A Light Infantry Offi cer Training at the Home of Mounted Warfare

A Light Infantry Officer Training at the Home of Mounted Warfare by Captain Ed Kennedy Fort Knox, Kentucky, the “Home of Mounted Warfare,” which has been home to the Armor Center since 1940, is in jeopardy of leaving the Bluegrass state. The May 2005 Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) Report recommends relocating the Armor Center to Fort Benning, Georgia, “Home of the Infantry.”1 It is conceivable that this base switch is not merely a consolidation of resources, but rather part of a larger conceptual transition to a new maneuver branch that attempts to keep pace with Army Transformation. While the Army has been making continual improvements to the vehicle platforms and unit compositions within the armor and mechanized infantry communities, my career has been focused solely on light infantry units and tactics. The BRAC recommendation suggests that educating armor soldiers at Fort Benning in conjunction with the infantry schoolhouse would be a better utilization of training resources and proposes sig nificant cost savings.2 However, this change could also serve as a catalyst for the concept of merging the infan try and armor communities into a maneuver force. Amidst the relocation of the Armor Center, officers such as Colonel Robert Valdivia, Director of the Armor School, examined a transition from separate mechanized infantry and armor branches into a single maneuver branch.3 This idea may stem from the continuously transforming operational environment that finds armor and infantry officers in similar roles. In current operational theaters, you will likely find an armor platoon leader maneuvering his light-skinned high-mobility multipurpose wheeled vehicle (HMMWV) platoon to raid a compound, or an infantry platoon leader maneuvering his armored Bradley platoon to establish an attack-by-fire position. With overlapping roles, it can be difficult to decipher the differences in their professional educations at both the basic and career levels. It is possible that the collocation of the Armor Center and the Infantry Center to Fort Benning is the first step to unite the branch that controls the soldiers maneuvering in HMMWVs, Bradley fighting vehicles, and Abrams tanks. My assignments so far have been light infantry. The Infantry Officer Basic Course (IOBC) has a strong focus on light infantry tactics and a solid preparation for Ranger School-style patrolling. Ranger School provides valuable leadership and tactical skills applicable to light, mechanized, combat arms, or combat service support units. However, the application of these lessons and tactics are focused mainly on light infantry units. On my arrival at the 25th Infantry Division, I trained for traditional light infantry tasks — from clearing a trench to platoon attack. Aside from the rare light medium tactical vehicle (LMTV) ride to the range or random interactions with the battalion’s antitank section or the support platoon’s light-skinned M998 HMMWVs, I had no experience with mounted warfare. It was not until a rotation to the Joint Readiness Training Center (JRTC) in 2003 that I first worked with a mounted maneuver force. As the Headquarters and Headquarters Company executive officer during our JRTC rotation, I was overwhelmed when we had a tank company attached to the task force. As a logistics planner in the field trains, I was quickly challenged as to how to support this new attachment — I had no idea just how much class III (bulk and packaged) each tank would require or what type of class IX was needed to be prepared to push forward. Without the tremendous assistance of the tank company commander, I would have failed to adequately supply the attachment. From a tactical perspective, the infantry lieutenants were also relatively untrained on how to operate with a tank section. Suddenly, I was keenly aware of how little I knew about the combined arms fight. Seeing how successful the task force had trained with the combination of infantry and armor units, sealed the importance of understanding how to effectively employ the pair. Following JRTC, my duty assignments included two other major deployments, but provided only a little more insight into mounted maneuver warfare. During Operation Enduring Freedom (OEF), patrols were conducted either on foot, by air assault, or mounted on HMMWVs. The types of operations conducted on HMMWVs were different from those of my platoon leader days. While the general concepts taught during IOBC and Ranger School could be applied, I did not have any experiences on which to base my actions. As an aerial reaction force team leader, I participated in a different type of mounted maneuver warfare. During such operations, I flew in UH-60s and inserted with a quick reaction force in response to enemy contact, or to action on signal intelligence or human intelligence. The decisionmaking cycle for such missions had to be extremely rapid to be effective. Any delay in the time it took to process reports and make