TESTING, TESTED


OT from an IOT to a limited user test and subsequently to a customer test (CT). Te CT resulted in the test timeframe being cut in half and the loss of range reserva- tions at Fort Drum, NY, which meant that the M4 and M9 weapon ranges and SERE lanes could not be conducted.


Challenged to collect adequate data to meet USAEC evaluator needs, but with less time and fewer resources, the situa- tion brought to the surface previously overlooked opportunities to collect rel- evant feedback. Leveraging previous working relationships with personnel at the SERE School, while ensuring a simul- taneous request through the TSARC process, kept all appropriate stakeholders in the loop.


STAYING ON COURSE


The chart depicts the paths of communication between test officers and unit action officers and their respective hierarchies. Greater collaboration and communication within the operational community can improve the effectiveness of operational testing while reducing the cost. (Image courtesy of CPT Lev Mazères)


in full-spectrum operations, the new system promises to provide existing capabilities while reducing weight and bulk and increasing situational aware- ness. As the Army’s only independent OT organization, USAOTC ensures such enhancements are adequately tested and worthy of being put in the hands of the Soldier. As is typical of most ACAT I and II programs, USAOTC used the Test Schedule and Review Committee (TSARC), in accordance with regulatory requirements, to source OT players and units from U.S. Army Forces Command to support operational testing.


PLANNING COMES UNDONE Originally planned as a combined devel- opmental test (DT) and OT event, with the intent to use the same test players for both the DT and follow-on initial OT


32


(IOT) effort, TSARC leadership noti- fied USAOTC in late 2013 to expect the 25th CAB to provide the test personnel and equipment necessary to execute the consecutive test events. Unfortunately, additional and competing higher priority taskings resulted in 25th CAB requesting a reclama (reconsideration of a decision) from the TSARC tasking in early 2014. As a result, the TSARC assigned the 10th CAB to take part in testing.


To meet program timeline constraints, PdM Air Warrior opted to conduct a separate DT event at the Redstone Test Center, located at Redstone Arsenal, AL, while shifting the IOT to the sum- mer. System maturation issues resulted in a joint agreement between Army Test and Evaluation Command and Program Executive Office for Soldier to reduce the


Te joint effort resulted in an extensive test of the Air SS 72-hour survival gear during a SERE situation, as well as test- ing the performance of the combat basic ensemble configuration during various stress weapon and break contact firing ranges. All testing occurred at mini- mal cost and within the timeframe for inclusion into the USAEC OT agency milestone assessment report. Te test also served as a great learning event for test


By engaging in these discussions and negotiations at the action officer level, the TSARC process would in fact be enhanced rather than marginalized.


Army AL&T Magazine April–June 2015


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  |  Page 89  |  Page 90  |  Page 91  |  Page 92  |  Page 93  |  Page 94  |  Page 95  |  Page 96  |  Page 97  |  Page 98  |  Page 99  |  Page 100  |  Page 101  |  Page 102  |  Page 103  |  Page 104  |  Page 105  |  Page 106  |  Page 107  |  Page 108  |  Page 109  |  Page 110  |  Page 111  |  Page 112  |  Page 113  |  Page 114  |  Page 115  |  Page 116  |  Page 117  |  Page 118  |  Page 119  |  Page 120  |  Page 121  |  Page 122  |  Page 123  |  Page 124  |  Page 125  |  Page 126  |  Page 127  |  Page 128  |  Page 129  |  Page 130  |  Page 131  |  Page 132  |  Page 133  |  Page 134  |  Page 135  |  Page 136  |  Page 137  |  Page 138  |  Page 139  |  Page 140  |  Page 141  |  Page 142  |  Page 143  |  Page 144  |  Page 145  |  Page 146  |  Page 147  |  Page 148  |  Page 149  |  Page 150  |  Page 151  |  Page 152  |  Page 153  |  Page 154  |  Page 155  |  Page 156  |  Page 157  |  Page 158  |  Page 159  |  Page 160  |  Page 161  |  Page 162  |  Page 163  |  Page 164  |  Page 165  |  Page 166  |  Page 167  |  Page 168  |  Page 169  |  Page 170  |  Page 171  |  Page 172