In October 2012, the 2nd Cavalry Regiment (2CR) rolled. Perspectives On Saber Junction-I. out of its motor pools near Vilseck, Germany, crossed

Similar documents
OPFOR Replication of Complex Threats at JMRC

Information-Collection Plan and Reconnaissance-and- Security Execution: Enabling Success

Preparing to Occupy. Brigade Support Area. and Defend the. By Capt. Shayne D. Heap and Lt. Col. Brent Coryell

Train as We Fight: Training for Multinational Interoperability

A Decisive Action Training Environment for Lieutenants

Brigade Combat Team Commander: How Do You Plan to Sustain a Partnered Multinational Formation?

The 16th Sustainment Brigade Sustains a Strong Europe

DISTRIBUTION RESTRICTION:

The Bear Marches West Alternate Tables of Organization & Equipment for Optional Wargame Scenarios. Glenn Dean

HUMAN RESOURCES ADVANCED / SENIOR LEADERS COURSE 42A

RECRUIT SUSTAINMENT PROGRAM SOLDIER TRAINING READINESS MODULES Army Structure/Chain of Command 19 January 2012

JAGIC 101 An Army Leader s Guide

Integration of the targeting process into MDMP. CoA analysis (wargame) Mission analysis development. Receipt of mission

HUMAN RESOURCES ADVANCED / SENIOR LEADERS COURSE 42A

TACTICAL EMPLOYMENT OF ANTIARMOR PLATOONS AND COMPANIES

HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY FM US ARMY AIR AND MISSILE DEFENSE OPERATIONS

Chapter FM 3-19

Employing the Stryker Formation in the Defense: An NTC Case Study

CENTER FOR ARMY LESSONS LEARNED

Report on Counterinsurgency Capabilities. Within the Afghan National Army. February Afghan National Army Lessons Learned Center

Tactical Employment of Mortars

RECRUIT SUSTAINMENT PROGRAM SOLDIER TRAINING READINESS MODULES Conduct Squad Attack 17 June 2011

Chapter 1 Supporting the Separate Brigades and. the Armored Cavalry Regiment SEPARATE BRIGADES AND ARMORED CAVALRY REGIMENT FM 63-1

The Croatian Armed Forces Training Simulations Program

FM AIR DEFENSE ARTILLERY BRIGADE OPERATIONS

Armor Basic Officer Leaders Course

Maneuver Leaders Role in Observation Planning

CHAPTER 2 THE ARMORED CAVALRY

FM (FM 19-1) Headquarters, Department of the Army. Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited.

September 03, 1985 Military Exercise Druzhba-85 Plan to conduct a one-sided, multi-stage combined-arms army exercise codenamed "Druzhba-85"

Overtasking and Its Effect on Platoon and Company Tactical Proficiency: an Opposing Forces and Observer/Coach/Trainer Perspective

AUSA BACKGROUND BRIEF

As we reduce our presence in Iraq and begin to

Beyond Breaking 4 th August 1982

The Dragoon. Contents. Highlights in 2d Cavalry History. Calendar Events 2. Saber Sharpener 3. 1st Squadron. 2nd Squadron. 3rd Squadron.

Army Doctrine Publication 3-0

ROLE OF THE COMBAT TRAINING CENTER COMMAND SURGEON

DIVISION OPERATIONS. October 2014

Engineer Doctrine. Update

January 31, 2011 Photo by Spc. Breanne Pye

Expanding the NATO Movement Control Network

As we approach what promises to be a pivotal

Red Devils and Panzers, 1944 A Flames of War Mega-Game Scenario

Revolution in Army Doctrine: The 2008 Field Manual 3-0, Operations

Headquarters, Department of the Army

HUMAN RESOURCES ADVANCED / SENIOR LEADERS COURSE 42A

STATEMENT BY GENERAL RICHARD A. CODY VICE CHIEF OF STAFF UNITED STATES ARMY BEFORE THE

ORGANIZATION AND FUNDAMENTALS

FUTURE ARMED FORCES 2040 BRIEFING. BRIGADIER GENERAL IAVOR MATEEV COMMANDER OF 68 th SF BRIGADE

Fifth Battalion, Seventh Cavalry Regiment Association. First Cavalry Division (Airmobile) ( ) Third Infantry Division (2004-Present)

Project Warrior: Bridging the Gap Between Operational and Institutional Domains

At the U.S. Army Europe s (USAREUR s) Assurance in Europe. Why Relationships Matter

Adjusting the Training Paradigm to Win in a Complex World

The U.S. Army reactivated active component division. Reinventing the Wheel

THE 2008 VERSION of Field Manual (FM) 3-0 initiated a comprehensive

ack in the Fight n April, I Corps assumed command of Multi-National Corps-Iraq (MNC-I) from the outgoing XVIII Airborne

C4I System Solutions.

Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield Cpt.instr. Ovidiu SIMULEAC

The Philosophy Behind the Iraq Surge: An Interview with General Jack Keane. Octavian Manea

Training and Evaluation Outline Report

Training and Evaluation Outline Report

Modern Leaders: Evolution of today s NCO Corps

The 19th edition of the Army s capstone operational doctrine

21st ICCRTS C2-in a Complex Connected Battlespace. Operationalization of Standardized C2-Simulation (C2SIM) Interoperability

MERITORIOUS UNIT COMMENDATION

Chapter 1. Introduction

Training and Evaluation Outline Report

From Cameroon to the Baltic States: Chosen Company s Path to Atlantic Resolve

Chapter 3. Types of Training. The best form of welfare for the troops is first class training, for this saves unnecessary casualties.

Developing a Tactical Geospatial Course for Army Engineers. By Jared L. Ware

A Field Artillery Division

Learning to Operate At the Speed of Trust

Organization of Marine Corps Forces

The. Most Devastating War Battles

The Army Executes New Network Modernization Strategy

CLASSES/REFERENCES TERMINAL LEARNING OBJECTIVE

THE MEDICAL COMPANY FM (FM ) AUGUST 2002 TACTICS, TECHNIQUES, AND PROCEDURES HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY

Advanced Situational Awareness

Chapter III ARMY EOD OPERATIONS

Ana-Maria TAMAS* Lucian KISS* Marin-Marian COMAN**

CD Compilation Copyright by emilitary Manuals

The Ability of the U.S. Military to Sustain an Occupation in Iraq

Regionally Aligned Force Success in Europe Relies Heavily on Logistics Planning

Saddles and Sabers: The Thunderbolt: a Reminder of What Makes Armor Unique

Airborne & Special Operations Museum

CHAPTER 1 COMBAT ORGANIZATION. Section I. THE DIVISION

US Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Analysis Center (TRAC)

JMRC LTC MATTHEW T. ARCHAMBAULT CPT FRANKLIN G. PEACHEY CPT SEAN D. HAYBALL SSG DREW D. LINCOLN

Maintenance Operations and Procedures

Our Readiness Problem: Brigade Combat Team Lethality

Security Force Assistance and the Concept of Sustainable Training as a Role for the U.S. Military in Today s World

By Lieutenant Colonel Joseph L. Romano III, Captain William M. Dains, and Captain David T. Watts

Forward-Support Company Employment in a Decisive- Action Environment

CH (MAJ) Pete Keough, CH (CPT) Marty Schubert, SFC Winston Rhym, and SSG Chris Corbett. Approved for public release: Distribution unlimited

Making Soup with Stones. JMTC Partnership and the NATO Connected Forces Initiative

MECHANIZED INFANTRY PLATOON AND SQUAD (BRADLEY)

Sustaining the Force Forward

Weapons of mass destruction (WMD) The Challenge of Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction on the Korean Peninsula

Army Expeditionary Warrior Experiment 2016 Automatic Injury Detection Technology Assessment 05 October February 2016 Battle Lab Report # 346

LESSON 2 INTELLIGENCE PREPARATION OF THE BATTLEFIELD OVERVIEW

Transcription:

Perspectives On Saber Junction-I U.S. Army/SGT Paul Sale By LTC Curtis D. Taylor Above, Bulgarian army soldiers from the 61st Mechanized Infantry Brigade return simulated fire from behind a BMP-1 tracked vehicle during a decisive action training environment Exercise Saber Junction 2012, at the Joint Multinational Readiness Center in Hohenfels, Germany, last October. Opposite, a Stryker armored vehicle provides cover for a halted convoy. In October 2012, the 2nd Cavalry Regiment (2CR) rolled out of its motor pools near Vilseck, Germany, crossed the line of departure and attacked into the German countryside. So began Exercise Saber Junction 2012, the largest, most complex U.S. Army training event seen on the European continent in more than 20 years. Partnered with military forces from 18 other nations, ranging from British 38 ARMY March 2013

