1

BG (P) David FastabendDirector, Concepts Development and Experimentation

Futures Center, US Army Training and Doctrine Command

Diverging Views on MilitaryTransformation

Transformation Concepts for CoalitionOperations

2

Future Operating Environment ! Concepts

Capabilities Doctrine Organization Training Leader Development Personnel Material Facilities

Concepts ! Wargaming, Experimentation

Concepts (& Theory) Do Not Equal Doctrine

3

Future Operating EnvironmentAdversary Intent

• Act Quickly• Block Points of Entry• Disperse & Hide• Protect Key Assets• Present Complex Threats in Complex Environments

4

The Anti-access ChallengeLine of Sight Anti-Tank

5

Coalition

XXX

ISR SatelliteCommercialComms Satellite

MilitaryComms Satellite

CAS

SOF

UAX

SPODTSV

(Sealift) Theater Airlift

Joint Fires

APODSBCT

X

JTF HQ

UEX

DCP1UA

XUAX

UEX

MCG

JFACC BattleManagement / C3I Army ISRArmy ISR

AircraftAircraft

JointISR

UA

XUSMC

X

Operational Maneuver from Strategic Distances

Network-Enabled Battle Command

Distributed Support and Sustainment

JOpsC Capabilities• Common Understanding• Decision Superiority• Adaptive• Rapid Employment• Continuous Pressure• Disrupt the Adversary• Distributed Deployment -Employment - Sustainment• Interagency & Multinational

SPOD

Decisive Maneuver: Direct Attack of Decisive Points Simultaneous, Distributed Operations Continuous Operations; Controlled Optempo

CAS

Joint Fires

Entry and Shaping Operations

Joint ISRJoint ISRUAVUAV

X

FIRESHeavy

BCT UA

X

Concurrent and SubsequentStability Operations

IntratheaterOperational

Maneuver

JTF Stability

MVREN

XSUSTAIN

MENT

X

KEY IDEAS The Army in Joint Operations

6

Things We “Know” About Coalition Operations ….

“The US Army will conduct unilateral operationswithout any coalition participation …”

“Army concepts do not address multinationaloperations …”

“Hybrid coalition operations with theArmy Future Force will be impossible …”

“Multinational partners do not have thetechnology …”

“Multinational partners do not have thecapability …”

“These problems will get worse and worse …”

Coalitions: - aggregate military power - bring essential political benefits

Future Force will also be hybrid

International defense industry is: - competitive - in some cases superior

Multinational partners bring keycomplementary capabilities

Not true … (anymore)

IT may solve problems … fasterthan it creates them

7

CommonInformation Model

C2IEDM

Staffofficer

Staffofficer

Commander

Common understanding

Automated informationexchange

Shared tactical picture

Effective C2 for international operations

Collaboration

C2IEDM

Commander

NationalImplementation

DEMMEM

MCI MCI

MIP ConceptMIP Concept

8

Data Replication Concept

Nat. DB

LC2IEDM LC2IEDM

Nat. DB

MIP Common InterfaceNat.

Comms.Nat.

Comms.

{101}A05{206010001207770023|7|R05{206010001207770….PDUUser Terminal User Terminal

En. En. ArmoredArmored Bat in 30TXM200123 Bat in 30TXM200123

II II

NationalNational C2IS C2IS NationalNational C2IS C2IS

Ethernet LAN

9

Transformation Challenges ofCoalition Operations

Transformation Challenges ofCoalition Operations

Strategic• Unity of Purpose• Divergent Strategies

Operational• Conceptual Approaches• Integration

• Joint• Multinational• Interagency

• Deployment Synchronization• Planning for Employment ofDisparate Capabilities

Tactical• Interoperability• Language• Rules of Engagement

All Levels• Network Enabled BattleCommand• Intelligence Sharing• Information Operations

10

“The strategic commitment of US forces willslow down US transformation … “

War stimulates adaptive societies …

The US military is an adaptive society …

Our rate of change is accelerating, not slowing down …

A Final Myth …

11

Soldier

Current Future

Modularity

Rebalancing

Rapid Equipping Force

Combat Training Center

Future Force Concept

Joint Interdependencies

Transformation ChallengeTransformation Challenge

MultinationalInteroperability

Programme

12

QUESTIONS

13

100K+ of Restructuring" FY 04--09 ~ 30K (Civil Affairs, PSYOP, Chemical, SOF, Intel, MP)

"FY 05-08 ~ 10K (MP, Trans, QM)

"FY 05-11 ~ 85K + (Ongoing Rebalancing Efforts)#USAR & ARNG TTHS Accounts#AC High Demand Unit Increases

Phase 1

Phase 2

Phase 3

Military PoliceTransportationPOL/Water Dist.Civil Affairs PSYOP BIDs COs

Decrease IncreaseField Artillery BnsAir Defense BnsEngineer BnsArmor BnsOrdnance (Bn – Tm)

100K+ of ChangeFY 04 - 11

– Divesting Cold Warstructure to enableGWOT capability

– More AC CS/CSS forfirst 30 Days of anoperation

– Relieve stress onHD/LD units

– Improve readinessand deployability ofunits

– Execute Military toCivilian Conversions

Transforming Cold War mass to GWOT versatility

#ALO 1 (100% Manning/Authorization = Requirements)#100% Deployable Units – Policy Changes

