FirstSpear

Archive for the ‘Guest Post’ Category

The Baldwin Articles – Leadership and Training

Saturday, January 6th, 2018

“As iron sharpens iron, so one man sharpens another.” – Proverbs 27:17

Although the above quotation is not specifically related to military training, it is very appropriate to the subject. Here is another exchange on the topic that many of you will recognize. “What kind of training have you men been doing?” “Army Training, Sir!” If you have seen the classic movie, you also know exactly why we do not let privates train on their own recognizance. As I said last time, planning, managing and conducting good training is a complex art – and in many ways is just as hard to master as war itself. In other words, it is a truly serious business requiring continuous attention and effort. Here are just a few points to ponder and discuss.

IMG_5927

Let us start with the bad news. There have been and always will be training distractions and obstacles. Those routinely include conflicting priorities, constrained resources, and especially limited time. The trick is not to let the distractions sidetrack you – stay focused on the mission. True, it is something easier said than done. Still, good units and effective trainers work around or through those diversions all the time. Unfortunately, it is also true that a good number of leaders simply do not know how to properly organize and drive their training efforts. I especially worry about those squad leaders, platoon sergeants and platoon leaders who do not necessarily know what right looks like when it comes to planning and conducting truly productive training at the tactical level.

Just as you have to fight for intelligence on the battlefield, a unit has to fight to train. Know what you are trying to accomplish before you start. Plan to train but do not get fixated on your plan – be flexible. The training objective is what is important not the process. Many units spend a great deal of time trying to make the training look good and in the process lose sight of their actual training goals. Likewise, others become preoccupied with making the training uber “cool” rather than effective. My advice is to make sure your people are well grounded in the fundamentals before moving to master the high-speed flaming hoops drill (above).

Always train to a pre-established and reasonable standard and not to a time schedule. Training is never finished so do not become obsessed with the outcome of any one event. Do not be afraid of failure. Training exposes our shortcomings – if we are doing it right. Take advantage of the opportunity to figure out why you failed to achieve the intended training objectives. Was it a planning mistake, a resource shortfall or an issue of poor time management? Did the trainers know beforehand how to do the task required properly themselves? Take corrective action and do better next time.

Aggressively prioritize. Some training is always better than no training. A good trainer can get something out of even the most unproductive training evolution. At least the experience can serve as a reminder to build a better plan for future training events as mentioned above. Know who needs or will befit the most from the training. When time or other resources are limited, it is usually much better to train a few to a higher standard then everyone to a sub-par level. Look for non-traditional training opportunities and partners. Old school and new techniques can often coexist and reinforce one another. Do not presume that they are mutually exclusive or that one is automatically better than the other.

We have all probably seen the following counterproductive dynamic on qualification ranges more than once. In units with poor training habits, the intent invariably devolves into just cycling everyone through as fast as possible. The alleged point of the drill, i.e. improving unit marksmanship, turns out to be a pretense and not the true objective. Unfortunately, the longer-term and deeper negative effect can be debilitating to that entire unit. The leadership has revealed to their soldiers that they consider training an onerous chore that is to be competed as quickly as possible. Positive results are optional or even irrelevant. Sadly, that dysfunctional lesson will imprint some soldiers for the rest of their careers. They in turn will invariably infect others. It is an all too familiar cycle – but it can be broken.

Fighting back against bad training habits is hard but not complicated. It starts with leadership. Recognize that all unit training always involves team building AND leader training. Make sure to give your subordinate leaders something important to do in the training plan; and keep them visibly in charge of their soldiers as much as possible. This is especially important for those new sergeants who are leading for the first time and are trying to establish their credibility. In turn, soldiers benefit directly from seeing their leaders treated like valued members of the unit’s leadership team. In short, properly conducted unit training should professionally develop better leaders and concurrently result in stronger teams.

This also helps mitigate the problem of a unit hampered from accomplishing quality training because the leadership is overly distracted with the many other balls they are juggling. First, recognize and take advantage of the fact that every leader is part of a team and does not have to carry the burden alone. Delegate dammit! Moreover, a leader has to learn (and teach subordinates) not just to juggle but also how to judge those balls. Some balls are more important than others; and not all of them are made of glass. In reality, some balls can be set aside for another time or safely dropped. In doing so, we have the opportunity to demonstrate that unit leadership indeed considers quality training a high priority – though action rather than empty platitudes.

As I have mentioned before, there is a great book on training in WWII that I would recommend called “The Making of a Paratrooper” by Kurt Gabel. The author was a trooper going through Airborne training as a unit with the 517th PIR. He describes how the NCOs and junior officers would go off by themselves, learn a skill and – sometimes the very next day – turn around and teach it to the other troops. Not the ideal situation of course, but they made it work. They optimized, as best they could, their available organic assets to maximize limited external resources and extremely constrained time. They successfully met the challenge as an increasingly cohesive team and always took their training seriously. They knew that there was no other option. It also sets a great example to emulate even today.

Remember that even the most realistic training, conducted by the highest-speed units, has logical constraints that require soldiers to suspend disbelief when necessary. One simple example would be blanks or simunitions. If used properly, blanks are not going to kill or maim. Nevertheless, soldiers are expected to react to blank fire drills as if they were life-threatening live rounds. Likewise, when introducing simulated casualties the expectation is that soldiers will act in as close an approximation as possible to how they would respond to a real injury.

Teach your soldiers to value training though your example. It is true that not all training is fun and adventure. For instance, there is a lot of necessary repetition required to master the fundamentals of any individual or collective task. That can become boring. Bad weather can also make even good training more than a little unpleasant. Still, successfully building skills, competence and confidence – even in the worst of circumstances – is always a net positive for the collective esprit of a unit and the morale of individual soldiers.

Most of the veterans on this board could point to countless hours wasted on the tarmac or field site somewhere waiting for transportation. Did anyone in your unit consider trying to use that otherwise dead time to get at least some critical training accomplished? More often than not the answer is no. If someone made the effort, it was probably less than effective because it was not pre-planned but pulled hastily out of their fourth point of contact. Still, to be fair, I would give them at least partial credit for trying. Assuming they do better next time.

Time, money and ammunition are always finite resources. Never waste those precious assets – especially time! Always seek to get maximum effect from the resources you have. Do not waste time lamenting the resources you do not have. As with everything else we have been talking about, I would submit that the wise use of resources always comes down to the quality of leadership at the small unit level. Funny thing is that good leaders, despite the perpetual distractions and constraints, always seem to have enough to build good strong units. Even during periods when resources are much more constrained than has been the case in the last 16-17 years. Poor leaders, on the other hand, always seem to need more time, money or ammo – and still cannot get quality training results.

My final advice on training is that leaders must be willing to take risks. Most soldiers, myself included, like to think that we can always be as physically courageous as required in battle. Perhaps not ready, but willing and able to risk our lives if necessary. From my experiences and observations in various hostile places, I would say that is generally true enough. However, displaying moral courage is arguably much harder. In part, that is because the need for action does not present itself as unambiguously as it does in combat. It sneaks up on a leader over time. It often starts with the insidious – often self-generated – pressure to pencil whip a few training records so the unit looks good or to CYA. After all, training is not life or death and is certainly not important enough to risk damaging a career…or is it?

Now we are clearly talking about dedication to duty more than we are training. You have to ask yourself a question. How much do I really value training and how hard am I actually willing to fight for what might only be a modest and temporary improvement? That is an individual decision we all have to make for ourselves. The Army does constantly tell soldiers to do “the hard right over the easy wrong.” That is noble and righteous advice. However, it would be a mistake to think the institution actually cares. It does not. The Army is a soulless, unfeeling and ungracious machine; a whore who has never loved you – and never will.

If you are a whistleblower, no matter how justified the complaint, you will not be rewarded for your courage or you honesty. No exemplary service award is waiting for you; no building or street named in your honor; and you are not going to receive public recognition as the unit’s soldier, NCO or officer of the year. Worse case, you might even be punished. It should come as no surprise to any professional soldier that truly selfless service is always a bitch. None of that changes the fact that the right thing is always the right thing. In the end, all I can tell you is that principled leadership in training and war is never easy or painless – but I strongly recommend it anyway. De Oppresso Liber and good luck with your training!

LTC Terry Baldwin, US Army (Ret) served on active duty from 1975-2011 in various Infantry and Special Forces assignments. SSD is blessed to have him as both reader and contributor.

The Baldwin Articles – Leadership and History

Monday, January 1st, 2018

Lately there has been quite a bit of talk about the connection between history, professional military education and quality training on this site. Perhaps we can all initially agree on a couple of facts to frame some additional discussion. First, war is a bloody art form much more than it is a science and requires continuous study and practice to truly master even at the tactical level. Second, planning, managing and conducting good training is also an art – and in many ways is just as hard to master. For the sake of brevity, I am going to address training separately in part two of this article so that we can concentrate on history as a component of professional education up front.

So how can studying history help make you a better soldier and build stronger units? To be sure there is an important caveat; any “lessons” gleaned from history cannot and will not give definitive answers to today’s military questions. The past is not some accurate predictive tool that can somehow be used to prophesize future outcomes. Nevertheless, the study of history certainly often provides valuable context that can and does serve to inform decision makers in the present. Therefore, it is safe to say that seeking to understand events and characters in history does indeed teach and enlighten.

Obviously countless others have had a similar opinion about the enormous utility of historical study. I do not think it is an exaggeration to say that a great many notable historical figures have been self-acknowledged students of history. That has certainly been true of military leaders. Roman generals like Caesar studied the writings of the ancient Greek warriors intently. Not just to learn how they fought, but also how they successfully trained, motivated and sustained those earlier formidable armies. Later others studied Caesar’s campaigns to capture his insight into war. Each generation in turn contributing and perpetuating an unbroken military historiographic circle of life.

We now live in a golden age of information. I have more educationally sound books about all aspects of warfare throughout history sitting on the shelves in my home than were ever available to any general in WWII. Moreover, my collection is extremely modest compared to the exponentially greater volume of material accessible through any modern digitally empowered library. It would be a shame – really a crime – if those of us with that kind of fingertip access to vast reservoirs of information did not take full advantage of all of that educational abundance.

Based on my own personal experiences, I have always been able to learn a great deal about my profession from men and women who died long ago. Military philosophers and theorists like Clausewitz still speak to me. Over time I internalized his concepts, Sun Tzu’s teachings and Machiavelli’s advice and was no doubt the better soldier, trainer and leader for having done so. For me, reading “Lee’s Lieutenant’s” and “This Kind of War” or “The Uncertain Trumpet” was never some academic exercise that was not destined to serve any practical purpose. I learned to appreciate history from the example set by the leaders I met early in my career. In turn, I have tried to pass on that historical sensibility to those I have had the privilege to serve with, lead, and mentor over the years.

In fact, studying books like those above was vital to my vocational education and eventually critical to whatever success or failure I might achieve while practicing my profession. Most importantly, I was able to make better and timelier decisions in ambiguous and challenging circumstances than I would have if I had not had that reasonably broad and sufficiently deep historical exposure beforehand. I simply would not have full confidence in any senior military leader who had no informed sense of history.

To be clear, I am not talking about a formal educational or degree producing program. No one needs to run off and get a PhD in Military History in order to be a good soldier or capable leader. Indeed, we can start at the small unit level with resources we already have readily available. How many leaders out there have made the effort to teach their subordinates their unit’s unique history – let alone the Army’s service history? I can tell you that the answer is not enough. What campaign streamers do you display on your colors? What battles do the elements of your unit crest represent? Why is your unit called the Manchus or Cotton Balers or Devils in Baggy Pants. Of course you might ask, is that “minutiae” really truly important to know? How will that information help “kill the enemy” or keep my people alive?

The answer is simple and ancient in origin. Expending the energy to inculcate a unit’s history helps build stronger teams. The Roman Legions understood this dynamic. Even today, the USMC – better than any of the other services – still understands and leverages this important bonding practice. So why doesn’t the Army do the same? Some units certainly do, but far too many do not even try. Some units consider it a waste of time and a distractor from other priorities. I would argue that the leaders of those units have the wrong priorities. They are shortchanging the professional development of their soldiers and failing in arguable their most important duty. That is to build motivated, cohesive, and ultimately winning teams.

And no, this does not mean a unit has to “stand down” or curtail other training to get it done. Some still serving NCOs or former NCOs out there probably think I am trying to put another rock in your already-too-full professional rucksack. The fact is that particular rock has always been your responsibility. You are the keepers of a unit’s history, and by extension the Army’s history, and have always had the responsibility to pass on that knowledge to your soldiers. The majority of NCOs do not need a reminder. They know they have the mission and do a superb job. But far too many do not – probably because they were never taught what right looks like when they were growing up. You cannot set the example or effectively teach what you don’t know or don’t value.

Obviously, we need to work diligently on correctly that problem at the unit level. However, we should not stop there. What are some of the positive aspects of studying history for broader professional development? Below I have selected three relevant quotes from my favorite fiction book, “Starship Troopers” by Robert Heinlein. For those not familiar with the work, be advised that the book has absolutely nothing to do with the movie series of the same name except the title. I have literally read the book a hundred times or more and always carried a paperback copy with me on deployments. I also loaned it out many times. But it was not the plot or the characters that keeps drawing me back. Rather it was the core ideas; the embedded concept of civil responsibility and duty as well as selfless service and even insight into conflict and war itself.

As many of you know, Heinlein was a brilliant, unique and even odd historical figure. He wrote science fiction primarily and never saw combat himself. Yet in Starship Troopers, Heinlein was able to capture the quintessential rationale of voluntary military service and martial virtue. He clearly intended to present more of a philosophy of duty than a practical military theory or strategic concept of war. Still, his book is a recognized military classic and has been on the recommended reading list for the Army and the USMC for many years. That is not to say that all of Heinlein’s ideas were original. He was well read and had an inquisitive mind so I suspect he had read at least potions of Clausewitz and Sun Tzu and quite possibly Machiavelli as well.

