TECHNOLOGY-BASED PILOT PROGRAMS

IMPROVING FUTURE U.S. MILITARY RESERVE FORCES

Committee on Reserve Forces for 2010 and Beyond

Division of Military Science and Technology

Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems

National Research Council

NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS
Washington, D.C.



The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement



Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page R1
Technology-Based Pilot Programs: Improving Future U.S. Military Reserve Forces TECHNOLOGY-BASED PILOT PROGRAMS IMPROVING FUTURE U.S. MILITARY RESERVE FORCES Committee on Reserve Forces for 2010 and Beyond Division of Military Science and Technology Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems National Research Council NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS Washington, D.C.

OCR for page R1
Technology-Based Pilot Programs: Improving Future U.S. Military Reserve Forces NATIONAL ACADEMY PRESS 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20418 NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. William A. Wulf is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Kenneth I. Shine is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Bruce M. Alberts and Dr. William A. Wulf are chairman and vice chairman, respectively, of the National Research Council. This is a report of work supported by Contract DASW01-98-C-0026 between the Office of the Secretary of Defense and the National Academy of Sciences. The views, opinions, and findings contained in this report are those of the author(s) and should not be construed as an official Department of Defense position, or decision, unless so designated by other official documentation. International Standard Book Number: 0-309-06576-3 Limited copies are available from: Board on Army Science and Technology National Research Council 2101 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20418 Additional copies are available for sale from: National Academy Press Box 285 2101 Constitution Ave., N.W. Washington, D.C. 20055 800-624-6242 or 202-334-3313 (in the Washington Metropolitan Area) http://www.nap.edu Copyright 1999 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America

OCR for page R1
Technology-Based Pilot Programs: Improving Future U.S. Military Reserve Forces COMMITTEE ON RESERVE FORCES FOR 2010 AND BEYOND DONALD N. FREDERICKSEN, chair, Hicks and Associates, McLean, Virginia JOHN D. CHRISTIE, vice chair, Logistics Management Institute, McLean, Virginia BISHNU S. ATAL, AT&T Laboratories, Florham Park, New Jersey JAMES R. BLAKER, Science Applications International Corporation, McLean, Virginia JOHN R. BRINKERHOFF, Institute for Defense Analyses, Alexandria, Virginia MARION R. BRYSON, North Tree Management, Monterey, California BEVERLY B. BYRON, Byron-Butcher Associates, Washington, D.C. SAMUEL E. EBBESEN, VITELCO, U.S. Virgin Islands FREDERICK L. FROSTIC, Booz-Allen & Hamilton, Inc., McLean, Virginia WALTER B. LaBERGE, University of Texas, Austin RAYMOND P. MARCHI, TRW Corporation, Inc., Albuquerque, New Mexico WILLIAM E. RAMSEY, consultant, Pensacola, Florida JOHN RUML, consultant, Cambria, California BRUCE W. SCHMEISER, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana HARRY E. SOYSTER, MPRI, Alexandria, Virginia LANGHORNE P. WITHERS, consultant, Springfield, Virginia National Research Council Staff BRUCE A. BRAUN, director, Division of Military Science and Technology MARGARET N. NOVACK, study director JACQUELINE JOHNSON, senior project assistant NORMAN M. HALLER, technical consultant MARGO FRANCESCO, publication manager Liaisons ANTHONY J. BURSHNICK, consultant, Springfield, Virginia RUTH M. DAVIS, Pymatuning Group, Inc., Alexandria, Virginia THOMAS L. McNAUGHER, RAND Corporation, Washington, D.C.