CSA Focus Area

Adapting Army StructureAdapting Army Structure

14

MIP Solution -Exchange Services

INTERNATIONALMIP SPECIFICATION

(Lingua Franca)

MCINATIONAL

CCIS

• System-independent IER• IP-based Comm• DB-DB Replication Services• C2 Interface

NATIONAL

LC2IEDM LC2IEDMMCI

NATIONAL

15

(VIDEO)

16

Multinational Coalitions. In conflicts more characterized by ideological disputes than nation-statecombat, multinational coalitions will be frequent and increasingly dynamic, but hindered in theirformation by differing perceptions of the threat. Managing this tension will require extensiveengagement with regional partners, whose response to US initiatives will often be situationally-based. Effective harmonization will become more difficult in the future, especially given the trendtoward assembling ad hoc coalitions to deal with crises. While solutions to this challenge arebeyond the scope of a service concept, five observations are pertinent:

• During the period addressed by this concept, we should expect only relatively modest overallimprovement of coalition integration -- even among America’s closest military allies. Evendiscounting political and cultural obstacles, it will be unreasonable to expect others to conformto U.S. practices in the absence of equivalent material capabilities.• Given that reality, the core requirement will be to organize, train, and equip US joint forces,especially the Army, to accommodate the limitations of our multi–national partners,separating responsibilities geographically, and where politically acceptable, employingdivision of labor among battle tasks and functions.• Integration efforts will be especially productive in the areas of C2, communications, andinformation sharing, although commensurate requirements for multi-level security,collaborative planning, and common data standards must be resolved.• The use of liaison teams, flexible technical C2 interfaces, and leaders trained andexperienced in multinational operations will continue to be relevant.• Finally, because most potential coalition partners are unlikely to possess significant air, sea,or space capabilities, the primary need will remain the integration of ground forces. TheArmy’s need for the associated integration resources will continue to grow.

17

$ Integrated program toprovide balance for theSoldier and everything worn,carried, or consumed

$ Improves 5 specificcapabilities – lethality,survivability, mobility,sustainment, and battlecommand / situationalawareness

$ Consolidates 300+ separaterequirements documentsinto 4 CapabilityDevelopments Documents

Soldier as a SystemSoldier as a System

18

Modular OrganizationsModular Organizations

10 X 43- 48 X

• Optimized for Specific Missions ---------- Standard, Broad, Embedded Capabilities• Army-Centric ----------------------------------- Inherently Linked to Other Services• Independent ------------------------------------ Independent, More Self-contained unit• Support from Corps/Army level ----------- UEx Augmented by Support Brigades• Division Logistics/Aviation Units --------- Support Bdes: Aviation, Sustainment, etc.

(Armored Division Shown) (Heavy BCT Shown)

FROM: An Army based around 10large, powerful, fixed AC divisions

XX Division Division

TO: An Army designed around 43- 48more self-contained AC brigades

. . . and modular multi-functional Support Brigades

XBrigadeBrigade

CombinedArms

ArmedRecon

CombinedArms

Fires Intelligence Engineer

MP/SecuritySignal Logistics

MP/Security

Chemical

Aviation Fires Sustainment RSTA MNVREN

Reconnaissance,Surveillance, andTarget Acquisition

ManeuverEnhancement

Field Artillery

Military Police

Intelligence

Engineers

ChemicalDivisionTroops

Aviation

MechanizedBrigade

LogisticsSupport

Division Cav (Recon) Signal

Armor BrigadeArmor Brigade

A More Ready and Relevant Force

19

Rapid Equipping ForceRapid Equipping ForceMission: Provide operational commanders with rapidlyemployable solutions to enhance lethality, survivabilityand force protection.

20

$ Experience entire campaign process - RSOI, Major Combat Ops,Stability Ops

$ Maintaining CTC relevance:– Landscape

• MOUT and Urban sprawl• Tunnels and caves

– Culture• NGOs• Media• Arabic names• Arab/American role players• Negotiation training ICW DLI

– OPFOR• Improved Explosive Devices• Technical vehicles• Paramilitary• MILES capable RPGs

– Training• OC visits• Convoy Live Fire

Combat Training CentersCombat Training Centers

21

Future Combat Systems■■■■ Manned Systems ■■■■ Unmanned Air Vehicles

Class II Class III Class IVClass I

Armed Robotic VehicleARV RSTAARV Aslt

ARV-A (L)

Small(Manpackable)UGV

Command andControl Vehicle

Non-Line of Sight Cannon Non-Line of Sight Mortar

FCS Recovery andMaintenance Vehicle

Medical Treatmentand Evacuation

Recon andSurveillance Vehicle

• UnattendedGround Sensors

■■■■ Unmanned Ground Vehicles

• UnattendedMunitions

• NLOS LS• Intelligent

MunitionsSystem

Infantry CarrierVehicle

MountedCombat System

MULE:(Countermine)

MULE:(Transport)

