The 1st Armored Training Brigade Overhauls Initial Entry Training

1st Armored Training Brigade Overhauls Initial Entry Training by Lieutenant Colonel Jim Larsen and Lieutenant Colonel Jerry Cashion Over the past year, initial entry training (IET), specifically basic combat training (BCT), has undergone the most significant change since World War II. The new curriculum focuses on producing soldiers who can immediately contribute to their unit following advanced individual training (AIT). Developing Individual Skills Gone are the days of sterile phase testing — soldiers standing in line at parade rest at field tables covered with camouflage net, score cards neatly tucked under the camouflage bands of their helmets, waiting to be tested on individual tasks. The hours of perfecting drill and ceremony and sitting in large lecture-style classes have been slashed. In place of sterile phase testing comes judgment-based training in the form of end-of-phase situational training exercises (STX), where soldiers perform critical individual tasks under replicated combat conditions. Squad tactical movement, urban operations, and convoy operations have replaced many of the hours formerly devoted to marching. Small group, performance-oriented training, taught by a new breed of warrior-focused drill sergeants, characterize most of the instruction once taught by committee, or at the very least, in a classroom with a platform instructor addressing 220 students. Combat-focused courses are constructed so that teamwork events, such as litter carrying, water and ammunition resupply, and fighting position construction, replace the noncombat-related teamwork development course. The first step was to change the training methodology and preserve this methodology through the application of an updated mission essential task list (METL) for BCT. The second step was to incorporate individual skills developed and mastered during the first weeks of BCT into a new training strategy called “warrior challenge,” which empowers drill sergeants and BCT soldiers to focus on combat-oriented, squad-level tactics. At the core of this transformation is the new Basic Combat Training Methodology, which is shown in Figure 1. As indicated in the upper “individual” band, soldiers are trained in key individual tasks that are relevant to the force’s current needs. Instead of sterile testing at the end of each training phase, soldiers’ performance is validated during the execution of critical collective tasks in the form of STXs. Every effort is made to ensure these STXs are as realistic as possible, to include media, civilians, urban areas, improvised explosive devises (IED), and a healthy dose of ambiguity, information overload and/or deprivation, uncertainty, and unpredictability. These training standards are ultimately measured by mission accomplishment within the commander’s intent, rather than performance measures accomplished in specific order. During the final five-day field training exercise (FTX), soldiers conduct an intensive squad external evaluation (EXEVAL), which challenges soldiers and drill sergeants in executing warrior tasks and drills. By the end of nine weeks, soldiers have been exposed to many of the same situations they will face in combat. They will make tough decisions, just as they will in combat, and for many, combat is just around the corner. The STXs and the final EXEVAL add focus to BCT and require drill sergeants to develop training strategies to prepare them for these events; battle-focused training improves soldiers and leaders. The current goal is to preserve this methodology and consolidate gains made over the past year, making BCT more realistic, relevant, and rigorous. Recent headway was made when the U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) approved changes to the Infantry School’s BCT program of instruction. However, resources are only part of the effort — ensuring BCT battalion and company METL are battle-focused is another critical component. 46 — January-February 2005

“Conduct BCT” has been the usual METL task briefed by nearly every BCT battalion and company commander far too long. This task might work at the battalion level, but it is not adequate to focus company commanders and their cadre. U.S. Army Field Manual 7-0, Training the Force, states, ”Battle focus is equally applicable in TDA organizations,” and “mission essential tasks should include critical training tasks.”1 The critical training tasks in the new BCT are the foundation for the STXs, which include establishing a checkpoint, occupying an assembly area, conducting tactical movement (mounted and dismounted), and conducting tactical movement in an urban area. Moreover, accomplishing these collective tasks enable soldiers to execute many of Task Force Soldier’s recommended 40 core warrior tasks and nine core warrior drills.2 All U.S. Army BCT organizations must accomplish identical functions to get the most from the new BCT POI. To accomplish this, every BCT organization must have a standardized METL for common tasks. At the battalion-level, the METL can be organized into three essential tasks, which include conducting BCT, exercising command and control, and maintaining certification and readiness. Each of the battalion’s METL tasks has supporting battle tasks that logically feed into the company’s METL. For example, the battalion METL task of conduct BCT has supporting battle tasks of establishing a checkpoint, conducting tactical movement (mounted and dismounted), and conducting tactical movement in a built-up area. The company’s METL would then include tasks such as establishing a checkpoint, conducting tactical movement (dis mounted), con duct tactical movement (mounted), and conducting tactical move ment in a builtup area. The company bat tle tasks then logically become critical collective and/or individual tasks on which drill sergeants can focus their efforts. For instance, the company battle task of establishing a checkpoint would have supporting battle tasks that include tasks such as handling enemy prisoners of war/de tainees, determining location on ground, reacting to media, and performing first aid. The majority of these battle tasks, critical collective tasks, and critical individual tasks are, in fact, core warrior tasks and drills. It is important to note how the assessment of this METL differs from a modified table of organization and equipment unit. The assessment of this METL is largely cadre-focused, as opposed to being focused on the METL task proficiency of squads, platoons, companies, and battalions. Focusing on the soldier in training and his ability to accomplish these tasks would be too perishable and the unit would be not be trained at the beginning of every cycle. True BCT unit proficiency is measured by cadre proficiency to accomplish and teach tasks. Therefore, focusing primarily on the cadre and measuring success based on cadre proficiency is key to assessing this METL. Cadre proficiency is measured in performance of these collective tasks during the squad EXEVAL and provides a real assessment of training rather than statistics used in the past. Using this approach, commanders at all levels can assure cadre training during cycle breaks is battle focused and targets key areas to improve training for upcoming cycles. Squad-Level Tactics Once soldiers complete training at the individual level, we train the standardized METL at the squad level for the remaining weeks of BCT. The warrior challenge is a set of externally evaluated STX lanes designed to challenge drill sergeants and soldiers in conducting squad-level tactical missions while demonstrating the application of individual skills learned during BCT. Each BCT squad competes against an established standard while conducting tactical missions. The program’s success relies on drill sergeants, acting as squad leaders, whose performance is evaluated while conducting missions. Each squad earns points based on their performance and competes for the warrior challenge streamer. Additionally, the top scoring drill sergeant squad leader earns the warrior ethos award and trophy. Currently, the warrior challenge missions include movement to contact, convoy resupply, and rescuing an ambushed convoy. These missions and associated tasks are derived from the current operations in Iraq and Afghanistan and supported by the 40 core warrior tasks and nine warrior drills as defined by Task Force Soldier.3 For movement to contact missions, the squad is given a scenario where small insurgent elements are attempting to destroy local infrastructure such as water sources and roads/bridges. Specifically, the squad’s mission is to secure a key water source to allow nongovernment organizations (NGOs) to repair damage caused by insurgent forces. They are further tasked to destroy any insurgent forces they encounter during this mission. Under the leadership of the drill sergeant squad leader, the squad plans and conducts rehearsals for the mission in a semi-secure assembly area. As the squad begins movement to their objective, they encounter a sniper, indirect fire, and an ambush. In each case, the squad is evaluated on its performance of the appropriate battle drill, reporting procedures, and its ability to continue the mission. While the lane is well structured, there is a great deal of “free-play”

PATRIOT PHASE

GUNFIGHTER PHASE

WARRIOR PHASE

BRM-1

WEEK 1 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 5 WEEK 6 WEEK 7 WEEK 8 WEEK 9

BAYONET

CBTIVES

US WPNS

TACTICS

RECOVERY

GRD DUTY

NBC

TCP OPS

IED/UXO

URBAN

D&C

COMMO

LAND NAV

CONVOY

FIRST AID

LLW/ROE

THREAT

EPW/TQ

COMBAT

TDC

1-DAY FTX

1-DAY FTX

5-DAY FTX

STX 3

(MTC)

STX 4

(CVY)

STX 5

(UO) 3K FM 5K FM 8K FM 10K FM

TM LFX

NIC

PT

ASMT

DIAG

APFT

FINAL

APFT

ADDED OR REVISED INSTRUCTION

GRAD

SQUAD

EXEVAL

COLLECTIVE (SITUATIONAL) INDIVIDUAL

The New Basic Combat Training Methodology 10K FM 15K FM

STX 1

(TCP)

