Wednesday, May 09, 2018

Army Says It Needs $2B More Per Year For Big Six: Over Half For Air & Missile Defense

via Breaking Defense.
For example, the most expensive single initiative — part of the Air & Missile Defense portfolio — is $3.2 billion for Maneuver Short-Range Air Defense, the Army’s crash program to rebuild the frontline anti-aircraft units it largely disbanded after the Cold War. Identified as an urgent need in the face of Russian aggression, the M-SHORAD was already underway before Army Chief of Staff Mark Milley identified the Big Six. The program also relies on putting proven missiles and radars on a proven platform, the 8×8 Stryker, rather than inventing any new technology, so it can move quickly into production.

The second most expensive line item, also under Air & Missile Defense, is $2 billion for the Integrated Air & Missile Defense Command System. IBCS is meant to share targeting data among Patriot, THAAD, future anti-missile systems like lasers, and an array of Army radars. IBCS was the Air & Missile Defense community’s top priority before the Big Six were named and was already underway well before M-SHORAD.
Story here. 

This story should make every F-35 supporter pause in his tracks.  The US Army is basically declaring that the era of allied air superiority is over and that its up to the ground forces to protect themselves.

If they have the data to back this up, and I'm sure they do because they're shoveling money at air defense as fast as they can, then that's a stunning indictment of the USAF and will out of necessity cause a realignment of things.

The Army doesn't need ground attack because the USAF can do it. The Army doesn't need fighters cause the USAF can do it. The Army doesn't need transport airplanes cause the USAF can do it.

But what happens if a service doesn't live up to it's end of the bargain?

What happens when a service doesn't fulfill its roles and missions?

No comments :

Post a Comment

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.