Replies

Hard to refute what is said in here. Honest critique is what combat is about - learn from the mistakes now and save lives later.

I'm damned proud of our forces.

I notice that a number of these recommendations were adopted by the Israelis a generation ago. Why are we just now finding these things out?

Goodbye Stryker.

Keep this.

Can a current tank fire "air bursts"? An air burst above the enemy troops should lower the capabilities to fight effectively.

Great reading. I have no military experience so I'm writing without any practical experience but these seem obvious to me:

1) Design of a future heavy combat vehicle that can't sustain a direct RPG attack borders on criminal neglect. If the Stryker can't take an RPG, it should be discarded. Our guys were chopped up in Mogadishu even though they were only a couple of miles from base.

2) The idea of simultaneous tank and infantry attack will work until the enemy uses anti-tank weapons instead of RPGs as their weapon of choice. I would hate to see our forces fight the last battle instead of anticipating the next one. Columns of dead M1s and Bradleys in alleys is not a pleasant thought. The Russkies learned this the hard way in Grozny. I guess quick assessment of the enemy's tactics and multiple training scenarios would allow us to adapt effectively (eg. if they're using RPGs, send in the tanks, otherwise, use infantry).

3) Our infantry needs higher firepower. Do we have a cheap alternative to the RPG? Something cheap, lightweight, and *plentiful* with a reusable launcher. The ones I see on globalsecurity.org appear to be self-contained units that are one-shot items. Seems like it would be harder to carry multiple rounds in this configuration because of the bulk.

4) The fact that our soldiers have resorted to using items for combat that I can purchase at Walmart shows two things: a) the ingenuity of our soldiers and b) the failure of our military planners/designers. I've read about the same thing in Afghanistan where our guys used commercial GPS systems instead of the military's. Shocking. The impression I get is that our military systems are overdesigned - too bulky and power-hungry.

We need to get our eggheads to come up with ideas for ambush detection. Here are some speculative ideas that aren't just sci-fi fantasy (like phasors and photon torpedos):

1) Remote detection of humans. Ultrawideband technology can "see" through walls and other obstacles though only over a limited range right now. Laser-driven photoconducting tranceiver antennas can be used for characterization of remote objects. It's an inherently simple technology and inexpensive to build. Our eggheads need to rapidly develop this technology to increase its range and detection capabilities. Signal processing of the returned signal can be used to detect the heartbeat of hidden enemies. This could be a handheld device.

2) A much larger vehicle-mounted device could be developed to remotely detect and neutralize RPG rounds (eg. detonate in-place). It seems like the metal on an RPG round could be used as a receiver antenna for our transmitting device. The right frequency or frequencies could be used to generate an arc between pieces of the RPG's metal. A high powered transmitter would be required so I doubt such a thing would ever be man-portable. Our eggheads need to see if this sort of thing is possible.

3) We need anti-personnel electromagnetic devices, lethal and/or non-lethal. I see no moral difference between an explosive grenade blinding the enemy with fragments versus a laser/maser rifle doing the same.

We are the masters of electromagnetic technology. We need to hold our eggheads' noses to the grindstone to produce em weaponery that goes beyond radios, radars, and nightvision technology.

Thanks for posting this AAR.