I Predicted This 12 Years Ago
The Pentagon has killed the MEADS surface to air missile system:
The Pentagon announced today it would kill MEADS, an anti-missile program once declared the highest priority weapon system for the United States and its allies to build together.I did some very preliminary work on MEADS about 12 years ago. Essentially, because, unlike the PAC-3, it did not exactly need to have 4 missiles to fit in a 4-pack that had the same form, fit, and function as the larger Patriot PAC-2, which allowed for some logistical enhancements.
The Army has tried several times before to kill the program, which uses the Patriot interceptor, but has always been overruled before by the Office of Secretary of Defense. Germany and Italy have made major political and industrial commitments in pursuit of MEADS and they will doubtless let America know just what they think of this decision.
At the time, I said that the program was doomed, because it was a multinational program, and, like the Roland SAM, it would be dropped by the US military, because the opportunities for cushy consulting gigs for retired generals would be too small.
I was right, and I am not alone in my jaundiced assesment of the decision:
To get expert perspective on MEADS’ demise, we contacted Frank Cevasco, one of the top international defense consultants and someone who has closely followed MEADS for more than a decade. While a senior Pentagon official he and colleagues at OSD pushed the Army to create a program office to manage a future extended air defense program, which eventually became MEADS. He said he does not represent any of the companies involved in the program.The military funds fairy is named either Obama or Gates, your choice.
Cevasco said at least part of the cost overrun can be attributed to a plan to replace Patriot with MEADS on a one-for-one basis. “I was told that doesn’t make sense as a MEADS fire unit has substantially greater geographic coverage than Patriot. I agree there would be additional costs associated with integrating MEADS with a separate Army command and control system, a requirement that was levied on the program unilaterally by Army about two years ago. Moreover, a portion of the cost overruns and schedule slippages can be attributed to the Army and DoD technology disclosure community who refused to allow the MEADS industry team to share key technology. The matter was resolved but only after intervention by senior OSD officials and the passage of considerable time; and, time is money with major weapons system development programs,” he said in an email.
Bottom line for Cevasco: “Army has done its best from the every beginning to sabotage the program, preferring to develop a US-only solution funded by the US (with funds provided by the good fairy).”
No comments:
Post a Comment