US Army Shifting to Division Level Maneuver

ProfMagoo(ret)

ProfMagoo(ret)

Homburg, Belicoso and Cane
Benefactor
Life Member
Multi-Factor Enabled
Joined
Dec 23, 2016
Messages
8,200
Location
Vance County NC
Rating - 100%
4   0   0
See: https://www.battleorder.org/post/waypoint-divisions
Note the internal link to a "White Paper" on the topic if concerned that the original link is just internet chatter.

tl;dr
Doctrine changing to make divisions once again the fundamental echelon of maneuver (up from the modular brigade concept). Brigades will still exist, of course, but will fight integrally to their division rather than independently.
Corps level echelon will return to more of a tactical-level combat control.
Five new division TOEs: Armor (Reinforced); Armor; Light; Airborne (JFE); Air Assault (JFE). JFE = Joint Forcible Entry. The "Light" division is the reimagined 'infantry' division, with its combat brigade teams being either or a mix of "light" or "mobile."
Fires (artillery) and recon moved from the brigade to DIV level control. Individual brigades have recon troops (companies), but no longer an integral squadron (battalion).
Divisions will incorporate a 'protection' brigade to C2 ADA, CBRN, MP, and rear area security.
Sustainment elements increased.

Current divisions mapped to one of the new templates, e.g. 1AD, 1CAV, 34 INF(NG) to the Armor(reinforced).

The Armor (reinforced) division indicates x3 armor brigade combat teams (ABCT) and substantial integral engineer/bridging assets. => primary 'penetration' unit.
The Armor (standard) division indicates x2 ABCT + x1 SBCT (Stryker) to provide a more significant infantry and on-road mobility aspect. Less engineer/bridging.

Anyway, that should be enough to whet one's appetite or deter it. :)
 
Why the change? I don't keep up with the why's and wherefore's of army organization. Don't they 'right size' every 20 years or so?
 
It has to do with fighting a near pear enemy in large scale combat operations (LSCO) instead of counter insurgency operations (COIN). Lessons learned from Ukraine and some of those "awesome" think tanks/planners say that a lone BCT doesn't have the support or power to conduct operations against a near pear enemy. I am not combat arms but speaking from a logistical point of view, it requires division and really Corp assets to fully be able to support LSCO.

It is a lot of fun right now living through this change as leadership who grew up in COIN are now trying to update plans for LSCO with little experience in those operations...
 
InertOrd13 said:
It has to do with fighting a near pear enemy in large scale combat operations (LSCO) instead of counter insurgency operations (COIN). Lessons learned from Ukraine and some of those "awesome" think tanks/planners say that a lone BCT doesn't have the support or power to conduct operations against a near pear enemy. I am not combat arms but speaking from a logistical point of view, it requires division and really Corp assets to fully be able to support LSCO.

It is a lot of fun right now living through this change as leadership who grew up in COIN are now trying to update plans for LSCO with little experience in those operations...
Click to expand...

Just like watching those who’d only trained in Cold War tactics tried to adapt to an insurgency in Iraq

How quickly we forget the lessons of yesterday
 
11B CIB said:
Just like watching those who’d only trained in Cold War tactics tried to adapt to an insurgency in Iraq

How quickly we forget the lessons of yesterday
Click to expand...

Not nearly as bad. The senior decision makers in the Army grew up when the division was still king. The organizational structure has changed so much that it’s going to take time to build back (compare US Army Europe pre-BRAC to post-BRAC), but it shouldn’t be as painful.
 
InertOrd13 said:
It has to do with fighting a near pear enemy in large scale combat operations (LSCO) instead of counter insurgency operations (COIN). Lessons learned from Ukraine and some of those "awesome" think tanks/planners say that a lone BCT doesn't have the support or power to conduct operations against a near pear enemy. I am not combat arms but speaking from a logistical point of view, it requires division and really Corp assets to fully be able to support LSCO.

It is a lot of fun right now living through this change as leadership who grew up in COIN are now trying to update plans for LSCO with little experience in those operations...
Click to expand...
I started with near peer when I was active duty in the early 90's, went to COIN in the 2K's with the Reserves, and now going back to near peer in the Training Divisions Reserves. Glad I'm retiring in January.
 
rufrdr said:
Guess this means the NTC will have to reset their scenarios.
Click to expand...
I believe that they have been doing so for a time now. IIUC, 1-7 CAV has been testing out the DIVCAV concept (rather than integral to the brigade). I say that tentatively as it was something I read and, well, we know about reading things on the internet.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom