The Maneuver Battle Lab – Knox

The Maneuver Battle Lab – Knox by Lieutenant Colonel Kenny D. Harper and Colonel (Retired) William R. Betson The Maneuver Battle Lab-Knox (MBL-Knox), formerly known as the Mounted Maneuver Battle Lab (MMBL), has seen much activity since the Unit of Action Maneuver Battle Lab (UAMBL), now known as the Future Force Integration Division (FFID), relocated to Fort Bliss, Texas, in the summer of 2007. The lab has been a major contributor to the progression of armor modernization activities at Fort Knox, and has been involved with experimentation that focuses on how the Army fights in current operations, as well as on the conventional and asymmetric battlefields of tomorrow. Since the spring of 2007, the lab has participated in five major experiments, which have profoundly impacted the Army as a whole. In March 2007, the lab conducted its last major experiment under UAMBL. The “counterinsurgency (COIN) experiment” was a major effort that required 4 months of preparation, included nearly 300 participants, and involved the efforts of seven U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) battle labs across the Continental United States. The objectives from this experiment were designed to assess the effectiveness of the future brigade combat team (FBCT) in an urban COIN situation. This experiment employed a massively complex computer simulation, at the individual soldier level, operated by a huge 3-D virtual terrain database. The results from this experiment demonstrated that an FBCT was quite effective in such an environment, although it identified some organizational and operational issues requiring further attention through future experimentation. Until the FFID has the capability to perform its own experimentation, much of the future combat system (FCS)-related experimentation will remain with MBL-Knox. The MBL-Knox conducted an experiment during August 2007 that examined the effectiveness of the current heavy brigade reconnaissance squadron in major combat operations against a future enemy force. This particular simulation exercise (SIMEX) involved more than 100 participants and three TRADOC battle labs. The purpose of the SIMEX was to assist the training doctrine and combat development community, specifically the combat development division, in its comparison of the current HMMWV-Bradley mixed force against alternative future organizations. The experiment demonstrated that the current reconnaissance squadron organization has significant operational issues and requires greater dismounted scout capability. It also suggested that this organization may not have the capability to develop the enemy situation from stand-off with remote sensors; therefore, reconnaissance units will likely have to fight for information.

During the spring of 2009, the lab conducted another significant experiment; this time exploring how a heavy brigade combat team (HBCT) would fare against an enemy force executing a “complex web defense (CWD).” A CWD involves an enemy who exploits complex and urban terrain, and the presence of civilian populations to deny U.S. forces advantages in sensor and firepower capabilities against more traditional foes. Involving more than 200 participants and another massive terrain database, the experiment clearly highlighted the difficulties of fighting such an enemy. The MBL-Knox is currently the only place where simulations can be conducted in enough detail to address these issues. The TRADOC commanding general, upon learning of the impact this experiment would have on implications for future warfare, directed that the Armor Center commander brief these results to the Chief of Staff, Army. The significant results of the CWD experiment led the Army to ask the lab to examine the performance of the FBCT’s reconnaissance, surveillance, and target acquisition (RSTA) squadron against an enemy employing CWD-like tactics. The lab conducted another experiment in July 2008 in which soldiers from the Army Experimentation Task Force experimented with various differing RSTA organizations against an enemy employing CWD-like tactics. The results suggested that the current all-aviation squadron, found within the FBCT, needs a ground element to enhance its capability to more effectively support the brigade. The lab followed up this event with a series of short-notice excursions that studied ways to help determine the organizational structures found within the RSTA formations at brigade and battalion levels. Efforts from this experimentation continue to be reviewed by the FFID for possible implementation. In keeping with the lab’s critical role to shape the future force, in October 2008, the lab conducted an experiment exploring the capabilities and effectiveness of the organizational design of the new battlefield surveillance brigades (BfSB). Six U.S. Army National Guard BfSBs sent representatives to participate. The results of this effort were briefed at the Armor Center’s Reconnaissance Expo in November.

Experimentation at MBL-Knox will continue to support the mounted community for the next 2 years; however, reality remains and this organization will move to Fort Benning as a part of the Base Realignment and Closure (BRAC) initiatives and will combine into one operation, the 10

— January-February 2009 Maneuver Battle Lab (MBL), which will support both mounted and dismounted soldiers. The MBL, as a directorate, will be incorporated into the Capabilities Development and Integration Directorate (CDID), a Maneuver Center of Excellence (MCOE) organization.

As of 1 August 2008, the CDID established a virtual operating capability (VOC) to effectively manage its subordinate directorates both at Fort Knox and Fort Benning. The transformation will be a phased operation and will progress through an initial operating capability (IOC — the physical move of personnel and equipment) and culminate in full operating capability (FOC) in 2012. Currently, the Soldier Battle Lab (SBL), the Infantry Center’s executive agent for experimentation, and the Mounted Maneuver Battle Lab (MMBL), the Armor Center’s executive agent for experimentation, began the formal process of transforming into the Maneuver Battle Lab (MBL). In August 2008, a formal conference was conducted at Fort Benning between both organizations with the intent of formalizing daily operations, as well as future experimentation planning.

Once the MBL becomes a single operation, its support to the MCOE will be threefold: conduct analysis in support of soldier and mounted requirements divisions; support the concept development division and TRADOC capability managers (TCMs) associated with maneuver formations with a focus on MCOE proponency (armor, infantry, and soldier) related projects; and conduct experiments to glean findings and insights to assist with future doctrine, organization, training, materiel, leadership and education, personnel, and facilities (DOTMLPF) development.

