previous post next post  

TRADOC Reorg

First - since this is a long boring text post talking about the re-organization of the Army's Training and Doctrine Command, here's something for Just This Guy - a 3 Inch Anti-tank Gun in the collection of the National Infantry Museum, Fort Benning (that's an M1 155mm Long Tom in the background).


I finally found the details that LongTabSigO was referring to in his posts on the reorg of TRADOC. While Sanger doesn't get his dream of TRADOC going 'poof' this *does* represent a huge shift in outlook if it holds up through the BRAC process. Looks like all we get here at Leavenworth are more prisoners and guards.

For those of you with a long enough memory - the FA/ADA merger is 'deja vu all over again'...

But essentially merging the Infantry and Armor schools represents an enormous paradigm shift, and will prove an interesting cultural move. These mergers, if done correctly, are also going to render a lot of senior people redundant - which will make Jim Dunnigan happy, though the impact on careers and career patterns has potential to be intriguing. (Dunnigan is just going to make many of us Warrants...) The next question will be... can they merge the branches... I can hear the grunts and tankers falling away in a faint already. The Field Artillery and Air Defense branches went through this once already, and heck, the air defenders started life as Coast Artillery, anyway - the cultures spring from a common core.

And all the musical chairs of relocation and dislocation is going to produce some real unhappiness among contractors and civil servants... but if you are a canny real estate guru, the opportunities are out there.

Since it's a longish bit, and only the real geeks are going to want to read it - I stuck it in the Flash Traffic/Extended Post. You're welcome!

DoD recommendations to move headquarters, consolidate 7 TRADOC schools
By Lisa Alley/TRADOC News Service

FORT MONROE, Va. (TRADOC News Service, May 13, 2005) – The Defense Department’s 2005 base realignment and closure recommendations released this morning have two major recurring themes: consolidation to achieve military value, and Joint usage. Consolidation will combine seven U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command centers and schools, while Joint usage will establish several Joint centers of excellence at installations that currently host TRADOC schools.

DoD’s recommendations are outlined in Vol. 2, a 398-page report containing the details, found on-line at http://www.defenselink.mil/brac/pdf/Vol_I_Part_2_DOD_BRAC.pdf.

TRADOC headquarters
If, as DoD recommends, Fort Monroe closes, Headquarters TRADOC would move to Fort Eustis, Va., to stay within commuting distance of Joint Forces Command headquarters in Norfolk, Va. U.S. Army Accessions Command and U.S. Army Cadet Command headquarters would move to Fort Knox, Ky., along with the Army’s Human Resources Command (moving from leased facilities in Alexandria ,Va.; Indianapolis, Ind.; and St. Louis, Mo.), to join U.S. Army Recruiting Command in a nexus that will create “a center of excellence for military personnel and recruiting functions by improving personnel lifecycle management.”

“This process is just beginning, but I see an opportunity for the Army and TRADOC to become more efficient, modernize our infrastructure and improve how we train,” said Gen. Kevin P. Byrnes, TRADOC’s commanding general. “(Throughout the process), I am committed to keeping (everyone) informed and taking care of our people.”

Consolidation
Seven TRADOC branch schools would consolidate into centers patterned after the Maneuver Support Center at Fort Leonard Wood, Mo., which combines the military police, engineer and chemical centers and schools. DoD’s recommended actions include:

The Air Defense Artillery Center and School, Fort Bliss, Texas, would combine with the Field Artillery School at Fort Sill, Okla., to establish a Net Fires Center at Fort Sill, which would consolidate net fires training and doctrine development at one location.
“This recommendation improves the MANSCEN concept by consolidating functionally related branch centers and schools, which fosters consistency, standardization and training proficiency,” according to DoD’s BRAC report. “It also facilitates task force stabilization by combining operational forces with institutional training. In addition, it consolidates both ADA and field artillery Skill Level I courses at one location, which allows the Army to reduce the total number of military-occupation skills training locations (reducing the TRADOC footprint). … It improves training capabilities while eliminating excess capacity at institutional training installations.”

