"Mike Williamson" wrote in message
...
Kevin Brooks wrote:


Gee, the Army has already deployed the similar Raven small UAV into the
theater of operations...why do we keep tripping over each other to
develop
what is basically the same capability twice or thrice over for
individual
services?

If I had to guess, I'd say the likely reason is that the relatively
small costs and numbers involved make it less expensive and time
consuming to just stand up the individual systems as opposed to opening
a joint office to determine everyone's separate needs- even if they
are very close off the bat.

But correct me if I am wrong, don't we *already* have a standing joint
office to handle UAV development (witness the adoption of Firescout as a
prototype rotary UAV by the Army from the Navy program)? I doubt the needs
of the USMC and US Army in terms of such a small UAV are that drastically
different--something that can be easily transported, requires minimal ground
support and operator training, offers both day and night observation
capability, etc. Heck, it sounds like the two vehicles (Raven vs. Silver
Fox) are pretty darned similar, from what I have read thus far. My usual
bent, having watched the US Army (from up-close) completely balls-up the
counter-obstacle vehicle (Grizzly) program, while the USMC was happily
fabricating and testing a much more simple (and affordable) M1-based
breaching vehicle, is that the Army has historically been much the worse in
the "nope, it's gotta have its home here, not in another service"
department, but here it appears the USMC/USN may have bought into the same
pig-headed approach with this program.

Brooks


Mike