fehrenbachvstofflersnlbv1.0

8/7/2019 FEHRENBACHvstofflersNLBv1.0

1/39

Building 2D/3D optimized Land

Combat Forces for Decisive

Strategic Maneuver in the 21stCentury

"In war the chief incalculable is the human will, which

manifests itself in resistance, which in turn lies in the

province of tactics. Strategy has not to overcomeresistance, except from nature. Its purpose is to diminish

the possibility of resistance, and it seeks to fulfil this

purpose by exploiting the elements of movement and

surprise."

--Sir Basil H. Liddell-Hart

Air LandSea

2002 Lieutenant Michael S arks IN USAR d nmic ara aol.com


2/39

The Two Basic Battles

1. The Battle Against the Earth: HartsNature

"We have severly underestimated the Russians, the extent of the country and the

treachery of the climate. This is the revenge of reality."

- German General Heinz Guderian, letter to his wife 1941

Observation

Closed terrain: mobile forces automatically lighter and 3D air transportable linkage; note

world is URBANIZING rapidly

Open terrain: roads, rural areas where we grow food, prairies require GROUND

FORCES TO CONTROL---we must be able to control these areas...requires 2D

optimization

Future Land Forces must FIRST bepowerful against the earth in terms of

mobility, firepower, survivability, and sustainability--if the earth itself easily smothers theircombat power how can they even begin to think of overwhelming the human enemy?

Open terrain

Closed terrain


3/39

2. The Battle Against Man

"Natural hazards, however formidable, are inherently less dangerous and less

uncertain than fighting hazards. All conditions are more calculable, all obstacles

more surmountable than those of human resistance".

--Sir Basil H. Liddell-Hart

The Two competing 21st Century War Thought-Forms in the West

VS.

TOFFLERIANS FEHRENBACHIANS


4/39

1. Ego-centric Gadgetry trumps of the Tofflerians

Hubris that we have latest gadget that trumps all, computer mentalism

directing firepower to destroy PLATFORMS since without a platform enemy

humans cannot abide in temporal air/sea mediums, man is on a gadget

escalator of human progress (arrogance to exalt human intellect and spendmoney on what makes us feel superior)

Favorite example: WWII aircraft carriers with 300 mile range aircraft besting

battleships with 25 mile range guns


5/39

New replaces old:

1st Wave: Agrarian

2nd Wave: Mechanical

3rd Wave: Information: FIREPOWER TRUMPSALL!

2nd Wave: Mechanical

1st Wave: Agrarian

3rd Wave: Information

Nave Civilian Utopians: reality on a timeline: man on escalator to heaven

Ooops! We still live on

PHYSICALplanet earth

and grow

food but timeline

hubris says we must

discard this reality

4000 B.C.Cavemen

2002A.D.

Scientists

Throw out the past:

not relevant or respected


6/39

Physicality vs. Earth (thats2nd Wave)

NOT Important! We will mouse-click firepower!

Wheeled Armored Car

Madness: cant MANEUVER

x-country, swim, airdrop or fight; infantrywill suffer bloody WWI stalemates in cities

Defeat on the Battlefield:

no boots-on-the-ground

decisive, encircling MANEUVER

LAV3STRYKERFCS

Afghanistan: Taliban/al Queda

escape by C3D2

Kosovo: Serb Army unscathedSOMALIA


7/39

2. Tactical-centric Reality trumps of the Fehrenbachians

Must get RESULTS, factors in entire context of reality including gadget vs.

gadget, human factors that men can live on ground if platforms are taken from

them; thus MANEUVER is central to control ground where men live (humility to

focus on what's relevant) since the earth itself is the ultimate "platform" whichundergirds enemy existence/resistance

Favorite example: 1940s German Army with inferior light tanks encircling BEF

in France. Military Combat veteran T.R. Fehrenbach wrote inThis Kind of

War:

"Americans in 1950 rediscovered something that since Hiroshima they

had forgotten: you may fly over a land forever; you may bomb it,

atomize it, pulverize it, and wipe it clean of life--but if you desire to

defend it, protect it, and keep it forcivilization, you must do this on

the ground the way the Roman

Legions did, by putting your

young men into the mud."


