All Eyes on Army Acquisitions.

• Author: Magnuson, Stew
• Position: Editor's Notes

* Last month's "Editor's Notes" column looked at the Army Software Factory in Austin, Texas, which has had some success in its first year developing applications soldiers are using for a variety of purposes.

It was a "good news" story for the Army and the magazine was happy to print it. It's just as import to report about programs that are going right as the ones that are going sideways --or the "bad news."

When it comes to writing about military acquisitions there is rarely a lot of good news to report, even more so for the Army.

It's not as if the Air Force, Navy and Marine Corps haven't had their share of high-profile failures that cost taxpayers millions. It's just that Army's reputation for acquisition failures tops the others.

Perhaps knowing this, Army Chief of Staff Gen. James McConville declared at two major defense conferences last fall that the service would deliver 24 new technologies--all aligned with its modernization goals--by fiscal year 2023. Let's call it the 24x23 campaign.

The programs came from a larger list known as the 31+4 priorities, which are 31 technologies being developed by Army Futures Command and four from the Army's Rapid Capabilities and Critical Technologies Office.

Considering the Army's checkered acquisition reputation, McConville's promise may have been the bravest declaration publicly spoken by an Army general outside of a battle zone in modern times.

And the Army requires bold moves to restore its reputation.

The cancelation of the Comanche helicopter program in 2004 and Future Combat Systems in 2009 are two often-cited colossal failures, but what came afterwards only entrenched the Army's poor reputation for completing acquisition programs. Years later, soldiers are still waiting for the follow-on Kiowa-replacement that came out of Comanche and the new ground combat vehicle that emerged from FCS.

The Army received accolades for one program that delivered what it promised: the joint light tactical vehicle. But good news stories for the Army such as the JLTV are rare.

One solution to the Army's acquisition woes was to create Futures Command.

In a larger context, the Air Force and the Navy have their own big-ticket modernization goals and compete with the Army in the yearly budget battles for funding.

China is the pacing threat, so what is the land force's role in the Indo-Pacific, critics have asked.

The answer should be obvious: the Korean Peninsula, but that's a topic for another column.

Putting...