The Armor Center and School, Fort Knox, Ky., would move to Fort Benning, Ga., to consolidate with the Infantry Center and School into a Maneuver Center of Excellence for ground-forces training and doctrine development. Consolidation joins both infantry and armor one-station unit training, allowing the Army to reduce the number of basic combat training locations from five to four (Forts Jackson, Sill and Leonard Wood would be the other three besides Fort Benning).
The Armor Center would be replaced at Knox by the 84th Army Reserve Regional Training Center, moving from Fort McCoy, Wis., and by engineer, military police and combat-service-support units relocating from Europe and Korea under the Integrated Global Presence and Basing Strategy realignments.

DoD plans to create a Combat Service Support Center at Fort Lee, Va., by moving the Ordnance Center and School from Aberdeen Proving Ground, Md., and the Transportation Center and School at Fort Eustis, and merging them with the Combined Arms Support Command, the Quartermaster Center and School and the Army Logistic Management College at Fort Lee. The Missile and Munitions Center would also move from Redstone Arsenal, Ala., to Fort Lee to be part of the new CSS Center. This would consolidate CSS training and doctrine development at one installation.
Other consolidation that would affect TRADOC includes:

The Aviation Center and School, Fort Rucker, Ala., would gain the Aviation Logistics School from Fort Eustis, which would consolidate aviation training and doctrine development at a single location.
DoD is recommending that the drill-sergeant schools at Fort Benning and Fort Leonard Wood be relocated and consolidated with the DSS at Fort Jackson, S.C. This would consolidate drill-sergeant training from three locations to one, which fosters consistency, standardization and training proficiency.
Joint centers
Fort Lee would also become the home of two Joint centers: one for consolidated transportation-management training and another for Joint culinary training.

Transportation-management training would move from Lackland AFB, Texas, to Lee to consolidate similar service schools. As home of the most military-transportation training, Fort Lee would become the Joint Center for Consolidated Transportation Management training.

The Air Force’s culinary training would also leave Lackland AFB, to be relocated at Lee, which would be established as the Joint Center of Excellence for Culinary Training. The Army Center of Excellence-Subsistence is already located at Fort Lee. Lee was chosen because it’s the installation with the largest service requirement for culinary training, according to the DoD BRAC report.

Another Joint training center to be established would be the Joint Center of Excellence for Religious Training and Education at Fort Jackson, S.C. The home of the Army’s Chaplain School would gain other services’ religious training and education from Maxwell Air Force Base, Ala.; Naval Air Station Meridian, Miss.; and Naval Station Newport, R.I.

“Consolidation at Fort Jackson creates a synergistic benefit by having each service’s officer and enlisted programs conducted in close proximity to operational forces,” according to the DoD report. “Realized savings result from consolidation and alignment of similar officer and enlisted educational activities and the merging of common support functions.”

Other recommended changes
Other recommended changes that would affect TRADOC include:

2nd Recruiting Brigade would move to Redstone Arsenal, Ala., since DoD recommended that the brigade’s present home of Fort McPherson, Ga., close.
The U.S. Army Reserve’s 95th Division (Institutional Training) would move to Fort Sill, as the facility it is based at – the Maj. Gen. Harry Twaddle United States Armed Forces Reserve Center, Oklahoma City, Okla. – would close.
The USAR’s 100th Div. (IT), Louisville, Ky., would move nearby – onto Fort Knox – as part of DoD’s BRAC recommendations.
The Army Prime Power School would move from Fort Belvoir to Fort Leonard Wood, since courses at this school are engineer branch courses and the Engineer Center serves as the service engineer proponent. This realignment would consolidate engineer courses at Fort Leonard Wood.
DoD is recommending relocation of several service correctional facilities from Lackland AFB, Fort Knox and Fort Sill to Fort Leavenworth, Kan., and consolidating them as a single Level II Joint regional correctional facility – one of five Level II Joint facilities. The Midwestern Joint Regional Correctional Facility at Fort Leavenworth would consolidate the Lackland Confinement Facility; the Army Regional Correctional Facility, Fort Knox; the Army Regional Correctional Facility, Fort Sill; and the components of the U.S. Disciplinary Barracks, Fort Leavenworth.
Next steps
BRAC is considered an essential step in the transformation of the Army and other military services, maximizing their capabilities to work together more effectively while providing substantial savings in military spending.