8/39

Analysis

Air/Sea not natural mediums for man, rely on gadgets to abide there, more

susceptible to gadgetry trumps

Land is where man abides, doesn't need gadgets to abide there, no gadgetryescalator of human progress, latest gadget doesn't nullify/negate/trump earlier

gadgets, ALL weaponry is relevant and can be lethal; level playing field;

example: can slit throats of unwary sleeping crewmen in multi-million dollar

armored car with computer screen, applying AF/Navy thinking to create a

gadget-centric units that employ counter-gadgetry without physicality versus the

earth is unsound, enemy can refuse to play "arms race" and accept gadget

escalator, all weapons in play at all times

YES!


9/39

More Problems:

Tofflerian Ego-Gadgeteers think their brand of computer mentalism

firepower trumps all; think battlefield will become giant video game;

Russians callSurveillance Strike Complex (SSC) like aircraftcarriers vs battleships at sea; not so on land! Land forces must be able to

defeat entire spectrum of enemy gadgets which requires REALITY

centeredness not expectation that a gadget trump will singularly carry the

day.

Land forces must be able to MANEUVER across open and closed terrain

(Battle against the Earth) and be optimized gadget/weapons wise to prevail

while doing so against human (Battle against Man) foes who will have ALL

weaponry types at their disposal, from low to high tech. Low-tech

advantage will require in open terrain low-tech counters, which is heavier

armor protection/firepower. High-tech has not REPLACED low-tech in landwarfare, it has SUPPLANTED it


10/39

Air/Sea Warfare

High Tech - Low Tech = High Tech Gadget-centric Reality

Land Warfare

High Tech + Low Tech = Complex Tactical-centric Reality

Best Case if Gadgeteers have their way (defined in Reality Context)?

Ego-Gadgeteers create medium weight tracked vehicle FORCE that is 3D air

transportable and terrain agile with C4I SA, BUT ISSUB-OPTIMIZED for combat in

open terrain; too light, will be at disadvantage against human forces with same gadgets

but with heavier platforms with more weight/capability to work with (2D optimization)!

Answer is the have two types of land forces!

2D and 3D Optimized for open and closed

terrain combats against human foes!


11/39

We will have a good 3D "extraordinary" force but not the complimenting 2D "ordinary"

forces to dominate maneuver in open terrains we must have!

[Sun Tzu'stai" andchi" force constructs]

In all fighting, the direct method may be used for joining battle, but indirect methods will be

needed in order to secure victory. In battle, there are not more than two methods of attack - the

direct and the indirect; yet these two in combination give rise to an endless series of maneuvers.

The direct and the indirect lead on to each other in turn. It is like moving in a circle - you never

come to an end. Who can exhaust the possibilities of their combination?-Sun Tzu

Analogy: WWI British battlecruisers at Jutland getting sunk by heavier German battleship's

gunfire, M4 Medium offensive tanks versus Heavy Tiger/Panther defensive tanks in WWII

Worse case if Gadgeteers have their way (defined in Reality Context)?

Ego-Gadgeteers create medium weight rubber tired wheeled force that is marginally 3D and

NOT terrain agile, but road-bound, is sub-optimized for maneuver in ALL terrains relyingcompletely on its gadget trump of C4I to direct firepower at a stand-off, with survival mode

infantry security guards to keep low-tech enemies at bay at high cost in blood (keep RPGs

away). Neither3D or2D maneuver optimized

Analogy: LAV-III/Stykers IBCTs or FCS "Units of Action" without 3D or agile 2D cross-

country fire & maneuver capability versus low-tech enemy who fightsbelt buckle close,

ambushing these armored cars along roads/trails with low-tech weapons in closed terrainwhere stand-offSA cannot be employed


12/39

ITS 2D/3D MANEUVER AND FIREPOWER:

WAR PHILOSOPHIESWE SHOULD BE STUDYING FOR

21st CENTURY VICTORY THRU 2D/3D OPTIMIZATION--IF WE

WERE OVER THE FIREPOWER VERSUS MANEUVERCONUNDRUM!

