DOCSLIB.ORG

Field Artillery School

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Field Artillery School HISTORY of the FIELD ARTILLERY SCHOOL 1979 FORT SILL, OKL~HOMA Pro~erty of ~.S. Army INDEX Para Page SECTION I. MISSION 1-1 Gene'ra1 1 1~1 SECTION II. KEY PERSONNEL 2-1 SECTION III. PROGRAMS OF INSTRUCTION 3-1 General 1 3-1 Accomplishments & Items of Interest 2 3-4 SECTION 'rV. INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY 4-1 CEO 1 4-1 CFO 2 4-1 GO 3 4-3 SECTION V. TRAINING DEVELOPMENTS 5-1 OTD 1 5-1 DCRDT 2 5-3 TCAD 3 5-10 SECTION VI. NEW DOCTRINE/CONCEPTS 6-1 CEO' 1 6-1 CFD 2 6-1 .DCD 3 6-2 GO 4 6-12 TCAD 5 6-12 DCRDT . 6 6-12 SECTION VII. TRAINING LITERATURE 7-1 .CFO 1 7-1 DTD 2 7-1 GO' 3 7-3 WD 4 7-4 TCAO 5 7-4 SECTION VIII. MODIFICATION, DEVELOPMENT, TEST & 8-1 ACQUISITION OF EQUIPMENT CFD 1 8-1 DCD 2 8-2 GO 3 8-2 DCRDT 4 8-3 TCAD 5 8-5 SECTION IX. TRADOC SYSTEMS MANAGERS . 9-1 . TSM, TACFlRE 1 9-1 TSM, RPV 2 9-1 TSM, MLRS 3 9-2 .TSM, COPPERHEAD 4 9-3 TSM, FlREFINDER 5 9-3 TSM, PERSHING II 6 9-4 TSM, CANNON 7 9-5 i ii SECTION I. MISSION GENERAL. TllP mission of the US Army Field Artillery School is to provide the means 'i~)r-Activ('Army and Reserv(' Components to achieve required levels of individual and ('oll('ctiv('trainingthrough n'sid('nt and ('xtension training systt'l1\sandmaterials; to cI('v('lopanel('valual('cloctrilH'and organizalioll; lo llel('nnilH'rt'quin'Il1('nlsalHI priot"i- tit.ssfor the development of combat materiel. These missions ('nlail tht' foll"owing functions: a. Prepare, conduct, and administer resident and nonresident courses of instruction as directed. b. Provide training support of active Army Units, Army National Guard, Army Reserve, Reserve Officer Training Corps, and US Marine Corps Reserve elements as directed. c. Participate in the review of doctrine, organization, and equipment for which training responsibility has been~assigned, including the development of training plans to support new items of materiel, new organizations, or new tactical and technical concepts. d. Review and evaluate new or revised doctrine, tactics, and techniques prepared by other Army agencies or other services, as appropriate . e. Develop, distribute, review, and update pertinent instructional packets for other schools in those areas in which USAFAS is designated the proponent school.' f. Prepare and maintain long-range emergency mobilization plans. g. Prepare and review Army-wide training literature as prescribed in AR 310-3. ,h. Promote interservice and foreign understanding of US Army doctrine, tactics, techniques, organization, and operations by providing instruction and training to members of other arms and services of US Armed Forces and to students from foreign countries, and by participating in standardization programs: i~ Serve as the user proponent throughout the life cycle of field artill~ry system materiel. Serve as spokesman for the field artillery in qualitative interpre- tations and definitions in support of the materiel development community. j. Develop technical data and manufacture all graphical firing'items required' by the services and provide these items to US Army Materiel Development and Readiness Command (DARCOM) .for issue to troops world-wide. k. Provide a repository of publications (library) for the use of students, staff, and faculty in support of other mission requirements. 1. Serve as the "home" of the field artillery. m. Serve through the Commandant as the principal field artillery advisor to the Commander, TRADOC. W 2039 1-1 SECT I ON I I. KEY I'I':HSONNEL COMMANDANT -MG Jack N. Merritt remained as Commandant. ASSISTANT COMMANDANT . BG Edward A. Dinges remained as Assistant Commandant. DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMANDANT COL James P. Holley remained as Deputy Assistant Commandant. DIRECTOR OF SUPPORT (SECRETARY) COL John J. Ridgway, Jr. remained as Secretary. DIRECTOR, COMMUNICATIONSELECTRONICS DEPARTMENT (CED) COL Don E. Karr assigned 19 Jun 79 vice COL James H ..Carney, Jr. DIRECTOR, COUNTERFIRE DEPARTMENT'(CFD) COL Kenneth Kleypas assigned 26 Nov 79 vice COL Jere L. Hickman DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF COMBAT DEVELOPMENTS (DEC) COL Anthony G. Pokorny assigned 18 May 79 vice COL (P) James E. Drummond. DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF COURSE DEVELOPMENT AND TFAINING (DCRDT) COL. Thomas J. P. Jones remained as Director. DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF EVALUATION (DOE) ,COL Roland B. Rogers assigned 5 Jun 79 vice COL Chester F. Campbell. DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF TRAINING DEVELOPMENT (DTD) COL George M. Krausz assigned 27 Aug 79 vice LTC Gunnar C. Carlson, Jr., who was serving as Acting Director. DIRECTOR, GUNNERY DEPARTMENT (GO) COL James W. Wurman remained as Director. DIRECTOR, TACTICS/COMBINED ARMS DEPARTMENT (TCAD) COL John E. Donohu~ remained as Director. DIRECTOR, WEAPONS DEPARTMENT (WD) COL Samuel J. Ady assigned 6 Feb 79 vice COL Jack L. Van Pool. COMMANDER, USAFAS BRIGADE , COLWilliam II. Rogers assigned 30 Mar 79 vice COL Robert E. Hunter. COMMANDER, STAFF AND FACULTY BATTALION MAJ Graham N. Babb assigned 5 Apr 79 vice LTC Isaac F. Bonifay. COMMANDER, OFFICER STUDENT BATTALION LTC Robert E. Lax assigned 23 Jul 79 vice LTC Charles W. Hendrickson. TRADOC SYSTEM MANAGER, TACFlRE COL Hardy R. Stone III remained. 2-1 TRADOC SYSTEM MANAGER, REMOTELY PILOTED VEHICLE (RPV) COL Sherwin Arculis remained. TRAnOC SYSTEM MANAGER, GENERAL SUPPORT ROCKET SYSTEM (GSRS) COL Charles J. Buel remained. TRAnOC SYSTEM MANAGER, COPPERHEAD COL William F. Fitzpatrick assigned 1 Jun 79 vice COL Adalbert E. Toepel. TRADOC SYSTEM MANAGER, FIREFINDER COL Richard N. Griffin remained. TRADOC SYSTEM MANAGER, PERSHING II COL William R. Owel remained. TRADOe SYSTEM MANAGER, CANNON eOL James A. Quinlan remained. TRADoe SYSTEMS MANAGER, CLOSE SUPPORT WEAPONS SYSTEM eOL Kenneth A. Kleypas assigned 2 Aug 79. 2-2 SECTION III. PROGRAMS OF INSTRUCTION 1. GENERAL. On 30 Nov 78, TRADOC discontinued use of the term Course of Instruction' (COI) and directed use of the term Program of Instruction (POI). USAFAS programed 15,458 students to attend 693 classes in 47 courses during FY 79. The initial input was 13,140 students. In FY 79, 11,425 students were available for graduation, and.9,984 graduated. a. Program Deletions. The following courses were deleted in 1979: (1) Field Artillery Cannon Battery Officer, 2E-13A. (2) Tactical Electronic Equipment Maintenance NCO Advanced, 1-31~C42B. (3) Tactical Communications Systems Operator/Mechanic Course, BTC, 101-31V30. (4) Nuclear and Chemical Target Analysis. Reserve Component, 2E-ASI5HB. (5) Honest John Missile Crewman, 042-15F10. b. Program Additions. The following courses were added during the same time frame: (1) Field Artillery Cannon Battery Officer, 2E-13E. (2) Tactical Communications Chief NCO Advanced, 101-31V40. (3)' Nuclear and Chemical Target Analysis- Nonresident/Resident, 2E-ASI5HB. (4) Lance Missile Mechanic, 043-F4. (5) Tactical Communications Chief, BTC, 101-31V30 .. c. Nuclear and Chemical Target Analysis Course- Nonresident/Resident. The letter of transmittal for the establishment of the NCTAC-NR/R was submitted on 9 Nov 78. This course superseded the NCTA-CRC (Reserve Component); its target population encompasses not only the National Guard and