22

Joint Battle CommandJoint Fires and EffectsJoint Force ProjectionJoint Air and Missile DefenseJoint Sustainment

EASY TO DO BUSINESS WITH (ETDBW)

OOOO

YYYY

QUANTITATIVE MANAGEMENTCOMMERCIAL BEST PRACTICES

PROCESS MANAGEMENT / IMPROVEMENT

USMC

Joint Interdependency

JointTransformation

USA

USN

USAF

SPECIAL OPERATIONS COMMAND

Joint InterdependencyJoint Interdependency

23

FCS MainProgram

UA UnitSet

Fielding

Spiral 1integration

Spiral 2integration

Spiral 3integration

ContinuedDevelopment

ContinuedDevelopment

Spiral 4integration

FCS UAThres/Obj

Spec

ContinuedDevelopment

Spiral 1 Spiral 2 Spiral 3“Production”

DecisionSpiral 4

Assess

Assess

Initial Product & Post Deployment Support, Including architectural integrity, CM, Commodity &SW support

Initial Product & Post Deployment Support, Including architectural integrity, CM, Commodity &SW support

M-BCTs Fielding

Assess

Assess

EVAL

E-BCT

Feedback

Support to E-BCT

EVAL

EVAL

EVAL

FCS Revised ProgramM-BCTs M-BCTs

OT, Field, SustainmentOT, Field, Sustainment

E-BCT

E-BCT

E-BCT

24

+

Acceleration Strategy

FY04 FY08 FY10 FY12

Army BDEPending FY 06 DecisionModular ConstructEvaluation BCTBCT w/ Spiraled CapabilitiesFCS UA

BCTs

Unattended Ground SensorsNLOS–Launch System

Intelligent Munitions SystemNLOS-Cannon (Pre-Production)

Comms Relay PayloadEnhanced EO/IR/LD (UAV)

UAVsNLOS-Cannon (Block 0)

Unmanned Ground Vehicles

+ +FCSProcured in POM 06-11

M-BCTs

FCS CoreSystems /

Capabilities

4 of 18

Spiral 1 Spiral 3Spiral 2

DCGS-AWIN-T

CRP Platform

+MBCOTMWIN-T(-)

ComplementarySystems (+)

GSTAMIDSGCSS-A

Movement Tracking System

ISR

Sensorto

Shooter

C2

AH-64 BLK IIILLDR/MK VII

Q36Excalibur

Shadow PIP

JTRS CL 1JTRS CL 5C2PC / JC2

M-BCTs

3 of 18

ACSER/MP

Armed UAV

CDA (Soldier) A2C2S

Combat ID

+

- 3 Variants

E

(08/43)

EEE

“NETW

OR

K”

M-BCTs

7 of 18 (32/43)18 of 18

Fusion

SOSCOE

(20/43)

LimitedFusion

SOSCOE

M-BCTs

(01/43)

CommsRelay

NetworkData LinkSOSCOE

(11/36)

1)Wide Band Network Waveform2)Soldier Radio Waveform3)Integrated Computer System

System Of SystemCommon Operating Environment (SOSCOE)

FY14Battle Command

Global Information Grid

Spiral 4

25

21 3L1

L1L1 L1

L1 L1L1

S2 S2 S2

S2 S2

S2 S2 S2S2 S2 S2

S2 S2 S2S2 S2 S2S2 S2

S3 S3 S3S3 S3 S3S3 S3 S3S3 S3 S3S3 S3 S3S3 S3S3 S3 S3S3 S3 S3S3 S3 S3S3 S3 S3S3 S3

L4

“NETW

OR

K”

•+ + +

FCS

M-UAsM-BCTs M-UAsM-BCTs M-BCTs M-BCTs

18 of 18

FCS Core Systems

3 of 18 4 of 18 7 of 18

E E

FY08Spiral 1

FY12Spiral 3

FY14Spiral 4

FY10Spiral 2

E

Army Bde’sModular ConstructEvaluation BCT

UA w/ Spiraled CapabilitiesFCS UA

E

Army Bde’sModular Construct

UA w/ Spiraled CapabilitiesFCS UA (-)

E

FY 08 Spiral 1

Protos withEval BCT

Acceleration Process

S1S1

S1S1 S1

S1S1

S2 S2 S2S2 S2

S2S2 S2S2

S3 S3 S3S3 S3 S3S3 S3 S3S3 S3 S3S3 S3 S3

S3 S3 S3

S3 S3 S3S3 S3 S3

S3 S3 S3

S3 S3

S3 S3

S2 S2 S2S2 S2 S2S2 S2

S2 S2

FY 14 Spiral 1, 2, 3All Prod withEval BCT (–)UA Battalion

FY 14 Spiral 1,

2 &Startingin FY 15,Spiral 3

Prod withM-BCTs

FY 12 Spiral 1, 2 Prod

and Spiral 3Protos withEval BCT

Starting inFY 12

Spiral 1 &2 Prod with

M-BCTs

FY 10 Spiral 1 Prodand Spiral 2Protos withEval BCT

Startingin FY 10 Spiral 1

Prod withM-BCTs

Pending FY06 Decision