DoD’s recommendations will be reviewed by the nine-member independent BRAC commission. The commission, chaired by former Secretary of Veterans Affairs Anthony Principi, must submit its recommendations to President George W. Bush by Sept. 8.

Next steps are that the BRAC commission will hold regional meetings to solicit public input before making its recommendations to the president in September. The president then forwards the recommendations to Congress, which has 45 legislative days to act on the report.

Under the BRAC statute, actions to close or realign an installation must be initiated within two years after Congressional approval, with completion in six years.

TRADOC’s Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel, Infrastructure and Logistics has established a Website that includes the TRADOC civilian personnel, engineering and environmental issues related to BRAC. All affected TRADOC activities are included. The site will also link to fact sheets on civilian-personnel issues such as reductions-in-force, realignments and transfers of function.

The Web address of DCSPIL’s site is http://www.tradoc.army.mil/dcspil/cpd/brac.htm.

For other information on BRAC and how it affects installations nationwide, visit DoD’s BRAC Website at http://www.dod.mil/brac and the Army BRAC Website at http://www.hqda.army.mil/acsim/brac/braco.htm

19 Comments

I guess I qualify as an Ubergeek since I read this before you posted it, and have read the entire BRAC report as well. Branches have outlived their function. We now have combined arms battalions in the heavy force, so it only makes sense to train the soldiers for these battalions at the same place. I say let's organize and train the way we intend to fight. Use the Regiments to sustain the Army's lineage, traditions, and heritage. BTW, the 2d Battalion, 7th Infantry is a combined arms battalion in the new modular 3d Infantry Division. It has two tank companies and two Bradley-equipped infantry companies. What color are the guidons of the tank companies? What branch insignia do they display, and what regimental numerals are embroidered on those guidons? Just curious.
 
BD - when I look in the dictionary under Ubergeek, I see your picture... the one of you standing out at the NTC as a battalion commander, in your rumpled NBC suit with windblown hair (what there was even then) holding forth in your schoolmarmish way... right before your task force kicked the crap outta the OPFOR. As for your question - I dunno - but mebbe some readers do!
 
I'm applying for Vice-Geek, as I too have been pouring over the BRAC recommendations all weekend. I'm disappointed my home post of Fort Knox will no longer be the Home of Armor and Cavalry, but very pleased Knox has apparently positioned themselves for future growth by nabbing some combat units and a BCT. Oh, to be a real estate agent around Fort Benning!
 
Good read, not much to say, except I think there are going to be issues with land use and growth, especially with places like Leonard Wood which is bounded by the Mark twain National Forest, and already has a ton of envrionmental restrictions. As for Knox, well, I guess I'm saddend by the loss of the Armor School there, but then the thought of a TRADOC shake-up does offset the gloom... :-) Good stuff, thanks! Of course, on a final note, I suppose it'd be reasonable for the DoD to consolidate the CAS function with the ADA/FA centers, since they all have the same mission, eh. I can see it, A10s vs. Avengers with them and the FA competeing for air space... yowzah!
 
Dis I ever tell you about the Combat Training Centre in Camp Gagetown, with its four constituents being the Armour School, School of Artillery, Infantry School and Tactics School? Cheers JMH
 
Yes, John, you have. Thanks for reminding us what reverting to a little army bereft of governmental love and affection is like. Stop gloating. It's rude.
 
Ah the 3-Inch Fitty. Funny how this Naval Gun got slapped on a Pack Cassion and rebaptized in to a Tank Killer. Guess that if its good enough against ships at sea, its good enough against ships at land too.
 
