| Page 3 of 3 < |
Weapons Upgrade Faces Big Hurdles

|
Discussion Policy
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
|
Cristina Chaplain, who oversees the GAO's review of space systems, also said that "TSAT was being designed to support communications on the move, whereas other programs don't do that to the extent that's needed by" Future Combat Systems.
Lt. Gen. Jeffrey A. Sorenson, the Army's chief information officer, acknowledges that the development of TSAT and the other complementary programs represent a "high risk," but he said the military is attempting to manage that risk by developing the programs incrementally.
Rickey E. Smith, a retired Army colonel who is part of the military team designing how Future Combat Systems will be used, said that if the complementary programs fail, the Army project would certainly be impacted, but so would other military services that depend on these technologies. And he said that while the GAO does good work, "They've never seen a program they liked."
For the GAO's Francis, the question for his team of investigators is not whether they like these military programs but whether they will work in concert with Future Combat Systems.
That remains a multibillion-dollar question. "The Army believes this will all work," he said, "but they won't be able to demonstrate that for some time."






