Protact by Haartz

Archive for the ‘SOF’ Category

Task Force Dagger Foundation and Cubic Raise Awareness For Special Operations Forces Families

Thursday, June 18th, 2020

Task Force Dagger Foundation (TFDF) will be the beneficiary of the SOF Online Auction presented by Cubic, opening June 15 at 8AM EDT and closing June 19 at 5PM EDT.

Auction items include an OMEGA “James Bond” watch, Daniel Defense Experience, 75th Anniversary D-Day Flag shadow box, Argentina 4 person Dove Hunt, Maxim Defense Pistol Kit, Custom Bourbon Barrel Table, Tickets to 2021 PGA Championship, Weapons from Benelli, SigSauer, Glock, S&W and an Adams Arms TFD rifle, Plus additional items from Under Armour, Aimpoint, Magpul, FirstSpear and many more.

Funds raised though the auction will directly impact families of the Special Operations Community and will be applied to TFDF’s three core programs: Immediate Needs, Rehabilitative Events, and the SOF Health Initiatives Program.

To bid on an item or learn more about this fundraising event, please visit: bit.ly/SOFAuction

Task Force Dagger Foundation provides assistance to wounded, ill, or injured United States Special Operations Command members and their families. We respond to immediate needs, conduct Rehabilitative Therapy Events, and provide next-generation health solutions for issues facing our service members. Our cohesive programs improve the quality of life for Special Operations Families.  To learn more about Task Force Dagger Foundation, visit our website at www.taskforcedagger.org.

 

 

SOFWERX – Trusted Capital AI Virtual Venture Day Starting 24 June 2020

Wednesday, June 17th, 2020

The Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) Trusted Capital, in concert with the United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM), the Joint Artificial Intelligence Center (JAIC), and the Department of Energy (DOE), will host an AI-focused Trusted Capital Virtual Venture Day.

Trusted Capital events are designed to bring together DoD-critical companies and capital providers to align their existing capabilities with national security interests.

The goal is to facilitate funding of companies with critical technology to provide risk mitigation against adversarial influence in supply chains and funding channels.

Trusted Capital maximizes the public-private partnership model. The U.S. government screens capital providers and companies for national security risks prior to offering participation in Venture Days and the Trusted Capital program. Eligible companies are firms offering technologies and capabilities critical to national security and seeking to secure sources of funding in support of the defense industrial base. Eligible capital providers are investment groups that support U.S. national security sectors that align with their investment portfolio.

Approximately 10 qualifying AI companies will deliver their pitches and funding needs to trusted providers of capital weekly over the course of several weeks. If your organization is accepted in Trusted Capital, you will receive an opportunity to prepare a five-minute pitch video with one minute at the end for questions from the capital providers and acquisition community.

This program will be administered on a first-come, first-serve basis for those companies that qualify to participate in the Trusted Capital Marketplace (TCM).

AI sectors of interest:
• Autonomous Vehicles
• Machine Vision and Image Recognition
• Machine Learning
• Robotics and Scale Automation
• Navigation System
• Language Processing and Recognition

Potential participants will undergo the due diligence required to pass a national security review for entrance into the Trusted Capital Venture Day and Trusted Capital Marketplace.

Submission Deadline: 22 June 11:59 PM EST

Visit events.sofwerx.org/trustedcapital to enter.

The 75th Ranger Regiment Announces Permanent Activation of the Regimental Military Intelligence Battalion

Wednesday, June 17th, 2020

Effective June 16, 2020, the Regimental Military Intelligence Battalion, 75th Ranger Regiment is officially activated and an enduring part of the 75th Ranger Regiment.

The Regimental Military Intelligence Battalion was provisionally activated on May 22, 2017 at Fort Benning, Georgia.

It was announced in October 2019, that the battalion would became a permanent part of the 75th Ranger Regiment.

“Within Sullivan’s Charter for the 75th Ranger Regiment, we continue to evolve as an ‘awesome force composed of skilled, dedicated Soldiers who can do things with their hands and weapons better than anyone,’” Lt. Col. Timothy Sikora, Commander, Regimental Military Intelligence Battalion said.

“Today the intelligence and cyber Rangers remain at the top of their fields, able to do things with their tools that are rarely matched by their peers.”

“Each one of the RMIB Rangers earned their tan beret and scroll the same as every other military occupational specialty in the 75th Ranger Regiment formation,” Sikora added. “Everyone is a Ranger first.”

Whether it is unmanned aircraft systems operators, all-source analysts, geospatial analysts, human intelligence collectors, technical operations, electronic warfare or cyber analysts, RMIB Rangers make up the majority of Ranger-tabbed Soldiers in their specialties.

“In deployed and garrison environments, the RMIB adapts to meet the needs of the 75th Ranger Regiment,” Sikora said. “We are 75% towards our authorized fill and continue to actively recruit motivated Soldiers from all specialties to join our team.”

For more information on serving with RMIB, go to: www.benning.army.mil/Tenant/75thRanger/RMIB-ABOUT or email 75recruit@socom.mil or 75officerrecruit@socom.mil.

About the Regimental Military Intelligence Battalion

The battalion’s mission is to recruit, train, develop, and employ highly trained and specialized Rangers to conduct full spectrum intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance, cyber, and electronic warfare operations in order to enhance the Regimental Commander’s situational awareness and inform his decision-making process. Presently, the RMIB consists of a headquarters detachment and two companies.

The staff and command group are embedded within the Headquarters and Headquarters Detachment. It leads the Regiment’s recruitment and management of intelligence Rangers, synchronizes intelligence training and operations across the Regiment and with other special operations and conventional forces, and also provides intelligence support to the Regimental staff.