STX 2

(AA)

RIFLE MKSMANSHIP

Figure 1 January-February 2005 — 47

between friendly and enemy forces. The enemy is issued a mission to conduct a baited ambush under the supervision of a drill sergeant. In many cases, the friendly unit detects the ambush and seizes the initiative from the enemy — likewise, the enemy may totally overwhelm the friendly unit. In either case, the observer controller (OC) observes the contact and assesses casualties accordingly. During the course of the mission, the squad has multiple opportunities to treat and evacuate both friendly and enemy casualties based on the adjudication of contact. Once the objective is secured and casualties are treated and evacuated, the squad receives a change of mission and conducts an after-action review (AAR) led by the OC. Once the AAR is completed, the OC issues the squad leader the next mission. The next mission requires the squad to conduct vehicle movement to resupply a unit not in contact. Insurgents continue to operate in the area, conducting small ambushes to interdict movement along key road networks. Just as in the previous mis sion, the squad conducts planning and rehearsals in an assembly area. During the con duct of the mission, the squad encounters a far ambush and a blocked ambush. In each case, the squad is evaluated on their performance of the appropriate battle drill and reporting procedures. Free-play applies in this lane as well and the OC assesses casualties to further de velop the squad in both first aid tasks and casualty evacuation. Again, the OC leads the squad through an AAR, and then issues a fragmentary order (FRAGO) for the final mission. The third and final mission requires the squad to rescue an ambushed convoy. Insurgents continue to interdict vehicle movement with IEDs and small ambushes. A two-vehicle convoy is ambushed returning from a mission. The squad must secure the vehicles and treat and evacuate casualties. While the squad conducts this portion of the mission, they receive fire from a couple of insurgents who break contact and draw them into a nearby building. The squad enters and clears multiple rooms within the building attempting to identify and kill or capture the insurgents. As the squad clears the rooms in the build ing, they are presented multiple targets that include, small children, women, and hostile men and women. In each case, soldiers are evaluated on room clearing and shoot/don’t shoot responses. Once the building is cleared, the squad completes its original mission, establishes a helicop ter pickup zone and calls for a medical evacuation. Once again, the squad is evaluated on its performance of tasks and drills required to successfully complete the mission. Understanding the Warrior Challenge Indeed, noncombat arms drill sergeants leading squads through infantry-type training tasks could be challenging. However, there are no longer just infantry-type tasks. The contemporary operating environment presents challenges like these throughout the entire area of operation. The results in Operation Enduring Freedom and Operation Iraqi Freedom have highlighted the requirement for all soldiers and leaders to master these skills, regardless of military occupational specialty (MOS). The Army most recently codified the “warrior first” intent in the warrior tasks and drills, which are the foundation for the missions within the warrior challenge. Our drill sergeants are perfectly capable of leading squads through these tasks. They were great noncommissioned officers before arriving at BCT and can perform leader tasks required to lead squads through these missions. Drill sergeants will practice, rehearse, and refine leader and tactical skills to give them the necessary confidence they need to train and lead soldiers. This area has been addressed and we developed a two-pronged approach: leader training and peer training. We assembled drill sergeants, company commanders, and first sergeants and executed leader training on each aspect of the warrior challenge. Some of these training events were conducted with ad hoc squads made up of leaders actually executing missions. Some of this training was conducted as noncommissioned officer professional development programs, which focused on specific tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP) such as room clearing procedures. In each case, leaders were trained on the performance of the missions and provided TTP to prepare soldiers to execute supporting tasks. Peer training occurred at the company level. One or two subject-matter experts, within the company, would continue the leader training process in preparation for upcoming cycles. Each time a company conducted the warrior challenge, drill sergeants shared TTP and developed strategies to be prepared and prepare soldiers for the next warrior challenge. This basically developed into an “upward spiral,” whereby the training, as well as leader and soldier performance, improved with each execution of the warrior challenge. Preparing soldiers to perform these tasks in the short eight-weeks provided requires absolute focus. The focus of BCT was previously on sterile phase testing. Now, the focus is on performing well during warrior challenge. To perform well during warrior challenge, soldiers have to un derstand both how and when to perform a task. During instruction, the “how” for a task occurs pretty much the way as always — task, con- “In place of sterile phase testing comes judgment-based training in the form of end-of-phase situational training exercises (STX), where soldiers perform critical individual tasks under replicated combat conditions. Squad tactical movement, urban operations, and convoy operations have replaced many of the hours formerly devoted to marching. Small group, per formance-oriented training, taught by a new breed of warrior-focused drill sergeants, characterize most of the instruction once taught by committee, or at the very least, in a classroom with a platform instructor addressing 220 students.” 