Reserves but also active duty officers. This course is quite similar to the self-paced NCTAC resident course with the excep- tion of the training locations. NCTAC/ NRR consists of two phases: Phase I is an ACCP which consists of 5 subcourses with an equivalent of 85 credit hours •. Phase II is a self-paced I-week resident course at Fort Sill exposing the student to classified data and procedures. TRADOC approval was granted on 18 Jun 79. d. Field Artillery Officer Advanced Course. (1) GO/NO GO. GO/NO GO became firmly established. Student' acceptance of the system has continued to vary from one extreme to the other. The Honors Program itself has turned out to be one of the more palatable systems of those employed by the various service schools. Several schools have adopted the USAFAS honors program and adapted it to their particular branch. (2) Validation Examinations. Validation examinations have continued to be employed. However, decreasing numbers of students have attempte~ to validate the 3-1 ~aterial. The prevalent rationale for not attempting the validation was that they l wanted to gain the most possible information. Another possible reason is the declin- ing experience level of the officers entering the course. Validation examinations have all been made optional. (3) Enrichment Program. A new enrichment program option was added in 1979. FAOAC students were assigned to FAOBC and FACBOC sections to provide guidance on future Army life. The program has met with moderate success. e. Operations/Intelligence Course. The US Army Operations/Intelligence NCO/Specialist Course, for which USAFAS was project manager, was fielded on 22.May 78; One month prior to that date, pUblici~y flyers were sent to all combat units in the J National Guard, Army Reserve, and Actlve Army that had been identified by the schools involved with the production. Kinton Research has been contracted for a I-year studY of the course and its administration. I f. Lance Missile ~fechanic. The Lance Missile Mechanic Course was conducted on a ',tempo'raryapproval basis for 50 students in 1978. TRADOC approved the course in , tlar 79~ However, approval of the MACRIT is required before true training requirementS will be known. g. Saudi Arabian National Guard Field Artillery Officer Basic Course (SANGFAOBC). The SANG maintains the security of the Royal Family and provides internal security for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. A 1973 memorandum of understandin (MOU) committed the governments of the United States and Saudi Arabia to a moderniza- tion program for the SANG. The program calls for English language training at , Lackland Air Force Base to be followed by training at appropriate TRADOC service schools.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Strategic Plan for the Crusader Howitzer
    Calhoun: The NPS Institutional Archive Theses and Dissertations Thesis Collection 2001-12 A strategic plan for the Crusader Howitzer. Lockard, William M. http://hdl.handle.net/10945/9707 NAVAL POSTGRADUATE SCHOOL Monterey, California THESIS A STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THE CRUSADER HOWITZER by William M. Lockard December 2001 Thesis Advisor: David Matthews Associate Advisor: Keith Snider 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 December 2001 Master’s Thesis 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE: Title (Mix case letters) 5. FUNDING NUMBERS A Strategic Plan for the Crusader Howitzer 6. AUTHOR(S) William M. Lockard 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING Naval Postgraduate School ORGANIZATION REPORT Monterey, CA 93943-5000 NUMBER 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.
