82REDLEG: Thanks for the links. Over the next few days or so I will review them, and let you know what I think. Right now it is drywall and light fixture time down in the old mess hall , oops dining facility.
82REDLEG: Thanks for the links. Over the next few days or so I will review them, and let you know what I think. Right now it is drywall and light fixture time down in the old mess hall , oops dining facility.
CNAS: Hard Choices--Responsible Defense in an Age of Austerity
I would imagine that some have read this report, which really does not get too specific. What I do question is the idea of shifting the majority of heavy forces to the reserves/national guard - what does that mean? If the Army was forced to shift heavy forces to the national guard where do the heavy forces go? Do we re-set the national guard brigades back to armor brigades that were "transformed" into IBCTs? Or do we look to change existing IBCTs west of the Mighty Miss into HBCTs because there is more room to train?
Link to cited report:http://www.cnas.org/hardchoices
Last edited by davidbfpo; 10-07-2011 at 07:35 PM. Reason: Link added
The choices are only hard for Rice Bowl Coveters...
They are actually -- logically and militarily -- fairly easy. Unfortunately, they are, politically, a number of varying size Rice Bowls all full of a mass of worms -- or worse.
Hard to say how it'll work out, we'll see -- but your comment about west of the Mississippi is very appropriate. The issue is not training room per se -- the NTC provides more maneuver space than is neccessary -- but range fans. Twenty years ago I tried to point out to folks that after 2020 or so, the likelihood of having adequate ranges for 105mm much less 120mm and above east of that river was quite slim. The antiwar Squirrels have been using and will continue to use environmental, heritage and other pretexts to shut down impact areas and live fire in general on both coasts -- they will not stop. They would totally ban training if they thought they could. Fortunately, the folks in flyover country are more sensible.
I also strongly believe it in the interest of the Nation that the 1980s concept of combat arms units only in the ArNG be revisited. While the Guard slickly co-opted the 'Militia' title as theirs alone, that's a politically beneficial belief and a flaky law, not a Constitutional clause. The Nation can do recruiting, training, location, employment and mission things with the Guard it cannot do with the USAR -- and vice versa. That versa indicates that some USAR combat units would be beneficial so also would some currently USAR peculiar skills be beneficial to the Guard and the States. Laws can be changed...
I've heard a rumor that the 81st HBCT might be converting to a SBCT - anyone here have info?
Happy Thanksgiving!
While it would make sense (We get a LOT of guys from 2ID and even our 2nd batt guys are familier with Strykers) we just got upgraded to a new type of Bradley and are going through a year plus cycle to get everyone "qualified" on it. This is one of the reasons I disagree with Ken about HBCT's belonging in the NG. Light Infantry, Aviation, MP, Medical, Engineering, etc, all have dual use ability (How exactly are you going to use M1's and M3's during a state emergency?) and are units that we typically have understrength after a shooting war turns to OOTW, UW or COIN. HCBT's also cost quit a bit to maintain becouse the equipment maintanaince needs don't change much, nor does the required rounds fired per year... SO I'm of the opinion that AC should be Heavy units, especially on the old armoured Cav model and rapid deployment forces to augment the USMC's ability in that area, and RC should be primarly the types of units mentioned above.Originally Posted by gute
Reed
As long as we keep the Guard relevant during ARFORGEN cycle green years, by sending them to NTC/Hoenfels/JRTC, the HBCT will work in the National Guard. If there's not a goal to work towards, it doesn't what type of BCT is out there.
I still think a handful of HBCTs should be kept on the AC side though - just for mobile operation. Maybe rotate the funds per quarter or 1/2-year for each AC HBCT to be completely ready and capable to conduct tank-on-tank battle, and allow the others to perform maneuver/tank tables less. This may sound absurd to some AC guys, but ARNG does this all the time.
Before there was an NTC...
The AC used force on force training constantly -- produced better units more able to operate flexibly IMO. Canned stuff has its limitations even with a 'world class OPFOR'. Donated training has some advantages; it also has some disadvantages...
One size fits all does not work in fairly intense combat.
What Reed says above makes sense. If the Army Reserve still had combat units, that would be the ideal place for RC HBCTs and the Guard could have light Inf, MPs aEngineers and Medics for State missions. However, the ArNG didn't want the USAR to have such units and won that battle (another example of "be careful what you want..."). So the ArNG gets stuck with some HBCTs -- since that heavy stuff is a Federal need and since the Feds pay about 90% ± of the total cost of the Guard, I guess it's a fair trade...
Generally, RC units cannot train as thoroughly and have some problems with readiness compared to AC units (though I've seen RC units that could outperform some AC elements...) but that's okay -- an RC HBCT can get trained up and deploy a whole lot faster than the AC could recruit, equip, train and deploy one from scratch. Typically, RC elements cost about 25% of their AC counterparts costs, you get what you pay for and what we get is more than good enough -- far better than a lot folks active units.
Round-out battalions instead of brigades
It's my understanding that round-out battalions were used in the 70's, but did suffer from readiness and recruitment issues. In today's fight are round-out battalions practical/feasible? Would it work to place all RC maneuver battalions and attached CS/CSS under operational command of an AC BCT for combat, but RC divisions would have administrative control of the battalions for drills, natural disasters, etc?
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks