"The new Objective Force Now scheme will shrink brigades by roughly a third, making them less capable than they already are of securing large swaths of contested area, especially in urban environments. Based upon Colonel Douglas MacGregor's studies and others, the new mini-brigades will lack sufficient combat power to decisively defeat a well-organized, well-trained, well-led adversary brigade/regiment. It still doesn't resolve the real need to integrate combat support/service support into the brigade-sized force so it can be a self-sustaining force within the JTF. The only way this could conceivably have ANY benefit is if the Division and Corps superstructures are abolished completely, and the staff elements reorganized as headquarters cells to plug into SJTFHQs and ad hoc JTF command groups, and the support /service support units reformed into modular units that can be subordinated to SJTFHQs or ad hoc JTFs. That doesn't seem to be in the plan.

This may be another dangerous reflection of the inability of the Modeling & Simulation community to succeed in building a JSIMS/WARSIM that is truly an object-oriented simulation on the ground. All the models being used now aggregate forces up to battalion or higher levels, and assign numerical values to them in terms of firepower, mobility, protection, sustainment, etc. These artificial notions are being played with too often by the people making decsisions at the Battle Labs and TRADOC, as well as in the Pentagon.

As for needing to be lighter to be rapidly deployable, if necessary, I'd rather have a brigade made up of a battalion of Bradleys and two battalions of improved M113 Gavins, formed into battalion combat teams, and deployed "from the sea" -- than any STRYKER or FCS-based force likely to become available in the next 10 years. STRYKER or FCS -- if it could really be air-delivered by a sufficient number of C-17s and C-5s -- is probably more useful than heliborne air assault leg infantry or airborne assault leg infantry, but they are far less combat effective or survivable than even the weak (tank-less) mechanized force I just described. Ideally, I think a battle group made up of a modest number of tanks, a modest number of Bradleys, and a lot of improved APCs emphasizing capacity and protection would be very useful. If properly tracked and engined, they could travel pretty far, too.

Light forces in thin-skinned vehicles don't cut it. Look how many troops have died or been significantly injured in HMMWVs. They are overdue for mine protection upgrades, and even with applique still have no real protection against RPGs. Everyone is worried about 12.7/14.5 mm machine guns. Our enemies dont bother too much with those -- they're too big and heavy, and not lethal enough. They like light machine guns, RPGs, MANPADS, and probably light ATGMs if they could get them."

Slide 2 of 10