SUN TZU

HART

VAN CREVALD

BIBLE

War is about whose ideas dominate

Defeat the mind of the enemy

4th Generation War is mind warfare

Make enemy your friend

MAN HAS

ALWAYS

BEEN TECHNOLOGICALLY ADV

ANCED, BUTHESA KILLER ANGEL; AS TIME GOES ON DANGERS INCREASE


13/39

Example of imbalanced fire & maneuver-poor force structure

againstSurveillance Strike System: October 6, 1973.

Egyptian ground forces storm across the Suez Canal and

surprise/overwhelm the Israeli Defense Force (IDF)

Bar-Lev forward line of troops (FLOT)

3D Projected

FLOT

2D/3D

2D

2D


14/39

The Egyptian Army

advanced under a

complete radar-guided,high-medium-low altitude

surface-to-air missile

umbrella, backed up

on the ground by

hunter/killer infantryteams with Rocket

Propelled Grenades

(RPGs) and Sagger1

Anti-tank Guided Missiles

(ATGMs) to defeat IDF

tank ground maneuver: a

Surveillance Strike

Complex (SSC) in a Major

Theatre of War (MTW)


15/39

When IDF tanks rushed headlong into Egyptian

Armored formations, they are destroyed by

SaggerATGMs and RPGs: the invasion

continued

RPGs ATGMs

= Knocked-out IDF tanks

+


16/39

"To defeat Israeli armored counter-attacks in 1973, the Egyptians

employed an average of 55 infantry anti-tank weapons every1,000 meters. Their anti-tank positions were mutually supporting

and in depth, using Russian-made RPG-7 armor-defeating

rockets, backed up by Sagger anti-tank guided missiles (ATGMs),

and Soviet tanks and Saggers in a third echelon. By using the

maximum stand-off ranges of all anti-tank weapons andneutralizing the Israeli Air Force with an effective air defense

umbrella over the main battle area ( MBA), the Egyptians

repulsed attack after attack of Israeli armor."

-- Major Theodore Sendak, U.S. Army Military Review,

September 1979 "The Airborne Anti-Armor Defense"


17/39

The situation desperate, the IDF

launches fighter-bombers to strafe

and bomb the Egyptian Armored

Columns now just a few milesaway from the capital city of

Israel....

But they are shot down in

horrendous numbers....

Avi Zeira was one of thousands of Israeli Soldiers who

rushed to the front in a frantic call-up of every able-bodied person in the country:

"I was so angry that we were surprised," Zeira says. "I was

really angry, too, that they had better weapons and we didn't

know about it. I watched as they just shot our planes out of the

sky, leaving us without cover."


18/39

Then a miracle happened...the Egyptians paused....

...giving the IDF precious time to call up its

reserves and re-organize itself to defeat the enemy

surveillance strike complex; their new tactics:

1. Artillery suppresses enemy

air defense and ATGM locations

2. Tracked M113 Mobile infantry clears RPG/

ATGM locations

3. Tanks suppress ATGM firing

signatures, dodge missiles


19/39

5. Ground maneuver regained---with Artillerysuppressing and tanks destroying enemy air defense sites

so the IDF Air Force can fly Close Air Support missions

IDF Centurion

tank killing

ADA

Egyptian Air DefenseArtilery Site

IDF Air/Ground Team

4. USAF emergency airlift begins from CONUS and

USAREUR to replace all lost equipment


20/39

IDF recon/covering forces

discover gap in between

Egyptian armies; IDF

ground maneuver forces

under General Sharon

cross Suez Canal and

encircle an entire

Egyptian Army!

Egyptians sue for peace to

prevent annihilation!: Israel

saved

3D IDF Paratroops!

2D IDF Armor

Extended

FLOT


21/39

IDF GENERAL AVRAHAM

ADAN

(TEL AVIV,

13/5/97.TRANSLATED.)www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/coldwar/inter

views/episode-17/adan3.html

I decided that I would put

a tank brigade in ambush in

the sand dunes; I would

camouflage them with nets

and they would be there to

act against the force coming

from the south. And in the

morning... no, at night, that

night we got Paratroopers,

and they went out into battle

to broaden the passageway to

the bridgehead. They arrived

quite late; they came from

Sharm-al-Sheikh, from a

very far-away front, and they

arrived in helicopters, very

slowly...and we built up a

Paratrooper Battalion, which

entered into a very difficultbattle.

