Great article Bazaar of War. You offer some very useful insights. One idea we would add is the the vulnerability of large formations in an increasingly sensor-saturated environment. Note, we are not believers in the "transparent battlefield" concept. It will be a long time before technology is good enough (and more importantly reliable enough) to create a truly transparent battlefield. However, large formations are now more vulnerable to detection and subsequent targeting with an unprecedented volume of guided munitions and accurate artillery. We believe this will require formations to disperse more, use deception and camouflage. So while we believe you are absolutely correct that the evolving requirements of modern war will require formations to grow bigger, we think there will be a competing urge to split into smaller elements, capable of independent combined arms maneuver in order to complicate the enemy's battlefield equation, increase uncertainty and allow for greater flexibility. We are not sure what that balance is but we thought we would put the idea on the table to hear your thoughts. Great article once again.
Thanks WMI. That's partly what I'm getting at: increased dispersion requires a lot more protective measures for individual units. But those dispersed elements aren't *operationally* independent, they still depend on higher echelons to sustain their very complicated requirements in theater.
Absolutely, there is a difference between physical colocation and operational codependence and once again, we were not arguing with any of your points. We think you are spot on in your analysis. All we were saying is that impetus for dispersion is going to create strain on large units that are operationally independent. There are so many unanswered questions. How do you resupply a brigade combat team or larger when its subordinate units are dispersed? How do you maintain cohesive command and control while still giving smaller elements the ability to exercise initiative to take advantage of terrain for camouflage from air observation? There are many such questions and we do not have the answers. It is likely no one does yet. We were just highlighting some of these challenges to encourage more discussion and sharing of ideas. Hopefully some other readers jump in to the ring to share their own perspectives too!
100%. I suspect there's a reluctance within every institution to acknowledge the full scale of the problem because it will take so much - right now it feels like we're scratching around the edges.
You are absolutely right. We get the sense that few organizations are really considering these questions in adequate depth while simultaneously considering the "long-view." That is why the insightful and independant work of publications like yours is so critical! Keep up the great work! We look forward to reading more from The Bazaar in the future!
Great article Bazaar of War. You offer some very useful insights. One idea we would add is the the vulnerability of large formations in an increasingly sensor-saturated environment. Note, we are not believers in the "transparent battlefield" concept. It will be a long time before technology is good enough (and more importantly reliable enough) to create a truly transparent battlefield. However, large formations are now more vulnerable to detection and subsequent targeting with an unprecedented volume of guided munitions and accurate artillery. We believe this will require formations to disperse more, use deception and camouflage. So while we believe you are absolutely correct that the evolving requirements of modern war will require formations to grow bigger, we think there will be a competing urge to split into smaller elements, capable of independent combined arms maneuver in order to complicate the enemy's battlefield equation, increase uncertainty and allow for greater flexibility. We are not sure what that balance is but we thought we would put the idea on the table to hear your thoughts. Great article once again.
Thanks WMI. That's partly what I'm getting at: increased dispersion requires a lot more protective measures for individual units. But those dispersed elements aren't *operationally* independent, they still depend on higher echelons to sustain their very complicated requirements in theater.
Absolutely, there is a difference between physical colocation and operational codependence and once again, we were not arguing with any of your points. We think you are spot on in your analysis. All we were saying is that impetus for dispersion is going to create strain on large units that are operationally independent. There are so many unanswered questions. How do you resupply a brigade combat team or larger when its subordinate units are dispersed? How do you maintain cohesive command and control while still giving smaller elements the ability to exercise initiative to take advantage of terrain for camouflage from air observation? There are many such questions and we do not have the answers. It is likely no one does yet. We were just highlighting some of these challenges to encourage more discussion and sharing of ideas. Hopefully some other readers jump in to the ring to share their own perspectives too!
100%. I suspect there's a reluctance within every institution to acknowledge the full scale of the problem because it will take so much - right now it feels like we're scratching around the edges.
You are absolutely right. We get the sense that few organizations are really considering these questions in adequate depth while simultaneously considering the "long-view." That is why the insightful and independant work of publications like yours is so critical! Keep up the great work! We look forward to reading more from The Bazaar in the future!