With the transition from counterinsurgency to large-scale combat operations, the environment in which we prepare to conduct missions, the capabilities of the threat, and the types of units that execute the missions are rapidly changing their focus and modernizing equipment. As the Army innovates and explores new areas of operation, an obvious but rarely spoken problem comes to the forefront of every logistical mind: How do we support the units based on the environment and structure in which they operate?
The Secretary of the Army, the Honorable Christine E. Wormuth, stated in March 2023 that the Army’s six modernization portfolios are long-range precision fires, next generation combat vehicles, future vertical lift, the network, air and missile defense, and Soldier lethality. With the additions of multidomain operations (MDO) included in Field Manual 3-0, Operations, and the Secretary of the Army’s comments to the Committee on Armed Services, it is evident that the Army’s modernization efforts will continue to challenge the capabilities of the sustainment and maintenance units. Our combat arms and combat support units are testing new innovative equipment, and sustainers and maintainers must be ready to support all aspects of the equipment in new and challenging environments. Additionally, Gen. James E. Rainey, Commanding General of U.S. Army Futures Command, notes that the Army must continuously transform and adapt to advances in technology. A logical consequence of continuous transformation is continuously changing maintenance and support.
It may be time for the Army to reconsider modernizing from the one-size-fits-all mentality and instead organize the support units by their area of operation (AO) and the mission of the unit in MDO.
Personnel Structure
With retention rates decreasing throughout the Army, it is sometimes difficult to ascertain the needs versus the wants of Army support units. With the publication of the most recent Army structure, it is evident the Army is growing and modernizing. However, this is just the beginning for sustainment. With numerous units across the Army, such as the Stryker Medium Caliber Weapon System upgrade, autonomous vehicles, medium- and long-range precision fires testing, indirect fire protection capability testing, and many more, the implied task is that Army sustainers and maintainers must provide support with their current military occupational specialties (MOSs) and their current modified tables of organization and equipment.
The types of MOSs and the ratio between service members and mission is a careful balance that more times than not is impossible to predict or perfect. When a unit receives a modernization fielding, it is crucial to ensure the sustainment and maintenance aspect of the fielding is secured before fielding the equipment. The worst thing we can do for warfighters is give them an upgraded piece of equipment without the capability to sustain and maintain it, much less an upgraded item that does not work.
AO and Mission of Unit
The AO in which a unit executes its mission also plays a vital role in how the unit needs to organize itself. A unit with a European Command AO will need to be set up differently than a unit with a Pacific Command AO. The sustainment trains will function differently and will require different types and numbers of MOSs to ensure the mission is supported properly and in a timely manner.
The mission of the unit is the most important factor to consider when trying to align the personnel strength of a support unit. A unit may operate the same piece of equipment and may have the same line unit structure. However, they may spread their units out differently, and the tempo at which they fight may be different as well. It is important that the support unit be able to adapt to the unit they support to ensure warfighters do not exceed the capabilities of their supply chains.
Equipment Structure
With the increasing focus on air-defense asset testing across the Army, the allocation of a support unit’s equipment may not be adequate to the equipment they are testing. The array of basic support unit equipment needs to be spread throughout the globe. The lack of available new support equipment prevents support units from adding assets to their fleets. This causes units to submit more requests for support than usual. Although some units may have the correct number of capabilities, the maintenance requirements may lag behind due to a long lead time on parts or a lack of available equipment to repair the fault.
The AO and mission of the unit play vital roles in the array of equipment used by the unit. If the unit’s mission is surrounded by infrastructure, its bulk fuel requirements will be lower than those of a unit in a more rural environment. The potential threats of the area will also play a role in the unit’s equipment.
MOS Specialty Training vs. Contractor Requirements
One could argue that one of the biggest friction points in the maintenance world right now is over contracted maintenance. Like any support strategy, the pros and cons are endless. But we, as the subject matter experts, must decide if the pros outweigh the cons as a long-term solution.
The job of maintenance is not to slow down or prevent the success of the warfighter. However, if, in the long term, progress must slow down for maintenance to catch up (i.e., training on modernizing or innovating technology), then I believe the risk is worth the reward. Similar to the evaluation of personnel and equipment for the unit, sustainment is based on the mission and the efficiency of the current MOSs to learn the new maintenance strategy. The Army Chief of Staff, Gen. Randy A. George, stated at the 2023 Association of the United States Army Conference that delivering ready combat formations and continuous transformation were two of his top priorities.
In the world of modernization and innovation, we need to continue to always bring up the question no one wants to hear: How do we sustain and maintain this piece of equipment? The expectation should never be to hear an answer immediately. Instead, we must continue to ask and consider this question as we continue to modernize and increase the lethality of the fighting force. The criticality of a clearly articulated answer to this question cannot be overstated. The bottom line is that if we cannot sustain and maintain a piece of equipment, it is useless to the warfighter.
--------------------
Capt. Abigail Tomkovich serves as a support operations planner in the 3rd Expeditionary Sustainment Command at Fort Liberty, North Carolina. She previously served as a support company commander in the 1st Multi-Domain Task Force stationed on Joint Base Lewis-McChord (JBLM), Washington. Before that, she served in the 555th Engineer Brigade at JBLM, in 82nd Airborne Division at Fort Liberty, and in the movement control team at Camp Henry, South Korea. She holds a Bachelor of Science degree in nutrition from the University of Alabama.
--------------------
This article was published in the fall 2024 issue of Army Sustainment.
RELATED LINKS
The Current issue of Army Sustainment in pdf format
Current Army Sustainment Online Articles
Connect with Army Sustainment on LinkedIn
Connect with Army Sustainment on Facebook
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Social Sharing