A New Level of Complexity In the Decisive Action Training Environment mechanized infantry to Serbian military police, the Regiment faced a multinational opposing force (OPFOR) led by the professional OPFOR of 1st Battalion, 4th Infantry Regiment, supported by German Panzers, Czech artillery and Slovenian aircraft. For the first five days of the rotation, the blue force objective was to fight its way across 80 kilometers of rolling countryside and villages of southern Bavaria through a region known as the Maneuver Rights Area and seize critical river crossing points into the Hohenfels Training Area. At more than 1,000 square miles, this region is roughly the same size as the National Training Center in Fort Irwin, Calif., and represents the most complex, integrated training environment currently available to the U.S. Army. Saber Junction 2012 marked the fourth decisive action training rotation executed by the Army over the past 18 months, but this exercise was unprecedented in many ways. Operating among German towns over extended distances and dealing with a real host-nation population and real multinational partners on a complex battlefield that forced the simultaneous execution of offensive, defensive and stability tasks, 2CR was presented with a level of realism and operational complexity that cannot be replicated anywhere else on the globe. Operation Saber Junction differed from previous decisive action rotations in three fundamental ways: It featured sustained offensive operations over extended distances, multinational integration and operations among U.S. Army/SPC Jordan Fuller March 2013 ARMY 39

U.S. Army Grafenwoehr Training Area SABER JUNCTION Maneuver Rights Area Hohenfels Training Area NTC JMTC The Seventh Army Joint Multinational Training Command s (JMTC) Saber Junction Maneuver Rights Area in Bavaria is comparable in size to the National Training Center at Fort Irwin, Calif., roughly 1,000 square miles. condition in any future war. This event brought to light many great lessons for our Army regarding our ability to sustain our forces and communicate on the move across large distances. Specifically, it highlighted both the urgency and importance of the ongoing work at Fort Bliss, Texas, to field and test Capability Set 13 networks that can operate on the move in a highly fluid, fastmoving battlefield. Operation Saber Junction was the first decisive action rotation to see the extensive employment of multinational partners in both the training unit and the opposing force. Nineteen different nations participated in the rotation. The 2nd Cavalry fought as a true coalition with a Romanian infantry battalion, British and Slovenian mechanized forces, Italian airborne infantry, Slovenian engineers and air defense, and Serbian military police all supported by French special forces and Ukrainian Hind D attack helicopters. The Regiment s higher headquarters for the exercise included a contingent from the First German-Netherlands Corps to replicate a multinational headquarters. a live host-nation population. When 2CR crossed the line of departure early on the morning of October 13, 2012, their ultimate objective was a fictitious city named Kibirli in the Hohenfels Training Area, more than 50 kilometers away. Between them and their objective were several major German towns, more than 100,000 German citizens, an autobahn, rivers and, most importantly, a hybrid enemy threat consisting of near-peer conventional forces and insurgents who moved freely among the real German population. The 2nd Cavalry attacked for 148 hours without interruption before their forces finally closed around Kibirli. During that time, the regimental main command post jumped three times with squadron command posts in nearly continuous movement in order to keep up with the forward line of troops. This attack represented the longest sustained advance against organized enemy forces that our Army has conducted since the 3rd Infantry Division fought its way to Baghdad in 2003. The ability to conduct continuous offensive operations over long distances remains one of the great asymmetrical advantages of the U.S. military and a likely LTC Curtis D. Taylor is currently serving as the brigade senior trainer at the Joint Multinational Readiness Center in Hohenfels, Germany. He was previously assigned as the commander of Task Force 3-66 Armor in Paktika Province, Afghanistan. We will likely never fight another conflict without substantial involvement from coalition partners on our flanks, in our higher headquarters, and within our own formations. With more than 1,800 foreign soldiers involved in the exercise, Operation Saber Junction afforded the ideal opportunity to test our ability to integrate formations from multiple nations in a fast-developing tactical situation. The list of potential friction points is long and detailed. Rules of engagement, national caveats, fuel and ammunition compatibility, night vision capability, and doctrinal differences all affected the rapid integration of multinational formations in the Regiment during this exercise. The lack of compatible radio systems and the ever-present language barrier also hampered true integration at the tactical level. While 2CR did an impressive job working through these many challenges, it is clear that the task of integrating coalition partners requires sound doctrine and continual training at every echelon. President Rosen Plevneliev of the Republic of Bulgaria visited his troops during the exercise. He observed how the interface challenges were similar to the struggles he faced as a software developer building compatibility among various platforms and operating systems. Compatibility is essential in the multinational environment, he said. Ultimately, the exercise demonstrated that the decisive point in successful multinational operations 40 ARMY March 2013

