Dominant Logistics
Light Infantry Systems
An obvious question arises once we embrace the concepts that will get our logistics functions to the level they need to be - now what? If we accept Dominant Logistics, what can we do once we achieve it? Much debate has gone into the concept of transforming today's force into a more deployable and effective combat force. Unfortunately, this has resulted in a variety of schemes that are useless at best and counter-productive at worst. The current plan for the Future Combat System is arguably the most ridiculous military notion ever put to paper.
If we're serious about transitioning the force to a more capable entity, we need to start by addressing the combat capabilities, or lack theref, of our most deployable units, the light infantry and airborne units. The entire point of this endeavor is to improve lethality and survivablility in a deployable package so let's start with our most deployable units and see if we can achieve our ultimate goals with those. Personally, I think we can.
In the 10th Mountain Division, we had a motto - too light to fight, too heavy to run. With the RAV, I think we can resolve both of these problems. We start with a hybrid-powered M113A3 as the basic chassis but we aren't using this as a personnel carrier per se. We're going to use it to bear the weight of larger weapons and larger quantities of ammunition while using the enhanced mobility of a light track to go where the infantry goes. This should also keep the vehicle light enough for air mobility purposes.
The RAV would include a stabilized turret housing an 81mm gun mortar with a coaxial 7.62mm heavy barrel machine gun. A second 7.62mm gun would ride on a ring mount with a third available. A dismount 81mm gun mortar would be carried on the exterior of the vehicle. On the side of the turret, two Javelin or Starstreak missiles would be mounted with two more carried externally for dismount use or as reloads. The side mount could also carry a 7-round Hydra rocket pack as well. The vehicle will include a mounted laser system for rangefinding and targeting as well as an additional unit for dismount operations.
The side of the RAV would include fold down jumpseats sufficient for carrying a squad of infantry or for loading up additional gear, supplies, or materials as spaced armor for enhanced survivability. The idea behind the RAV is that the vehicle serves as a load bearing mobility system for the infantry with the additional capability of adding effective fire support. As more and more exotic and heavier weapons like anti-material rifles are added to the infantry, the weight is borne by the RAV instead of weighing down the grunts. Based upon current TO&E for light infantry battalions, each battalion should get 18 RAVs to fill the current Javelin slots. An additional 12 M113A3s should be included for support purposes in place of current HMMWVs.
Phil West has proposed an excellent design for an AGM based upon a cutdown M113A3 chassis with the engine relocated to the rear. The only change that I would make to this design is to replace the proposed 120mm mortar with the larger version proposed by Carlton Meyer - a 155mm heavy mortar. This would make a wider and more useful variety of ammunition available to the infantry while also allowing for Mr. Meyer's other proposal to use 155mm shells in a dismounted configuration using manually detonated fuses.
Based on the current TO&E, four of these vehicles should be fielded in each of the light infantry battalions. These can serve as heavy mortars while also filling the role of an assault platform with its improved armor configuration.
The AEV is a design somewhat similar to the Tankita proposed by others. Ultimately, this vehicle should be based on a modified M113A3 chassis but in the interim, we can base it directly on the already available M113A3. The AEV mounts a stabilized turret with a 40mm cannon and a coaxial 7.62mm machine gun. For missile options, a side rack would carry either four Javelin/Stinger/Starstreak missiles, two Hellfires, or a 19-round Hydra pack. As with the RAV, similar quantities would be carried externally and lasers would be included as well for dismounted operations.
The AEV should include thermal as well as radar targeting options. The radar should be a lightweight Active Electronically Scanned Array system with a variety of modes including active, passive, millimetre wave, jamming, and counterbattery. Another factor in this decision is the impending fielding of the Joint Tactical Radio System. This is a digital data transmission system for very high bandwidth communications. AESA antennas can be used with JTRS for transceiver applications.
While the current TO&E uses separate air defense formations, I feel these SHORAD systems should be incorporated directly with the infantry because of their wide variety of uses. Each infantry battalion should receive 6 AEVs for these roles.
Artillery Systems
For basic tube artillery, the current M119 system should be retained as it is lightweight and can be handled by the HMMWV on the ground or the Blackhawk in the air. The current TO&E of 54 tubes should suffice. I would replace the current limited quantity of 155mm towed artillery with six TSV-based rocket systems that could carry a single MLRS 6-pack or a quantity of other rocket sizes.
I would also merge higher echelon ADA assets into the artillery mix. I would add two batteries of ADA to General Support, each with 12 HUMRAAM systems. I would modify these to enable them to carry a mix of AMRAAM, Sidewinder, or Sidearm missiles. A modified AMRAAM should be capable of engaging ground targets as well as air targets using the existing semi-active radar mode. The Headquarters Battery would then get 6 AEVs for the radar and communication capabilities.