48 — January-February 2005 dition, and standard. The trick of capturing “when” to perform a task oc curs during a more focused drill sergeant’s time. Because of the added focus of warrior challenge, drill sergeants use every opportunity to train soldiers in performing fire team and squad drills while reinforcing tasks traditionally taught during BCT. Every opportunity during the day is used to train/reinforce some task, whether it is tactical movement to or from training, or a battle drill during the physical training cool-down period. Each time drill sergeants execute warrior challenge they develop a more comprehensive strategy to train soldiers for the next one, improving training yet again. STX training may tax resources, such as time, personnel, and equipment, and every installation varies slightly on available resources. However, with careful planning and command emphasis, STXs can be executed with resources internal to the battalion. Each BCT company has enough transportation assets to support the convoy resupply lane. We use an existing building and static vehicles to support the rescue an ambushed convoy lane. Temporary rooms can be made of pickets and target cloth as an alternate and almost any vehicle can be substituted for the objective on the lane. There is enough pyrotechnics and blank ammunition in the current FTX to support all three lanes. To ensure we have enough drill sergeants to allow one per squad, we execute with eight squads per day. Some drill sergeants lead a squad through both days, but lead no more than two squads during the training course. With only eight squads executing per day, the remaining eight squads, with drill sergeant supervision, are available for opposing force (OPFOR) support. Time and OCs go hand-in-hand as the biggest challenge. To gain the most efficient use of time, we use two OCs on each lane. One OC is moving with a squad, while the other OC is simultaneously observing planning and rehearsals in the assembly area with another squad. Using this method, it takes approximately 12 hours to execute eight squads per day. A typical FTX timeline is: day 1, deploy to field and prepare; day 2 and 3, conduct warrior challenge (8 squads per day); day 4, continue warrior challenge as necessary and conduct retraining; and day 5, redeploy. It is important to note day 4 remains available for backup in the event of bad weather or other distracters that postpone or delay training on day 2 or 3. It is also used for retraining squads that fail to meet standards. To place the proper emphasis and aid in assessment, the OCs are made up of the battalion commander, the command sergeant major, and company commanders. We currently use four company commanders across the battalion to run each warrior challenge. Each company commander gets an opportunity to evaluate 32 squads per quarter, as well as an opportunity to observe training and standard operation procedures of sister companies. The value added is self-evident, and as in many areas throughout the program, contributes to improved training throughout the battalion. Let there be no doubt, this is an evaluation. Drill sergeants and soldiers are being evaluated on individual, collective, and leader tasks throughout training. In the assembly areas, soldiers are evaluated on individual weapons proficiency with the M16A2 and the M249 squad automatic weapon, proper use of the claymore and AT-4, map reading, and maintaining individual weapons and equipment. During the time in the assembly area, the drill sergeant and squad are graded on occupation and local security, planning, FRAGOs, and rehearsals. During the execution of each mission, the squad is evaluated on the performance of numerous tasks and drills. In many cases, these tasks and drills are redundant across all three missions, and the squad improves through the execution and AAR of each lane. All evaluations are based on task-condition-standard and performance measures from the most current doctrine rolled into training and evaluation outlines (T&EOs). The squad is scored based on how well they perform these tasks as outlined in the T&EOs; platoon and company streamers are awarded for those who meet or exceed established standards. The highest scoring drill sergeant is also recognized with the warrior ethos award presented by the battalion commander at graduation. While these are the positive awards that come from the evaluation, the true assessment is in the training and the trainers. Commanders at company and battalion, along with the battalion command sergeant major, evaluate every drill sergeant and a cross section of every platoon in each company. Key leaders gain an extremely accurate assessment for the level of training proficiency of soldiers and drill sergeants. This is a much more effective tool for developing training than the traditional statistics used in years past. Based on assessments over the past year, we have refined leader training and can identify drill January-February 2005 — 49 “During the final five-day field training exercise (FTX), soldiers conduct an inten sive squad external evaluation (EXEVAL), which challenges soldiers and drill sergeants in executing warrior tasks and drills. By the end of nine weeks, soldiers have been exposed to many of the same situations they will face in combat. They will make tough decisions, just as they will in combat, and for many, combat is just around the corner.”

