Wed, 08/07/2024 – 17:33
The Army’s first mobile brigade combat team will be put through its paces in August as it heads to the Joint Readiness Training Center at Fort Johnson, Louisiana. Equipped with new capabilities such as the Infantry Squad Vehicle, the 101st Airborne Division (Air Assault)’s 2nd Brigade Combat Team is part of the service’s transforming in contact effort, an Army chief of staff initiative to accelerate the Army’s transformation for the future fight.
Just as the Army adapted to address the emerging needs of the fight in Afghanistan and Iraq, it is now evolving for large-scale combat operations, Maj. Gen. Brett Sylvia, commanding general of the 101st Airborne Division, said earlier this year. “The 101st has been one of two divisions to test and prototype the Army’s near-term transformation efforts,” he said. “We’re doing that by introducing the mobile brigade combat team and integrating various technologies to increase lethality and survivability on the future battlefield.”
In addition to designating the 2nd Brigade as the mobile brigade combat team, the division also has “embarked on a multiyear campaign to build a unique capability” for combatant commanders and the Army, he said. In May, the 2nd Brigade completed its first comprehensive field assessment, called Operation Lethal Eagle, in its new form, Sylvia said. The 21-day exercise involved the entire division and included a large-scale, long-range air assault, he said. The exercise “provided us a venue to test new Army technologies, prototype reorganized force structures, employ multidomain fires and experiment with creative sustainment solutions to be able to mass combat power at scale [and] at the time and place of our choosing,” Sylvia said.
Operation Lethal Eagle was the first time the mobile brigade combat team was “put through the paces,” Sylvia said. “We’ll do it again in August when we take them down to our Joint Readiness Training Center,” he said. “We’ll fight it again, and the idea is to continue to fight it in future iterations or whatever it is that the Army wants next out of our 2nd Brigade,” Sylvia said. Lessons learned will be used to inform Army decisions on whether to move ahead with mobile brigade combat teams, how many there should be and how they should be used, he said. The centerpiece of the mobile brigade combat team is the Infantry Squad Vehicle, Sylvia said. The nine-passenger vehicle, based on the Chevrolet Colorado ZR2 platform, has enabled the brigade to “move every infantry squad much faster,” Sylvia said. The vehicle has given the brigade more flexibility and mobility, he said. During an air assault, soldiers don’t have to land in a single, consolidated location. They can be dispersed, then rapidly come together where they’re needed, he said. “It provides this ability to rapidly move combat power in a way that you could not before,” he said. “Before, I could move 2½ kilometers an hour when I’m under load, and now I can go up to 200 kilometers in an Infantry Squad Vehicle, and I have the capability to carry more.” The ability to carry more gives units greater resupply and endurance while out in the field, Sylvia said. “This allows division commanders and corps commanders to increase our operational reach, to extend the lengths at which we would be able to fight the formation,” Sylvia said.
The mobile brigade combat team also has structures designed to integrate its new capabilities, such as a multifunctional reconnaissance company, Sylvia said. Each of the brigade’s infantry battalions also has multipurpose companies that are “providing a landing spot for new capabilities down inside of the infantry battalions as well,” he said. As the division continues to experiment, test and collect soldier feedback, Sylvia said the 101st Airborne is excited to be at the forefront of the Army’s continuous transformation efforts. “This process that we’ve embarked on will continue to be iterative, adaptive and incentivize disciplined innovation,” he said.
https://www.ausa.org/news/armys-first-mobile-brigade-combat-team-prepares-jrtc
Comment: Although this article is over a year old, it is relevant in light of the recent letters from SecDef and the Army Chief on Army modernization. The Army will up the procurement of the M1301 Infantry Squad Vehicle (ISV) and equip all infantry brigades with them. I imagine that includes the 82nd Airborne Division and the 10th Mountain Division. I would hope the 11th Airborne Division would stick with something more suitable for the arctic terrain and climate. I gather the Army is under no illusions that the ISV will not be suitable as an assault vehicle although it can be equipped with a top ring and side pintle mounts for machine guns. I look at that photo above and see nothing but a series of imminent FPV drone explosions followed by smoldering hulks and strewn bodies. At least the ISV provides no illusions of protection like the now canceled HMMWV tactical vehicle and the JLTV light armored vehicle. The same goes for the canceled Booker light tank, which really isn’t that light.