The Military Intelligence Company possesses a diverse mix of capabilities which include all-source analysts, geospatial analysts, human intelligence collectors, counterintelligence agents, and unmanned aerial systems. This enables the company to conduct multi-discipline collection and production, expeditionary imagery collection and processing, exploitation, and dissemination of raw data, and all-source analysis, to further enable the Regiment’s training and operations.

The Cyber Electromagnetic Activities Company integrates and synchronizes cyber, electronic warfare, signals intelligence, and technical surveillance in support of the Regimental Commander’s objectives. The CEMA Company represents a new approach in line with the Army’s intent of fielding a modernized force capable of operations on any front. The multi-domain concept provides a non-linear approach where all events can occur across the environment at any time. CEMA places emphasis on innovation, technological advancement and electronic pursuit to support real time operations against any threat, digital or otherwise.

Rangers Lead the Way!

June 88 – 160th SOAG Recovers Mi-24 in Chad

Monday, June 15th, 2020

June 1988, the 160th SOAG (Originally Task Force 160, the unit was later Designated a Group, the Regiment) received a short-notice directive to recover a Russian made Mi-24 Hind attack helicopter from a remote location in Chad.

At midnight on June 11, 1988, two MH-47s flew 490 miles at night without outside navigational aids to the target location, the Ouadi Doum airfield in northern Chad.

The first Chinook landed and configured the Mi-24, while the second hovered overhead and sling loaded it for return to Ndjamena.

A surprise sandstorm slowed the return trip, but less than 67 hours after the arrival of the C-5 in Chad, the ground crew had the Mi-24 and Chinooks aboard and ready for return to the U.S.

Operation Mount Hope demonstrated incredible teamwork by aviation, ground, and support personnel. Their efforts resulted in the unit’s ability to strike deep and accomplish the mission.

Night Stalkers Don’t Quit!

The Baldwin Files – More SWCS History

Tuesday, June 9th, 2020

Leaders practice leadership constantly, but rarely – if ever – come close to mastering it. Practicing good leadership is always hard. To be successful, leaders have to strive to be harder…and smarter. I have not always been good, and I certainly have not always been smart, but I always tried to do it right. The most challenging leadership position I ever had was as Commander of F Company, 1st Battalion, 1st Special Warfare Training Group at Camp Mackall, North Carolina, 2000-2001. I have spoken about that assignment several times before. To be sure, the actual job of managing two phases of the Special Forces Qualification Course (SFQC) was both personally and professionally rewarding. It was the single most satisfying assignment of my career.

On the other hand, the leadership and command climate of the 1st Training Battalion at the time left much to be desired and made some aspects of my job harder than it needed to be. I make no secret of my bias here. I consider myself the good guy in this story, and my Battalion Commander (BC) the bad guy. Performing my unit’s training mission was a joy; dealing with my boss was a constant frustration. I am sure he saw it differently then and likely still does to this day. He is free to tell his version. However, if his story is substantially different from what I am about to share, he will be a damn liar.

As I have mentioned before, by 2000, Special Forces were in a statistical death spiral. In better times, we had become a Branch, stood up the 1st SFG, and started reactivating the 3rd SFG by 1990. Then, the Army went through a significant drawdown after Desert Storm. So, by 1993-94, our in-service recruiting pool was reduced almost by half. I saw the effects while I was commanding C/1/5th SFG, 1994-95. With few exceptions, the Group had ODAs with only 7-8 personnel assigned and even fewer on hand on a daily basis. The problem was getting worse as time went on. We were simply losing more people to ETS and retirement then we were graduating from the SFQC.

When I got to the Special Warfare Center and School (SWCS) in April 2000, the situation looked bleak. Some good initiatives did come out of this difficult period. The 18X-Ray Enlistment Option for example that let us dip into another pool of potential candidates. However, while that initiative was approved during my time at SWCS, it was almost two years later – well after my time – before any of those folks got through the pipeline. Other ideas were frankly harebrained. One Group Commander opined that the Army could be convinced by SF leadership to “levy” soldiers to attend our Selection Course  (SFAS). Whether they wanted to go or not. He believed that at least some of those pressganged into attending would pass. I have no idea why he imagined that tactical units would voluntarily cull out their best and brightest – rather than take the opportunity to get rid of their shitbirds – to meet our needs rather than their own. Fortunately, that experiment was never attempted.

One of the unfortunate consequences of wrestling with this seemingly insurmountable problem was that the people actually in charge began to look around for someone else to blame. Much of that blame fell – unjustly – on the Cadre of the Training Companies. Since my company had two big pieces of the SFQC, we got our share of the blame and then some. In fact, when the new BC met my Cadre for the first time, his initial comment was “if you people were better NCOs we would have more people graduating from the course.” Fortunately, SF NCOs are not shy. One of my NCOs jumped up immediately and replied, “Sir, you don’t know what the F#@* you are talking about!”

I had only been there a couple of months myself but I had already seen my NCOs busting their rear ends trying to get salvageable borderline students across the finish line. After the BC had thrown his rhetorical grenade in the classroom, the situation only deteriorated. He got defensive, and the Cadre continued to push back – hard but professionally – on the additional points he tried to make. It was the most counter-production encounter I have even witnessed between a commander and troops. After only 3-4 minutes, the BC beat a hasty retreat. My SGM and I immediately buttonholed him and his CSM outside the building and unloaded on him as well. He left Camp Mackall and went back to the Battalion HQ at Fort Bragg. Believe you me, he left pissed at all of us – especially me – and he never got over it. As for myself, I could not have been more proud of my soldiers.

