Comments for Sometimes the "Can Do" attitude puts you in a bad place

Sometimes the "Can Do" attitude puts you in a bad place

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 05:06:50 -0600

Heh. Even when it's a "Must Do." There’s a lot of email floating about in the Redleg community. Its a discussion of where the Chief of Artillery and his staff feel the branch is, and where it needs to go. There is much to ponder in there, for us Redlegs. For the Army. For whoever wins in November, for that matter. An excerpt: …We must improve how we prepare Field Artillery Soldiers, leaders, families, civilians, and units for the challenges they will face. This is a daunting task, complicated by the fact that we must execute it as we fight. We've been...

Comment from BillT on 2008-10-25

Sat, 25 Oct 2008 03:35:42 -0600

For us to remain the dominant player in the Fires and Effects world...

That statement makes a pretty hefty assumption...

Comment from Cannoneer No. 4 on 2008-10-24

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 19:46:55 -0600

The 8th Guards Tank Army is not going to be concentrating itself conveniently under your rain of dumb projectile steel, John.

GMLRS and Excaliber put more gun bunnies out of business than acting as infantry in Iraq did.

Acquiring and servicing discrete enemy C4ISR targets in a 21st-Century version of Radio-Electronic Combat is the full spectrum 3GW mission against a near peer. Opportunities for massing fires on area targets aren't likely to arise much in the future, and when they do, we probably won't have enough tubes and big bullets in range to go Old School anyway.

You guys used to have a "beaten zone" into which you poured hellfire and scunnion, killing some, demoralizing the survivors, and suppressing their ability to shoot back . Now you are snipers. One shot, one kill. Rinse, repeat.

Until EMP fries all the Buck Rogers War Machines and everybody's in Degraded Mode. Then Old School will be New again.

Comment from Argent on 2008-10-24

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 15:42:39 -0600

Hmm John is your idea serious? In one sense I feel like it's too bandaid as the problem sounds systemic from these commenters. On the other hand I've often thought people like you (.. where's my politically correct manual.. here we are uhm.. "experienced") who frankly know things most don't but aren't necessarily quick or strong enough to do the yakka are ideally placed as teachers.

I think the knowledge we throw away in the form of death is a terrible waste. That's why paper is so good. But conveying stuff through paper is kinda second best.

Comment from fdcol63 on 2008-10-24

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 15:32:36 -0600

Heartless Libertarian, thanks!

Comment from Heartless Libertarian on 2008-10-24

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 14:36:11 -0600

Each Brigade Combat Team (which as a combat arms maneuver brigade, vice a support-type brigade) contains one artillery battalion of appropriate type (light/airborne/air assault have towed 105s, Strykers have towed 155s, heavies have Paladins). These battalions are what used to be called the direct support battalions, and are now owned directly by the maneuver BCT commander. The old DIVARTY HQs, as well as the GS battalion that belonged to the Division CG, are gone.

There are also Fires Brigades, although I'm not sure exactly how many of these there are. I think there are currently 7, but don't quote me. These can vary in their exact composition, but generally include various types of artillery (the 18th here at Bragg has towed 155s and HIMARS) plus counterfire radar batteries, as well as an O6 HQ.

MG Vangjel's plan would add a few more Fires Bdes (so each division HQ would have one) and have them function as what they call the Force Field Artillery HQ (basically, DIVARTY) for that division. This is where the expertise and training in things like mass fire planning and execution would mostly reside. (Actually, in the Stryker battalions, you can almost do it on a smaller scale, but with mortars, since all the rifle companies plus the battalion mortar platoon have 120s. 10 120mm tubes on a single target is nothing to sneeze at.)

Comment from XBradTC on 2008-10-24

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:52:35 -0600

Given that so many brigades are deployed to a higher command that is division sized, I think we are seeing the folly of the "brigade centric" model. First we take away the corporate knowledge of division level warfighting, then we keep the division as an admin HQ, then we make a divsion level HQ in the field with a fancy name, and none of the benefits.

For the amateurs here, I'd suggest reading Geoffrey Perret's "There's a War to be Won." One of the topics he covers was MacArthur's insistence on forming "task forces" when the existing structure was not only more than adequate, but simpler to control.

Comment from fdcol63 on 2008-10-24

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 13:01:54 -0600

John, how exactly is artillery support in the brigade-centric force organized? One Arty Bn per? And I guess if so, it's direct support to the Bde/BCT?

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2008-10-24

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:53:00 -0600

Clearly, Argent - I proposed a solution. I await my recall orders!

Mostly, I'm just putting this out, as information, to see what kind of discussion it might generate.

Comment from Argent on 2008-10-24

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:42:16 -0600

Well you pose problems. What solutions do you envisage?

Comment from Argent on 2008-10-24

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 10:49:53 -0600

I just see this as a natural consequence from the change of focus. I don't think there is an easy solution to this problem.

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2008-10-24

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 10:05:24 -0600

Which is *exactly* the dilemma we're grappling with.

And, interestingly enough - points up one of the weaknesses of the brigade-centric Army.

The problems in the artillery are just symptomatic of a larger systemic problem as we've adapted to fight this war.

Which, short- to mid-term is okay, we're really not likely to face anyone who is going to stand up to us toe-to-toe, but the skills to do so will have atrophied over time - leaving us on a more even par with an enemy who *is* willing to fight the big fight.

Comment from Heartless Libertarian on 2008-10-24

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 09:59:08 -0600

Actually, there is one place where our Arty guys get to do counterfire on a fairly regular basis - Afghanistan. Of course, what they're counterfiring is usually a few BGs with a mortar, but they do have to do it. And a lot of the time, they have to go through all sorts of contortions in the clearance process, but the BGs are on the other side of the Durand Line, and we've got to make sure we're not blasting Paks.

Granted, it's not planning a Corps TOT to smash a Krasnovian bridgehead. And I think it's symptomatic of a larger problem - at the big unit level, our Army is no longer prepared or trained to fight a conventional fight against a near-peer adversary. If the Artillery thinks they've got it bad, they should look at their Air Defense brothers - the Army has largely done away with the branch by assuming a permanent state of friendly air supremacy. And when was the last time anyone saw a Division or higher level Warfighter exercise for a conventional fight? Rough guess, I'd say early 2003 at the latest. And the Optempo won't allow us to do any anytime soon.

Comment from Pogue on 2008-10-24

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 09:35:17 -0600

Oh, yeah... get me fired up before I finish my coffee, even. John, I couldn't agree more. You may remember my whining to Cassie when I came off the Kuwait deployment about how very few Redlegs are actually deploying as arty. Then we get back and work to become competent at our MOS before the next SECFOR deployment where we forget it all. Well, Arizona solved the problem by standing down the state's artillery regiment and replacing it with Infantry and MP units.

On the subject of MPRI (My Pay Really Increased), I really appreciate the work those guys are doing. The Army, starting with TRADOC is so risk adverse that it's almost impossible to get realistic training. MPRI is filling the gaps with realistic, effective live fire training while TRADOC has decided that the answer is to put everyone on a make believe FOB and teach outdated material poorly. That attitude seems to be spreading. I'm really hoping that the new senior leadership encourage the growth of some fuzzy ones among the people who are supposed to make sure we're ready to fight effectively. Of course that's another topic altogether. :-)

Comment from John of Argghhh! on 2008-10-24

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 09:13:52 -0600

Snerk - *all* of us Beltway Bandits do, No4. Heck, Vuono, one of the bigs of MPRI, is a Redleg.

Comment from Cannoneer No. 4 on 2008-10-24

Fri, 24 Oct 2008 09:10:25 -0600

outside help will be required

Does MPRI know about this?