Ken:

BLUF, keep the counter-points coming. Healthly debate is good for the soul.

I agree with your points regarding manuever units and FOBs, but the Loggies got to live/operate from someplace. No reason a maneuver unit could/should not operate off-base for days/weeks at a time, depending on re-supply. Lots of infantry/armor/cav units in Viet Nam spent nights off their base in Night Defense Positions. Seems like we have lost that capability....

I see the issue here being the ability to conduct re-supply in the "non-linear, asymetric battlefield" of today/tomorrow. Our future opponents are watching. They will continue to attack this weakness until its no longer a weakness.

We can secure the LOCs, secure the convoys or try to do both. I like the navy's solution of secure the convoy, understanding that a certain amount of that effort will have to go into securing/clearing a ground route immediately in front of the convoy. If we can get use to flexible MSRs, and the terrain allows for it, then all we need is the unit organized, equipped, manned and trained to run the route ahead of the convoy and provide close-in defense. We could leave that all to the CSS units, but will create a higher degree of risk. What I am trying to do is create a force for Lines-of-Commuinication (LOC) security. The Combat Battalion in an MEB appears to be a good first choice for this. Don't need/want a tank/Bradley Combined Arms Battalion. Would love Stryker Infantry Battalion, if someone is buying more Strykers. Above the ones needed to transform the 3rd ACR and 1st BCT/1AD. A dismounted Infantry Bn does great securing fixed sites and clearing urban areas. Really lousy when they try to keep up with that moving convoy. So, why not create an Infantry Bn (LOC) equipped with MRAPs/JLTVs/M-ATVs?

Agree about a fuel guzzling tank, but until/if we get a new engine its the one we have. I have tried to get the CSS-types to take up this topic, not interested.

Wonder what a 1000 mile operating range for a tank, or APC or IFV would be. At the end, you will still need fuel, only 3 times more then from 300 miles. (bad at math, I know)

I'm pretty sure that most infantry types would prefer to traverl in a Bradley of Stryker, but I see these as over-kill of the MSR-Security/Convoy Escort role. I think we can all generally agree to get rid of add-on/up-armored HMWWVs ASAP. In all of their roles. bad idea for a vehicle that started life with a plastic fuel tank, a fiber glass hood and an aluminim frame.

Cole:

Not sure I understand your Recon Sqdrn. Is it Company Size or a Battalion? Are your Troops Company or platoon sized?

1 M1A1 is very bad Ju Ju.

Is you intent to re-create combined arms/CAV platoons? Personaly like combined arms Co/Troops better. Pushes the requirement to understand more complex operations to the more experinced CPT level vice the newbe LT. It also enables the ability to still task org based off the situation.

While your solution of foward delivery of supplies by M-ATV might be feasible, the MSRs run all the way back to an APOD or SPOD. Vulnerability starts a soon as any convoy departs that location.