search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE


To understand the challenges of today’s Army organic industrial base, it helps to look to the past


by LTC(P) Richard B. Debany I n every conflict after its struggle for independence


against King George III, the United States relied upon a national


industrial base to deliver and sustain the war fighting materiel necessary for victory. Te segment


of that base catering specifically to the military is the defense industrial base, a multitude of prime contractors and a com- plex web of sub-tier suppliers that span the globe. Within the domestic defense industrial base, there is a comparatively small but strategically critical component—a collection of government-owned manufacturing


arsenals, maintenance


depots and ammunition plants providing rare, often unique, industrial capabilities and skill sets. For the U.S. Army, these facilities are collectively called the Army organic industrial base or “organic base.”


Changing Army requirements, strategic priorities, tolerance to risk and budgetary realities have molded the organic base throughout its existence. Twelve years of persistent war, the approaching end of military operations


Evolution of the organic base over the past 236 years has been characterized by cycles of expansion and contraction that, not surprisingly, reflected the nation’s periods of war and peace. While Great Britain benefited from the dawn of what would later be coined the Industrial Revolution, mid-18th-century America was primarily an agrarian society, with the first significant benefits of domestic industry still decades in the future. With severely limited manufacturing capacity, the fledgling Continental Army received much of its armament from Europe.


in Afghanistan and


the anticipated economic landscape now necessitate another evaluation of the Army’s approach to organic manufacturing and depot maintenance. Tis reexamination should be mind- ful of history while it considers challenges faced by the organic base and the Army’s ability to leverage the entire defense indus- trial base. In the end, the Army must manage risk in terms of


144


Te disadvantages of relying upon foreign sources of military supply were apparent at the outset of the Revolutionary War. In an effort to reduce this strategic vulnerability, significant effort was made to rapidly increase domestic industrial capabil- ity. During the war, the Continental Congress established five arsenals to manage the arms, ammunition and related materiel required to fight England.


In recognition of a largely successful wartime framework, in its 1794 Act for Erecting and Repairing of Arsenals and Maga- zines, Congress authorized President Washington to establish or retain up to four national arsenals. While the act formally


balancing affordable industrial capability with the ability to meet any manufacturing demand.


Army AL&T Magazine


January–March 2014


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  |  Page 173  |  Page 174  |  Page 175  |  Page 176  |  Page 177  |  Page 178  |  Page 179  |  Page 180