To execute these priorities, the MBL is currently operating with three separate divisions, two located at Fort Benning and one at Fort Knox. The divisions at both locations have the ability to conduct live, virtual, and constructive experimentation to gain insight and recommend changes to DOTMLPF to support current force development and future concepts for the soldier and infantry and armor formations, up to brigade combat team. The live experimentation division, located at Fort Benning, focuses on live prototype experiments and is well known throughout the Army as an organization that has successfully assisted soldiers by rapidly fielding equipment into current theaters of operation. The two virtual constructive simulation divisions, one located at Fort Knox and the other at Fort Benning, conduct integrated, distributed experimentation using virtual, constructive, and instrumented live simulations to primarily assist CDID and TCM organizations with insights that will enable justification for programs associated with future Army modernization or program upgrades. It is currently expected that by the end of 2010, the Fort Knox virtual constructive simulation division will cease operations and the MBL directorate at Fort Benning will assume all experimentation concerning the dismounted and mounted soldier programs. The new MBL will be housed in a new 84,000 square-feet structure, which is expected to be completed by late 2012. The MBL, as a part of the CDID’s executive agent for experimentation, will successfully complete its transition process and will be fully capable of performing all associated experimentation for the armor and infantry communities as a member of the Maneuver Center of Excellence.

Lieutenant Colonel Kenny D. Harper is currently the chief, Maneuver Battle Lab Virtual Constructive Simulation Division-Knox, Fort Knox, KY. He received a B.S. from the Ohio State University-Columbus. His military education includes U.S. Army Command and General Staff College, Combined Arms and Services Staff School, Armor Officer Basic Course, Armor Officer Advanced Course, and Simulations Officer Certification. He has served in various command and staff positions, to include chief of operations, Training Doctrine, Combat Development and Experimentation Directorate, Fort Knox; XO, U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command (TRADOC) Capabilities Manager, Future Combat Systems, Fort Knox; XO and operations officer, 1st Squadron, 8th Cavalry, 1st Cavalry Division, Fort Hood, TX; and assistant G3, Battle Command, III Corps, Fort Hood. Colonel (Retired) William R. Betson is currently employed as the assistant vice president, Alion Science and Technologies, Fort Knox. He received a B.S. from the United States Military Academy, an M.A. from the University of Pennsylvania, and an M.M.A.S. from the School of Advanced Military Studies. His military education includes U.S. Army War College, U.S. Army Command and General Staff College, Infantry Officer Advanced Course, and Armor Officer Basic Course. He has served in various command and staff positions, to include special assistant, Chairman, Joints Chiefs of Staff, The Pentagon, Washington, DC; garrison commander, Fort Stewart, GA; senior armor and senior brigade observer controller, Operations Group, National Training Center, Fort Irwin, CA; G3, Berlin Command, Germany; and commander, 6th Battalion, 40th Armor, Berlin Brigade, Germany.

January-February 2009 — 11 equally effective without the bloated organizational structure of a brigade. CHESTER A. KOJRO

LTC, U.S. Army, Retired “Cold War Troopers” Share Summer of ’58 Dear ARMOR, I write in response to LTC Burt Boudinot’s letter to the editor on wheeled versus tracked vehicles in the November-December 2008 edition of ARMOR, specifically, his request for information on “Pegasus,” the M20 in front of 3d Squadron, 8th (3/8) Cavalry headquarters at Coleman Barracks. I was assigned to 3/8 Cavalry from 1976 to 1979 and Pegasus was on the concrete pad the entire time. I have several photographs of Pegasus done up in desert camouflage. During those years, all of our vehicles were painted in desert camouflage, which seemed strange since we were in Germany. We were also still hanging around with the same French army reconnaissance unit; 20 years later, they had the same vehicles described by LTC Boudinot, but we had the M551 Sheridan and motorcycles from local purchase. It was fun reading the colonel’s account of life at Coleman Barracks in 1958. It took me back to my own time there. I have an aerial photo of the entire squadron on parade at the athletic field next to the Alpha Troop barracks, circa 1958-1961. It was given to me by one of my fellow lieutenants from those days, Douglas Rives Brown, who got it from his father, Don Brown, who commanded Bravo Troop in the early ’60s. I wonder if 3/8 Cavalry still has the Spanish spur? Honor and Courage!

JOHN L. RODDY

LTC, U.S. Army, Retired Dear ARMOR, Your letter to the editor from LTC Burt Boudinot in the November-December 2008 ARMOR brought back wonderful memories of Budingen, Germany, and inprocessing at Coleman Barracks. I arrived there in October of 1984 and was assigned to B Troop, 3d Squadron, 12th Cavalry until 1989. I also had the privilege of serving with two great leaders, our squadron commander, Colonel J.W. Thurman, and our first sergeant, Milton Jackson. In regards to the ‘wheel versus track’ debate, I prefer a track, but also realize I am a “cold war trooper.” As missions change, there is a need for a wheeled vehicle armored personnel carrier (APC) (Stryker). It is much more forward deployable and requires less maintenance. However, I am concerned about the “submission” of the Armor Corps to the Infantry School at Fort Benning. It is inevitable that armor will become a redheaded step child to the 11-series guys. In my humble opinion, it is a priority that we retain, prepare, train, and continue to field at least two legacy divisions that are armor heavy and will serve as the “commander’s fist.” I may be an old “dat” stuck in the past, but the tank strikes fear and respect in the enemy’s mind. I’d like to thank LTC Boudinot for his candid observations.

DENNIS W. WHITE

1SG, U.S. Army, Retired LETTERS from Page 2