DOCSLIB.ORG

Survivability Design of Ground Systems for Area Defense Operation in an Urban Scenario

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Calhoun, Institutional Archive of the Naval Postgraduate School Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Theses and Dissertations Thesis Collection 2014-09 Survivability design of ground systems for area defense operation in an urban scenario Goh, Wei Jun Monterey, California: Naval Postgraduate School http://hdl.handle.net/10945/43918 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL MONTEREY, CALIFORNIA THESIS SURVIVABILITY DESIGN OF GROUND SYSTEMS FOR AREA DEFENSE OPERATION IN AN URBAN SCENARIO by Wei Jun Goh September 2014 Thesis Advisor: Douglas H. Nelson Co-Advisor: Eugene Paulo Second Reader: Gary Langford Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No. 0704–0188 Public reporting burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response, including the time for reviewing instruction, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing this burden, to Washington headquarters Services, Directorate for Information Operations and Reports, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, VA 22202-4302, and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork Reduction Project (0704-0188) Washington, DC 20503. 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED September 2014 Master’s Thesis 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5. FUNDING NUMBERS SURVIVABILITY DESIGN OF GROUND SYSTEMS FOR AREA DEFENSE OPERATION IN AN URBAN SCENARIO 6. AUTHOR(S) Wei Jun Goh 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION Naval Postgraduate School REPORT NUMBER Monterey, CA 93943-5000 9. SPONSORING /MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING N/A AGENCY REPORT NUMBER 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES The views expressed in this thesis are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of Defense or the U.S. Government. IRB Protocol number ____N/A____. 12a. DISTRIBUTION / AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited 13. ABSTRACT (maximum 200 words) This thesis applies a systems engineering approach to determine significant ground system design factors that impact the mission objectives of an urban area defense operation. The shift in conventional warfare to urban operations changes the determinants of an operationally-effective ground system design. Urban terrain characteristics pose different battlefield conditions and design challenges to ground system in an area defense operation. Limited by engineering constraints, ground systems should be designed to leverage the operational environment to achieve mission success. Drawing reference to performed functions in urban area defense, this thesis identifies four design factors of passive and active survivability measures, mobility, and sensor classification range. Map Aware Non-uniform Automata (MANA) software is used to model an area defense operation against an invading enemy. This thesis utilizes nearly orthogonal Latin hypercubes (NOLH) to determine the design points for simulation. For each identified measure of effectiveness (MOE) of mission success rate, friendly attrition, and loss exchange ratio (LER) during an area defense mission, the effect of respective design factors and its relative contribution are analyzed. 14. SUBJECT TERMS survivability, vulnerability reduction, area defense, ground systems, armor 15. NUMBER OF PAGES 97 16. PRICE CODE 17. SECURITY 18. SECURITY 19. SECURITY 20. LIMITATION OF CLASSIFICATION OF CLASSIFICATION OF THIS CLASSIFICATION OF ABSTRACT REPORT PAGE ABSTRACT Unclassified Unclassified Unclassified UU NSN 7540–01-280-5500 Standard Form 298 (Rev. 2–89) Prescribed by ANSI Std. 239–18 i THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ii Approved for public release; distribution is unlimited SURVIVABILITY DESIGN OF GROUND SYSTEMS FOR AREA DEFENSE OPERATION IN AN URBAN SCENARIO Wei Jun Goh Civilian, Defence Science and Technology Agency B.S., Nanyang Technological University, 2008 Submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN SYSTEMS ENGINEERING from the NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL September 2014 Author: Wei Jun Goh Approved by: Douglas H. Nelson Thesis Advisor Eugene Paulo Co-Advisor Gary Langford Second Reader Clifford Whitcomb Chair, Department of Systems Engineering iii THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK iv ABSTRACT This thesis applies a systems engineering approach to determine significant ground system design factors that impact the mission objectives of an urban area defense operation. The shift in conventional warfare to urban operations changes the determinants of an operationally-effective ground system design. Urban terrain characteristics pose different battlefield conditions and design challenges to ground system in an area defense operation. Limited by engineering constraints, ground systems should be designed to leverage the operational environment to achieve mission success. Drawing reference to performed functions in urban area defense, this thesis identifies four design factors of passive and active survivability measures, mobility, and sensor classification range. Map Aware Non-uniform Automata (MANA) software is used to model an area defense operation against an invading enemy. This thesis utilizes nearly orthogonal Latin hypercubes (NOLH) to determine the design points for simulation. For each identified measure of effectiveness (MOE) of mission success rate, friendly attrition, and loss exchange ratio (LER) during an area defense mission, the effect of respective design factors and its relative contribution are analyzed. v THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK vi TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................1 A. RESEARCH QUESTIONS .............................................................................2 B. SCOPE ..............................................................................................................3 C. APPROACH .....................................................................................................3 D. METHODOLOGY ..........................................................................................4 E. CONCURRENT STUDIES .............................................................................4 II. LITERATURE REVIEW ...........................................................................................5 A. URBAN OPERATIONS ..................................................................................5 B. DEFENSIVE OPERATIONS .........................................................................6 C. URBAN OPERATIONAL FRAMEWORK ..................................................6 1. Understand ...........................................................................................6 2. Shape .....................................................................................................7 3. Engage ...................................................................................................8 4. Consolidate ...........................................................................................8 5. Transition..............................................................................................8 D. IRON TRIANGLE OF VEHICLE PLATFORM DESIGN TRADE- OFF....................................................................................................................8 E. LETHALITY ....................................................................................................9 1. Kinetic Energy Threat .........................................................................9 2. Chemical Energy Threat .....................................................................9 F. PROTECTION AND SURVIVABILITY ....................................................11 1. Susceptibility Reduction ....................................................................11 2. Vulnerability Reduction ....................................................................12 G. MOBILITY .....................................................................................................15 H. PLATFORM DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS .............................................16 III. SYSTEMS ENGINEERING APPROACH .............................................................17 A. PROBLEM DESCRIPTION ........................................................................18 1. Problem Statement.............................................................................20 B. STAKEHOLDER ANALYSIS .....................................................................20 C. CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS ....................................................................21 D. FUNCTIONAL ANALYSIS .........................................................................22 1. Maintain Situational Awareness .......................................................23 2. Communicate......................................................................................24 3. Maneuver Forces ................................................................................24 4. Limit Enemy Advance .......................................................................25
Recommended publications
  • Projected Acquisition Costs for the Army's Ground Combat Vehicles

