Future Combat Systems

But I think they're in a better place in terms of, you know, the Cheyenne that is being developed by Bell, the XM-30s.

you know, they seem to be on a kind of more solid footing where it is more evolutionary, but it is, you know, not like the future combat systems or FCS, which was, a lot of it was not really grounded in reality.

You know, this, you know, the current approach is, it is more evolutionary, but I think that there's really kind of, they're, working hard to adapt the, you know, the capabilities to meet the challenges of today and have the adaptability to meet future challenges.

So it seems in a better place than it has been for many years.

I, I think I started working as a, uh, civilian, uh, seven days after I retired.

Uh, almost right back into the same, uh, desk that I was, and picked up and began working concepts for Uh, future combat systems and really designing sustainment in.

And so sustainment was a big part of future combat systems.

Most of the things in what most people call a, a failed modernization program, but at the heart of that for a sustainment perspective, sustainment was woven through every aspect of, of the FCS program.

It was, uh, truly a, a transformative effort.

Um, and a- at the same time, it was bringing forward new concepts, not just new material solutions.

Many of those things which the Army has integrated in over time, and in some cases from a modernization transformation perspective, the Army is still chasing some of the things that future combat systems went after.

Future conse- combat systems was probably too aggressive, uh, and way ahead of its time, um, because we're still chasing many of those things.