OCR for page R1
Technology-Based Pilot Programs: Improving Future U.S. Military Reserve Forces COMMISSION ON ENGINEERING AND TECHNICAL SYSTEMS W. DALE COMPTON chair, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana ELEANOR BAUM, Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art, New York, New York RUTH M. DAVIS, Pymatuning Group, Inc., Alexandria, Virginia HENRY J. HATCH, American Society of Civil Engineers, Reston, Virginia STUART L. KNOOP, Oudens and Knoop, Architects, PC, Chevy Chase, Maryland NANCY G. LEVESON, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge CORA B. MARRETT, University of Massachusetts, Amherst ROBERT M. NEREM, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta LAWRENCE T. PAPAY, Bechtel Technology and Consulting, San Francisco, California BRADFORD W. PARKINSON, Stanford University, Stanford, California JERRY SCHUBEL, New England Aquarium, Boston, Massachusetts BARRY M. TROST, Stanford University, Stanford, California JAMES C. WILLIAMS, Ohio State University, Columbus RONALD W. YATES, U.S. Air Force (retired), Monument, Colorado Staff DOUGLAS BAUER, executive director DENNIS CHAMOT, associate executive director SYLVIA GILBERT, administrative associate CARLA MOORE, administrative assistant SHARON SEGAL, financial officer CAROL R. ARENBERG, editor

OCR for page R1
Technology-Based Pilot Programs: Improving Future U.S. Military Reserve Forces Preface As the twenty-first century approaches, the number of full-time, active duty personnel in the U.S. military (excluding the Reserves and National Guard) is about 1.4 million, the lowest level since before World War II. Nevertheless, the U.S. military is supposed to be prepared to fight two major-theater wars almost simultaneously while conducting peacekeeping operations and other assignments around the globe. To fulfill this wide range of missions, the U.S. military must continue to rely on the Reserves and National Guard, which are known collectively as the reserve components. The current number of reserve components is almost equal to the number of active duty personnel. In the case of the U.S. Army, the number of reserves is double the number of active personnel. This study addresses how technology can be used to improve the readiness and effectiveness of the reserve components and their integration with the active components. Many technologies are expected to enhance the capabilities of the U.S. military in the twenty-first century, including precision weapons, high-fidelity sensors, long-range surveillance, enhanced stealth characteristics, and advanced communications and information systems. This study reaffirms the importance of improved communication and information systems, for improving comprehensive training and accelerating the mobilization of reserve components for military missions in the coming decade. Although programs using these technologies are already under way in both the reserve and active components of the military, this study focuses on the effectiveness of reserve components and active-reserve integration. In this study, the committee develops pilot programs to take advantage of these advanced technologies. Well designed, innovative pilot programs could be very valuable to the U.S. Department of Defense because they could provide a low-cost, low-risk means of exploring new approaches and furnishing data related to the effectiveness and use of reserve and active military components. The pilot programs in this study should be considered both specific suggestions and generic examples of the kinds of programs that should be explored by the Department of Defense. Pilot programs that could promote the integration of reserve and active components are especially valuable. Remote and distributed learning, advanced simulators, and interactive, distributed exercises could substantially improve the proficiency of reserve personnel. These technologies could also be used to train reserve and active personnel simultaneously, even if they are geographically separated. Pilot programs that experiment with modern communications and information technologies could be used to assess whether U.S.-based reserve components could support commanders and forces engaged in overseas military operations. Other programs address the potential for technology to alleviate the time consuming chores that now accompany the mobilization of reserve forces. Pilot programs may demonstrate that advanced technologies could lessen some of the difficulties of integrating part-time reservists and full-time personnel. The committee that conducted this study wants to express its appreciation to the many representatives of the Department of Defense and other experts who furnished oral and written information. Their input was vital to the committee's deliberations. Finally, the committee expresses its gratitude to the staff of the National Research Council for its assistance during the study; without their support, this task could not have been completed. Donald N. Fredericksen, chair Committee on Reserve Forces for 2010 and Beyond

OCR for page R1
Technology-Based Pilot Programs: Improving Future U.S. Military Reserve Forces This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
Technology-Based Pilot Programs: Improving Future U.S. Military Reserve Forces Acknowledgments This report has been reviewed by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council's Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the authors and the NRC in making the published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The contents of the review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their participation in the review of this report: Brian Barr, U.S. Army Frederic J. Brown, Institute for Defense Analyses Vinton G. Cerf, MCI Worldcom Philip R. Clark, GPU Nuclear Corporation (retired) Gerald P. Dinneen, Honeywell, Inc. (retired) Robert L. Goldich, Library of Congress Thomas R. Lalime, RTA Corporation Larry G. Lehowicz, Quantum Research, International F. Robert Naka, CERA, Inc. Alton D. Slay, Slay Enterprises, Inc. Eugene P. Wilkinson, Institute of Nuclear Power Operation (retired) John W. Woodmansee, Tactical Rescue Gear, Inc. While the individuals listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, responsibility for the final content of this report rests solely with the authoring committee and the NRC.