Thanx again, JoA. Boqui, I dunno about that. I think there were complaints by some of the guys in DEs that that gun would not reliably make a hole in the pressure hull of a U-Boot. Ain't that the one which was adapted to be the 76mm gun in the later Shermans, with disappointing results? As for the BRAC, and re-organization stuff, OMG, MEGO! Reminds me of that poem, "Naming of Parts". Am afraid I'd have my eyes looking out the classroom window if I had to listen to a lecture on that topic. I'd be looking at the birds and bees, "easing the spring." Yah I know it's important, affects Nat'l Security, Real Estate, Jobs, etc etc, but it's so hard to pay attention to that kind of stuff. What makes it worse, is that that kind of stuff really is important, but bores most people to tears, even though it may affect them, and they need to know about it.
 
Say, where is everybody? Hello? Did y'all actually try to read all of that acronym-rich bureaucratese, and contract acute, severe, narcolepsy? Y'all do know, of course, that if you fall forwards, the drool will hurt yer keyboards!
 
Well, some of us *live* the jargon and don't even think about it - it's why I hid it below the fold... As for the M5 3 inch - it sucked at everything the Army put it to. And two small quibbles with Boq - caissons are ammo carriers, I'm sure you were thinking carriage and your fingers betrayed you, and the carriage for the gun was based on the M1 105mm howitzer, not the pack 75, even to the point of originally having the same splinter shield as the howitzer before the one show in the photo was fitted as being better suited to direct fire combat. We knew it sucked when we fielded it - but went ahead for two reasons - one, to train the AT units, and two, it was better than nothing. However - the 3inch gun is *still in service* - scroll to bottom of the page.
 
The proposed Joint Chaplain & Assistant school at Jackson would be the second Joint school here. We've already got the Joint Postal school. What's funny is that they don't do Joint PT. Each service group does their own. Which, as far as I can tell, means the Navy and Air Force go get coffee, the Marines run 10 miles every day in their super-short PT shorts, and the Army folks to mostly push-ups and sit-ups. And if they're moving the Armor school to Ft Benning, does that mean the Patton Museum will be moving there as well? And would Patton again be subordinate to Bradley, museum wise?
 
Oh humble pie - where art thou. My brain must have had too much fibrous food. Where´s the Beano when I need it?
 
Dave - might be the reason the move founders... can't have Patton working for Bradley again...
 
In response to Heartless Libertarians Patton Museum question (having poetic justice written all over it), there is talk up here at Knox about moving the Patton Museum, although some are quite hesitant because the community just forked over several million dollars last year to expand it. Somebody is in need of a DoD mole.
 
As a former TRADOC school Military Historian, I frankly doubt the Patton Museum will move. Fort Knox is staying open, after all. There might be some movement of exhibits between Benning and Knox (probably in trade) but I wouldn't expect there to be a move of the museum.
 
Yeah, besides, all those tanks would just confuse the FNG grunts... Too many moving parts and all...
 
The only thing I need to know about tanks is how to kill them. I wonder if anyone has ever tested a Javelin vs an M1...just to see what would happen. Actually, tanks don't confuse me...helicopters, now those things confuse me.
 
I kind of doubt that the Patton Museum is going to move. They've got a motor pool full of artifacts that they don't have room to display. (Who else would WANT an M60A2?) And moving all of those items while protecting them from damage is going to be expensive. And the military isn't doing much to fund museums these days.
 
Heartless Libertarian posted "I wonder if anyone has ever tested a Javelin vs an M1...just to see what would happen." Warhead detonates over engine deck = mobility kill, tank theoretically recoverable, repairable. Crew probably OK Warhead detonates over turret bustle ammo compartments = ammo in ready/semi-ready racks cooks off, blow-off panels on turret roof come off the tank as designed. Crew probably OK, tank repairable by direct-support maintenance unit. Warhead detonates over front portion of turret roof (i.e., over turret fighting compartment = crew likely dead or seriously injured, tank may be repairable. Warhead detonates over front slope of tank = possible damage to the main gun barrel (replaceable in the field by battalion maintenance,) possible death or injury to driver, possible breach of fuel tank. Tank will probably be repairable depending on degree and location of damage. At least, that's my sense of it after having worked with the durned things for 11 or 12 years.
 
© 2008 John Donovan
All rights reserved.