I appreciate this first quote because it perhaps explains why Sun Tzu still resonates after more than two thousand years. Why Clausewitz and Jomini are still read intently to be both interpreted and misinterpreted by countless professional soldiers. And perhaps it also explains why no more contemporary authors have ever been able to convincingly threaten their intellectual authority or supplant them.

“Basic truths cannot change and once a man of insight expresses one of them it is never necessary, no matter how much the world changes, to reformulate them. This is immutable; true everywhere, throughout all time, for all men and all nations.”

The second quote might appear to be no more than a restatement of Clausewitz’s basic theory. And I am reasonably sure that was Heinlein’s original source. But it does expand on the idea that in war it is the application of coercive violence and not killing itself that is actually the military “means” to the political “end” or “objective” that Clausewitz referred to repeatedly.

“War is not violence and killing, pure and simple; war is controlled violence, for a purpose. The purpose of war is to support your government’s decisions by force. The purpose is never to kill the enemy just to be killing him . . . but to make him do what you want him to do. Not killing . . . but controlled and purposeful violence.”

Lastly, I have used what I call “the cooking analogy” below many times to try to explain the notion of military education and realistic training providing immense value added on and off the battlefield.

“…unskillful work can easily subtract value; an untalented cook can turn wholesome dough and fresh green apples, valuable already, into an inedible mess, value zero. Conversely, a great chef can fashion of those same materials a confection of greater value than a commonplace apple tart, with no more effort than an ordinary cook uses to prepare an ordinary sweet.”

Unfortunately, higher-level professional training and education is largely undervalued in the institutional military. That is a counterproductive but systemic organizational attitude. To use Heinlein’s analogy, the services consequently only manage to consistently produce good “fry cooks” that can perhaps reliably fashion an edible meal but have a limited repertoire. In other words they are generally “tactically sound” in the most limited sense but not necessarily adaptive, multifunctional or innovative in any way.

We simply do not produce many world-class chefs; i.e. master craftsmen or artists with more advanced skills that can take the raw material and other means provided to them and produce results approaching a tactical, operational or even strategic work of art. We need military artisans who can be hard fighters AND consummate trainers AND equally deep thinkers. Leaders that have the intellectual tools necessary to profoundly reflect on the art and artifices of war and the disciplined aptitude to translate the resulting thoughts into practical applications. The enduring challenge for us remains how to identify, cultivate and encourage the intellectual development of more martial master chefs at every level.

That brings us to the final point for now. It would certainly be possible to put a committee together and “distill” the more advanced works of Sun Tzu, Clausewitz, et al into 3×5 cards of command approved military axioms that every soldier could carry in his or her breast pocket. Laminated of course and dutifully memorized and regurgitated on command. But that will not make us any smarter. To seek legitimate understanding of Sun Tzu and the others it is important to consider the social, cultural and historical context in which they lived and wrote. In other words, it takes intellectual effort. There is no shortcut.

If simply taken literally, out of context, or only partially and imperfectly understood, Sun Tzu’s or Clausewitz’s or Machiavelli’s ideas can be truly dangerous rather than helpful to a soldier or politician trying to make a decision with life and death implications. Therefore, the services – especially the Army – would clearly be best served by providing more opportunities for high quality, practical and continuous professional education at all levels. This could start by making the effort to instill a deeper appreciation of history in Army leaders of all grades. That is probably the single most useful thing we can do to improve the U.S. Military’s tactical, operational and strategic rate of success in the future.

LTC Terry Baldwin, US Army (Ret) served on active duty from 1975-2011 in various Infantry and Special Forces assignments. SSD is blessed to have him as both reader and contributor.

MILDEP Brings SOF Perspective to Acquisition Strategy to Deliver Now

Saturday, December 30th, 2017

By John Higgins, PEO IEW&S Public Affairs, December 29, 2017

IMG_5805
On Aberdeen Proving Grounds, Md., Program Executive Officer Intelligence, Electronic Warfare & Sensors (PEO IEW&S) joined by members of other PEO’s: Command Control Communications — Tactical (PEO C3T) and Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives (PEO ACWA) along with Joint Program Executive Office Chemical and Biological Defense (JPEO Chem Bio) hosted Lt. Gen. Paul Ostrowski, the Principal Military Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of the Army, for his Acquisition Streamline & Culture Initiatives brief, Dec. 20, 2107. (Photo Credit: John Higgins)

ABERDEEN PROVING GROUND, Md. — Program Executive Officer Intelligence, Electronic Warfare & Sensors (PEO IEW&S) joined by members of other PEOs: Command Control Communications — Tactical and Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives along with Joint Program Executive Office Chemical and Biological Defense hosted Lt. Gen. Paul Ostrowski, the Principal Military Deputy to the Assistant Secretary of the Army (Acquisition, Logistics and Technology), for his Acquisition Streamline & Culture Initiatives brief.