OCR for page R1
Technology-Based Pilot Programs: Improving Future U.S. Military Reserve Forces This page in the original is blank.

OCR for page R1
Technology-Based Pilot Programs: Improving Future U.S. Military Reserve Forces Contents     EXECUTIVE SUMMARY   1 1   INTRODUCTION   8     Background   8     Commission on Roles and Missions of the Armed Forces   9     Statement of Task   9     Committee Process   10     Report Road Map   10 2   RESERVE FORCES TODAY   11     Organization   11     Ready Reserve   12     Total-Force Policy   14     Capabilities and Limitations   14     Barriers to Integration   16 3   NATIONAL SECURITY AND TECHNOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENTS AND THEIR EFFECTS   17     The Environments   17     Missions for the Reserves   19     Future Missions   19     Common Elements   21     Relevant Technologies   21     Influence of Technology on the Reserves   22     Readiness   23     Integration   25 4   PILOT PROGRAMS   27     Definitions   27     Methodology   27     Development of Candidate Pilot Programs   27     Criteria   27     Process   29     Areas for Immediate Action   31     Management of the Individual Ready Reserve   31     Reserve Component Automation System   31

OCR for page R1
Technology-Based Pilot Programs: Improving Future U.S. Military Reserve Forces     High-Priority Pilot Programs   31     Increased Training Time through Technology   31     Advanced Distributed-Learning Technology for Maintenance Personnel   32     Streamlined Administrative Processes   32     Telesupport and Remote Staffing   32     Highlighted Pilot Programs   32     Reserve Component Battle-Staff Officer Performance   32     Best-of-Type Competitions   32     Reserve Peacekeeping Battle Laboratory   33     Continuous Land Warfare   33     Other Pilot Programs   33     Cadre Units for Peacekeeping Operations   33     Reserve Component Participation in the Aftermath of Incidents Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction   33     Information Technologists in the Total Force   33     Unmanned Vehicles   34     Biosensors   34     Total Force for the Twenty-First Century   34     Helicopter Unit Interfaces with Allies   34     Test-Bed for Active Force Transformation   34     Additional Considerations   34     Benefits of Pilot Programs   34     Development of Additional Pilot Programs   34     Baseline Data Collection   35     Data Management   35     Appendix to Chapter 4   36 5   DESCRIPTIONS OF HIGH-PRIORITY AND HIGHLIGHTED PILOT PROGRAMS   43     High-Priority Pilot Programs   43     Increased Training Time through Technology   43     Advanced Distributed-Learning Technology for Maintenance Personnel   46     Streamlined Administrative Processes   49     Telesupport and Remote Staffing   52     Highlighted Pilot Programs   54     Reserve Component Battle-Staff Officer Performance   54     Best-of-Type Competitions   55     Reserve Peacekeeping Battle Laboratory   56     Continuous Land Warfare   57 6   CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS   60     Conclusions   60     National Security Environment   60     Technological Environment   60     Effect of Technologies on Reserve Components   61     Other Conclusions   61     Recommendations   61     REFERENCES   63     APPENDICES         A COMMITTEE MEETINGS   67     B DESCRIPTIONS OF OTHER PILOT PROGRAMS   70

OCR for page R1
Technology-Based Pilot Programs: Improving Future U.S. Military Reserve Forces Tables, Figure, and Boxes TABLES 2-1   U.S. Armed Forces: Active and Ready Reserve Strengths as of September 30, 1998   11 2-2   Total Force Strength during and after the Cold War   12 2-3   Organization and Strength of the Ready Reserve as of September 30, 1998   13 2-4   Varying Levels of Participation by Reserve Components   15 FIGURE 4-1   Rankings of pilot programs   30 BOXES ES-1   Other Pilot Programs for Consideration   6 3-1   Potential Areas of Change   20 4-1   Overview of Pilot Programs   28 4-2   Sample Pilot Program, Test, and Experiment   29

OCR for page R1
Technology-Based Pilot Programs: Improving Future U.S. Military Reserve Forces This page in the original is blank.