Do not get me wrong, the Cadre at the SFQC are not perfect. Some occasionally get into what we call the “protect the Tab” mode and add their own personal hoops for the candidates to jump through or invent their own standards. However, despite the pressure, most do an outstanding job class after class. In Ranger School – at least when I went through – the RIs rotated out every 24 hours or so. I would say that methodology is appropriate for that particular school. Of course, because of that constant change over, I do not remember any of the RIs except those I had served with in other units. Conversely, individual SFQC Cadre stay with the same student team throughout a phase. More akin to the way Drill Sergeants continuously instruct as well as model the behavior expected of their assigned charges. Similarly, just as soldiers remember their Drill Sergeants, an SFQC candidate will likely also remember his Cadre Team Sergeant’s example of quiet professionalism – good, bad, or otherwise.

The majority of the Cadre in my company routinely carried that heavy burden with pride, skill, and style. Moreover, they did it day after day without complaint. However, they were not inclined to be unfairly critiqued by anyone not shouldering that same rucksack. I had overlapped with the BC in 3rd Group. He commanded A/3/3 and, toward the end of my tour, became XO of 1/3 while I was commanding A/1/3; but I had not had enough personal contact to form a professional opinion of him. Still, the BC’s intensely negative attitude towards the Cadre was hard to understand. He had been an NCO in the Air Force as a SERE instructor; shifted to the Army and been an 18C (SF Engineer), in 7th Group; then a Signal Officer, also in 7th Group; before going through the 18A (SF Officer) course. I have to assume that in one or both of his SFQC experiences the Cadre at the time had inflicted damage to his sensibilities in some fashion.

He definitely held a grudge. Whenever he met with students – mine or those of the other companies in the battalion – he always asked first if they had any complaints about their cadre or had they witnessed any cadre misconduct. He made it abundantly clear that he did not trust us and, in turn, we knew not to trust him. Since he was some 35 miles away from me at Bragg, I had to deal with him far less than some of the other company commanders based across the street from him. When he did come out to see me or the other two companies (SFAS and SERE) at Mackall, he always came out unannounced – specifically, as he self-righteously told me to my face more than once – to catch us doing “something wrong.”  

Normally, given that he was only one-year group ahead of me and we had served together as Majors, one would expect our professional – if not personal – relationship to be cordial and near-peer. Indeed, I was the senior Major in the Training Group at the time. However, he took every opportunity to emphasize that he was a Lieutenant Colonel (LTC) and the boss and I was just a Major and his subordinate. True enough, but irrelevant to my mission, so I mostly tried to ignore him. One of the idiosyncrasies of working at a schoolhouse is that you do not have a unit produced Training Schedule that is subject to change at a moment’s notice. Instead, Cadre execute a Program of Instruction (POI) that has to be followed with little deviation. It also meant that resources like money, aircraft, and other transportation assets were pre-allocated two years out. Therefore, I had no requirement or need to ask battalion or Training Group for anything additional. 

The BC seemed to have trouble understanding that reality. For example, he slipped onto the Camp one afternoon and started shutting down training. We were in the middle of teaching the Military Decision Making Process (MDMP) in the student team rooms. In those days, the students lived and did most academic training and planning is some pre-fabricated sheds. Those sheds had been used and abused when I went through in 1990-91. By 2000, they were in bad shape. In fact, SWCS had cut off funding for anything but emergency maintenance and the buildings were already scheduled for demolition and replacement within a couple of years. He went into one of the rooms, was dissatisfied with the neatness of the student team’s gear and ordered a GI Party. He was in the process of doing the same in all the other team rooms when I caught up with him.

He started to chew my ass about how the team rooms were pigsties and it was my fault. He then demanded that I put one hour of barracks maintenance every day on the schedule. He added that he expected me to personally inspect each barracks daily to ensure a high standard of cleanliness. I told him no. I explained that the buildings were at the very end of their lifecycle. I also said I cannot change the POI, and neither can you. Every hour of the day and night is allocated to specific tasks. Right now, we are doing MDMP. For many of the NCOs and even some of the officers, it is the first time they have seen anything above a Patrol Order. They are graded on this task. If we fail, they will be recycled or dropped. Nowhere in the POI does it require me to run an NCO Academy or conduct white glove inspections. If you can get the Proponency – ultimately the CG – at SWCS to add barracks inspections I will start doing them. I also mentioned that it would take about two years before any such change would take effect.

I am not sure how much of what I said got through. He just looked at me and said, “So you are refusing my order?” I replied with more composure than I felt, “Sir, I have explained to you why I cannot follow that order.” He stormed off. I then when around all the team rooms, stopped the GI Party and got the students and Cadre refocused on their actual mission. The next day, the BC came back and gave me a Letter of Reprimand for “disobeying” his order. I took it and moved on. The funny thing is, I do not think he cared about the barracks issue. He certainly never checked again. I knew he was not going to pursue the asinine idea of scheduling barracks maintenance with the CG. I eventually came to think that he just wanted to pull my chain – just to remind me that he could.

It became a regular thing. About a month later, during Robin Sage, he came out to see a student team. The team we chose to show him was having some problems. We made a point of trying to build student teams that were balanced in terms of skill sets and prior experience. We intentionally avoided creating teams of just studs or duds. However, despite our best effort, every cycle saw one or two teams that just did not “gel” the way we would hope. One of the ways we would “reset” a team like that would be to have the OPFOR force them out of their G-Base and require them to move to another. It was a wakeup call and usually helped the students regain their footing and refocus on the mission. I explained all of that to the BC before we got there.