Ostrowski’s whirlwind tour took him to Huntsville, Ala., for time with PEO Aviation and PEO Missiles & Space, then it was off to Warren, Mich., home of PEO Ground Combat Systems and PEO Combat Support & Combat Service Support.

The purpose of the tour was to meet with Army Acquisition professionals and discuss plans for the future.

Ostrowski certainly had a plan. It’s a rare thing when a speaker can be said to be “electrifying” in the field of acquisition.

“We’ve been so brain washed in a way,” Ostrowski said to a well-attended auditorium, “to follow processes and that those processes were more important than product, which has put us in a position where we no longer than keep up with the threat and we no longer can keep up with the advances in technology with the speed at which they are turning.”

In Special Operations fashion, Ostrowski directly offered to “fly high cover,” saying “I’ve got your back. Because it’s on me. Which is exactly where I want to be, because we have got to change this thing.”

The first part of these dramatic plans actually began almost a year ago with the Section 809 Panel, assembled specifically to assess acquisition and identify areas of improvement. They presented their initial findings to the Armed Services committee in May of 2017.

Their fifty page paper ended with this conclusion:
“All these events exact a toll on the morale of the acquisition workforce. At some point people, motivated by their desire to serve the country and the men and women defending it, feel frustrated in their efforts to make a difference and do not feel empowered with respect to work processes. The workforce deserves a better system.”

To find that better system, Ostrowski directed his team to “Go to the Navy: they got this thing called an ACAT [Acquisition Category] IV, I want to know all the things about what an ACAT IV is and whether or not we can use something like that in our Army.”
An Acquisition Category IV was exclusive to the Navy and Marines until very recently. It designates either testing or monitoring of a product. Further, those ACAT IV items will be directly managed at the Colonel (O-6) or Civilian GS-15 level.

“I also said, ‘Look, I want you to go to SOCOM and I want to you pull up a thing called a SAMP, a Simplified Acquisition Management Plan,” Ostrowski continued. “Right now one size shoe fits all, weather you’re at ACAT I or ACAT III, in our Army? The documentation isn’t substantially different.”

A SAMP contains acquisition strategy, logistic support plan and a testing plan in roughly ten pages. The reason for this is the paper work is required by law, the there is no specified length.

Ostrowski pointed out that there are waivers that would allow Acquisition personnel to tailor their paperwork, not just to the military requirement but how an item is created and what its intended purpose will be. The issue, he said, was it was easier to do something the “process” way, then to get permission to do it the “product” way.

“That’s why I had to do a Corrosion Prevention Control Plan for a combat shirt. In case you’re wondering, a combat shirt doesn’t have any metal on it at all. It’s just cloth. But I signed it! Because it was easier to that than to ask for a waiver!”

Ostrowski then launched into a comprehensive plan that would allow for a greater degree of customization across the board in acquisition strategies. Ostrowski also addressed testing, and how to hold industry partners accountable to a greater degree of initial functionality, but also a greater degree of long-term improvement. That also means communicating with industry partners on their level, the lieutenant said. “We have to bring the testing community into acquisition reform,” he said continuing, “Acquisition is a team sport.”

A key element of this, is “fly before you buy,” and “buy down risk.” Ostrowski said. This means that rather than rush a product to Milestone B where there is a greater oversight for development, project managers should utilize a more deliberate process to eliminate as much risk as possible before entering the next Milestone gate. Ostrowski said that while this will cost us time in the short term, it will save us time and money in the long term.

These reforms are even more necessary now, as The Army now owns 835 programs, with Integrated Air Missile Defense, Lower Tier Missile Defense and Future Vertical lift the only three programs still under the Office of the Secretary of Defense.

Ostrowski identified an ambitious plan, however, he made it clear that he had put in the work to make it happen and would continue to put in the effort to do so.

“You have equipped the most lethal, the most force protected and the most situational aware Army that has ever walked the face of this earth.” Ostrowski said, reflecting on the accomplishments of the PEO community. “You should be very proud of what it is that you have done.”

Kit Badger on Using an Adjustable Gas Block To Address Over / Undergassed Rifles

Saturday, December 23rd, 2017

Kit Badger posted an article on how to tell if your rifle is overgassed or undergassed, as well as how to address it by tuning a Superlative Arms Adjustable Gas Block. As always, he created a video.

You can check the full post out at kitbadger.com/tuning-a-superlative-arms-adjustable-gas-block.

Marine Corps Fields “Game Changer” Biometric Data Collection System

Thursday, December 14th, 2017

MARINE CORPS BASE QUANTICO, Va. — In September, Marine Corps Systems Command completed fielding a new biometrics system to help deployed Marines identify and track the movement of individuals encountered on the battlefield, conduct entry control point operations, and determine who is a friend or foe.

Identity Dominance System-Marine Corps, or IDS-MC, is a simple and effective biometric data collection, matching, and transaction management system that is composed of a handheld device, known as the Secure Electronic Enrollment Kit, and a laptop computer with specialized biometric collection sensors and a badge printer.

IDS-MC replaces the Biometric Enrollment and Screening Device to assist with detainee management and questioning, base access, counterintelligence screening, border control and law enforcement operations. Unlike the BESD, IDS-MC’s transactional data management capability conveniently collects, shares, matches and stores identity information immediately, allowing the user to connect to the Tactical Data Network, manage and submit collected data and receive responses and feedback on submissions. This improves on the legacy system, which could take days to download data via a CD or DVD, and then Marines had to transmit that vital identity information from a separately connected computing system. This process was not only logistically cumbersome, but the latency in data submission and response receipt created force protection mission challenges for the Marine.

15064A65-57B8-4876-94CA-D8F15F20C17B
Marines conduct a field user evaluation for the Identity Dominance System-Marine Corps, or IDS-MC, in Dahlgren, Virginia. In September, Marine Corps Systems Command completed fielding of the IDS-MC, which is a new biometrics system to help deployed Marines identify and track the movement of individuals encountered on the battlefield, conduct entry control point operations, and determine who is a friend or foe.

“The IDS-MC is more convenient because it connects directly to the Marine Corps’ Tactical Data Network, allowing Marines to share data and submit biometrics and receive the responses effortlessly,” said Sarah Swift, Identity Operations Team lead for Biometrics and Forensics Systems at MCSC.

To develop the IDS-MC, the Identity Operations Team identified a need for a portable, easy-to-use system via feedback from Marines in the fleet. The system was created to directly address the specific needs of Marine Expeditionary Forces in a contested environment.

Using IDS-MC, Marines collect biometric data by capturing a person of interest’s fingerprints, iris and face images. That data can then be matched with pre-existing information onboard the system, either on a BEWL or other lists, such as an access control list used for base force protection. The IDS-MC also has the capability to capture location, biographical and any other reference data that may be useful to an intelligence analyst now or in the future.

The IDS-MC user submits biometric information to the Department of Defense’s Automated Biometric Identification System authoritative database via a web portal, allowing data to be shared across the Biometrics enterprise, and also aiding in the creation of the DoD extensive Biometric-Enabled Watch List, or BEWL. The BEWL contains an ongoing collection of biometric intelligence that helps users determine what actions to take immediately when they encounter a person of interest. Additionally, the Marine Corps Intelligence Agency Identity Intelligence Analytical Cell, or MCIA I2AC, reviews the IDS-MC user’s biometrics submissions and other collected biographical and reference data, and provides direct support to the submitting Marines, providing them analysis reports and intelligence products for potential Persons of Interest.

“The BEWL helps Marines match nefarious people they might encounter anywhere in the world to the ones listed in the database,” said Swift. “We support Marines by providing them the most up to date BEWL, and then they can collect a person’s biometrics. If it shows up in the system as a match, they’ll be notified with a pop-up on the device.”

“All of this provides the Marine Air-Ground Task Force with the ability to rapidly and efficiently identify people encountered in the battle space in support of targeting, military intelligence, law enforcement operations and force protection,” said Maj. Keystella Mitchell, project officer for IDS-MC.

In addition to identifying known threats, the system also collects information on potential future threats and stores it for future reference. If an individual is a match in the system, Marines are able to immediately receive that information and use it to inform on-the-spot decisions.

“It can be difficult to determine who the enemy is because they truly blend in with their surroundings,” said Mitchell. “The IDS-MC is a game changer and force multiplier as a connected system for the commander on the ground because they can identify the threat and take action much quicker than before.”

In addition to the planned fielding of the IDS-MC system, an urgent system quantity shortfall was identified by the Special Purpose Marine Air-Ground Task Force and Marine Corps Forces Central Command customers. This required an unplanned increase in the number of production assets which required a fielding re-prioritization strategy, additional rapid procurement and integration. The Identity Operations Team adapted its strategy, and within two months of validating the requirement, it fielded the additional systems.

The fielding of the IDS-MC system has led to a 154 percent increase in the biometric collections submitted to MCIA I2AC and resulted in 11 watch list hits in just the first month of fielding.

The IDS-MC is managed by the Identity Operations Team which falls under Command Element Systems at MCSC.

