By Matthew Cox, Military.com: “The U.S. Army is locked on a path to replace its tanks, helicopters and other major combat systems -- a daunting venture in itself. But the true challenge for the service may be avoiding the minefield of mistakes that led to the multibillion-dollar demise of another leap-ahead plan, Future Combat Systems, less than a decade ago.”
By Peter Newell, War on the Rocks: “In the process of defining these innovation pipelines we observed that there are distinct types of people who actually drive innovation in the military’s ecosystem: makers and innovators, entrepreneurs, and innovation gurus.”
// Caroline Houck
Super-strong materials, cyber defenses are on the agenda as the Army Research Lab launches new partnerships.
By Robert H. Scales, War on the Rocks: “The Army’s decision to create a “Futures Command” is long overdue, well-intended, and absolutely necessary if the Army is to emerge from the malaise that has held modernization in its vice for all of this new century. But accelerating the pace of modernization without a rigorous understanding of how militaries anticipate the future of war might run the risk of creating an accelerating engine with greater thrust, but no vectors.”
From the AUSA Global Force Symposium, here's what we've learned about the Army's command devoted to modernizing the service. (Jeff Martin/Staff)
What’s next for Futures Command?
In an interview before the Global Forces Symposium, Under Secretary of the Army Ryan McCarthy laid out what’s ahead in the process to stand up the service's newest command. (Jeff Martin & Daniel Woolfolk/Staff)