Robin Sage is not like most Army training. It requires the students to respond to the dilemmas they encounter in fictitious Pineland. Many of those challenges are entirely unscripted and others are of the students’ own making based on how they respond or fail to respond. It is, of course, an artificial environment but great effort is made to help the students suspend their disbelief and react as if the situations are real and deadly serious. To do that, we always kept visitors to a bare minimum. When visitors did come out, we asked them to come in civilian clothes rather than uniforms. The BC insisted that he and his CSM would be in BDUs. I asked him to at least take off his top and put on a cadre shirt and ballcap. The BC would have none of that. I noted, that he took some glee in saying no – I surmised because the suggestion had come from me.

It was mid-morning when we got to the new G-Base. The student team and their role-playing guerrillas had literally just gotten there less than an hour earlier. They had been on the run for about 40 hours and were still establishing their security. The BC eschewed going around the perimeter to meet the soldiers individually as they busied themselves with their priorities of work – as they had been taught. Instead, he yelled out for them to stop what they were doing and gather around him. He introduced himself as the BC and asked them how they were being treated by the Cadre – pointing to me and my NCOs. He did not ask any questions about their training. I had to stifle a chuckle. Given that the students knew that we were unsatisfied with their performance as a team up to that point, I was sure they thought the BC’s visit was just another Pineland dilemma for them to solve. They stood silently until the BC was done; and as he turned to leave, they went back to work. As a side note, that team did much better during the rest of Robin Sage and most graduated.

I thought that was it. I told myself that the damage was minor and I should be grateful for that. However, when we left the woodline the BC started to chew my ass. He was especially angry that the students were unshaven. I reminded him that they had been moving, sometimes under OPFOR pressure, for two days. He said that was no excuse. He declared that since I knew that my BC was coming out to “inspect” training that I should have had the students “go admin” to shave, clean themselves up, and be standing in formation – ready for inspection – when he got there. It was very bizarre. Afterward, he gave me another Letter of Reprimand for “students not clean-shaven.” I put it with the first one.

That became the pattern. About once a class, he would come out and bitch about something. From time to time, he would find some similarly absurd reason to reprimand me. It was a running joke in the company that I was going to need a bigger file cabinet for all those letters. Toward the end of the year, my company was awarded an Army Superior Unit Award. There was no award ceremony and the BC never mentioned it. As I said earlier, most of the time I forgot all about him. Our classes at Mackall were back to back to back. There was not much time to dwell on nonsense. After a while, when he realized I was not giving him much satisfaction he stopped coming out much at all. The companies at Bragg were not so lucky and I felt sorry for them but relieved nonetheless.

In early 2000, my fist LTC Board was coming up. I had about seven months with the BC at that point and might normally get a Complete the Record Officer Evaluation Report (OER) for the Board. Of course, that was only truly helpful if one was going to get a “top block” rating on that evaluation. Since I had no doubt that the BC did not consider me top block material I knew that was not going to happen. After all, I already had six formal Reprimands from the guy; not to mention countless ass chewing for various lesser “unprofessional” offenses in his eyes. In early March, I got a message to meet him at the Training Group Commander’s office. I had not seen the BC in a couple of weeks and rarely had reason to see the Group Commander (GC). I assumed that the BC had decided to take his animosity toward me to the next level and that this was going to be unpleasant.

I was wrong. When I got there the GC was friendly, calling me by my first name and inviting me in. I went into the office and saw the BC was already sitting there. The GC sat at his desk and informed me that the BC had recommended me for a top block OER. I was stunned and remained mostly silent – as did the BC. Once the GC, BC, and I signed the OER, his secretary took it for submission. The write-ups in the OER were exceptionally flattering. Apparently, everyone in my chain of command agreed, I walked on water and was the best of the best. I knew almost instantly it was a trap – or more precisely a bribe. The BC had decided that if I could not be intimidated, perhaps I could be bought.

What I did not understand immediately is why the BC went to the trouble. However, he wasted little time in letting me know that I “owed him one.” He had something specific in mind that he wanted from me in payback. The manning challenges that I mentioned the Groups were having also directly affected the Training Group. I never had more than two-thirds of the Cadre I was supposed to have. For some events like Robin Sage, we got some “guest cadre” from the Groups. The Groups wanted that tasker to go away but did not want to lose any more people to a full SWCS tour either. Someone, I do not who, came up with the idea of expanding the guest cadre program significantly in order to sharply reduce the number of assigned instructors. The trouble with that idea is that just because someone graduated from SFQC it does not follow that they can teach the course to standard without additional preparation. Graduating college does not make one a professor, getting jump wings does not make one qualified to be a Black Hat at Airborne School.

To get newly assigned Cadre ready to solo a class we used what was called the Shadow Program. It was a fairly informal process. A new guy would be partnered up with an old hand and stick with him through one class cycle. To refresh some technical skills, like land navigation, we would take them out to the STAR course and run them through separate from the students. Likewise a myriad of Small unit tactics, Unconventional Warfare techniques, etc. needed to be reintroduced. Depending on the Group they had come from and where and how often they had deployed, invariably some of those skills would have atrophied. Except for the guys shadowing, we seldom had more than one Cadre NCO for each student team. They had to be ready to teach and then evaluate the students’ performance in all those tasks by themselves. Shadowing also allowed us to evaluate that new NCO. Again, not everyone who graduates the SFQC is suited to teach at the school.

Sometimes we would get a guy on a second SWCS tour and we could shorten the timeline but that did not happen often. This idea of handing students to guest cadre with little or no preparation had been rattling around SWCS for a couple of months. I was dead set against it for all the reasons I just mentioned. I had reminded people that four Ranger students had died in 1995 in part because some of the RIs that night were not well versed in the School’s safety protocols. Therefore, I also saw it as a safety issue. Moreover, by this time I knew that my most experienced NCOs were also the guys most capable of getting student stragglers over that finish line. Inexperienced, temporary cadre would not have those skills. I thought the idea had been shelved as unworkable but my BC had decided to resurrect it. More accurately, he was tasking me to make it work.

