The 2010 Fires Seminar began today, 17 May 2010 and will run through 21 May 2010. I'll be posting summaries from each day's key leader briefs for everyone's knowledge and would love feedback.
Printable View
The 2010 Fires Seminar began today, 17 May 2010 and will run through 21 May 2010. I'll be posting summaries from each day's key leader briefs for everyone's knowledge and would love feedback.
GEN Dempsey Notes – TRADOC Enterprise
Today, during GEN Dempsey’s discussion at the Fires Seminar, he discussed two broad mission sets. He defined these mission sets as, 1) wide areas of security, and 2) maneuver. GEN Dempsey stated our approach to both types needs balance and we can’t sub-optimize one for the other. Also, GEN Dempsey commented on development of the institution noting that in this century, we can’t be content to redesign ourselves every fifteen years. As the Army moves forward, he feels that the Army needs to adapt the institution on a possible two-year timeframe, transitioning from the current four-six year timeframe we currently operate in and do so with intent to redesign again every five years. For more of GEN Dempsey’s remarks and to watch other Fires Seminar briefings, log on to DCO-Connect at:
https://connect.dco.dod.mil/r75632489
Also, the presentations that speakers give will be posted on the Fires Knowledge Network on AKO.
MG Halverson Notes – State of the Fires
MG Halverson, (Commander of the Fires Center of Excellence, FCoE), discussed a wide array of topics during his portion of the seminar. Some of which included a discussion on the integration of Fires Doctrine with the ACC, 3-0, and Army Operating Concepts. MG Halverson said that we must set the intellectual foundation to stay relevant in today’s operating environment and that we have to have the right approach to maintain our core competencies at all levels.
He also took time to elaborate and dispel some “myths” about the Fires community. Some of his key points were that the Fires Force is a deployed force, adding that Field Artillery units are firing between 4000-6000 rounds per month in OEF and fire support is being used at all levels. And, AC and ARNG Air Defense units are deployed or preparing for deployment with CRAM missions, with 42% of the current Patriot force is forward stationed or deployed.
MG Halverson also spoke of issues that the FCoE is currently. Some of the points of this discussion were:
1.) What Fires C2 capabilities are required at various echelons?
2.) What Fires capabilities are required at the IBCT level?
Precision, near precision, conventional munitions mix
Organic v. task organized
Possible composite units
3.) What AMD capabilities are required at the tactical levels?
BCT – Corps
IFPC/C-RAM/CUAS/ and CMD
Lastly, he discussed his Top 6 Fires Gaps where he mentioned that these were the areas that needed to be addressed as we move forward as a Center of Excellence. There was then an open discussion on how best to address the shortfalls:
1.) Lack of organic precision indirect Fires capabilities in the IBCT
2.) Lack of ability to detect, ID, track and intercept Low/Slow UAS threats to the lowest tactical level (BCT –Div)
3.) Lack of lightweight accurate target location designation systems to support dismounted Soldiers in the IBCT
4.) Lack of ability to protect forces from rocket, artillery, and mortar projectiles down to the lowest tactical level
5.) Lack of an Accurate 360 degree targeting capability to accurately employ munitions at extended ranges (BCT – FiB(Div))
6.) Lack of ability to integrate Army and JIIM air missile defense capabilities across all echelons
For more of MG Halverson’s remarks and to watch other Fires Seminar briefings, log on to DCO-Connect at:
https://connect.dco.dod.mil/r75632489
Also, the presentations that speakers give will be posted on the Fires Knowledge Network on AKO.
Thanks for the updates on the seminar.
Mr. Dale Ormond – Deputy Commander of the Combine Arms Center
Leader Development
For his brief, Mr. Ormond reiterated a fact that in the past, situational awareness came from a top-down approach, but now it comes from the bottom-up. He said that today, we need creative thinkers and adaptive leaders in the Army and on today’s battlefields. He relayed to the audience that it was GEN Dempsey’s number one priority.
Mr. Ormond discussed how, when we begin our initial entry phases of our Army experience, we place a significant emphasis on tactically training our men and women and how, as we move up in rank, we train less and less. This has led to a slippery slope in some regards to where there are perceptions that you have to “stay in the fight” in order to move up in rank and that these people have been unable, or have little, broadening experiences. He mentioned that having these different experiences and learning other perspectives allow for success at a strategic level. A 40-minute discussion began immediate following his brief on several issues ranging from how to best implement CCC (among other courses) to building competencies in an era persistent conflict. It was a great discussion and highly encourage people to check out video on DCO.
Concur. Good job.Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Blair
Concur. This is a major problem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Randal Knight
Why? The equipment exists and is even combat provenQuote:
3.) Lack of lightweight accurate target location designation systems to support dismounted Soldiers in the IBCT
1) A compass, binos, a protractor, and a map are not that heavy.Quote:
3.) Lack of lightweight accurate target location designation systems to support dismounted Soldiers in the IBCT
2) The VECTOR system is fielded, works pretty well, and is not that heavy.
Look at your target location training, and fix it. Then look at your PT program, and fix that. If both of those are good and you're still having problems, then look at a new system.
I don't know what gear they use, but a 13F assigned to the 75th Regiment carries around 120 pounds of gear.
Highlight of the show, for me, was the M119A3. A digital 105MM howitzer. Much easier to lay.
Joint Training, JFCOM CDR, GEN Mattis (0930-1015)
GEN Mattis’s briefing had several key points, some of which discussed were Adaptability, Trust, Spirit of Collaboration, and the Human Innovation. On Adaptability, GEN Mattis discussed how we must be fit to fight and cannot allow the enemy to dictate how we fight. He spoke on how we need to make sure we remain dominate yet relevant at the same time. He also mentioned that we are losing our precision dominance and must move toward distributive operations. Trust was an area that GEN Mattis discussed in great length. For the joint community, trust is the point of the realm in joint and coalition operations, and that success and failure are based on the level of trust that is developed between our joint and coalition partners. From a maneuver perspective, GEN Mattis offered that trust allows us to move quickly against the enemy. Another topic for GEN Mattis was the spirit of collaboration. He mentioned that no nation is strong enough to stand on its own and defend the values it hopes to continue. Along those same lines he spoke of the race for the narrative – getting the first word out in the battle of the information age- must be embraced by all leaders and commanders. Questions included use of EW within the Joint and Coalition spectrum, sharing of TTPs with our allies, and how to work interagency issues.
Good discussion on future Coalition warfare and where we are going in the Joint realm.
LTG Vane spoke on what Army forces need to do - require a need to be executed in moderation and balance to achieve set goals – a centralized idea that drives strategic planning and leader development. He said that we have to allow Soldiers to connect with Industry, and that we have to leverage the prototype phase of development earlier. He transitioned to stating that we have to get our minds right of sending products to the field in order to identify risks and redundancies. He asked the audience to recognize that incremental improvements are a high priority as we move forward against an adaptive enemy. We must update the acquistion process to gain efficiencies. A prolonged discussion on how the Army acquires emerging systems ensued during the question and answer period.
"Buy less, more often" was a large discussion point for the group - we are doing it and have been doing it - is it better or worse, more expensive or cheaper?
Lt Gen Remington had a relatively short brief discussing the current warfighting dynamic in Korea. From the chain of command structure to the Joint Combined Fires Planning, Lt Gen Remington discussed areas and hurdles that both help and limit his ability to command his forces. At the conclusion of the brief, there was a lengthy Q&A session where questions ranged from how long range fires capabilities play into the Joint/Combine Fires planning in Korea to whether or not the architecture exists for Army JFOs to provide targeting data to JTACs located further from the DMZ if conflict were to break out.
LTG Hunzeker thought the title to read instead Adaptable LEADERS for Full Spectrum Operations. He opened with the current state of affairs in Iraq and discussed the recent election results and implications. He transitioned to the strategic depth of our partnership with Iraq; discussing such topics as national interest, security depth, diplomatic depth, and economic depth. Then, LTG Hunzeker discussed an IJOA operations overview where the majority of the topics discussed centered on the transition to stability operations and what is being done to ensure we meet our desired endstate. Lastly, LTG Hunzeker spoke of a need to increase and support our C-RAM efforts and offered his thoughts on where the future of counter fire and the Fires curriculum should move towards.
LTG Hunzeker then asked "is manual gunnery still a requirement that we should keep are part of our field artillery curriculum?"
thoughts?
Yes. Same way you do not give up teaching map reading because you have GPS. Toys break. Learn to use to ones that break less often. Manual reversion?Quote:
Originally Posted by SC6KFG68
....and I'm worried this even got asked......
I went through FAOBC in 2004 and Manual Gunnery was the bane of our existence for several months. That said, a high standard was set and you had to meet it. 10% of the class usually did not pass. Artillery does not have room for errors and you need competent FA Officers leading competent FA Soldiers. I went straight to a Fire Direction Officer slot in an Airborne battery and manual was our primary means. We used the digital systems once out in the field (with our trucks), but charts and darts were the primary means on the DZ and during initial occupation. All FA Officers had to take and pass the Safety test because if your digital goes down, you can still shoot. You need to know what AFATDS is doing, otherwise you're putting all your faith in machines.Quote:
Originally Posted by SC6KFG68
All FA Officers, even those going straight to Fire Support Officer slots, need to understand why and how FA works. Someday, they may command a Battery and have to confirm their FDO's safety data. I only spent 3 months of my almost 4 years in a FA BN shooting (thanks convoy security and staff), but I got to shoot 700+ rounds in that short window, and had a great time. The attention to detail I learned in Gunnery paid off later as a MI officer and taught me to look at the bigger picture and moving parts of a problem. FAOBC is not suppossed to train Infantrymen or Diplomats, it is supposed to train Field Artillerymen. King of Battle!
