• Military Menu                       

• Introduction
• Systems
• Facilities
• Agencies
• Industry
• Operations
• Countries
• Hot Documents
• News
• Reports
• Policy
• Budget
• Congress
• Links

• WMD
• Intelligence
• Homeland Security
• Space

'Iraqi Freedom' proves Transformation concepts

by Joe Burlas

WASHINGTON (Army News Service, April 28, 2003) -- While "Operation Iraqi Freedom" shouldn't be considered a model for future warfare, it has validated several Transformation concepts, an Army official said.

That Army official gave journalists a Transformation update in the form of a background (no names used for attribution) briefing April 24 at the Pentagon.

If you look at the ways wars have been fought during the past century, most have followed the World War II model where you build up massive military might, invade at a single location and then clear the area of enemy forces in a linear fashion, the official said. While Iraqi Freedom did include a time-consuming military buildup, those forces invaded in two widely separated locations and attacked key objectives rather than clearing the country on line of enemy forces.

Multiple entry points and focusing on key objectives are among several Transformation concepts used effectively during recent combat operations in Iraq, the official said. Others include: closer working relationships between special and conventional forces; true joint and combined operations at lower levels; and conducting operations across the full spectrum of conflict.

Iraqi Freedom is the first time the Army has ever conducted combat, peace-keeping, humanitarian relief and ecological cleanup operations all at the same time, the official said.

Speaking about the Stryker Brigade Combat Team, the official said it would have been ideal for operations in northern Iraq had it already been operationally tested. "It could have been flown in and provided the northern front more mobility and lethality than current forces have there," he said.

The Army's first Stryker BCT -- 3rd Brigade, 2nd Infantry Division, out of Fort Lewis, Wash. -- is fully equipped and will undergo operational testing at Fort Polk, La. in mid-May.

While much media attention is focused on the equipment technology aspect of Transformation, there is much more to it, the official said. "Technology is just a Transformation enabler," he said.

Under the Transformation umbrella, the Army is considering changing its Train-Alert-Train-Deploy model for units conducting real-world operations to Train-Alert-Deploy. The current model is based upon units training day-to-day for the high-risk end of the conflict spectrum. When those units are alerted for a low-end mission such as humanitarian relief or peacekeeping, they have to learn a new set of tasks.

Changing the individual replacement system with a unit replacement one that locks everyone in for two years might free up time for units to train other tasks than those needed for combat operations. The problem the Army faces now is that with the individual replacement system, you constantly have to retrain the same tasks over and over again because you have a constant stream of people coming and going, the official said. It takes time to build effective teams and individual replacement system means teams are always being broken up in the short term, he continued.

The Army is also looking at changing discreet, specialized, stove-pipe systems and processes into networked enterprise ones. For example, when a soldier gets deployed, the unit manning report will tell the personnel system where he is. However, unless someone gets the paperwork to finance, he may not get the danger pay he is entitled to for months, the official said. With a networked system, one stop tells everyone who needs to know what is happening with the soldier, he said.

A Transformation organization change might include combined arms teams organized from within during peacetime, rather than just being formed during combat operations down to the company level, the official said.

Comparing current Army systems with the Future Combat System, the official said that being the best equipped Army in the world does not necessarily mean being the best organization. Each system has its own discrete needs in terms of parts and specialized mechanics -- meaning a massive logistics tail. With FCS built on a common carrier, the logistics tail will be smaller than the current force -- meaning more tooth or combat troops available to carry the fight to the enemy given similar-sized forces, he said.

FCS met seven joint interoperability key performance parameters the end of April. It is scheduled for fielding by 2010.