I worked on FCS and it gave us small UAVs, SUGVs, improved 1st aid packs, improved weapon sites, improved datalinks, improved recon ability, improved jammers, improved counter IED systems, improved armor for vehicles and soldiers, improved propulsion systems, improved survivability, etc.
Will the FCS vehicles look exactly like what FCS program thinks they will in the end? Maybe, but maybe not. We transformed a horse army to a mechanized army in WWII and designers of the pre-war tanks had no idea what the Pershing tanks or the Pattons that followed them would look like. Nor did they think diesel engines and computers would ever be small and useful enough to fit into the chassis. Heck, with the way nanofibers, spidersilk, optical computers, powered armor, man-machine interfaces (cybernetics), batteries, and a host of other technologies are going, the FCS common chassis may look the same as we envision it, but the vehicle will be anything but.
Or we could let dim congress cut it and still have M1s and M2s in 2040. I Love the M1 tank, but though the final design is not quite as old as I am, it cannot last forever without A LOT of modifications (which the FCS program is also providing). Killing FCS will cripple the Army’s modernization and “quantum leap” efforts.
Though maybe that is what the leftist base desires?
You hit it on the head! Just to caveat:
1. The Cold War had static bases in Germany, Netherlands, and Italy where tanks sit in garrison and get rail loaded to ranges. The battles would have been large mechanized battles on rolling plains and the advanced FLIR technology and computing power and was not there to make things like Javelin, Spike, and other emerging systems possible. These tanks were not moved constantly in and out of theater and the threat is not constantly moving as well like today.
2. As a complex machine ages, and as components are no longer manufactured, the cost of maintaining it goes up. The M1 turbine is old and expensive at this point. The weight alone of an M1 imposes an impressive burden on the DoD when it comes to moving them.
Bottom line - the world has changed and so has the threat. Technology has advanced, and these older systems are getting expensive and unreliable. We need new systems for our troops!