Helicopter-borne

Paratroops in

extended FLOT 3D

operations!

200 mile 3D Air

Assault..at night


22/39

THE 2D BREAKOUT

Once across, the tankers overcame local resistance

and some determined Egyptian commando attacks on

their laagers as they reorganized. They then

quickly fanned out into the open desert, crossing thebridges over the sweet water canals. Here was good

tank country at last, resistance scanty and targets

plentiful. Their first task was to destroy the Egyptian

missile bases to clear the skies for the IAF. During the

day, Adan's and Sharon's tankers destroyed every

missile site within a perimeter reaching some 20miles along the western bank, breaking havoc among

administrative troops concentrated in the many army

camps in the rear zone of the Egyptian armies

now on the east bank in Sinai. As fast as the Egyptians

threw in reinforcements, they were destroyed by the

roaming Israeli armor. Freed from the threat of thesurface-to-air missiles, the IAF blazed away at

anything that moved, sowing destruction galore.


23/39

WARNING:

The 1973 war cost Israel 2,378 men, one third of her

air force (102 planes), and more than 800 tanks, ashockingly high figure for a country the size of

Delaware, with about the same number of people as

Alabama. To comprehend such a loss, a

comparatively high casualty count on the U.S.

armed forces would have resulted in 140,000 dead.As in previous conflicts, no official record of the

Arab losses was ever released, but again we

estimate that they were higher: about 19,000 dead,

more than3

50 fighter planes, 1,300 tanks, and 11ships. Israel won on the battlefield, but in world

opinion it was the first three days that counted,

because it showed that superior force structure in a

well-organized system coupled with surprise were

not Israeli (nor American) monopolies.


24/39

Did Israel win? Did the Egyptian SSC work?

Egypt knew that she could not defeat Israel militarily, so

Egypt set out to lose the war in such a fashion as to inflict

maximum casualties on Israel and then win the peace. Egyptdid just that. Egypt halted because Egypt did not want to

over-run its air defense umbrella. As a result of Egypt's

"defeat", the Israeli government fell, Egypt got the entire

Sinai peninsula back and Egypt was able to maneuver the

U.S. into the Camp David talks whereby the U.S. ended upguaranteeing Egypt's borders with Israel and pledging

massive aid to Egypt. Egypt's casualties would have been

less if Egypt had stuck to her original plan, but Egypt

succumbed to Syria's pleas to launch a limited spoiler attack

to take the pressure off in Syria's losing fight with Israel. The

spoiler attack was launched outside of their air defense

umbrella and was repulsed. The73 war is a perfect

example of the dictum that war is "a continuation of politics

by other means".


25/39

Nevertheless, this doesn't change the fact that it wasn't the Eqyptian

intention to have Israel cross the Suez and surround their Army. This gave

Israel a fairly strong bargaining position and made it very clear in the

mind of Egyptian leaders that the Israelis could be in Cairo in a matter of

hours. Although all Egyptians are rightfully proud of the initial attack theydon't like to talk about the end result. Lets not forget that Syria intended

to go all the way to Haifa and Tel Aviv to exterminate the nation of Israel if

possible--a simultaneous twoMTW type scenario that we seem today

to want to dismiss as an enemy attack option in order to cut defense

budgets. The Israelis fought a two front war of extreme violence,beginning with surprise attacks on both fronts and ending with both

aggressor countries seeing their capitols in danger. The Egyptian pinning

attack didn't succeed as well as hoped and this is what forced the change

in plans. The limited Egyptian attack outside of the ADA umbrella didn't

cause that umbrella to go away-it remained in place and the Israelis used

combined-arms to crack it.A static defense wouldnt have changed theoutcome since Israel was planning to attack to decide the issue (as per

their doctrine).

What ifs are part of war.


