Force transformation

#1
According to DefenseNews

...the US Army is undergoing its most comprehensive transformation since 1939 ... and achieving that aim means moving the service from a division-centric force to a brigade-centric organization. The primary combat unit of this new force will be the brigade combat team, which the Army is trying to standardize to ensure more units are available to be plugged into any forward-deployed higher headquarters.

The Army is creating three types of brigades: infantry, heavy, and Stryker, of between 3,500 and 4,000 soldiers. They are collapsing three higher echelons of command, army, corps and division, into two smaller, and as yet unnamed command echelons. The Army’s plan is to ultimately have 77 active duty and reserve brigades in the rotational pool.

... the Army continues to push the costly Future Combat Systems (FCS) program... the Army’s official cost estimate is $27.7 billion for research and development, and $94 billion to stand up 15 FCS equipped brigade combat teams by 2025, for total program costs of $122 billion.
Isn't something similar happening in the British Army, through FRES (at a mere £14 billion), and does this explain the "rationalisation" of the infantry regiments?
 
#4
Vegetius said:
The Army is creating three types of brigades: infantry, heavy, and Stryker
How can anyone, even an American, say they're from a "STRYKER BRIGADE!" and keep a straight face?

FFS.

V!
Read this and then come back and make the same remark.

The are sooooo inferior to armoured Land Rovers, doncha think.
 
#6
Vegetius said:
Develop a sense of humour. It's also the name of a well-known Gay pornstar from the 1980's.
It's also the name of two holders of the Congressional Medal of Honor.
 

LARD

War Hero
#8
Wasn't Ted Stryker our hero in that marvellous film 'Airplane'? He was the guy affraid to fly becuase he had b@llsed up a mission and bored everyone to the edge of suicide talking about it!

Doesn't bode very well then!
 
#9
Hmmmmm!

Wrote a paper on this Summer 2004. US Army (then, may have changed since) were creating two distinct types of unit: the Unit of Action (UA) and the Unit of Employment (UE). The UA is a scaled down BCT (Brigade Combat Team) utilising 2 TFs (task force) not 3. In that sense, even the word 'Brigade' was supposed to be dropped from the lexicon, however, it has proven impossible to convince the old grizzlies to join the world of PC-speak, and 'brigade' lingers on. The UE is supposedly the replacement for the Div level C2 headquarters etc. Each TF will be adapted to be more akin to a USMC MEU as it has a bit of av spt included.

The UAs are in the process of forming. Each US division with 3 ground bdes (9 x btn), 1 av bde, 1 arty 1 CSS bde and 1 eng bde - which previously constituted 3 BCTs - are being reconfigured into 4 UAs. In effect, this has 3 major implications:
1) 1 ground btn (tank or inf) is surplus to requirements,
2) av, arty, CSS and eng need to increase slightly to support 4, not 3, individually deployable units (inf types to rerole?),
3) there is the appearance of greater 'effect', deployability, flexibilty and firepower.

Apart from a little massaging of the names and precise orbat, the US Army is copying the USMC MEU structure for their 'new' TFs, the MEB, albeit scalled down for the UA, and the UE will essentially be a MEF!!!!

So, to try and equate this (very simply) to the HM Armed Forces doctrine, a 'new' US TF will equate to one of our BGs (with a bit of av spt too), a UA will be half of one of our 'square' brigades, and a UE will be a 2 'square brigade' sized div - ie 8 BGs!
 
#11
merkator said:
So, to try and equate this (very simply) to the HM Armed Forces doctrine, a 'new' US TF will equate to one of our BGs (with a bit of av spt too), a UA will be half of one of our 'square' brigades, and a UE will be a 2 'square brigade' sized div - ie 8 BGs!
Are the FRES Brigades are supposed to be independently deployable, with their own organic support elements?
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Top