Future warrior system brings non line of sight kills

Washington Post:

A $200 billion plan to remake the largest war machine in history unfolds in one small way on a quiet country road in the Chihuahuan Desert.

Jack Hensley, one of a legion of contractors on the project, is hunkered in a slowly moving SUV, serving as target practice for a baby-faced soldier in a Humvee aiming a laser about 700 yards away. A moment later, another soldier in the Humvee punches commands into a computer transmitting data across an expanse of sand and mesquite to a site 2 1/2 miles away. On an actual battlefield, this is when a precision attack missile would be launched, killing Hensley almost instantly.

For soldiers in an experimental Army brigade at the sprawling Fort Bliss base, it's the first day of field training on a new weapon called the Non-Line of Sight Launch System, or NLOS-LS, a box of rockets that can automatically change direction in midair and hit a moving target about 24 miles away. The Army says it has never had a weapon like it. "It's not the Spartans with the swords anymore," said Emmett Schaill, the brigade commander, peering into the desert-scape.

In the Army's vision, the war of the future is increasingly combat by mouse clicks. It's as networked as the Internet, as mobile as a cellphone, as intuitive as a video game. The Army has a name for this vision: Future Combat Systems, or FCS. The project involves creating a family of 14 weapons, drones, robots, sensors and hybrid-electric combat vehicles connected by a wireless network. It has turned into the most ambitious modernization of the Army since World War II and the most expensive Army weapons program ever, military officials say.

It's also one of the most controversial. Even as some early versions of these weapons make their way onto the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan, members of Congress, government investigators and military observers question whether the Defense Department has set the stage for one of its biggest and costliest failures. At risk, they say, are billions of taxpayer dollars spent on exotic technology that may never come to fruition, leaving the Army little time and few resources to prepare for new threats.

...

To hear the military tell it, there's a hint of Buck Rogers in the program, including an unmanned craft that can hover like a flying saucer between buildings and detect danger. The idea of Future Combat Systems is to create a lighter, faster force that can react better to tomorrow's unpredictable foes.

The last time the Army tried anything so far-reaching was more than half a century ago when it introduced mechanized forces, moving soldiers en masse by machine rather than by foot, Army program officials say. "We are pushing the edge of technology," said Lt. Gen. Stephen M. Speakes, a leader of the Army's modernization efforts.

...

Soldiers call it the "beer keg" or the "scrubbing bubble" from the old television commercial for the bathroom cleaning product. The UAV, a remote-controlled hovering craft built by Honeywell that weighs 29 pounds, is one of the more gee-whiz devices to emerge from Future Combat Systems.

The drone, essentially a cylinder on legs, uses a rotary fan to fly like a helicopter and comes with infrared night vision. The military has been using about 50 of an early version of the UAV for less than a year to identify improvised explosive devices, or IEDs, in Iraq, officials said. . The device isn't equipped with a protective shield, so someone could simply knock it down with a rock or bullet. But Rickey E. Smith, a retired colonel who now heads the Washington office of the Army Capabilities Integration Center, or ARCIC, which oversees the experimental brigade, said, "Would you rather have the bad guy shoot at that or at a soldier?"

...

This is obviously a long story with most of the nay saying between the ...'s. Many of the concepts are pretty unique while some are evolutionary. Boeing is the lead contractor and they are only about a third of the way to writing the software code for the systems. One of the reasons why this is so expensive is because the Army is not able to go to Radio Shack or Best Buy to pick up the components for the systems needed. As silly as that may sound, it is also a weakness of most large government projects. At one time the on board computers on the space shuttle was significantly less robust that most peoples home computers. That is likely to happen with this system to as hardware and software of computer technology passes this system by. If they could somehow design it with modules that could be replaced as technology advances they would have a more long term solution. They might also be able to take advantage of gamer software to enhance the training for the new system.

We are also in a very primitive phase of combat robotics now. UAVs will become ever more sophisticated giving ground combat troops more information and combat punch. We will also see more sophisticated ground robotics. The two together will give ground forces the equivalent of heavy and light cavalry to break through enemy defensive positions. The non line of sight weapons may be able to replace some indirect fire weapons like heavy artillery. It also may be a much more effective weapon than the Apache attack choppers which were very disappointing in their operations on the way to Baghdad. I can also see a UAV equivalent of the A-10 in assaulting enemy armor formations. The Apache still has some limited applications, but attacking massed formations is probably not one of them.

Strategy Page notes the Navy is testing a UUV (unmanned underwater vehicle) from a submerged submarine. Among other uses it will look for floating and submerged mines.