Boring, geeky army stuff

There's a fascinating post up at the Castle, talking about the next-generation of military vehicles the US has on the drawing board . . . and more importantly the command-and-control systems required to take full advantage of the new toys:

As I've mentioned before, a couple of years ago I worked ABCA exercises (the America-Britain-Canada-Australia Alliance). One thing about the Brit Army — they were far more comfortable working with the Marines than they were with the US Army — and while some of that was driven by cultural issues — the Brits are organized and used a lot like we do the Marines, and, well, they have some aspects of seeing themselves as peers to the Marines while the Army are slighty retarded younger brothers striving to show that we are too grown up (heh, let the snarks begin) . . . but the real issue is one of the US Army is so automated vice the Marines. The Brits are frankly just more comfortable hooking into Marines than they are the Army. They are (justly) concerned that the Army is so wired and used to being wired that, in effect, we are actually possibly *more* likely to engage a Brit formation in the wrong place at the wrong time because we are so used to the situational awareness we have from our systems they are concerned we will shoot first and ask questions later.

A couple of good points there, especially about the fundamental differences between the British Army and the US Army's typical deployment: the USMC are organized more like the Brits — and for totally functional reasons. The British army has been sealifted and dropped on foreign shores for centuries. It's how they expect to arrive at the point where they get to expend ammunition.

The idea is also mooted about opening the FCS to Britain and Australia (and possibly even Soviet Canuckistan), for economic and practical military reasons: it was already difficult enough to co-ordinate with their allies in the first Gulf War of 1991. Today, there are very few nations who can even pretend to have the technological parity to inter-operate with the US military, and all of them will be left in the dust when the new systems start to come into full production and distribution. And even the American military would appreciate design and development resources being contributed by their allies to offset the huge costs of these new systems.

I'm afraid I have to take the mention of Canadian participation as a friendly well-meaning red herring: who in their right mind would trust the current Canadian government to have any respect for other nations' military secrets?