26/39

IDF Colonel David Eshel writes:

"The Israeli command had anticipated the possibility of a well executedcrossing in their operational concepts. A plan based on the techniques of

Soviet forced river crossing operations was well known to Israeli

intelligence; even a film of such a river crossing maneuver was available

and shown in training. But in actuality, surprise was complete - tactically

as well as technically. The Israelis were neither prepared psychologically

nor militarily to accept the fact that the Egyptian Army was capable ofeffectively mounting such an intricate operation.

The fact that there would not be extensive air support came as a great

shock to the Israeli troops who, lacking the vast artillery forces of their

opponents, had been trained to take air support for granted...

So, although we were not prepared, we attacked with part of our forces on

8th October, just as they arrived, and again that was a mistake because

we did not have the power, and again we suffered great losses. Only later

did we decide to organize first and to switch to an offensive, when we

were prepared to concentrate all our forces.


27/39

Lessons Learned for defending MTW aggression:

1. Side that establishes an effectiveSSC first, lands the

first blows, usually the attacker taking ground

2. He that lands all-encompassing massed/precision strikesand/or shattering maneuver wins the first battle, which may

be the war--

3. There may be NO RECOVERY to the side receiving

massed, accurate fires if the enemy doesnt pause (dont

count on it) and takes ground by maneuver (no territory totrade for time); U.S. doesnt have ally with hundreds of

tanks/planes to resupply it if lost in first hours of battle

4. The side receiving SSC fires must be able to absorb,

misdirect and shrug off fires long enough to establish its

own SSC and combining of all joint arms to regain theinitiative through MANEUVER--or lose the war.

5. The key is to asymmetricallyattack the enemys SSC

boldly at its most critical points to collapse it with

unrelenting ground maneuver to not give the enemy any

time to recover, then pursue to victory: armored, 2D/3D


28/39

There is no one to rescue us if we dont get this right

--Professor Fred Kagan, U.S. Military Academy on how the U.S. is

in the same super-power dilemma as England was in 1939, except

without a potential rescuer with huge industrial base and time tore-arm & re-equip her if she fails to prepare for the right pattern of

future war

Israel's big brother (U.S.) made up all IDF combat equipment

losses and then some within a matter of days. We may not have

that backup in a conflict of our own. If we are defeated early on it'sentirely possible that no close airfields will exist for us to use. The

entirely competent Israeli ground forces didn't need any large

train up. They were ready-to-go as soon as they unloaded the

equipment off the planes. We have a terrible time getting ready for

gunnery and NTC deployments. Finally, our complicated

electronic equipment may not be easily adapted to an existingsituation. If the training and infrastructure don't already exist on

the ground, introducing it might make things worse.

ITS TIME FOR THE U.S. ARMY TO RE-INVIGORATE WITH 2D/3D

CAPABLE FORCES NOW USING EXISTING EQUIPMENT!


29/39

HowAir-Mech-Strike 2D/3D maneuver warfare

defeats Surveillance-Strike Complexes

1. AMS Forces can self-deploy to any location in the world to

establish a Forward Line Of Troops despite air/sea anti-access strategems and even in the presence ofSSC fires;

organic ground armored mobility expands options to include

high-altitude delivery offset from enemy SSC, ADA effects

and forces in position =powerful against the earth

CONUS/ISB ---> Drop Zone

Airdrop USAF t-tail aircraft deliver Forced-Entry

mobile Assault Echelon (AE) forces under armor

protection to overcome enemy SSC fires to

establish expanding FLOT; aircraft fly to ISB to

shuttle-airland remainder of AMS

Forces (FOE)into the now secure Assault Landing Zone (AZ)

Two-Tiered airlift system

CONUS ---> ISB

Airlanding pre-loaded 747

cargo aircraft out of enemy

SSC fire range bulk deliver

AMS combat forces QUICKLYunder 96 hours before

battle/war is lost; cargo 747s

available NOW in large

numbers at low-cost


30/39

AMS: strategically and tactically agile 2D/3D ground

forces that offer NO easy asymmetric weakness for an

enemy to exploit =Powerful against man

Deep rear Rear Close/Far Deep8,000 km back to CONUS 250km from enemy TBAMs 50km from TMAMs 300km in enemy rear

TSBAZ

CONUSCombat UAVs

2D Light Mech

APAF Cargo 747s, USAF aircraft,

Army helos (in C-5s or self-deploy)