I believe, and have often argued, that soldiers are obliged to execute legal orders – no matter how much they might personally disagree with those orders. Certainly, there can be exceptions; however, I am convinced it is a sound principle to follow barring extraordinary circumstances. So, I now had my marching orders – and they were not illegal. I gathered my Cadre, told them of my concerns but asked that we all withhold judgment until we had done legitimate mission analysis. I put the two committees to work separately and we broke down the tasks involved, the time required, mitigation strategies, and potential areas to accept risk. It was good sound work and the two teams came up with a tailored range of options. It became clear that if we had the guest cadre for enough time – the length of a class plus 3 weeks prior prep time (~10 weeks total) – we could get the job done. However, to work it also required consolidating the majority of classroom training and the result was a far more centralized process then had ever been used in the SFQC before. Bottom line: all of the Courses of Action we developed were clearly sub-optimum compared to the status quo – but not impossible. I admit I had hoped my teams would find a more obvious fatal flaw to kill the idea forever.

Nevertheless, I still expected that when I briefed the plan to the SWCS leadership and told them that the juice was not even close to being worth the squeeze they would agree to abandon the idea. I took our analysis to the BC and he went ballistic. He demanded that we redo the briefings to only highlight how we would make it work and emphasize that we saw no significant downsides. Moreover, he declared that the guess cadre would only arrive the week prior to a class starting. My company would produce and provide those guests with “cheat sheets” or a “smart booklet” that they could self-study and familiarize themselves with over a weekend! I told him he was out of his mind, that would be a lie, and I was not going to brief any such thing. I reminded him that he had a staff and he could do his own mission analysis and if he believed that bullshit he could brief it himself. He said, “no, you are going to brief it just the way I told you. Come back to me in two days with a new briefing.”

He had actually done me a favor and I am sure he did not even realize it at the time. He had just ordered me to lie to SWCS leadership – and that was an illegal order that I had no intention of following. I spent the next day visiting the SWCS Staff Judge Advocate (SJA) and Inspector General (IG). They shrugged off my illegal order premise and basically said it is not illegal or against regulations for your commander to be an asshole. I was not going to get any help from the system. That evening I went to see the SWCS CG. I had not had much contact with him but found out quickly that he was no fan of mine. Apparently, the BC had told him I was against any and all change in the SFQC and that he had reprimanded me more than once and had taken me under his wing in hopes I would become more of a team player. I tried to steer the conversation in a more fact-based direction but it was no use. He shook my hand on the way out. No help there.

The next day my SGM and I drove together to Bragg. He had been a great partner throughout all of the nonsense and I always counted on his honest feedback. He said, “Sir, it looks like you are just going to have to give them what they want. The guys will understand.” And there it was. He had just given me an opening to wiggle out of full responsibility with a relatively clean conscience by claiming, “Their fault not mine.” It was a rare moment of perfect clarity for me. I had seen it coming and knew what I had to do. I had no choice. We met the BC in his conference room with his staff present. I pushed the same briefings toward him that he had already seen. I told him that this is all we can do and this is what I intend to brief – including all the downsides. He threw the briefings in my face and started to storm out. In order not to drag this on, I will just say there were raised voices, chair banging, and red faces involved and I gave as good as I got.

When it was over I had been relieved. The BC also ordered me not to go back to Camp Mackall. He was afraid that I would foment some kind of insurgency. I probably could have. Instead, my two Cadre teams met me separately that day outside of the camp. I told all of them how sorry I was to have failed them. I cried more than once that day. I teared up writing it down just now. There is an upside to being publicly cashiered. I got to see who my real friends were. I was highly radioactive for some time. Men I had known for years would not return my calls. Thankfully, others still did. My BC had been a little too clever when he arranged that top block OER. It was clearly suspicious to write me up as a stud in March and then claim that I had “engaged in a [unspecified] pattern of misconduct” among other things a few weeks later.

SWCS unintentionally helped me as well. I requested an investigation in writing and they denied my request. If you have been in the Army you know they open an investigation if there is toilet paper missing from the latrine. That certainly looked like they were hiding something. Someone – the BC I presume –  started a rumor that I had a nervous breakdown from the pressure of the job. The SWCS SJA came to me and counseled that I was “lucky” because they could have charged me under the UCMJ. I told him he was full of shit. They had used an administrative process to remove me from command precisely because that puts all the onus on me to prove my innocence. If they charged me with a crime that meant a court-marshal, they would have to provide enough proof to convict me, and I would have a defense lawyer and the opportunity to provide evidence and witnesses of my own. SWCS did not want that. They wanted me to go quietly. That is also why SWCS did not attempt to pull my SF Tab or my TS Clearance despite my alleged heinous crimes against good order and discipline.

Later, I provided evidence of what actually happened to the Training Group Commander and he ended up writing a letter in my support. I consider him one of the good guys and a friend. Up front, I framed this as a story of good guys and bad guys with me in the lead good guy role. But, I am not the hero of this story. The heroes are those SFQC Cadre NCOs who did all the work successfully training, assessing, teaching, coaching, and mentoring, every emergent SF Candidate seeking to earn their Green Berets. Since then, I have asked myself many times if there was not a better way to work through the situation I found myself in. Perhaps a series of different decisions that might have led to a more positive outcome? Yes, I believe there probably was a better way. I still have not figured out what that might have been; but I am certain that a smarter leader, with more talent than I, would have done it differently. No doubt.