    Projected Acquisition Costs for the Army's Ground Combat Vehicles

    Projected Acquisition Costs for the Army’s Ground Combat Vehicles © MDart10/Shutterstock.com APRIL | 2021 At a Glance The Army operates a fleet of ground combat vehicles—vehicles intended to conduct combat opera- tions against enemy forces—and plans to continue to do so. Expanding on the Army’s stated plans, the Congressional Budget Office has projected the cost of acquiring such vehicles through 2050. Those projections include costs for research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) and for procurement but not the costs of operating and maintaining the vehicles. CBO’s key findings are as follows: • Total acquisition costs for the Army’s ground combat vehicles are projected to average about $5 billion per year (in 2020 dollars) through 2050—$4.5 billion for procurement and $0.5 billion for RDT&E. • The projected procurement costs are greater (in constant dollars) than the average annual cost for such vehicles from 2010 to 2019 but approximately equal to the average annual cost from 2000 to 2019 (when spending was boosted because of operations in Iraq). • More than 40 percent of the projected acquisition costs of Army ground combat vehicles are for Abrams tanks. • Most of the projected acquisition costs are for remanufactured and upgraded versions of current vehicles, though the Army also plans to acquire an Optionally Manned Fighting Vehicle, which will replace the Bradley armored personnel carrier; an Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle, which will replace the M113 armored personnel carrier; and a new Mobile Protected Firepower tank, which will be lighter than an Abrams tank. • The Army is also considering developing an unmanned Decisive Lethality Platform that might eventually replace Abrams tanks.
  • FEBRUARY/MARCH 2017. Issue 01

