ARMY AL&T
another key aspect of reinvention, pro- viding a virtual hands-on experience to understand the world of the warfighter.
Another part of this paradigm shift is focused on developing the platform. You put the stuff in and make it run, you make it mobile, you make it survivable—which means you put armor on it, maybe you put active protection systems on it, and all that’s good. You design it. You build it. You test it, and then you put a Soldier in it. Then you have HRED [Army Research Laboratory’s Human Research and Engineering Directorate] and the human factors people saying you’ve got to change it because they can’t push that reset button there.
The sequence of events was linear. You’ve got to turn all that upside down and start with a Soldier operating as part of a team and the requirements associated with keeping that team intact. Now, when I design this vehicle, I’m trying to build it from the perspective that I want to have that squad operate all together, and their survivability and mission effectiveness take priority.
The bottom line is we have to under- stand all of those relationships. That’s what S&T does as well—it helps you to understand the risks you’re taking against the tradeoffs you inevitably have to make, and you’re going to get a very different vehicle if you start developing from the Soldier, the squad perspective, versus that of the platform.
Army AL&T: Do you have any specific war-gaming events planned?
Freeman: Yes, we have several that started as a pilot effort when I was up at Natick. We used to do this same type of activity during the Army After Next initiative with TRADOC, but it was at a very high level: brigade and force-on- force. This experimentation is at the Soldier/small combat team level. Natick
12 APRIL –JUNE 2011
developed a repeatable methodology to do this and worked with TRADOC to get multiple scenarios.
The latest experiment is still in the planning phase. We’re going to be run- ning a war-game, tabletop-type event. It will be focused on individual mobility platforms to examine several contractor- developed concept alternatives.
Army AL&T: Are there any detractors to this reinvention, besides inertia and tradition?
Freeman: One of the biggest detractors is that it is not natural for people to work together. It really isn’t. Not just scientists—all people. Collaboration and cooperation are really not natural tendencies, especially when you’re threatened by declining resources.
I liken it to playing cards. You never want to show your hand, because you’re afraid if the other guy knows what you’re doing, you’ll lose the game. The higher the stakes in the game, the more closely you hold your cards. Right? The fact of the matter is, that is exactly the wrong thing to do in the world that we live in.
This is not a card game. This is not all about individuals or organizations themselves winning. It is about a bigger goal; it is about bigger survival. Therefore, the way you win this game is by laying your cards on the table and exposing it all, and being willing to share what you’ve got and the talents and capabilities that you bring to the table to solve the problem. So it is a difference between being in a card game and being an individual or an organization trying to win, and being in a problem-solving mentality. You’ve got to be in a problem-solving mode to win this game. Either everybody wins or everybody loses in this game, as I see it.
Army AL&T: So how do you overcome the tendency to not collaborate?
Freeman: You force it. You ask for results. I’m focused on results, not on activity. Activity is good; activity is the venue. But the demand for accountability, transparency, and responsibility has to be demonstrated through results, and people have to be held accountable for those results.
Army AL&T: Speaking of resources, what level of funding, short- and longer-term, will you need to
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88