a decision to insert could result in a missed opportunity. While these operations gave me some understanding of managing several radio nets with one set of headphones, processing information, and making rapid decisions, they did not test my ability to maneuver other mounted forces. After four years in the infantry, I had a solid understanding of light infantry tactics, but very little experience with mounted maneuver. Following my first duty assignment, I decided it would be best for me to broaden my breadth of knowledge and transition to a mechanized infantry or a Stryker unit. Understanding that my future would be mounted, I knew that I needed a far better understanding of operating with vehicles, their limitations and capabilities, and how best to employ them. The transition to mounted warfare would not be easy, and it was not long before I decided that the Armor Captains Career Course (AC3) would provide a better understanding of not only tank companies, but also increase my overall understanding of mounted warfare. I expected to graduate AC3 with a basic understanding of my doctrinal role as a battalion staff officer and company commander with a variety of different tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTP); the knowledge to maneuver tank platoons instead of squads of infantrymen; and the opportunity to reset my family after a relatively high optempo first duty station. AC3 presents students with the opportunity to develop operations orders at all levels, from company to brigade, with a strong emphasis placed on the delivery of the order. The instructors put a significant emphasis on being able to deliver an order in such a manner that platoon leaders will understand and execute the commander’s intent. AC3 met my expectations to maneuver tanks instead of infantrymen during tactical scenarios and the orders process, but not exclusively. While simulation network (SIMNET) training focuses solely on maneuvering tanks, it is one of the few situations where students are only responsible for a company of tanks. During the orders processes, and routinely during tactical scenarios in the classroom, students are required to plan for ma neuvering not only tank platoons, but al so mechanized and light infantry platoons. During the “Gauntlet,” the tactical training event with the Armor Officer Basic (AOB) Course lieutenants, AC3 captains operate as company commanders, executive officers, and observers/controllers from HMMWVs, Bradleys, and M113s. During this capstone training event, I conducted troop leading procedures as a company commander, from start to finish, in a field environment. This was a great chance to test my ability to deliver an order to lieutenants using the mapboard format and apply doctrinal and tactical knowledge learned during AC3. During the execution of the mission, I was challenged with maneuvering Abrams tank platoons from my Bradley fighting vehicle, while analyzing and adjusting to intelligence reports from my HMMWV-mounted scout platoon. This exercise com- “During the execution of the mission, I was challenged with maneuvering Abrams tank platoons from my Bradley fighting vehicle, while analyzing and adjusting to the intelligence reports from my HMMWV-mounted scout platoon. This exercise combined classroom conferences with very realistic hands-on training, which far exceeded my expectations of AC3.” January-February 2006 — 21 bined classroom conferences with very realistic hands-on training, which far exceeded my expectations of AC3. AC3 packs a remarkable amount of information into a short 100 days of class. They should not cut any topics from the course, but it would be in the best interest of the students, as well as the Army, to lengthen the course. The course has only enough time to scratch the surface when discussing effects based operations (EBO) and ur ban operations (UO). While most of the class has some operational experience with both EBO and UO, very few in the class have a solid base of doctrinal knowledge. In light of recent operations in both Afghanistan and Iraq, both of these topics deserve more attention in the classroom and training environment. A longer course would provide a more thorough understanding of the material without sacrificing personal time. Two blocks of instruction that I did not expect to receive during AC3 were the lieutenant mentorship program and Ranger School preparations. The Armor Officer Basic (AOB) course mentorship program is an opportunity to challenge individuals outside of the classroom blocks of instruction. During IOBC, a branch-qualified captain was in charge of my student platoon, which is vastly different than the current noncommissioned (NCO)- led AOB classes. While an NCO is capable of teaching the subject material, and in many cases more knowledgeable, it is important that lieutenants start to formulate relationships with captains. It is also important that lieutenants not minimize the officer’s role in training and not associate training as an NCO-only responsibility. The AOB