    [Show full text]
  • JFQ 31 JFQ▼ FORUM Sponds to Aggravated Peacekeeping in Joint Pub 3–0
    0203 C2 & Pgs 1-3 3/3/04 9:07 AM Page ii The greatest lesson of this war has been the extent to which air, land, and sea operations can and must be coordinated by joint planning and unified command. —General Henry H. (“Hap”) Arnold Report to the Secretary of War Cover 2 0203 C2 & Pgs 1-3 3/27/04 7:18 AM Page iii JFQ Page 1—no folio 0203 C2 & Pgs 1-3 3/3/04 9:07 AM Page 2 CONTENTS A Word from the Chairman 4 by John M. Shalikashvili In This Issue 6 by the Editor-in-Chief Living Jointness 7 by William A. Owens Taking Stock of the New Joint Age 15 by Ike Skelton JFQ Assessing the Bottom-Up Review 22 by Andrew F. Krepinevich, Jr. JOINT FORCE QUARTERLY Living Jointness JFQ FORUM Bottom-Up Review Standing Up JFQ Joint Education Coalitions Theater Missle Vietnam Defense as Military History Standing Up Coalitions Atkinson‘s Crusade Defense Transportation 25 The Whats and Whys of Coalitions 26 by Anne M. Dixon 94 W93inter Implications for U.N. Peacekeeping A PROFESSIONAL MILITARY JOURNAL 29 by John O.B. Sewall PHOTO CREDITS The cover features an Abrams main battle tank at National Training Center (Military The Cutting Edge of Unified Actions Photography/Greg Stewart). Insets: [top left] 34 by Thomas C. Linn Operation Desert Storm coalition officers reviewing forces in Kuwait City (DOD), [bottom left] infantrymen fording a stream in Vietnam Preparing Future Coalition Commanders (DOD), [top right] students at the Armed Forces Staff College (DOD), and [bottom right] a test 40 by Terry J.
    [Show full text]
  • An Investigation of Aiming Point Strategies for Field Artillery Against Area Targets a T H E S I S Presented to T H E F a C
    AN INVESTIGATION OF AIMING POINT STRATEGIES FOR FIELD ARTILLERY AGAINST AREA TARGETS A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE DIVISION OF GRADUATE STUDIES By LAWRENCE CARL PETERSEN IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE MASTER OF SCIENCE IN OPERATIONS RESEARCH GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY JUNE, 1978 INVESTIGATION OF AIMING POINT STRATEGIES FOR FIELD ARTILLERY AGAINST AREA TARGETS Approved: Dougl&i C Montgome&fy, Chairman Leslie G. Callahan ' \ r-—: —' rrv[^rpvyvrm —~ Harrison M. Wadsworth Date approved by Chairman ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my appreciation to Dr. Douglas C. Montgomery who served as my advisor and provided much assistance and guidance throughout this research. I am also grateful to the other members of the reading committee, Dr. Leslie G. Callahan and Dr. Harrison M. Wadsworth. Their suggestions and observations have greatly improved this thesis. I wish to thank Mr. Keith Myers and the U.S. Army Materiel Systems Analysis Activity for sponsoring the research; as well as Mr. Lonnie Minton of the Material Development Team, USAFAS, Fort Sill; Captain Allen Young of the TACFIRE Branch, Department of Combat Development, USAFAS, Fort Sill; and Mr. Merlyn Smith, BCS Technical Consultant for the Norden Division of United Technologies, for their valuable assistance. My most special thanks go to my wife, Barbara, for her patience, encouragement, and understanding during this research. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ii LIST OF TABLES v LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS vi SUMMARY viii Chapter I. INTRODUCTION 1 Description of the Problem Objective of the Research Scope of the Research II. LITERATURE REVIEW 6 The Coverage Problems Models III.
    [Show full text]
  • EXPORTS of Military Goods
    2019 EXPORTS of Military Goods www.exportcontrols.gc.ca - 0 - Table of Contents 1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................................... - 3 - Summary of Key Data ........................................................................................................................... - 4 - 2. Canada’s Policy on the Export and Brokering of Military Items ........................................................... - 6 - Military Goods and Technology – “Groups 2 and 9” ............................................................................ - 7 - Export and Brokering Permit Assessment Process ............................................................................... - 8 - Brokering Controls ................................................................................................................................ - 9 - Notes on the Export of Firearms ........................................................................................................ - 10 - International Cooperation on Military Trade ..................................................................................... - 11 - The Canadian Defence, Security and Aerospace Industry………………………………………………………………- 11 - 3. Developments in 2019 ....................................................................................................................... - 11 - Coming into Force of Amendments to the Export and Import Permits Act ......................................
