighter and tighter this coming decade, and our military has already got some big budget programs that are apparently to big to cancel (F-35 anyone?), so I'm curios what the people on Rally Point think the DoD should be spending what budget it has on, development and procurement wise, in he near and short term.
Obviously drones are getting a lot of press and development $$'s, with the Navy looking to field its UCAV this decade, and the Air force looking to have some weaponized drones that can fight in contested airspace here soon. But what is being over looked/neglected, what can we do without, what do we absolutely need?
I know from the Army side of things, I'm surprised the HMMWV replacement has been pushed out again and again, as has the M-16 replacement(died for what, the billionth time now?), the and the new "Family of Vehicals" that was supposed to see us get an updated mobile artillery platform, anti tank, and infantry combat vehicles. Are these priorities, or have we been doing alright without them?
How do the Navy people here feel about our near and long term fleet look out. We are looking at the leanest fleet in the US has had in a loooong time, tasked to cover a wide stretch of ocean that is difficult for a soldier like me to even comprehend. Yet ship after ship seems to get canceled, or neutered on the drawing board.
I remeber back before we invaded Iraq again, there was talk from those on the hill that Congress will never again authorize the development of a new Tank, saying they where outdated platforms. And then the M1 preformed spectacularly in the cities of Iraq, and they literally couldn't buy upgrade kits for them fast enough.
Obviously my interest are colored by my military and now civilian experience. I have strong feeling about the F-35, and the proposed re-engining of the UH-60's and AH-64s, but what do you guys think the priorities should be in these leaner times to come? And what developments are you guys excited to see fielded in the near and distant future?
Obviously drones are getting a lot of press and development $$'s, with the Navy looking to field its UCAV this decade, and the Air force looking to have some weaponized drones that can fight in contested airspace here soon. But what is being over looked/neglected, what can we do without, what do we absolutely need?
I know from the Army side of things, I'm surprised the HMMWV replacement has been pushed out again and again, as has the M-16 replacement(died for what, the billionth time now?), the and the new "Family of Vehicals" that was supposed to see us get an updated mobile artillery platform, anti tank, and infantry combat vehicles. Are these priorities, or have we been doing alright without them?
How do the Navy people here feel about our near and long term fleet look out. We are looking at the leanest fleet in the US has had in a loooong time, tasked to cover a wide stretch of ocean that is difficult for a soldier like me to even comprehend. Yet ship after ship seems to get canceled, or neutered on the drawing board.
I remeber back before we invaded Iraq again, there was talk from those on the hill that Congress will never again authorize the development of a new Tank, saying they where outdated platforms. And then the M1 preformed spectacularly in the cities of Iraq, and they literally couldn't buy upgrade kits for them fast enough.
Obviously my interest are colored by my military and now civilian experience. I have strong feeling about the F-35, and the proposed re-engining of the UH-60's and AH-64s, but what do you guys think the priorities should be in these leaner times to come? And what developments are you guys excited to see fielded in the near and distant future?
Technology
Equipment
Budget
Edited >1 y ago
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 3
2
2
0
I think the focus should be on maintaining the force we have now and "value engineering" updates that will save money maintaining what we have.
We could also augment the force with commercial vehicles where appropriate. 4x4 jeeps and trucks are much less expensive than tactical vehicles and can be used for about half of the current number of HMMWVs
I also think we are up armoring too much. You don't need a V hull on every truck all the time.
(2)
(0)
SPC Christopher Morehouse
Do you think the the HMMWV replacement (whenever that happens) should be a V hull, or start out more like a commercial truck and get built up from there for tactical configs as needed?
What systems/vehicles do you think should we be focusing on for "value engineering" efforts?
What systems/vehicles do you think should we be focusing on for "value engineering" efforts?
(0)
(0)
LTC (Join to see)
SPC-
I have no idea when you posted this but I'm just seeing it now.
I would focus as much systems development on commercial off the shelf vehicles as possible and only use developmental systems by exception.
I would value engineer our most expensive replacement parts that are only made by one company to lower their costs as well as looking at our current systems to see what changes could be made to lower maintenance time and costs.
I have no idea when you posted this but I'm just seeing it now.
I would focus as much systems development on commercial off the shelf vehicles as possible and only use developmental systems by exception.
I would value engineer our most expensive replacement parts that are only made by one company to lower their costs as well as looking at our current systems to see what changes could be made to lower maintenance time and costs.
(0)
(0)
1
1
0
It is all about what is there for training and defense protection for the nation as well as the military.
On that same note, the projects that are giving the desired immediate needs will most likely get the axe via cancellation or unknown delay time frame and then eventually cancelled. This will be a debatable issue for the next few years to come and maybe even farther depending on the politics and the leadership in the future, as that is something that is always a major player in all the decisions on projects whether it is admitted or not.
(1)
(0)
SPC Christopher Morehouse
I agree about the politics playing a big role in what projects go foreword and what do now. It is incredible frustrating to see politics kill the potential in a new weapon system, or keep an unwanted/unneeded system alive. I think politics has played a huge role in the mess that is the F-35 program.
(0)
(0)
0
0
0
World's first manned flight with an electric multicopter
*** Maiden flight of 2-seater 2013: http://youtu.be/tNulEa8LTHI *** On October 21st, 2011, Thomas Senkel of e-volo made the first manned flight with an elect...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L75ESD9PBOw, being able to get in and out of area's with drones maybe significant in the future, Mixing helicopter, drone, bullet proof housing etc... Could be future, and will most likely continue into civilian transportation needs. Several one man devices already built. I like the Ehang -184, but would like to see jet packs and more added. and parachutes.
(0)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google