So, the ISV isn’t that small, either. It’s a stripped down Chevy Colorado pickup truck. It’s closer to the old deuce and a half truck than it is to the quarter ton jeeps we had in the 1/35th Infantry. And the ISV is a monster next to the mechanical mules in the Marine Brigade at Kaneohe. The ISVs will not be easily hidden in the brush. Maybe the Army should also be looking at using dirt bikes in certain Infantry units, say a company within a battalion. Those companies can still have a few ISVs for cargo, ammunition and support weapons. My “Hollow Army” Infantry company had one deuce and a half, a handful of jeeps and Gamma Goats as mortar carriers. Our 106s and later TOWs were jeep mounted. I don’t know what modern Infantry companies have as support weapons.
Keith Harbaugh brought this issue to my attention with a couple of comments. I thank him for this. I chose this old article to point out that the Army was in the process of modernizing well before Pete Hegseth assumed his duties as SecDef. The ISV began development back in 2020 and was approved for mass production back in 2023. The Mobile Infantry Brigade was being exercised a year ago, but the decision to equip all Infantry Brigades with the ISV appears recent as does the decision to cancel further procurement of equipment like the HMMWV, JLTV and Booker light tank. Hegseth is to be commended for providing the encouragement and top cover for the Army to make these hard decisions. The changing face of ground warfare as shown in the Russo-Ukrainian War has increased the urgency of such decisions.
TTG
Pushing back a little on TTG’s comment: “I look at that photo above and see nothing but a series of imminent FPV drone explosions followed by smoldering hulks and strewn bodies.”
While acknowledging that this is something one might expect if Russians or Ukrainians sortied in the manner in the photograph, I don’t think the Russo-Ukraine war is the right yardstick to evaluate them.
[1] The Russo-Ukraine is a limited war. The US and Russia, as they compete on an escalation ladder, accept limits on the scope of military violence and technology.
[2] US needs to plan for both peer and non-peer competitors. If the US goes to war with a peer competitor, we will need only banner divisions since the decisive force in the war will come from our strategic arsenal. Against non-peer competitors, the ISV could work.
[3] For the US Military, outside of the strategic arsenal, any low-investment general-purpose solution is better than a high-investment solution.
[4] Biggest problem for the US Military (and the US Government) is recruiting smart, capable people. The recruiting crisis among the enlisted ranks is well documented, and the implications for future NCOs are well known. But there is a parallel crisis in the command ranks. No smart person wants to be military.
drifter,
Drones will, most likely, become a large part of our non-peer competitors. Look at the Houthis. Look at HTS in Syria. Still, I also think the ISV will be a good vehicle. Being open, the occupants can be more aware of their environment. They can employ airguards and anti-drone weapons.
I was a company grade officer during the hollow Army days of the 70s. My soldiers were more likey to non be high school graduated. Some were given the choice, join the Army or go to jail. Even so, they were almost all fine soldiers. The soldiers of today’s Army are even better. I’m also confident that our company grade officers are just fine. I’m not that certain of our general officers.
I would expect the ISV load capacity is closer to our old 3/4-ton M37. No way that thing can carry the 2-1/2 tons like a deuce and a half. Got to wonder though, if they tested its all-terrain capability with a max load.
As for “FPV drone explosions followed by smoldering hulks and strewn bodies”; let’s hope that JRTC has upgraded their Opposing Force with both recon and one way attack drones, EW, and other lessons learned from the Ukies.
leith,
The M37 was before my time, but we did rescue one from PDO yard when I ran the RECONDO School in Hawaii. We were good scroungers. We did have the M880, a commercial Dodge pickup in a lot of our combat service and service support units. That was billed as a 5/4 ton vehicle like our Gamma Goats.