    [Show full text]
  • Tm 9-3305 Technical Manual Principles of Artillery
    TM 9-3305 TECHNICAL MANUAL PRINCIPLES OF ARTILLERY WEAPONS HEADQUARTERS, DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY 4 MAY 1981 *TM 9-3305 Technical Manual HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF THE ARMY No. 9-3305 Washington, DC, 4 May 1981 PRINCIPLES OF ARTILLERY WEAPONS REPORTING ERRORS AND RECOMMENDING IMPROVEMENTS You can help improve this manual. If you find any mistakes or if you know of a way to improve the procedures, please let us know. Mail your letter, DA Form 2028 (Recommended Changes to Publications and Blank Forms), or DA Form 2028-2, located in the back of this manual, direct to: Commander, US Army Armament Materiel Readiness Command, ATTN: DRSAR-MAS, Rock Island, IL 61299. A reply will be furnished to you. Para Page PART ONE. GENERAL CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................ 1-1 1-1 2. HISTORY OF DEVELOPMENT Section I. General ....................................................................................................................... 2-1 2-1 II. Development of United States Cannon Artillery......................................................... 2-8 2-5 III. Development of Rockets and Guided Missiles ......................................................... 2-11 2-21 CHAPTER 3. CLASSIFICATION OF CURRENT FIELD ARTILLERY WEAPONS Section I. General ....................................................................................................................... 3-1 3-1 II. Current Field Artillery Weapons ................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Additional Protocols 40 Years Later: New Conflicts, New Actors, New Perspectives”
    40th Round Table on Current Issues of International Humanitarian Law “The Additional Protocols 40 Years Later: New Conflicts, New Actors, New Perspectives” Sanremo, 7-9 September 2017 Col. (ret.) Noam Neuman, former Head, International Law Department, Military Advocate General’s Corps, Israel Defence Forces Considering the Principle of Precautions Introduction I would like to thank the organizers of the conference for inviting me to speak. It is a great honor and privilege to be here. Before I start, I would like to give the usual caveat - I am here in my personal capacity. The opinions and ideas in my presentation do not necessarily represent the views of the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) or the Government of Israel. My point of reference for the discussion regarding precautionary duties under customary international law is the language of Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions (API). While it is widely accepted that custom mandates taking certain precautions in attack, it is important to keep in mind that not all states are parties to API (such as Israel and the US) and that there are some disagreements regarding the exact scope, and phrasing, of the customary rule in comparison to Article 57 of API. Nevertheless, API is a useful point of reference, considering the fact that so many militaries are bound by it. I will therefore use it as a point of reference during my presentation. To start, we should recall that in API there are two different obligations with regard to precautions. The first one, "precautions in attacks", refers to "active precautions" that the attacking party needs to take in the conduct of its military operations.
    [Show full text]
  • Report on the Uses of Foreign Military Financing, International Military
    Report on the Uses of Foreign Military Financing, International Military Education and Training, and Peacekeeping Operations Funds (Foreign Operations Appropriations Act, FY 2006, Section 584) FT 2006 FOREIGN MILITARY FINANCING CUMULATIVE QUARTERLY REPORT - June 30,2014 ($ in thousands) OBLIGATIONS AS OF EXPENDITURES AS OF COUNTRY June 30,2014____________ June 30,2014_______ USE/PURPOSE OF FUNDS AFRICA Djibouti 3.960 3,960 Training ammunition; technical assistance construction; blanket order training; construction equipment; camouflage clothing; modular tent system. Ethiopia 1.980 1.980 Aircraft parts/accessories; VHF radios/equipment. Ghana 495 495 M16A4 spare parts, components, accessories, and maintenance support items w/ magazines Liberia 1.980 1.980 Coast Guard technical services. Nigeria 990 990 Modeling and simulation center; C-130 technical coordination program; spare parts for buoy tenders, blanket order training, and C-130H engine. 