What We Learned From Afghanistan(Army Lessons Learned)

Army Times ^ | July 29, 2002 | By Sean D. Naylor, Times staff writer

[Fred Mertz]

Aren't you a little biased?

[connectthedots]

Aren't you a little biased?

I was a IN (Mech) platoon leader for one year and a REMF for my last three years on active duty. I have no ax to grind, but also think that nothing beats a tank when it comes to direct fire applications. Nothing raises the pucker factor like seeing a tank barrel pointed at you that has plenty of 'stand-off'. The fact that one may even be able to see the round coming at them must make it even worse.

[VaBthang4]

I'll say this...the Army Times makes a good point.

I think it is indespensible to have capable artillery with you. There has got to be a middle ground between Air Mafia types and land based Jedi knights.

I agree that the future is going to see more and more suppression coming from air platforms but the Infantry still needs to have decent artillery.

Given the gene pool of Army Command & Control coming out of the Clinton years...the battle at Anaconda was a raging success.

There seems to be a trend towards desiring the impossible. "No American losses in battle". Saying that the lack of artillery led to what losses we did incure is an honest enough statement but the spirit behind it implies that had we had artillery there...we wouldnt have lost anyone.[?]

I cannot tell if this is a "Arty pusher" piece or a legitimate gripe. Eitherway...it was Army incompetence at fault and not future DoD dogma towards Arty.

Just chiming in.

[TADSLOS]

I cannot tell if this is a "Arty pusher" piece or a legitimate gripe

It's neither, just 20/20 hindsight from the Center of Army's Lessons Learned (CALL). The 82nd deployed their artillery as part of their force package relieving the 101st. I just find it maddening that the powers that be didn't have the foresight to deploy land based artillery to begin with.

[VaBthang4]

You hit the nail on the head.

It comes down to the focus and intent of pilot training.

We [The Corps] puts our pilots through infantry school first in order to lay the foundation that they're sole purpose is what is taking place groundwise.

They learn how to orientate themselves toward terrain and enemy from an infantrymen's perspective.

So as a former Marine on the ground in an offensive or defensive combat scenario...given my choice...100 times out of 100 I select the Marine Corps piloted Cobras.

But...if I were riding on top of a transport and a grip of T-80's came rumbling over the horizon...I'd rather have the Army piloted Apaches.

Given the circumstances in Anaconda...I would have rather had the Cobras.

[colorado tanker]

IMHO this issue is caught up in Army restructuring. The ivory tower guys think armor and arty are things of the past and will be replaced by precision bombs, unmanned aircraft and computers.

A group within the Army, including, unfortunately, the Chief thinks they can preserve a role for the Army in a restructured force by giving up main battle tanks for armored cars and leaving most of the arty at home, which would give them a force transportable on C-130's and therefore be a "rapid reaction" force. Basically, they're willing to give up firepower for allegedly increased maneuverablity and mobility. Spec ops guys like Hackworth think this is great because they've been down on firepower since Vietnam and think spec ops and/or leg infantry is the answer to everything anyway.

The only thing I know for certain is that this world has not seen its last general or "world" war and it is highly unlikely the rest of the world will trade in their tanks and arty for all terrain bikes.

[VaBthang4]

I wonder if the decision was made based on an ability or lack thereof to get the Arty to the AO initially or if it was some dreamweaving, carpet grazing, 100 Star that made the call.

???

[TADSLOS]

The only thing I know for certain is that this world has not seen its last general or "world" war and it is highly unlikely the rest of the world will trade in their tanks and arty for all terrain bikes

Agreed. There's still plenty of Soviet era MBTs, IFVs and associated systems out there in large numbers and beligerant states with the industrial capacity to build more, requiring us to maintain heavy forces.

[VaBthang4]

"A group within the Army, including, unfortunately, the Chief thinks they can preserve a role for the Army in a restructured force by giving up main battle tanks for armored cars and leaving most of the arty at home"

That is the first I have heard of a desire to do this "Armywide".

I do think a sizable reaction division wouldnt hurt. But doing something like that Army wide would be completely rediculous.

[colorado tanker]

Two developments are occurring simultaneously. The first is to form several light brigades equiped with off the shelf armored car technology, already beginning production. I agree, forming a rapid reaction force while maintaining a heavy force for other threats is a good idea. I do have problems with implimentation because the initial design for the "armor" is a wheeled vehicle that won't stop a .50 cal. round but is still too heavy for a C-130.

The second development is long range planning for an Army of the "future," which at present envisions wheeled vehicles replacing the present tanks, ifv's and sp arty. The concept is the computerized battlefield of the future will be won by long range weapons (not yet designed) and airpower coordinated by computers, not needing old fashioned armored vehicles. This old dat is skeptical.

[bribriagain]

I hope not. I recently drove my brothers gator and it was a hoot!

[Paul Ross]

Ping. I'm afraid you might be right about SecDef.

[where's_the_Outrage?]

I suspect that artillery fire supporters at the staff level either didn't weigh in like they should have

As always, there's extraneous factors. In Ananoconda, inital planning was done by Special Forces, fire support to them is an AC-130.

I tried to get some Special troops (not army) to use convential forces as back-up using their morters. The reply was "F**K No, they'll Kill us."

Elitism has had an impact on Fire Support during this war. The US Special Forces has not exploited the advantages of conventual fire support.

I can't imagine MG Dick Cody, Div Cdr, 101st not raising hell over this issue.

I've met the man, even had him alone for 10 minutes. Hope he becomes CJCS, he's that good. And yes, 101st Arty was ready to go.

worn out Apache driver

I personnally don't don't know how the Apache Driver's during Ananconda could control the aircraft, there balls were so large, I can't see how they moved their legs (Screaming Eagle Appreciation).

: Too many chiefs at CENTCOM, not enough indians at the fight

As usual, the front line's don't have the staff's they need (can attest to 2 of the G-2s being reservists) while the higher HQ has more than enough (or maybe too much)

"Field sanitation is a lost art,"

Have to disagree. What's happened is that the Army has not trained in setting up base camps (Vietnam syndrom). Relearning old lessons.

[leadpenny]

Interesting stuff and thanks for the ping. What comes through loud and clear to me is; there must be some monumental battles going on inside and outside the Pentagon.

[chudogg]

Bump for later reading

[TADSLOS]

Hope he becomes CJCS, he's that good.

Agreed. One of the few warrior Generals around.

[river rat]

Please tell me that my Corps is NOT still flying Cobras!
My God, they were flying them in the 60's!

In our war, in our terrain - the Cobras diving straight toward the enemy was both the most terrifying and beautiful sight in the world. But, in Afghanistan - I have no idea of what would be the best way to deal with the bastards in the mountains. Off hand - I can't imagine why the Cobra or newer choppers could not deal with targets in tight canyons on on the slopes.

I've seen Jarhead pilots attack in any manner necessary to approach the target with least exposure to the grunts on the ground. I've seen them dive straight down, or up the river below tree tops - or even through the trees.

Not to make too much of a point --- but it was ONLY the Marine pilots that approached our smoke close enough to visually VERIFY the positions of the Marines and the positions of the targets we were asking them to hit..... We could actually see the whites of their teeth as they smiled their recognition of our "friendly" faces..... Loved the guys... they were crazy - but we loved them all.
Semper Fi

[Jimmy Valentine's brother]

I'll bet there some monumental battles going on in the puzzel palace. Some how we always fall into the trap of believing that air support can replace artillery support. Where it falls down is weather. If you look a major battle losses starting with WW II, and you'll see that over optimistic reliance on air support was a contributing factor.

And yes no one provides close air support like the Marines.