mentorship program is an excellent chance to make up for what some AOB students are missing, and for captains to start cementing their captain-to-lieutenant mentoring role. The mentorship program is an excellent opportunity for professional interaction outside of the classroom. In an attempt to expand this interaction, it would be beneficial for captains, instead of just classmates, to brief lieutenants on operations orders. This idea would be the classroom version of the AOB “Gauntlet,” and similar to task force operations where one small group of AC3, acting as the task force staff, briefs another small group of captains acting as company commanders. This would create a more realistic scenario, provide feedback, and serve as an indicator of the student’s ability to deliver an order. With the transition to units of action, where armor officers will fill infantry-related roles, there is an added incentive to push armor officers to attend and graduate Ranger School. There is a renewed focus in the areas of physical fitness and small unit tactics in an effort to prepare students, physically and mentally, to attend Ranger School. Officers, who already have their tabs, should help prepare classmates to attend and graduate their follow-on courses. While I could have taken the typical path of attending the Infantry Captains Career Course (ICCC), graduating and successfully commanding some day, I would not have had the same experiences as I did by attending AC3. ICCC is an outstanding course for preparing captains for command and staff and I would have benefited from attending the course. However, the AC3 curriculum does not focus solely on tank platoons or companies; therefore, it provided me a great balance in my quest to understand the employment of all maneuver forces, not just mechanized infantry. As long as the armor and infantry communities remain as separate branches, my recommendation to other combat arms captains is to consider cross training at these different career courses. Based on my experiences and from talking with other officers, the basic career course classroom instructions are comparable; however, the lessons that can be gained from a different perspective outside of the set curriculum are immeasurable. As I complete AC3, there are a few lessons I will take with me as I prepare for a future in mounted warfare. These lessons have increased significance, as my follow-on assignment is to 4th Infantry Division where I will be a staff officer and company commander in the mech anized infantry. It is here that I will test my ability to provide the purpose and direction to accomplish any mission, facilitated through my delivery of company-level operations orders; test my understanding of mount ed warfare, to include the capabilities and limitations of a tank company; and prove my ability to perform as any member of a staff during the military decisionmaking process. Although not as exciting as being a company commander, and not as fun as planning your company’s mission in a movement to contact in an urban environment, staff time is inevitable and you must be prepared to excel in that role as well. As I move back into the transforming Army, amidst an ever-changing operational environment, understanding these three topics will greatly impact my ability to contribute to my next unit. I am eager to link up with my infantry brethren; however, I feel very fortunate to have had the opportunity to attend one of the last armor classes held at the birthplace and current home of mounted warfare, Fort Knox, Kentucky. Notes 1Base Realignment and Closure Report Committee, Department of Defense Base Closure and Realignment Report, Volume I, Part 2 of 2: Detailed Recommendations, May 2005, available online at http://www.defenselink.mil/brac/. 2Ibid. 3Colonel Robert Valdivia, “Maneuver Branch: A Vision for the Future,” Stormingmedia.us, 2005, available online at http:// www.stormingmedia.us/44/4422/A442234.html. Captain Ed Kennedy is currently assistant S3, 1st Battalion, 66th Armor, 1st Brigade Combat Team, 4th Infantry Division, Iraq. He received a B.S. from the U.S. Military Academy. His military education includes Armor Captains Career Course, Infantry Officer Basic Course, Ranger School, Infantry Mortar Leader Course, Airborne School, and Air Assault School. He has served in various command and staff positions, to include assistant S3, 2d Battalion, 5th (2-5) Infantry, 25th Infantry Division (ID) (Light), Uruzgan, Afghanistan; S4, 2-5 Infantry, 25th ID, Schofield Barracks, HI; XO, Headquarters and Headquarters Company, 2-5 Infantry, 25th ID, Schofield Barracks; and rifle platoon leader, B Company, 2-5 Infantry, 25th ID, Schofield, Barracks. “It is also important that lieutenants not minimize the officer’s role in training and not associate training as an NCO-only responsibility. The AOB mentorship program is an excellent chance to make up for what some AOB students are missing, and for captains to start cementing their captain-to-lieutenant mentoring role.” 22 — January-February 2006