Cavalry Systems
For Assault Aviation, I would go with two battalions each with two companies of 15 UH-60 Blackhawks and one company of 16 CH-53 Stallions giving us 60 Blackhawks and 32 Stallions for air mobility in the basic division. The Attack Aviation section gets three battalions, each with three companies of 8 RAH-60 Strikehawks (72 total). On the ground I'd go with two recon troops in the HMMWV-based Cobra vehicle with a hybrid powertrain and a support troop outfitted with EFOGM-equipped HMMWVs.
Overall Thoughts
Strategic Mobility
Overall, this division would require roughly the same amount of airlift assets for strategic deployment as the current LI division. Using the modified Blackhawks that can self-deploy eliminates 81 helicopters from current airlift requirements while allowing us to expand the helicopter fleet. We're also eliminating a dozen ADA HMMWVs and the 155mm artillery tubes. Countering this is an additional 10 vehicles per infantry battalion (90 vehicles total) plus an increase in the weight of most of the infantry vehicles. But remember that most current airlifts are flying with much less weight than the aircraft's payload capacity because of volume limitations. This division may require more aircraft, but the increase won't be significant and is more than accomodated by proposed aircraft increases.
Tactical Mobility
This division possesses considerably more tactical mobility than the existing LI division. With the proposed replacement of the FMTVs with the TSV, the bulk of this formation will be on light tracked vehicles using hybrid powertrains. Plus, everything can be air dropped as well as slingloaded. An entire battalion with just it's combat assets can be slingloaded in a single lift with enough capacity for an additional two dismounted battalions. But the option also remains to stay on the ground with vehicles carrying virtually all of the weight. It should also be noted that most of the assets of the infantry will have a nominal amphibious capability as well.
Survivability
The proposed TO&E for the infantry battalion includes a total of 30 M113A3-type vehicles that could each carry a full squad if we move gear around enough. That's 30 squads under armor in vehicles with NBC overpressure systems per battalion, nearly the entire battalion. It really isn't possible to get more survivable than this without going to a fully mechanized formation. It should also be noted that all of the proposed infantry systems can use enhanced armor systems and even reactive armor for a higher level of survivability if needed.
Firepower
Perhaps the greatest increase in capabilities in this formation is firepower. The current LI battalion features a total of 18 Javelin missiles and about 10 mortar tubes. We're bumping that up to a maximum of 40 gun mortars and a maximum of 72 Javelins (or Starstreaks) per battalion. Where the previous LI division had a total of 36 Avengers as the entire ADA package, we now have 60 AEVs with a much bigger and more versatile cannon and more missile options (not to mention radar) as well as 24 HUMRAAMs. We're swapping out 6 tubes of 155mm for 6 MLRS systems plus 36 155mm gun mortars in the infantry and we're stepping up from 24 attack helicopters to 72 with greater capacity and capability. This is a massive increase in not just overall firepower but also the range and capabilities of the firepower.
Sustainability
If we make the transition in our logistics to the proposed concepts, particularly palletization and TSVs, this formation will be about as easy to support as existing LI divisions. While the overall unit will require considerably more logistical support, the proposed changes should be more than sufficient to meet those needs. For example, with the proposed pallet system, each infantry battalion will require two pallets of supplies per day on average while they have the organic capability to handle four pallets per day under most conditions without even factoring in the transportation assets in the FSB. Our needs are increasing substantially but our capacity will be increasing by a factor of about five overall.
Other Key Points
Perhaps most important is that unlike current military formations, this unit is really tailored to the types of needs expected for future conflicts. For example, many would like to see the military deployed in support of the Border Patrol but our current units really aren't equipped to function in this type of arrangement - the proposed division could do so without difficulty. Most future conflicts are expected to be low intensity affairs in heavy terrain and this formation should perform quite well in these conditions. Finally, rapid deployment will be critical in future conflicts as we simply cannot afford to continue taking months and even years to prepare for wars - this unit is very rapidly deployable on both a strategic and a tactical level.
I have no background in combat arms so obviously, many changes could and probably should be made in this design. But this shows the potential of what we can field if we embrace the concept of Dominant Logistics. This is a very deployable, survivable, potent formation that can address just about any type of threat imaginable short of nuclear weapons. It is also realistic as virtually all of the systems discussed in the proposal are based on technologies that either already exist or are already proven.
References
http://www.oocities.org/futuretanks/lightfantastic.htm
http://www.oocities.org/futuretanks/armorsachillesheel.htm
http://www.oocities.org/wheelsvstracks
http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/panz.html
http://www.g2mil.com/hellfire.htm
http://www.g2mil.com/tank-escorts.htm
http://www.g2mil.com/Heavy-Mortars.htm
http://www.angelfire.com/art/enchanter/ARA.html
http://www.naval-technology.com/projects/mh_60s/index.html
http://www.g2mil.com/foil-stealth.htm