    FEBRUARY/MARCH 2017. Issue 01

    FEBRUARY/MARCH 2017. Issue 01. READY FOR WHEREVER YOUR MISSION TAKES YOU ELAMS TOC: The ELAMS TOC Primary mission is to provide effective, reliable space for execution of battlefield C4I. MECC® Shower/Latrine: The AAR MECC® is a fully customizable ISO that allows you to mobilize your mission. SPACEMAX® The SPACEMAX® shelter provides lightweight, durable solutions for rapidly deployable space that reduces costs and risk. 2 armadainternational.com - february/march 2017 MADE IN armadainternational.com - february/march 2017 3 www.AARMobilitySystems.com THE USA FEBRUARY/MARCH 2017 www.armadainternational.com 08 AIR POWER COST VERSUS CREDIBILITY Andrew Drwiega examines maritime patrol aircraft procurement, and the options available for air forces and navies on a budget. 14 20 26 LAND Warfare TURING STIRLING CLASS WAR CATCH-22 VEHICLES FOR CHANGE Stephen W. Miller examines how the designs of Thomas Withington examines the Link-22 tactical Andrew White uncovers some of the latest light armoured vehicles are changing around data link, its workings and what it heralds for advances in vehicle technology to help the world. tomorrow’s naval operations. commandos reach their objectives. 32 38 FUTURE TECHNOLOGIES SEA POWER 44 THE MAN WHO FELL TO EARTH WHAT LIES BENEATH LAND Warfare Parachute technology is over a century old and is Warship definitions are becoming increasingly PREVENTION IS BETTER THAN CURE being continually refined, thanks to advances in blurred due to technological advances. Are we Claire Apthorp explores some of the innovative design and manufacturing, Peter Donaldson moving towards the multipurpose combatant, asks methods being adopted for military vehicle finds out. Dr.
  • The Army's M-1 Abrams, M-2/M-3 Bradley, and M-1126 Stryker: Background and Issues for Congress

    The Army's M-1 Abrams, M-2/M-3 Bradley, and M-1126 Stryker: Background and Issues for Congress

    The Army’s M-1 Abrams, M-2/M-3 Bradley, and M-1126 Stryker: Background and Issues for Congress (name redacted) Specialist in Military Ground Forces April 5, 2016 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov R44229 The Army’s M-1 Abrams, M-2/M-3 Bradley, and M-1126 Stryker Summary The M-1 Abrams Tank, the M-2/M-3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle (BFV), and the M-1126 Stryker Combat Vehicle are the centerpieces of the Army’s Armored Brigade Combat Teams (ABCTs) and Stryker Brigade Combat Teams (SBCTs). In addition to the military effectiveness of these vehicles, Congress is also concerned with the economic aspect of Abrams, Bradley, and Stryker recapitalization and modernization. Due to force structure cuts and lack of Foreign Military Sales (FMS) opportunities, Congress has expressed a great deal of concern with the health of the domestic armored combat vehicle industrial base. ABCTs and SBCTs constitute the Army’s “heavy” ground forces; they provide varying degrees of armored protection and mobility that the Army’s light, airborne (parachute), and air assault (helicopter transported) infantry units that constitute Infantry Brigade Combat Teams (IBCTs) do not possess. These three combat vehicles have a long history of service in the Army. The first M-1 Abrams Tank entered service with the Army in 1980; the M-2/M-3 Bradley Fighting Vehicle in 1981; and the Stryker Combat Vehicle in 2001. Under current Army modernization plans, the Army envisions all three vehicles in service with Active and National Guard forces beyond FY2028. There are several different versions of these vehicles in service.

  • The Bradley Fighting Vehicle-The Troops Love It Just Like Its Partner-In

    The Bradley Fighting Vehicle-The Troops Love It Just like its partner-in-combat the Ml Abrams tank, the Army's new M2 Bradley Infantry Fighting Vehicle is rolling off the assembly line in grow­ ing numbers and finding an enthusias­ tic welcome in the units where it is be­ ing assigned. From the battalion com­ manders down to the squad leaders who fight from the Bradley there is high praise for its speed, agility, fire­ power and protection from artillery fragments and small caliber weapons. Also, just like the Abrams tank, the Bradley has been subject to a great deal of uninformed and polemical crit­ icism leading to its current less-than­ optimal press image. In truth, the Bradley, now fielded in 17 battalions, is a very successful piece of equip­ ment. It does what it was intended to do and does it very well. It deserves more objective treatment by the press and other critics who do not under­ stand its function. The Bradley exists to provide infan­ trymen and cavalry scouts a protected fighting platform on the battlefield where they function as partners of a combined-arms team, closely integrat­ ed with tanks, artillery, aviation and air defense weapons. For the first time our infantry soldiers can move into a new dimension-aboard a protective vehicle from which they can fight the enemy, with the firepower, agility and speed which assures continuous effec­ tiveness on a modern battlefield. This is not just a matter of getting the infantry to the battle. It is the de­ mand that infantry and tanks fight to­ gether, that both be there offering their strengths and protecting the oth­ er's weaknesses.
  • Armored Infantry Fighting Vehicle