I said I believe in following legal orders. That does not mean a leader has any obligation to underwrite someone else’s bad choices. Instead, be honest with your soldiers. Tell them it is not your cockamamie idea but if anyone can make chicken salad out of this chicken shit we can. Do not let anyone barter your reputation, credibility, and integrity, as cover for his or her bad decisions. Make whoever actually made the decision own it. Good leaders will always do that anyway. Bad leaders do not deserve your loyalty, your soldiers do. Finally, I draw your attention to the attached picture. It is a framed guidon from F Company. Typically, a commander who is relieved would not receive a guidon. I did. It was presented at a clandestine ceremony the Cadre invited me to at Camp Mackall about three weeks after I was fired and forbidden to return. I consider it living proof that I must have been doing something right. It is my most prized memento and the highest award for service I ever received. De Oppress Liber.

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.

GSA Awards 7-Year Light Tactical Vehicle Contract to Polaris

Thursday, June 4th, 2020

Polaris MRZR Alpha Pioneers a New Level of Air-Transportable Mobility

 

Minneapolis – June 4, 2020 – Special Operations Forces have a new light tactical vehicle: the Polaris MRZR Alpha. Following a competitive bid process, General Services Administration (GSA) awarded a follow-on contract to Polaris Government and Defense, a division of global powersports leader Polaris Inc., for the Light Tactical All-Terrain Vehicle (LTATV). The MRZR Alpha supports U.S. Special Operations Command’s (USSOCOM) requirements for durability, performance, payload profile and internal air transportability.

“Polaris has had the privilege of providing vehicles to USSOCOM since 2005 and we take a great deal of pride in delivering and supporting the current LTATV,” said Jed Leonard, vice president, Polaris Government and Defense. “USSOCOM and GSA provided industry with clear and early communication of requirements – we listened, we invested and we are honored another MRZR will be available for U.S. Special Operations.”

The MRZR Alpha is Polaris’ 11th military vehicle produced in 12 years. The LTATV specification – which calls for a 2-passenger and 4-passenger base vehicle, and seven variants or “packages” – results in a revolutionary new capability. Designed on an all new chassis, the MRZR Alpha is an entirely new breed of light tactical vehicle. Internally transportable vehicles have restrictions to size and weight, but Polaris’ investment and advances in chassis, driveline, suspension, and other technologies have allowed the company to provide a new level of durability, performance, and payload in the MRZR Alpha. Vehicle systems were also designed with near-future innovation in mind, with an architecture ready to accept new technologies and capabilities available within Polaris.

The MRZR Alpha’s versatility is further enhanced by improved exportable power and increased payload. Since their introduction, MRZRs have been outfitted with counter unmanned aerial systems (C-UAS), weapons and high-energy laser systems, intelligence, surveillance and reconnaissance (ISR) systems, expeditionary command and control systems, autonomy packages, litters for medical and casualty evacuation and communication equipment.

“We are extremely grateful that we have the opportunity to continue our support of USSOCOM. It’s an honor to provide this new capability to our warfighters, and a responsibility that our Polaris Team does not take lightly,” said Nick Francis, director of Polaris Defense. “We’re fully invested in providing the highest performing, most reliable LTATV ever – and we’ll continue to listen, support and innovate because our military – and especially our Special Operations Forces – demand and deserve the best.”

The seven-year contract calls for two and four-seat diesel vehicles and seven variants or packages. Missionization packages include a diesel-electric hybrid engine, rear-facing seats and rear ROPS, modular cargo area, top-mounted weapons integration, roof kit, enclosure or cab kit and arctic mobility package. The contract has a value of up to $109 million and was awarded on May 29, 2020.

The contract also includes systems engineering support and training for the new LTATV. Polaris is a global company that trains and supports over 3,500 dealers with products sold to 120 countries. Polaris has been supplying traditional technical and parts manuals along with in-person training to the military for years – and leveraging corporate resources, Polaris can also offer new training opportunities to the military. Best-in-class online training videos, app-based technologies and computer aided modeling within electronic technical manuals are currently offered to Polaris’ dealers and can be easily adapted to train today’s military technician.

Dedicated Military Field Service Representatives (FSRs) have been teaching operator and maintainer training courses for more than 12 years to the U.S. and its allies. Polaris also provides world-class parts distribution – an established inventory management system allows for proactive management of parts inventory, minimizes lead time for parts and reduces the logistics for supply chain planning and management.

Polaris designs, engineers and produces its MV850 ATV, MRZR and DAGOR military vehicles in the U.S. As the next-generation LTATV, the Polaris MRZR Alpha represents the insertion of cutting-edge off-road vehicle technology – derived from millions of research and development investments to keep Polaris in front of the highly competitive off-road vehicle market. And like all Polaris military platforms, the new MRZR Alpha continues a legacy of light tactical military vehicles that are intuitive to operate, easy to maintain, and easy to globally support within an existing worldwide infrastructure of parts distribution and dealer service networks.

Cannon AFB’s Combat Training Element

Sunday, May 31st, 2020

Part I – Monster Garage

CANNON AIR FORCE BASE, N.M. —

Editor’s Note: (This is the first part of a series documenting Cannon’s elite Combat Training Element team who challenge and push our Airmen to adapt and overcome with their cutting edge prototype technology and weaponry)

Recently, while sitting around the office looking for a story lead, I was looking around and my eyes found their way to our story idea white board, my wandering eyes landed on the words “Monster Garage,” and I wondered what the heck is a monster garage. Do they have monster trucks, my midwest-grown conscious asked myself gleefully. Surely I would have heard of something like that.

A major issue our operators face while running around simulating scenarios on our range is that all of the weapons are gas-powered therefore they have several tubes connecting from the weapons to a bulky bag on their back (how sneaky) that powers the rifles. The CTE guys wanted to change this and make them more mobile.