sergeants requiring additional training in programs such as the combat leader’s course at Fort Benning, Georgia. The upward spiral effect on improving training throughout BCT seems endless. This is attributed primarily to continued professional growth of the drill sergeants. As highlighted earlier, our drill sergeants continue to assess their own abilities and develop self-improvement strategies to better train soldiers in upcoming cycles. Noncombat arms drill sergeants had the steepest learning curve, but they have improved the most. Three of the past five top-performing drill sergeants had combat support and combat service support backgrounds. All company commanders in the battalion have served as OCs for at least 32 squad STXs in the past 60 days. The positive impact this has on their professional development, as well as training within their organizations, is incredible. The most important result is the impact this training has on individual soldiers. Soldiers now receive realistic, relevant training that prepares them for combat. Each cycle, this training gets better, based on the continued improvement of leaders at all levels, and soldiers leave basic training confident and proficient in the application of warrior tasks and drills. The original intent of warrior challenge was to enhance the development of noncombat arms drill sergeants; however, the end product proved to be much greater. The program provides a vehicle whereby soldiers are trained and leaders at all levels are developed. It provides focus for training and challenges drill sergeants to continue to develop professionally while on the trail. Because of these results, the warrior challenge was added to the new BCT POI and has become the catalyst for change in the BCT culture, fostering the best conditions to train soldiers and leaders for an Army at war. Notes 1U.S. Army Field Manual 7-0, Training the Force, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D.C., 22 October 2002. 2Task Force Soldier is one of Chief of Staff, Army’s initiatives to support Army Transformation. The program conducts a holistic review and analysis of individual soldier training, equipment, and readiness needs, institutional through small units, to support deploying soldiers fighting the Global War on Terrorism and prepare soldiers for the future force, review online at http://www.infantry.army.mil/taskforcesoldier/content/ mission.htm. 3Ibid. Lieutenant Colonel Jerry Cashion is currently the commander, 2d Battalion, 46th Infantry (Basic Combat Training), 1st Armored Training Brigade, Fort Knox, KY. He received a B.S. from Tennessee Technology University and an M.B.A. from Long Island University. His military education includes U.S. Army Command and General Staff College. He has served in various air assault and light infantry assignments and is a veteran of Operation Desert Storm. Lieutenant Colonel Jim Larsen is currently the commander, 1st Battalion, 46th Infantry (Basic Combat Training), 1st Armored Training Brigade, Fort Knox, KY. He received a B.A. from St. Martin’s College, an M.A. from St. Mary College, and an M.M.A.S. from the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College. His military education includes the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College. He has served in various Ranger, mechanized, and air assault infantry assignments. He is a veteran of Operations Just Cause and Iraqi Freedom. He has deployed in support of Operations Enduring Freedom and Joint Forge (SFOR-8). “For movement to contact missions, the squad is given a scenario where small insurgent elements are attempting to destroy local infrastructure such as water sources and roads/bridges. Specifically, the squad’s mission is to secure a key water source to allow nongovernment organiza tions (NGOs) to repair damage caused by insurgent forces. They are further tasked to destroy any insurgent forces they encounter during this mission. Under the leadership of the drill sergeant squad lead er, the squad plans and conducts rehearsals for the mission in a semi-secure assem bly area.” 50 — January-February 2005