    Armored Infantry Fighting Vehicle

    SUMMARY AIFV Type : Armored Infantry Fighting Vehicle ARMORED INFANTRY FIGHTING VEHICLE Place of origin : United States Specifications : Dimensions : ● Weight : combat load 13.6 tons / empty 11.4 ton ● Length : 5.26 m ● Width : 2.82 m The AIFV is a tracked light armored ● Height : hull top front 1.85 m / rear 2.00 m vehicle that serves as an infantry fight- turret roof 2.79 m ing vehicle in several countries. It’s an ● Ground clearance : 0.432 m improved M113A1 armoured personnel carrier with 85% identical spare parts. Crew : 3+7 Armour : aluminium hull (40 mm) with spaced laminate steel armor on front and sides Main armament : 25 mm KBA-B02 cannon with ● Munition : 180 rounds ready; 144 in reserve ● Rate of fire : 50 rounds/min ● Muzzle velocities : 1.100 – 1.360 m/sec (depending ammo type) POWER PACK ● Firing height : 2.33 m GM Detroit Diesel 6V53 Turbo engine ● Recoil force : 2.500 kg Allison TX100-1A transmission Secondary armament : 7.62x51mm NATO Machine gun (not installed) ● Munition : 230 rounds ready; 1610 in reserve. MAX SPEED Smoke-laying equipment : 6 smoke grenade launchers mounted on the turret ● road 61.2 km/h Power pack : ● water 6.3 km/h ● Engine : GM Detroit Diesel 6V53 Turbo engine model 5063-5396 V-type watercooled engine ACCELERATION producing 265 hp at 2800 rpm 0 to 32 km/h in 10 sec ● Transmission : Allison TX100-1A transmission SUSPENSION ● Power/Weight Ratio : 19.29 hp/ton high strength torsion bars Max speed : road 61.2 km/h / water 6.3 km/h Acceleration : 0 to 32 km/h in 10 sec FUEL CAPACITY Suspension : High strength torsion bars 416 litres - range : 490 km Fuel capacity : 416 litres - range : 490 km Steering : mechanically controlled differential and pivot STEERING steering mechanically controlled differential and pivot steering Current operators : Bahrein 75, Chile (+169), Egypt (+1000), Jordan (500), Lebanon (16), Morocco (110), Malaysia (322), Philippines (71), Turkey EWS-ENCLOSED WEAPON STATION (+2000), United Arab Emirates (133) ● 25mm KBA-B02 cannon ● 7.26x51mm Nato machine gun FLANDERS TECHNICAL SUPPLY NV - SYLLAB SA J.
  • Army Transformation and Modernization: Overview and Issues for Congress

    Army Transformation and Modernization: Overview and Issues for Congress

    Order Code RS20787 Updated March 11, 2004 CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web Army Transformation and Modernization: Overview and Issues for Congress nae redacted Specialist in National Defense Foreign Affairs, Defense, and Trade Division Summary The U.S. Army continues an ambitious program intended to transform itself into a strategically responsive force dominant in all types of ground operations. As planned, its Future Force will eventually meld all ongoing initiatives into a force based on a high- tech Future Combat System (FCS). Its Current Force is beginning to provide a new combat capability, based on current-technology armored vehicles, for the mid-intensity combat operations that seem prevalent in today’s world. Its current “legacy force” of existing systems is being modernized and maintained to ensure effective light and heavy force capabilities until the Future Force is realized. This short report briefly describes the program and discusses issues of feasibility, viability, and affordability of potential interest to Congress. It will be updated as events warrant. Background Modernization is not a new issue or objective for U.S. military forces, but it has taken on new urgency because of: the post-Cold War downsizing and procurement reductions, the new global environment and unexpected requirements, and the promise of a “revolution in military affairs” (RMA) suggested by rapid developments in computers, communications, and guidance systems. The last notable surge in modernization culminated during the “Reagan build-up” of the 1980's. Weapons and doctrines developed and fielded in that era made fundamental contributions to United States successes in the Cold War, the Gulf War, and Kosovo.
  • Mg 34 and Mg 42 Machine Guns

