Cost of Army program soars, raising long-term concerns

The Future Combat System, the core of the Army's future warfighting capabilities, has become the second most-expensive military development in history, a Senate panel learned Wednesday.

Weighing in at somewhere between $161 billion and $200 billion, according to various estimates, the complex program has gone through several permutations and now ranks below only the $256 billion Joint Strike Fighter as the costliest development program in the Pentagon's pantheon.

The disclosure came as Government Accountability Office Director of Acquisition Paul Francis reported that FCS lacks "the elements of a sound business case for such an acquisition program -- firm requirements, mature technologies, a knowledge-based acquisition strategy, a realistic cost estimate and sufficient funding."

Also, Francis said, it is "predicated on technological breakthroughs," a factor that is always a red flag for such fiscal penny pinchers as Senate Armed Services Airland Subcommittee Chairman John McCain, R-Ariz.

"We are still early in the long journey that FCS entails," Francis warned.

More than two years since FCS entered its design and development phase, the program continues a complex path toward creating what Assistant Army Secretary Claude Bolton, Jr., described as "a networked family of integrated and unmanned systems providing mobile-networked command and control capabilities; autonomous robotic systems; precision direct and indirect fires; organic sensor platforms, and adverse weather reconnaissance, surveillance, targeting and acquisition."

Bolton added that FCS will serve as the basis to "spin out" other advanced combat capabilities for existing fighting forces as it goes through the development process.

In addition, Army Vice Chief of Staff Richard Cody advocated strongly for its need and potential capabilities.

McCain acknowledged being "stunned" by the escalating costs of FCS and other defense programs, citing as examples $2 billion destroyers, $14 billion aircraft carriers and now the estimated $161 billion to transform Army combat systems.

McCain warned the Pentagon that the day soon will come when military spending, which has been ratcheting up steadily because of wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, will have to level off in light of ballooning budget deficits.

Under questioning from Airland Subcommittee ranking member Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., Cody said the Army National Guard will be reconfigured to match terrorist threats.

But Cody, reiterating what Army officials have been assuring for weeks, said officials are prepared to shift funds from other Army accounts to pay for a force level of 350,000 troops if National Guard recruiters can fill empty billets to bring it up to that strength.

The Bush administration has come under fire from lawmakers for budgeting in fiscal 2007 for only 333,000 Army National Guard troops -- the current size of the force, but below its congressionally authorized end strength of 350,000.