By Kaitlin Kelly, MCSC Office of Public Affairs and Communication

Kit Badger – VCAS Medic Sling By Blue Force Gear

Sunday, December 10th, 2017

4458C07E-9D95-4757-9FF6-6441B12DE8AB

For a limited time, Blue Force Gear is offering the Vickers Medic Sling.

Kit Badger did a video review of the sling. For his full post, visit kitbadger.com.

Program Office Begins Fielding Upgraded LAV Anti-Tank Weapon System to Marines

Wednesday, November 22nd, 2017

MARINE CORPS BASE QUANTICO, Va. — The Corps is upgrading the turret system on one of its longest-serving fighting vehicles–the Light Armored Vehicle-Anti-Tank.


A Light Armored Vehicle Anti-Tank Modernization A2 model sits under an awning aboard Marine Corps Logistics Base Barstow, Calif., June 15. Marine Corps Systems Command’s LAV-Anti-Tank Modernization program team completed its first fielding of four upgraded ATWS in September. (U.S. Marine Corps Photo by Keith Hayes)

In September, Marine Corps Systems Command’s LAV-AT Modernization program team achieved initial operational capability by completing its first fielding of four upgraded Anti-Tank Weapon Systems to 1st Light Armored Reconnaissance Battalion Marines at Camp Pendleton, California.

The ATWS fires tube-launched, optically-tracked, wire-guided, or TOW, missiles. It provides long-range, stand-off anti-armor fire support to maneuvering Light Armored Reconnaissance Companies and platoons, and observation capability in all climates and during periods of limited visibility.

The LAV-ATM program was established in 2012 to enhance the reliability, availability and maintainability of the vehicle’s turret system.

The team’s goal was to get a new turret system on the LAV-AT platform that was easy to maintain, reliable and effective, said Jim Forkin, Program Manager’s Office LAV-ATM team lead.

“Compared to the legacy version, the new turret is unmanned, it fires both wire-guided and radio frequency TOW missiles, and it can acquire targets while on-the-move with an improved thermal sight,” said Forkin.

It also has a Far Target Location system, new commander/gunner video sight displays, and an electric elevation and azimuth drive system, which helps rotate the weapon system onto the target.

“The turret is important because it protects Marines and gives them an enhanced capability that they didn’t have before,” said Chief Warrant Officer 4 Michael S. Lovell, Ordinance Vehicle Maintenance officer, PM LAV team. “The new turret on the LAV-AT helps us watch over other vehicles and target enemies with increased vision.”

The LAV-ATM team provides new equipment training to units receiving the ATWS upgrade. It lasts for two weeks, and the first week is focused on operators and the second week is on maintainer training. Continued training on the system can be conducted by the units using the embedded training mode.

IMG_5367
A Marine tests the enhanced vision capability–part of an upgrade to the Light Armored Vehicle’s Anti-Tank Weapon System–during new equipment training Sept. 18-29, at Camp Pendleton, Calif. Marine Corps Systems Command completed its first fielding of four upgraded ATWS in September. (Courtesy photo)

Thanks to advances in technology, Marines can initiate a built-in test to conduct a system check of the components that make up the ATWS to help the operator and maintainer diagnose and troubleshoot the system, a feature not previously available on the legacy turret, said Forkin.

The operator can also use an embedded training mode in the ATWS, which is software driven, to support individual and crew training by simulating the firing of the weapon system while viewing targets through the biocular display unit.

“This function is new to the LAV-ATM platform and will enhance sustainment training while in garrison or the field without wasting resources,” said Forkin. “With new technological advances, the overall design and functionality has improved.”

In addition to training in the field, anti-tank gunners and maintainers also train in a classroom setting environment with stations using existing 3D computer simulated technology leveraged by the U.S. Army to train their maintainers. This modernizes how the Corps trains its maintainers to meet the requirements to sustain the new ATWS.

By incorporating a blended training solution, all four existing Tactical Turret Trainers are upgraded with the ATWS and a 3D Diagnostic Turret Trainer, or DTT, is added. The DTT consists of two classrooms with eight student stations and one instructor station each. The Corps’ 3D DTT maintenance training system is unique to the ATWS and will be fielded in November.

“Using the 3D DTT, students will interactively conduct troubleshooting and remove and replace ATWS components in a simulated environment, which will be followed by training on actual hardware on the Tactical Turret Trainer and vehicles,” said Paul Kopjoe, Logistics Management specialist, PM LAV team at Program Manager’s Office LAV.

With a combination of an interactive 3D DTT, which allows the instructor to train multiple students at the same time, the ATWS Tactical Turret Trainer provides the student with the tactile feel of a real ATWS system. Benefits of DTT by other programs include the reduction in student attrition rates and the ability for maintenance tasks to be repeated numerous times, without risk of injury or wear and tear on equipment.