Luckily for them, they’ve got Lejay Colborn, a retired Navy explosive ordnance disposal technician, with a background in bombs and wiring. I just had to find him.

In a corner of base I hardly visit, behind a few hangars lies a quiet little building. The entrance was hidden by a fleet of civilian and military vehicles alike, but I couldn’t help but notice that one of the trucks was outfitted with a turret mount on the back. I thought surely that couldn’t be what I was seeing. I’d been to our training range several times but never had I seen that out there. After regaining my composure from the ensuing excitement of what lay beyond the hangar doors I found my way in.

I was greeted by a large empty room with a few quads, tools, and not much else at the time. Surely this isn’t it, I thought. Where are all the monster trucks!? I looked around a bit more and eventually remembered I was there to talk to someone and get a tour. I made my way to the first door I could find, knocked, and was greeted by wide smiles and friendly faces.

We stood and talked for a bit after we became acquainted but his eagerness to show off all of their toys, new and old alike, and what they had recently conjured up in the lab, kept us moving along rather swiftly.

This would be the first of several visits where I’d become acquainted with more of the guys from the shop, get my hands on a few pieces of equipment, and get an in-depth look at what they are engineering.

As we walked from room to room for the most part I wasn’t quite sure what I was looking at, except for a few quads, razors, welding tools, makeshift improvised explosive device concepts, some tools, and guns. A lot of guns.

Like a kid in a candy store, I was ecstatic. They had big guns, little guns, guns that go pew, guns that go bang, and some that go pow. From AK-47 assault rifles to light machine guns, a mounted machine gun or two, and even some World War II artillery cannons, they had it.

Through meticulous trial and error, Colborn has been able to route the power into the weapon itself, in places such as the magazine and stock, to increase the mobility and efficiency of our operators so they can get the most realistic training possible.

With the help of a 3D printer, currently Civil Engineering’s, with one of their own on the way, they’re able to build the schematics and print the pieces, big and small, they need to fit things together and increase the functionality of other items.

An awesome thing they’re working on now is getting turret mounts set up on the back of pick up trucks, a very real threat faced overseas. They do this by welding and bolting down custom metal gun stands to the back of the trucks. From here they’re using the 3D printed pieces to connect the turrets to their individual mounts. I don’t know about you, but building a turret mounted truck from scratch is not easy work, but sounds pretty rewarding and quite exciting.

Along with mounted turrets, CTE is also working on remote controlled artillery cannons. This allows them to have full control of the field while remaining in only a few locations, allowing for CTE to be playing their role as opposing forces or the occasional good guy, while simultaneously setting off the sounds and flares from turrets and cannons that further adds to the realism factor of shooting at troops and blowing up when targeted by our guships.

But they know more than screwing in a few bolts, these guys know the ins and outs of what they’re working on. They sandblast, clean, take apart, paint, piece back together and ultimately renew their equipment to perform at the top of the line. 

Do they know how to take apart and put back together a vehicle piece by piece? You betcha. Can they wire bombs to have multiple trigger points? Absolutely. Do they have the knowledge to precisely calculate and construct a drone that can drop grenades and carry packages? Of course they do! There is no limit to what they can and have created.

After checking out the guns, which took quite a chunk of my first visit, I was able to get a closer look at some of the more detailed work in the garage. Improvised explosive devices.

Improvised explosive devices are highly unpredictable, devastating, and unfortunately common tool used against troops overseas.

Good thing for the U.S., our monster garage has a ton of them. Simulated and non-exploding, of course.

Ranging from floor mat pressure-activated explosions or something as simple as opening a door, they’ve probably made it. With real IEDs, sometimes there’s really no telling what will or won’t set them off by normal everyday interaction, so the team at the Monster Garage has put together several designs and iterations of IEDs to continue to test our Airmen and expand their knowledge.

Again, these don’t explode, but when you’re at the range training and you swing open a door only to be greeted by a loud bang or blinding flash, you can almost guarantee you’d be down and out if that was a real life combat situation.

There’s a lot of raw ingenuity and first hand experience going into what goes down at the Monster Garage. They’ve hand-crafted countless designs for countless numbers of gadgets.

While we sit in our homes, go on about our days at work or spending time with our families, the enemy is working day and night to get any and every leg up on us, and this is why the Monster Garage is an absolute necessity for our armed forces. The men and women who work there are constantly pushing the envelope on new technology to allow us to get the upper hand in today’s modern warfare.

Part II – Operational Capabilities

CANNON AIR FORCE BASE, N.M. — Editor’s Note: (This is the second part of a series documenting Cannon’s elite Combat Training Element team who challenge and push our Airmen to adapt and overcome with their cutting edge prototype technology and weaponry)

By now, if you read the first installment, you should know what the Combat Training Element men and women can create, but you might not know what they can do. From an outside perspective, you’d think they generally play the bad guys for our good-guy teams, and though you wouldn’t be wrong, you’d be far from the mark.

The CTE folks do a lot more than meets the eye. To keep it brief, their role is to provide our tactical Airmen with the most realistic training possible, using realistic simulations, of course. Whether it be them playing the role of the opposing forces using adversarial tactics, dragging aircrew through a lake on the back of a boat to simulate a water landing with a parachute, or even playing the good guys, they do it all.

However, you must keep in mind that they are not training these Airmen, they are a tool used in their training to help them practice in a live environment to meet their commander’s standards, intent and expectations. Though you may not need a hammer to pound a nail, it’s more capable than the next piece of metal. CTE, with their collective knowledge, experience and prior service, is here to make the job done more efficient and sturdy, like the hammer does.