Humraam

CrusaderPatriot/THAAD

3D

C-130X

TBAMs = Theater Ballistic

Artillery & Missiles

TMAMs = Tactical Mortars,

Artillery & Missiles

Helo SEL

HIMARS/ATACMs

Twin 120 mortars

AGS

Follow-On-Echelon

(FOE)

Assault

Echelon (AE)

2D/3D BCTs

OBJshuttle

CH-47F

NMD

Border Patrol

NG

Coast

Guard/USN

Space/Air Cover by

US

AF/US

N

airdrop

airland

All Echelons protected from enemy missile attack


31/39

2. AMS2D optimized forces extend and/or project

from the FLOT to disrupt/suppress/destroy enemy

SSC air defenses to enable

3D decisive maneuver(encirclements, turning movements) or vise-a-versa

Extended FLOT tactics

FLOT2D

3D

2D

3D

Enables 3D

Force to

advance


32/39

Projected FLOT tactics

Projected FLOT Base

of Fire/Maneuver

(Mini-SSC)

Main FLOT

3D

2D

Enables 2D

Force toadvance


33/39

City

Road Ambushes,

Mines, RPGs,

missiles, obstacles,

predictable = DEATH

Tracked BCT

x-country

mobile avoidsroad threats

Swims acrossrivers/lakes

Wins close 1-5kmfight

Kills armor in

meeting

engagements

Quality infantry

defeats enemy

infantry

RSTA verifies

targets hit not

decoys

3D Forceblocks,

encircles

isolates

severs

enemy

2D Force

Wins far 5-50km fight

UAVs/UCAVsRobust 2D/3D BCTs win in ANY

situation

Scout dogs

C4I verifies

data, CAS

Mobile Crusader, HIMARS,

EFOGM, Twin 120mm mortar fire

support KILLS verified targets


34/39

Missions of the Urban Combat

Team

Rapidly Air Deploy Under a Division or Corps HQ as Part of a Joint Force as

the spearhead for MOUT operations

Prevent, Contain or Stabilize Crises Through Presence and precise Military

Operations in Urban Terrain

Determine Favorable Outcome of urban Small Scale Contingencies (SSCs)

Act as the urban Combat Force Guarantor in Security and Support

Operations (SASO) as Part of a U.S. or Multinational Force

Participate, with Augmentation, in Major Theater Wars (MTWs) insuringurban areas do not hinder decisive maneuver


35/39

Can we continue to assault

urban structures using

predictable top-down or

bottom-up tactics?

Slow Ladder

assaults date

back to ancient

times!Stacking teams

at ground-level

Helicopter

rooftop

assaults

exposes them

to enemy fires

Foot Infantry exposed

to enemy fires!!!!!


36/39

Solution to 21st Century

Urban combat: Modern Siege Engines;

tracked tanks with combat engineering

means--original purpose of tanks inthe first place in WWI!

General Percy

Hobarts

Funnieswith PHYSICAL

MECHANICAL

ADVANTAGE todirectly cope not

impotent, rubber-

tired armored cars

mouse-clicking pleas

for firepower help!


37/39

MOUT VERTICAL ASSAULT

VEHICLE

Lethality is Not Always Weaponry

it can be MANEUVER

Stealthy Hybrid-Electric

M113A4 used to

transport rifle squad

over rubble, debris

Combat-proven mobility

with RPG resistant

applique armor

Boom arm delivers

infantry to

unexpected spot onbuildings


38/39

What matters in war is VICTORY, not

prolonged operations, however brilliantly

executed

---

3. AMS2D/3D maneuver forces employ maximum fire &

maneuver to paralyze enemy SSCs as they collapse the

enemys centers of gravity with lasting, decisive ground

maneuver, ending the conflict clearly on our favorable terms


39/39

Questions?LT Michael L. Sparks IN USAR

[email protected]

Book:

www.geocities.com/air_mech_strike/amsbook.htm

Internet:www.geocities.com/transformationunderfire

www.geocities.com/strategicmaneuver

Airborne!

fehrenbachvstofflersnlbv1.0

Documents