495 495 Weapons spares; blanket order training; vehicles; JANUS system; body armor; packing, crating, and handling. Africa Coastal/Border Security 3.960 3,200 Benin (S200K Supply Support for 27’ Defender Boats); Burundi (S130K Foreign Aircraft Spares); Ghana (S150K Supply Support for Balsam Class Buoy); Nigeria Program ($75K Supply Support); Sao Tome (S125K Boat Spares for Sea Turtle Conservation); Senegal (S150K Patrol Craft Spares); Mozambique (S520K communication equipment;inflatable boat); Comoros (S470K fast response boat); Mauritius ($270Kfast patrol boats); Cape Verde ($200K boat spares); Cameroon
    [Show full text]
  • M60 M2 Blyskawica
    Machine guns/1 Machine guns/2 M60 M2 Machine gun Heavy machine gun Can be used both offensive and defensive Nicknamed Ma Deuce by troops Usually operated by more than one soldier Designed by John Browning When tested in the field, the M60 was fairly effective Country USA Country USA Date 1900 Date 1932 Length (mm) 10 Length (mm) 1650 Weight (kg) 10 Weight (kg) 38 Speed (m/s) 85 Speed (m/s) 930 Cannon caliber (mm) 7,62 Cannon caliber (mm) 12,7 Machine guns/3 Machine guns/4 Blyskawica MP5 Submachine gun Submachine gun Probably the only weapon designed and mass The MP5s accuracy, reliability, and wide range of produced covertly in occupied Europe accessories and variants have made it the submachine gun of choice for law enforcement agencies worldwide. Country Poland Country Germany Date 1943 Date 1966 Length (mm) 730 Length (mm) 680 Weight (kg) 3,22 Weight (kg) 2,54 Speed (m/s) 400 Speed (m/s) 270 Cannon caliber (mm) 9 Cannon caliber (mm) 9 Machine guns/5 Machine guns/6 Sten Mark II AA-52 Service sub-machine gun Vehicle-mounted machine gun The name STEN is an acronym, deriving from One of the first French produced guns of the the names of the weapons chief designers post World War II era Over 4 million Stens would be made in the 1940s Country UK Country France Date 1941 Date 1960 Length (mm) 760 Length (mm) 1080 Weight (kg) 3,18 Weight (kg) 9,75 Speed (m/s) 365 Speed (m/s) 830 Cannon caliber (mm) 9 Cannon caliber (mm) 7,5 Machine guns/7 Guns/1 PM63-Rak Desert Eagle Sub-machine gun Semi-automatic, gas-operated pistol War service : Sino-Vietnamese
    [Show full text]
  • The Army's Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV): Background And
    The Army’s Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV): Background and Issues for Congress Updated July 10, 2020 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R43240 The Army’s Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV): Background and Issues for Congress Summary The Armored Multi-Purpose Vehicle (AMPV) is the Army’s replacement for the Vietnam-era M- 113 personnel carriers, which are still in service in a variety of support capacities in Armored Brigade Combat Teams (ABCTs). While M-113s no longer serve as infantry fighting vehicles, five variants of the M-113 are used as command and control vehicles, general purpose vehicles, mortar carriers, and medical treatment and evacuation vehicles. The AMPV is a nondevelopmental program (candidate vehicles would be either existing vehicles or modified existing vehicles—not vehicles that are specially designed and not currently in service). Some suggest a nondevelopmental vehicle might make it easier for the Army to eventually field this system to the force, as most of the Army’s past developmental programs, such as the Ground Combat Vehicle (GCV), the Future Combat System (FCS), the Crusader self- propelled artillery system, and the Comanche helicopter, were cancelled before they could be fully developed and fielded. On November 26, 2013, the Army issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) for the AMPV. This RFP stipulated the Army planned to award a five-year Engineering and Manufacturing Development (EMD) contract in May 2014 worth $458 million to a single contractor for 29 prototypes. While the March 2013 RFP established an Average Unit Manufacturing Cost Ceiling for each AMPV at $1.8 million, this was rescinded to permit vendors greater flexibility.
    [Show full text]
  • The Army's Future Combat Systems Program
    CBO TESTIMONY Statement of J. Michael Gilmore Assistant Director The Army’s Future Combat Systems Program before the Subcommittee on Tactical Air and Land Forces Committee on Armed Services U.S. House of Representatives April 4, 2006 This document is embargoed until it is delivered at 2 p.m. (EDT) on Tuesday, April 4, 2006. The contents may not be published, transmitted, or otherwise communicated by any print, broadcast, or electronic media before that time. CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE SECOND AND D STREETS, S.W. WASHINGTON, D.C. 20515 Mr. Chairman, Congressman Abercrombie, and Members of the Subcommittee, I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to discuss the Army’s Future Combat Systems (FCS) program and possible alternative approaches to moderniz- ing the Army’s forces. My statement is based on a forthcoming Congressional Budget Office (CBO) study that was requested by Mr. Abercrombie. CBO’s analysis of the FCS program and potential alternatives supports the follow- ing observations: B The FCS program must surmount substantial technical and funding challenges if it is to develop and initially field all of the individual FCS components as cur- rently scheduled—by December 2014. B According to the Army’s estimates, total annual costs to purchase the various FCS components could approach $10 billion.1 However, if such costs grew as those of similar programs have in the past, annual costs could reach $16 billion. B Moreover, if the Army fields FCS vehicles according to its current schedule, more than $2 billion of additional funding could be needed annually from 2010 through 2016—with lesser amounts required thereafter—to maintain and up- grade the Army’s inventory of aging ground combat systems.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Ground Forces and the Conventional Balance in Europe
    CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE JUNE 1988 U.S. Ground Forces and the Conventional Balance in Europe CBO STUDY U.S. GROUND FORCES AND THE CONVENTIONAL BALANCE IN EUROPE The Congress of the United States Congressional Budget Office For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, DC 20402 85-887 - 88 - 1 : QL 3 NOTES Unless otherwise indicated, all years referred to in this report are fiscal years. Unless otherwise indicated, all dollar amounts reflect budget authority in constant fiscal year 1989 dollars. Details in the text, tables, and figures of this report may not add to totals because of rounding. PREFACE The conventional balance in Europe between the forces of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization and the Warsaw Pact has been the topic of widespread debate since the two alliances were formed shortly after World War n. The recent agreement between the United States and the Soviet Union to eliminate the entire class of intermediate-range nuclear weapons has focused attention on the relative standing of the conventional forces that remain in Europe. Many suggestions have been made in recent years as to how to improve NATO's standing in relation to the Warsaw Pact, including numerous proposals for in- creasing the capability of NATO's ground forces. Yet the Congress, faced with budgetary constraints, must consider the cost of those op- tions as well as their benefits. This study by the Congressional Bud- get Office, performed at the request of the House Committee on Armed Services, first assesses the current standing of NATO relative to the Warsaw Pact, with emphasis on each alliance's ground forces.
    [Show full text]
  • The Soldier and the Industrial Base Chapter 11 Carbon Monoxide
    Carbon Monoxide Chapter 11 CARBON MONOXIDE TIMOTHY B. WEYANDT, M.D., M.P.H.* AND CHARLES DAVID RIDGELEY, Jr., M.D., M.S.† INTRODUCTION TYPICAL SOURCES OF EXPOSURE Steel Manufacturing Combustion Engine Exhaust Methylene Chloride Smoking MILITARY EXPOSURES World War I: Combat Mining Operations World War II: Tank Warfare The Modern Era: Armored Fighting Vehicles Military Aviation Household Heating PATHOPHYSIOLOGY OF EXPOSURE Carbon Monoxide’s Hemoglobin-Binding Affinity Carboxyhemoglobin and Oxyhemoglobin Dissociation HEALTH EFFECTS Autopsy Findings Signs and Symptoms of Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Staging of Signs and Symptoms Exposure and Muscular Exertion Central Nervous System Effects Circulatory Effects Chronic Effects DIAGNOSIS AND TREATMENT Clinical Diagnosis Treatment HEALTH STANDARDS Occupational Safety and Health Administration American Conference of Governmental Industrial Hygienists Committee on Toxicology Military Standards MEDICAL SURVEILLANCE SUMMARY *Director, Occupational Health Program, Pennsylvania State University, University Park, Pennsylvania 16802; Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army (ret); formerly, Medical Advisor for Clinical, Occupational, and Environmental Health; U.S. Army Biomedical Research and Development Laboratory, Fort Detrick, Maryland 21702-5010 †Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Army; Occupational Medicine Physician, Occupational and Environmental Medicine Division, U.S. Army Environmental Hygiene Agency, Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland 21010-5422 397 Occupational Health: The Soldier and the Industrial Base INTRODUCTION Carbon monoxide is a colorless, odorless, taste- Many of the effects of what we now recognize as less and nonirritating gas formed as a by-product in carbon monoxide poisoning were discussed in an- the incomplete combustion of carbonaceous materi- cient literature. During the Middle Ages, these effects als. Frequently, but not reliably, the presence of were sometimes considered to be the work of demons carbon monoxide is accompanied by the odor of un- and witches.
    [Show full text]