If there is no such thing as a stupid question, this one is close enough to stupid for effects on target.Quote:
"is manual gunnery still a requirement that we should keep are part of our field artillery curriculum?"
I could see that if you were leaving the wire for a week or so.Quote:
I don't know what gear they use, but a 13F assigned to the 75th Regiment carries around 120 pounds of gear.
patmc,
My understanding is that guns are no longer grouped into batteries by MVV, which means that using analog methods you will get an irregular sheaf. Is this effect noticeable in the field?
Seth, those words are music to my ears, but I haven't been near a cannon in half a decade. Someone closer to the powder has to answer that one for you. I still have my first MVV homework assignment. A lot of red pen on that one.Quote:
Originally Posted by SethB
I should caveat what I wrote, you need to know BOTH digital and manual, which was how they taught gunnery. You learned manual, then applied it to digital. The majority of FA ops are digital because machines can crunch the big numbers fast. That said, you have to know what the computer is doing to ensure it gives you good data. You need to know what right sounds like. In my Fire Direction Center, we used AFATDS, a handheld computer and 2 charts. AFATDS accounted for Met, powder temp, elevation, etc... We confirmed it was in the right neighborhood with the charts and handheld, but shot the AFATDS data. You always want the most accurate data because mistakes can kill. Our Battery Commander trusted us to shoot off charts when needed, though.
I believe a Field Artillery Officer should know manual gunnery because it is the backbone of everything else. Assuming they'll learn it with OJT or OPDs will fail. Try reading FM 6-40 or a TFT for self improvement. OBC is unpleasant, but you learn it. "Just trust the FDNCO" is good, but you still need to verify. My SSG was really good, but I still had to give the fire commands and it was my ass if the data was bad. The fact that we both knew gunnery made ops smooth and we got along great.
When I went through FAOBC in 1978 we were taught manual gunnery first and later using computers, then FADAC, a Vietnam-era system. My Advanced Course in 1981 was the first one to be taught TACFIRE, another obsolete gunnery computer. Back around 9/11 when most Army publications were still online FM 6-40 resembled the versions I used, so it appears that things haven't changed that much. The one thing I thought Fort Sill ought to have been doing was provide pre-canned fire missions for FDC training with all the input data--grid coordinates, azimuths, met, propellant temperature, etc--as well as school solutions to the fire missions. That way it would be easier to present training for FDCs without having to do all the computations in advance. If I recall correctly something like that was available for 155mm; at my first assignment I was in a 175mm gun battalion and we didn't want to repeatedly reprogram FADAC from one caliber to another. FDC skills decline rapidly, as one can find out the hard way during live-fire exercises. I imagine many 13Bs are rusty on laying pieces and so forth after years of being infantrymen overseas.
Actually, I'd retired by then as an eternally young Smaj with almost ten years in grade. I think I was prob'ly a Corporal before you were born... :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Pete
However, as I'm sure you meant that Corporal in '78 as a testament to said youth, you get full credit and no ' West By God' jokes for a month. ;)
On a serious note, good point on the rapid skill decay, that's true of all cognitive skills as you know. Good news is that if those skills are firmly and properly trained and embedded they can be quickly recovered. Thus the critical importance of manual plotting...
Actually I knew that. We graduates of Fort Sill schools are taught that a round landing within 50 meters of the target counts as a target hit, something Fort Benning types have difficulty fathoming. I was born about three weeks before Ike was elected president in November 1952. When my dad was a reporter for the Louisville Courier-Journal about three years later he had one of its photographers take a picture of him holding me and my brother next to a convertible with former President Harry Truman smiling in the backseat.
Oh we understand that, we're just not at all used to seeing FArty get that close, 500m ± we're used to, that and 3,200 mil deflection errors (there's a reason FOs are taught to make "bold corrections..."). The boys and girls at Sill really ought to work on that abbreviation... ;).Quote:
Originally Posted by Pete
My Grandfather was an Editor for the CJ, he'd retired about about four years before. I used to play with Barry Bingham, Jr; that was a really good newspaper -- until he sold it to Gannet. Was in Louisville a couple of years ago for a visit. Small world indeed...Quote:
...When my dad was a reporter for the Louisville Courier-Journal
When dad attended the Field Artillery Replacement Training Center at Camp Roberts, California in 1943 it went by the acronym FARTCEN. I know gentlemen of the press aren't the most popular people in military circles, so if it's any consolation, after having been a battery clerk in combat in Europe he went on to run the composing room of Stars and Stripes-Pacific in Tokyo in December 1945. I have the 7.7mm Arisaka he won at the S&S Christmas party raffle in 1945. At the C-J he was its TV critic for a while--he wrote that the best setting on a TV was the "off" position. He also predicted that a young comedian named Johnny Carson who was then being badly beaten in viewer ratings by Liberace would go on to have a good career.