As I told drifter, I like the openness of the ISV. Being open, the occupants can be more aware of their environment. They can employ airguards and anti-drone weapons. We should now be back at the awareness of an air threat that was ingrained in us in the 70s.
Former Deputy CG of 10th Mountain, now retired, has some words on the MBCTs. Says that without protected firepower and a recon platform, with just a few light vehicles, the will be toast.
https://x.com/PatDonahoeArmy/status/1918669131932454968
Also mentions what happened to 7th Cavalry back 149 years ago when Custer refused to bring cannon and gatlings along in favor of traveling light.
https://thestrategybridge.org/the-bridge/2016/5/24/into-the-greasy-grassthe-importance-of-the-tank-in-war-today-and-in-the-future
leith,
I would like to hear Donahoe expand on that. His is thinking of what a modern battlefield is still pre-UAV? Just a few years ago I am sure he was right.
The UAVs and FPV drones have changed the definition vastly. Used to be anything that can be seen can be killed, but now it seems anything that can be seen WILL be killed.
In Ukraine it seems the view of APCs has become almost sacrificial. Like the Iraqis in the early 90’s, the survivors are the ones that ones that separate themselves from their equipment ASAP. Fewer eggs in the baskets, lots and lots of cheap and easily replaceable baskets. I suspect moto-cross and skeet shooting may shortly become key parts of advanced basic.
The old modern battlefield, she just ain’t what she used to be.
Mark Logan,
The Ukrainians love the Bradley. It can usually take several hits before it becomes disabled and, most importantly, the crew inside one almost always survives a disablement. Even when disabled, they are often retrieved and repaired. One point though, the Ukrainian often uparmor the Bradleys as well as other APCs, IFVs and tanks, including the Abrams.
TTG, I agree there will always be a place for light tanks . I would guess Ukraine is being very careful with their Bradleys.
Mark Logan,
Because they’re so survivable, they’re used quite often in assaults. They drive into the Russian trench works and then drop off the infantry. The same principle as Russian soldiers on motocross bikes, but with far less casualties.
Bradley’s Russians captured a couple of Bradleys. MinDef Belousov’s engineers and techies are reverse engineering them as we speak. But even if Russkii factories can reproduce them, it is 40+ year old technology. We lost a lot in the Gulf and Iraq Wars, some to friendly fire. The Ukrainians have reportedly had more than 8o destroyed. But they do provide good crew protection and their TOW missiles and chain gun are tank killers.
That Bushmaster
TTG, I would guess they would be careful about using them in high FPV environments. Seems both sides are unable to maintain a high FPV environment everywhere.
Damnation Alley
Cast cement command bunker out of steel and concrete in field put on chassis and drop on front line. cover with various destoyed tanks and burry in earth while creating moat .
The tri-star is a novel wheel design—originally by Robert and John Forsyth, assigned to Lockheed in 1967—in which three wheels are arranged in an upright triangle with two on the ground and one above them. If either of the wheels in contact with the ground gets stuck, the whole system rotates over the obstruction.[1]
The Landmaster is a unique 12-wheeled amphibious articulated vehicle constructed by Dean Jeffries at Jeffries Automotive in Universal City, California, for the 1977 science fiction film Damnation Alley (itself based on a novel by Roger Zelazny). Despite the appearance of two Landmasters in the film (achieved with process photography and models), only one was built, at a cost of $350,000 in 1976.[1]
Hegseth personally explains the reduction in the number of flag officers in this two-minute video:
https://x.com/SecDef/status/1919499390370066650
Keith Harbaugh,
I wish him luck in this. It’s long overdue. I’d definitely like to see a reduction in headquarters and headquarter functions. A lot of those general and field grade officers should be given the opportunity to lead brigades and battalions where experience and wisdom will really count. If they can’t do that, they can retire. The Brits have captains leading their platoons. I like that idea.