    Mg 34 and Mg 42 Machine Guns

    MG 34 AND MG 42 MACHINE GUNS CHRIS MC NAB © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com MG 34 AND MG 42 MACHINE GUNS CHRIS McNAB Series Editor Martin Pegler © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 4 DEVELOPMENT 8 The ‘universal’ machine gun USE 27 Flexible firepower IMPACT 62 ‘Hitler’s buzzsaw’ CONCLUSION 74 GLOSSARY 77 BIBLIOGRAPHY & FURTHER READING 78 INDEX 80 © Osprey Publishing • www.ospreypublishing.com INTRODUCTION Although in war all enemy weapons are potential sources of fear, some seem to have a deeper grip on the imagination than others. The AK-47, for example, is actually no more lethal than most other small arms in its class, but popular notoriety and Hollywood representations tend to credit it with superior power and lethality. Similarly, the bayonet actually killed relatively few men in World War I, but the sheer thought of an enraged foe bearing down on you with more than 30cm of sharpened steel was the stuff of nightmares to both sides. In some cases, however, fear has been perfectly justified. During both world wars, for example, artillery caused between 59 and 80 per cent of all casualties (depending on your source), and hence took a justifiable top slot in surveys of most feared tools of violence. The subjects of this book – the MG 34 and MG 42, plus derivatives – are interesting case studies within the scale of soldiers’ fears. Regarding the latter weapon, a US wartime information movie once declared that the gun’s ‘bark was worse than its bite’, no doubt a well-intentioned comment intended to reduce mounting concern among US troops about the firepower of this astonishing gun.
  • Military Vehicle Options Arising from the Barrel Type Piston Engine

    Military Vehicle Options Arising from the Barrel Type Piston Engine

    Journal of Power Technologies 101 (1) (2021) 22–33 Military vehicle options arising from the barrel type piston engine Pawe l Mazuro1 and Cezary Chmielewski1,B 1Warsaw University of Technology B [email protected] Abstract in terms of efficiency, meaning that piston engines can deliver enhanced range and endurance. This is benefi- The article reviews knowledge about requirements for engines in cial in missions requiring a stopover for refueling and state-of-the-art unmanned aerial vehicles and tanks. Analysis of particularly useful for unmanned supply, observation design and operational parameters was carried out on selected and maritime missions. turboshaft and piston engines generating power in the range of 500 - 1500 kW (0.5 - 1.5 MW). The data was compared In contrast, land combat vehicles have significantly with the performance of innovative, barrel type piston engines, different drive unit requirements. High mobility en- which are likely to become an alternative drive solution in the ables the vehicle to rapidly change location after de- target vehicle groups. tection. To this end, the torque curve as a function of the rotational speed of the shaft is of decisive im- portance. Keywords: military UAV, tanks, turboshaft engines, piston engines, barrel type piston engines The complexity of tank engines adds an additional layer of requirements, impacting the reliability and durability of the power unit, and they come with re- 1 Introduction lated manufacturing and operating costs. In military land vehicles, the engine should be as small This article consolidates knowledge on options and as possible; the space saved can be used for other capabilities arising from use of the barrel type piston purposes.
  • Brazilian Tanks British Tanks Canadian Tanks Chinese Tanks

    Brazilian Tanks British Tanks Canadian Tanks Chinese Tanks

    Tanks TANKS Brazilian Tanks British Tanks Canadian Tanks Chinese Tanks Croatian Tanks Czech Tanks Egyptian Tanks French Tanks German Tanks Indian Tanks Iranian Tanks Iraqi Tanks Israeli Tanks Italian Tanks Japanese Tanks Jordanian Tanks North Korean Tanks Pakistani Tanks Polish Tanks Romanian Tanks Russian Tanks Slovakian Tanks South African Tanks South Korean Tanks Spanish Tanks Swedish Tanks Swiss Tanks Ukrainian Tanks US Tanks file:///E/My%20Webs/tanks/tanks_2.html[3/22/2020 3:58:21 PM] Tanks Yugoslavian Tanks file:///E/My%20Webs/tanks/tanks_2.html[3/22/2020 3:58:21 PM] Brazilian Tanks EE-T1 Osorio Notes: In 1982, Engesa began the development of the EE-T1 main battle tank, and by 1985, it was ready for the world marketplace. The Engesa EE-T1 Osorio was a surprising development for Brazil – a tank that, while not in the class of the latest tanks of the time, one that was far above the league of the typical third-world offerings. In design, it was similar to many tanks of the time; this was not surprising, since Engesa had a lot of help from West German, British and French armor experts. The EE-T1 was very promising – an excellent design that several countries were very interested in. The Saudis in particular went as far as to place a pre- order of 318 for the Osorio. That deal, however, was essentially killed when the Saudis saw the incredible performance of the M-1 Abrams and the British Challenger, and they literally cancelled the Osorio order at the last moment. This resulted in the cancellation of demonstrations to other countries, the demise of Engesa, and with it a promising medium tank.
  • The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare

    The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare

    No. 109 JUNE 2016 The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare Michael B. Kim The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare by Michael B. Kim The Institute of Land Warfare ASSOCIATION OF THE UNITED STATES ARMY AN INSTITUTE OF LAND WARFARE PAPER The purpose of the Institute of Land Warfare is to extend the educational work of AUSA by sponsoring scholarly publications, to include books, monographs and essays on key defense issues, as well as workshops and symposia. A work selected for publication as a Land Warfare Paper represents research by the author which, in the opinion of ILW’s editorial board, will contribute to a better understanding of a particular defense or national security issue. Publication as an Institute of Land Warfare Paper does not indicate that the Association of the United States Army agrees with everything in the paper but does suggest that the Association believes the paper will stimulate the thinking of AUSA members and others concerned about important defense issues. LAND WARFARE PAPER No. 109, June 2016 The Uncertain Role of the Tank in Modern War: Lessons from the Israeli Experience in Hybrid Warfare by Michael B. Kim Major Michael B. Kim currently serves as the Squadron Executive Officer for the 8th Squadron, 1st Cavalry Regiment, 2d Stryker Brigade Combat Team, 2d Infantry Division. Prior to his current position, he graduated from the Command and General Staff College (CGSC), Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, and completed the Art of War Scholars Program.
  • Iran's Foreign and Defense Policies

    Iran's Foreign and Defense Policies

    Iran’s Foreign and Defense Policies name redacted Specialist in Middle Eastern Affairs December 21, 2016 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov R44017 Iran’s Foreign and Defense Policies Summary Iran’s national security policy is the product of many, and sometimes competing, factors: the ideology of Iran’s Islamic revolution; Iranian leadership’s perception of threats to the regime and to the country; long-standing Iranian national interests; and the interaction of the Iranian regime’s various factions and constituencies. Some experts assert that the goal of Iran’s national security strategy is to overturn a power structure in the Middle East that Iran asserts favors the United States and its allies Israel, Saudi Arabia, and other Sunni Muslim Arab regimes. Iran characterizes its support for Shiite and other Islamist movements as support for the “oppressed” and asserts that Saudi Arabia, in particular, is instigating sectarian tensions and trying to exclude Iran from regional affairs. Others interpret Iran as primarily attempting to protect itself from U.S. or other efforts to invade or intimidate it or to change its regime. Its strategy might, alternatively or additionally, represent an attempt to enhance Iran’s international prestige or restore a sense of “greatness” reminiscent of the ancient Persian empires. From 2010 until 2016, Iran’s foreign policy also focused on attempting to mitigate the effects of international sanctions on Iran. Iran employs a number of different tools in pursuing its national security policy. Some Iranian policy tools are common to most countries: traditional diplomacy and the public promotion of Iran’s values and interests.
  • The Market for Light Tracked Vehicles

    The Market for Light Tracked Vehicles

    The Market for Light Tracked Vehicles Product Code #F651 A Special Focused Market Segment Analysis by: Military Vehicles Forecast Analysis 2 The Market for Light Tracked Vehicles 2010 - 2019 Table of Contents Table of Contents .....................................................................................................................................................1 Executive Summary .................................................................................................................................................2 Introduction................................................................................................................................................................3 Trends..........................................................................................................................................................................5 Competitive Environment.......................................................................................................................................6 Market Statistics .......................................................................................................................................................8 Table 1 - The Market for Light Tracked Vehicles Unit Production by Headquarters/Company/Program 2010 - 2019.......................................................11 Table 2 - The Market for Light Tracked Vehicles Value Statistics by Headquarters/Company/Program 2010 - 2019 .......................................................15 Figure