Advanced Military Gear: Strength of Weakness?

The below ideas are all well and good, but I have serious misgivings about spending huge amounts of wampum on such hi-tech and absurdly expensive materiel.  Blasphemy for a military guy, you say?  Allow me to share two stories for you...

First, when I went through the US Army Noncommissioned Officer Academy, I and the rest of my classmates had to master two of the most fundamental skills of a ground pounder:  how to read a map and use compass.  Sounds simple, right? 

Unfortunately, in military land navigation there's little room for mistakes; think the maintenance convoy in Iraq that got lost and ended up in an ambush resulting in 9 killed and PFC Jessica Lynch's cult following.  All the coolest weapons, bells and whistles don't mean a hill of beans if you don't know where you are (indeed, we learned map and compass techniques to find where we were if lost).

Then along comes the Global Positioning System.  "Hey!  It tells us exactly where we are!  Who needs a map and compass?"  Thus numerous NCOs turned entirely to the GPS to solve all their navigation problems and forgot how to use the simplest of navigational aids.  I suppose you see where I'm going with this:  stuff breaks.  Yes, the GPS is an amazing tool; but if the batteries die or you accidentally run over it with your Humvee, you'd better know how to read a map and use a compass or your going to be in a world of hurt.  My squadron commander at the time even had a phrase to describe soldiers who were so dependent on the equipment they couldn't function when it failed:  "clutter on the battlefield."

Next, when I was stationed at Hanscom I had the dubious honor of working in an experimental Air Operations Center--basically, the human and mechanical brain of any air campaign.  Man, was this place stuffed with the neatest toys:  huge electronic maps, plasma screens, Voice over Internet Protocols, PowerPoint as far as the eye could see--it would've made Billy Mitchell's eyes water.  Once again, I suppose you see where I'm going with this:  some numbnut tripped over a power cord and SHUT THE ENTIRE FACILITY DOWN.  That's right--an entire air force campaign halted because of a single power cord.  But wait, there's more:  when everything c[PIGEONED]pped out, everyone just sat and stared.  Or panicked.  No one made any attempt to roll out out paper maps, mark it up with grease pencils, and put together a plan.  It was high buffoonery at its finest.

With that, the US has won numerous battles through it's history for many reasons, with two of the most critical being superior firepower and the ability to act in the absence of orders.  That is, unlike centralized dictatorships such as Saddam's Iraq where you could target a major command post and the lower echelon forces wouldn't react, US doctrine teaches everyone--from the highest ranking general to the lowest private--to pick up your KIA buddy's map and rifle and continue the mission.  US troops don't wait for something to happen if the radio dies--they plan and act.  Furthermore, the repository of such initiative is usually not with the officers, but with the noncommissioned officers of the US military.  Of course other ranks show initiative under fire, but its usually the NCOs in who train the young privates and officers in peacetime so they'll rise to the challenge in wartime.

But my argument is this:  what happens to our ability to act in the absence of orders is we depend on high tech wizardry but can't remember how to fight "old school?"  The technology becomes a weakness an opponent can exploit, the technology becomes the head that's cut off rendering a unit combat ineffective.  To [PIGEONED] with always learning how to fight with the latest and greatest doodads--I want to train to fight while missing capabilities; so I and my airmen know how to react in wartime when our mightiest technologies become clutter on the battlefield.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Seeking to protect a $125 billion program that faces scrutiny in coming weeks, the Army demonstrated its high-tech, Boeing Co.-led future ground force, in a plea to congressional skeptics that the program isn't science fiction and should be fully funded amid pressing combat needs.

Yesterday's event, just days before the House Appropriations Committee takes up the 2006 military budget, featured quiet, electric-powered armored vehicles, automated cannons, unmanned reconnaissance aircraft that can fly autonomously and miniature robotic vehicles that can climb stairs. The program, called Future Combat Systems, or FCS, features 18 new vehicles linked by a wireless broadband network to create a swifter, smarter, more lethal infantry.  "What you just saw today is a clear demonstration that the Future Combat Systems program is no longer just a drawing-board concept. It is becoming a reality," Army Secretary Francis Harvey said at the Aberdeen Proving Ground test site.  In well-choreographed succession, Army and defense-industry officials delivered briefings echoing that theme, to rebut criticism from lawmakers and the Government Accountability Office, Congress's investigative arm, that the FCS program consists of immature technologies and futuristic but unworkable ideas.