The U.S. Army Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center, or ARDEC, is the overarching Army agency used to acquire and develop the 3D DTT training products. The Gaming Interactive Technologies & Multimedia and the Automated Test Systems Directorate are the primary organizations within ARDEC that completed the majority of the work to help make this happen, Kopjoe said.

“Traditionally, training products are procured utilizing industry which can take 18-24 months just to get effort on contract,” said Kopjoe. “We were able to eliminate that time by utilizing existing Army resources, so that our Marines would be properly trained when the ATWS was fielded. This also allowed the ATM Team to meet the training needs of the USMC Ordnance School located at Fort Lee, Virginia.”

Fielding for the ATWS will be completed at the end of 2019.

“Marines who serve as anti-tank gunners will be able to do their job better,” said Lovell. “We’re providing a product that gives Marines an enhanced anti-tank capability improving their forward reconnaissance and combined arms fire power on the battlefield.”

By Kaitlin Kelly, MCSC Office of Public Affairs and Communication | Marine Corps Systems Command

The Corps’ Secret Agents Get Their Own 007

Wednesday, November 8th, 2017

MARINE CORPS BASE QUANTICO, Va. — The Marine Corps is equipping Marines with a new weapon, providing enhanced concealed carry capabilities at an accelerated rate and lower cost to the Corps.

IMG_5324
Individual Weapons project officer Gunnery Sgt. Brian Nelson prepares to draw the M007 concealed carry weapon. The M007 offers enhanced concealed carry capabilities, which includes a smaller frame, ambidextrous slide stop lever and flared magazine well. Marine Corps Systems Command recently fielded the M007 to Marine and civilian CID agents and members of Helicopter Squadron One. (U.S. Marine Corps photo by Jennifer Napier)

The Glock 19M–called the M007 by the Corps–replaces the M9 service pistol for personnel requiring a weapon that can be easily concealed.

The Marine Corps requires that all accredited Marine Corps Criminal Investigators, both civilian and military, be armed with a concealable pistol when on duty in civilian attire. This concealed weapon capability ensures those performing official duties–such as law enforcement or security personnel–are not readily identified as being armed.

“The M007 has a smaller frame and is easier to conceal, making it a natural selection to meet the Marine Corps’ conceal carry weapon requirement,” said Gunnery Sgt. Brian Nelson, Individual Weapons project officer at Marine Corps Systems Command.

In coordination with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, which adopted the weapon in 2016, the Corps fielded the M007 earlier this year to Marines and civilians in the Marine Corps Criminal Investigation Division, as well as members of Helicopter Squadron One–also known as Marine One.

IMG_5325
Marine Corps Systems Command is equipping Marine and civilian CID agents and members of Helicopter Squadron One with the M007. The M007 offers enhanced concealed carry capabilities, which includes a smaller frame, ambidextrous slide stop lever and flared magazine well. The weapon’s smaller frame makes it easier to conceal, as demonstrated in the photo. (U.S. Marine Corps graphic)

Aside from concealability, the M007 has several physical improvements over its predecessor. The grip lacks finger grooves but has a textured frame, improving the ergonomics of the weapon and providing a consistently comfortable grip with traction for a wider range of users. The ambidextrous slide stop allows for both right- and left-handed use. The magazine release of the M007 can also be changed and the magazine well is flared, making the system easier to reload, said Nelson.

Collaboration between the product team at MCSC and the FBI played a key role in the Corps’ ability to hasten the otherwise lengthy acquisition process.

“The fielding of the M007 is an example of how we can streamline the acquisition process by reviewing another service or agency’s test data to see if it fits the Marine Corps’ need,” said Lt. Col. Paul Gillikin, Infantry Weapons team lead at MCSC. “We received the initial request for a new concealed carry weapon system in April 2016. By collaborating with the FBI, we were able to procure, establish sustainability plans and start fielding the weapon to Marines by May 2017.”

Typically, the acquisition process of a new weapons system–from the time the requirement is received by MCSC to the time the system is fielded to the fleet–takes months, if not years, to complete. By leveraging thorough test data performed by the FBI, MCSC’s team reduced their own testing time. The team also carefully planned to ensure the M007 is fully supported, sustainable, and meets all logistics and safety requirements, enabling MCSC to meet and deliver the concealed carry weapons systems Marines need in a relatively quick turnaround time, said Gillikin.

Program Manager Infantry Weapons, which falls under MCSC’s Ground Combat Element Systems portfolio, manages the concealed carry weapons program for the Marine Corps.

By Ashley Calingo, MCSC Office of Public Affairs and Communication