Army's future combat vehicle.

• Author: Kojro, Chester A.
• Position: READER'S FORUM - Letter to the editor

* Regarding your August 2009 article, "Army's Next Combat Vehicle: New Beginning or FCS Sequel?" my compliments to Sandra Erwin for exposing the mindset of the various Army leaders and agencies trying to desperately put together the "new combat vehicle" to replace the recently canceled predecessor "Future Combat Systems." This effort, as FCS before it, is utter foolishness.

The Army has a fleet of 16,000 combat vehicles (Abrams tanks, Bradley and Stryker fighting vehicles, personnel carriers, self propelled artillery). Through modifications, technology upgrades, and selective replacement, it intends to keep this fleet throughout the foreseeable future, perhaps 50 years. It has always been the intent to keep this combat vehicle fleet not only survivable but current with the latest communications and information technology architecture, and it would have remained fully compatible and interoperable with the then-emerging FCS.

The Army also has 12,000 MRAPs and perhaps 400,000 tactical vehicles, from small utility vehicles and cargo trucks to heavy equipment transporters and so on. These also require constant survivability and communications upgrades.

The Army also has aviation assets; a fleet of attack, utility transport, and cargo helicopters that are larger than the air forces of most nations. This fleet has survivability and communications upgrade requirements that are no less than those of the ground combat vehicle fleet.

The Army also has its overall command, control and communications architecture, from the individual soldier to the national command HQ. This architecture ties in all echelons of combat, combat support, combat service support, logistics and transport in general.

Finally, using evolutionary and revolutionary procedures and technology of an...