Those invited to attend the demonstrations this week included lawmakers and key congressional staffers. The Senate has approved President Bush's requested $3.4 billion for FCS next year; the House Armed Services Committee wants to cut $400 million and strip some vehicles from the program, which the Army says may derail the entire project. "This is a pivotal time for the Army. We're fighting now, but we can't live with today's equipment in future wars," said Maj. Gen. Stephen Speakes, the Army's director of force development. "When people say that FCS is pie in the sky, look around; it's not," he added at a test track where the Army showed a robotic vehicle that used sensors to follow a manned vehicle, as well as another software-controlled vehicle that can chart its own path around obstacles.  The FCS program has been restructured a number of times, and the Army is finalizing a new contract with Boeing, the lead integrator, to bring greater government oversight into the complex undertaking. The Army plans to begin introducing FCS technologies by 2008 and to produce the first complete FCS-equipped brigade in a decade.

Comments

[Stella]

The defence contractors have a trade fair. Some pointy head from the Pentagon who rose through the ranks kissing ass instead of earning it attends the show. He has orders from his superior pointy head to buy up as much shit as possible to justify the inflated budget submitted to Congress. The shit gets offloaded to various brigades, squadrons, fleets, etc. and if it half-ass works, some other pointy head looking for a promotion convinces his said pointy head superiors the shit is a way to save money. This looks good on paper in Washington so they get promoted and the military can buy more shit; its a win-win situation for everybody. The shit then gets dumped into the field and screw the poor GI that gets stuck with the shit when it breaks down with bullets flying all around because he/she is only an expendable 19 year old ground-pounder who's been convinced the conflict a good cause for the country. After enough bodies are buried, the pointy heads are finally convinced the shit doesn't work so they send one of their flunkies to the next defence trade fair to find something better for "our boys over there." And the beat goes on.

These guys don't give a flying pigeon turd about "old school" because they know their pathetic arse will never see combat which is a shame because if they did, they would be purged pretty quick by the enemy, doing all the forces a favor. These are the guys in the military with the "company man" philosophy in which there is a form for everything, you can't fart without following procedure, and if you divert from that they fear chaos will reign or they will do everything in their power to screw you over because they see you as a theat to their position. A competent person exposes their ineptitude so they get you before their ass is twisting in the wind.

As you can tell, I have a real dislike for such people with that mentality. I feel the way I do because they are dangerous; they get good people killed and are not made to account for it. I would welcome a low ranking NCO to my house any day and slam the door in the face of a high-ranking Pentago sycophant.

[Chairman Tao]

The over reliance on technology is a mistake in any walk of life. The military is a good example where, if taken too far, a huge fault line can appear.

But we see it everywhere.
A computer virus can take down news streams interupting transmissions.
Companies lose email for two hours and their entire workforce goes into stasis (especially if the IP phones go with it).

And recently my car cost me a fortune in repairs because the 'engine management system' (basically a little onboard computer) kept detecting errors in the mechanical components.
All the "mechanics" could do was plug in their diagnostic systems and replace the malfunctioning parts. They had no knowledge of the inner workings. They were just "part monkeys" trained to refit components.
Guess what ?
The actual fault was in the engine management system. They replaced £400 of non-faulty parts highlighted to them by a faulty computer.

In ten years, if we don't beware, there will be no one who knows how to do things from first prinicples.
No one who can lift a bonnet (hood) and know what's wrong.

Seems to me your reluctance to embrace new technology as a panacea is wise. It is a tool, nothing more.

And while we're on the subject of technology are you aware that your web site is taking a painful amount of time to load ? Either you have added too many external loads/gifs etc or your provider needs to invest in a larger server farm.
Just thought I'd highlight in case you didn't know...

[MOGS]

I'm a bonafide fan of training to do things the "old fashioned" hard copy way (as much as I love newfangled gadgets and all, I'm a big believer in having a "plan b" ready to go on the job)

Sooner or later, technology breaks, and you can't call off a war on account of a busted-ass tool of one kind or another.

It don't work that way :)