Right, Bulgarian President Rosen Plevneliev addresses his troops participating in Operation Saber Junction during a visit to JMTC last October. Below, a U.S. Army Europe fighting vehicle assigned to 1st Battalion, 4th Infantry Regiment moves into a fighting position during Saber Junction 2012. U.S. Army/SGT Michael Reinsch lies in finding creative ways to bridge the cultural and doctrinal divide. This is a skill too difficult and too important not to include in future decisive action training exercises. Saber Junction 2012 is the first U.S. brigade-level training exercise to take place in the midst of a real host-nation population in 23 years. The complexity of this environment added a level of realism unobtainable anywhere else in the world. Military operations in the future will almost certainly occur against the backdrop of the homes and businesses of an indigenous population, and this exercise truly tested our ability to operate in that context. Throughout the 21-day rotation, the Regiment never occupied a traditional forward operating base. Units moved constantly in response to a dynamic enemy. While there were many lessons learned about the basics of field craft the use of white light, field sanitation, digging of fighting positions our soldiers proved surprisingly adaptive. Sergeants who in multiple combat tours had never spent more than three continuous days outside of a secured perimeter went up to three weeks in open terrain, surrounded by an ever-present enemy threat. This highlights a critical but often overlooked advantage that is resident in our young soldiers, noncommissioned officers and junior officers. Our battle-tested force is surprisingly resilient and can adapt rapidly to a changing environment. As we move into a very uncertain future, in which so many U.S. Army/SPC Markus Rauchenberger 42 ARMY March 2013

A Romanian battalion commander and a British mechanized company commander discuss their scheme of maneuver as the main effort for the regimental attack while the regimental operations officer, MAJ Andy Watson (arms folded), 2nd Cavalry Regiment, looks on. threats to American security are completely unknown to us today, it is that adaptability that will be our greatest core competency. Four decades ago our Army found itself in a period of great transition, not unlike our current one. In the early 1970s, Generals Creighton W. Abrams and William E. DePuy recognized that a decade of counterinsurgency operations in the jungles of Vietnam had resulted in atrophy of the skills necessary to synchronize complex operations at the brigade and battalion levels. Accustomed to years of supporting what was essentially a platoon-and-company fight from small firebases, our brigade headquarters had lost the art of synchronization and served primarily as a resourceproviding headquarters. Abrams and DePuy, both World War II veterans, knew that in order to succeed against Soviet land armies pouring through the Fulda Gap, our brigades had to learn to plan and synchronize complex operations. The nature of the mission itself demanded a much more centralized approach and a different set of behaviors from our tactical headquarters. The result was the creation of the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) and the birth of the combat training centers a decade later. Our leadership at the time recognized that if we could accurately replicate the conditions our soldiers might expect on the battlefield in a live environment, then they would adapt, and the doctrine and training necessary for success would emerge as a generation of soldiers grew into leadership with experience in this environment. The key to success was replicating the environment as accurately as possible. The transformation of our Army in the 18 years between the birth of TRADOC in 1973 and Operation Desert Storm in 1991 is now viewed as one of the most productive periods in the history of our military. Our challenges today are different but reminiscent of those we faced after Vietnam. A decade of counterinsurgency has taught us great lessons about understanding the operational environment and built great initiative and autonomy into our company-level formations. While we should seek to retain those strengths, there are instances when old lessons must be adapted to the new environment and relearned. The decisive action training environment presents a new challenge to brigade and battalion staffs accustomed to decentralized company-level operations. Simultaneously faced with a near-peer conventional threat and a stability challenge across a broad operational environment, staffs must have the tools to manage both while they synchronize a growing variety of battlefield enablers, including significant contributions from our allied and host-nation partners. The first step in building a tactical Army that can handle this level of complexity is to accurately replicate it at our combat training centers. If we can continue to do this well, with scenarios that force extended operations over large distances in complex terrain and integrate our coalition partners, then the American soldier will adapt, as he has done so well in the past. Then the Army will succeed, as our predecessors did four decades ago, in building a new generation of warfighters who are prepared for the challenges of a new century. U.S. Army/LTC Jeremy Wilson 44 ARMY March 2013