A major role CTE fulfills, as the hammer, is that of the opposing forces. They plan, they gear up, and they get mobile. By the end of an operation they can be almost unrecognizable. They’re dirty. Their skin and uniforms, now a combination of sweat, dirt and paint from simulation rounds, resemble that of a freestyle art canvas more than that of an enemy force.

Let me not forget to add that they’re not only doing this for our Airmen, but for special operations forces of other nations. We are one of the only nations with MQ-9 Reaper and the only with AC-130 Whiskey Gunship capabilities. CTE trains them to know how to use and be comfortable utilizing these aircraft in real-life combat situations.

But executing exercises of this magnitude are not done on the fly, it takes weeks of planning for only a few hours of “play time.”

It all begins with preplanning between CTE and the squadron who’s running the operation. From there they move into figuring out what equipment they’ll need, risk assessment, area of effect and overall concept of operations. Once all of this, and most certainly more, is completed, they’re able to move on to gearing up.

Though missions may follow the same concept from time to time, such as Rubik’s cube, no two scenarios will be exactly alike. The ground team switching out, a different plane doing reconnaissance, a new location being selected, or a different set of decisions being made all make a difference in how each and every scenario will play out. And those with CTE are constantly making adjustments in real-time with each and every scenario, decision made, and position called out.

The CTE’s ability to think on the fly added on to their collective knowledge allows them to keep things forever dynamic. They’re able to provide a forever changing environment that shapes how the Airmen think, act and react, while they themselves are doing the same, which only adds to the dynamics of the situation.

Another capability that showcases how well-rounded CTE is, is the augmentation they provide to the Survival Evasion Resistance and Escape community.

They’re able to double as the aggressor, playing targets in the water on boats for gunships, while simultaneously playing the recovery force where they’re certified in providing care to those being airlifted from the water if something were to go wrong during the exercise. Talk about some talented individuals. They also assist in nabbing those going through land navigation before handing them back over to SERE for the rest of their training.

There really is no limit to what they have done, can do, and will do. I could go on and on, like ?, about every little detail for every operation or duty they hold, but words alone can’t describe the tremendous expertise they have or the love they have for what they do. It’s shown in the men and women who go through training with CTE, and are out their using what they’ve learned to fight for our country.

Though CTE receives funding, it’s not the money that keeps them going, it’s their raw passion for what they do that keeps the innovation rolling and their performance at a level that none can match. They’re making a difference in our United States Air Force, and they know it.

Story by By Senior Airman Gage Daniel, 27th Special Operations Wing

SCUBAPRO Sunday – SEALs Birthday

Sunday, May 31st, 2020

On 25 May 1961, President John F. Kennedy, addressing a joint session of Congress, delivered a speech that most people remember as his challenge to the country to put an American on the moon before the end of the decade. The most important part of that speech you seldom hear about. But, it mandated that the military broaden its numbers and the use of Special Operation in all branches of service: “I am directing the secretary of defense to expand rapidly and substantially … the orientation of existing forces for the conduct of … unconventional wars. … In addition, our special forces and unconventional warfare units will be increased and reoriented. …”

 

The East Coast and West coast teams have always joked about what team is older, Team One, or Team Two. Team Two says they are because of the 3-hour time difference, and the west coast says they are because they supposal received their message to commission first.  But this isn’t really about that. The SEAL Teams use 01 Jan 1962, the day the teams were commissioned as their birthday. But if you look through old messages, you can find about different dates that you could say should or could be the birthday of SEAL Teams. Before Kennedy gave his speech, the Navy and all the other branches had already started to plan for a new kind of warfare and a new group to fight it. The U.S. has just ended significant involvement in Korea and sent advisers to Vietnam around 1955, so we had an idea of what the next generation of warfare might look like.

“To augment present naval capabilities in restricted waters and rivers with particular reference to the conduct and support of paramilitary operations, it is desirable to establish Special Operations teams as a separate component within Underwater Demolition Units One and Two. An appropriate cover name for such units is “SEAL” being a contraction of SEA, AIR, LAND.”

– Vice Adm. Wallace M. Beakley,
Deputy Chief of Naval Operations, 05 Jun 1961

I love that the name “SEAL” started as a cover name, I am sure they never thought of what that name would come to mean. I say that in a good way and also a little wrong. I miss the days of being quiet professionals.

The Chief of Naval Operations, Adm. Arleigh Burke, in a memo dated 11 Jul 1960, tasked Vice Adm Beakley with studying how the Navy could contribute to unconventional warfare. Beakley responded to that tasking in a memo dated 12 Aug 1960, saying, “Navy Underwater Demolition Teams and Marine reconnaissance units were the logical organizations for an expanded naval capability in unconventional warfare.” Beakley further recommended that a working group be formed to study how the Navy could “assist or participate” in covert operations. Then, on 13 Sept 1960, an Unconventional Activities Working Group was formed. Like the military now, the progress was slow, and on 10 Mar 1961, when the Navy’s Unconventional Activities Committee presented a mission statement for the new special operations unit and officially used for the first time the acronym “SEAL.” 

Beakley sent another memo saying, “If you agree in the foregoing proposals, I will take action to establish a Special Operations Team on each coast.” Burke wasted no time in giving the green light. On 05 Jun 1961, the CNO issued a letter notifying the commanders in chief U.S. Atlantic, U.S. Pacific, and U.S. Naval Forces Europe about the Navy’s intentions regarding SEAL units. So, if you look at all the about dates, you can choose 25 May, 05 Jun, 13 Sept, 10 Mar or 01 Jan.  I do not really care about what date that it happened on; I am just glad that it did, and I think it is good to look back at the process that went from idea to a finished product.

Oh, and Team Two is the Oldest Team.