equipment and personnel. Military personnel today are highly trained, and equipment is state of the art.
The instruments of death have been developed and utilized with great success. Instruments to sustain the life support systems of U.S. soldiers on the modern battlefield must keep pace with these changes. Following World War II great strides were made through the development of a doctrine to improve the "Quality of Life" of U.S. soldiers. Since that time, there has been a continued emphasis on improving food, apparel, and other supplies and logistics for the soldier.
Harsh winter environments require detailed planning, coordination, and troops that are physically hardened and trained. Flexibility, maneuverability, and the use of equipment are all reduced in the cold, while logistic, engineering, subsistence, and medical problems increase dramatically. Winter creates physiological stress on the individual, and the additional weight of winter clothing, sleeping bags, and rations combine to reduce individual and unit mobility. "Survive, move, fight!" is the moxie of winter warfare.
Foodservice equipment to support and service a family of rations has been developed under the auspices of the U.S. Army. Examples of this equipment include the Mobile Kitchen Trailer (MKT) and Kitchen Company Level Field Feeding equipment (KCLFF). Rations supported through these kitchen units include menus of A Rations; B Rations; Meal, Ready-to- Eat (MRE); Ration, Cold Weather (RCW); and Food Packet, Long-Range Patrol II (LRP[II]).
Feeding the right meal, at the right place, and at the right time is the ultimate goal of the Army feeding program. The U.S. Army has had a field feeding standard of providing all soldiers with one MRE and two hot meals per day (U.S. Department of the Army, 1991a). The hot meal has been primarily the T Ration. This standard has also allowed for two A Ration meals in a 7-d period. The standard was regarded by field commanders as a prescription that dictated the contents and timing of meals, rather than as a policy or guideline for overall nutrition. They felt that the standard failed to offer them the flexibility they needed to modify feeding schedules within their own commands in response to the demands of particular situations.
At that same time, the U.S. Army Quartermaster Center and School was aggressively pursuing a revised feeding standard that would provide the commander with the flexibility needed to ensure that all soldiers on the battlefield were provided the right meal, at the right place, and at the right time (U.S. Department of the Army, 1991a). A revised feeding policy was written, which simply states that field commanders have the responsibility for providing their soldiers with three quality meals per day. This revised feeding