HISTORYof the

FIELD ARTILLERY SCHOOL

1979FORT SILL, OKL~HOMA

Pro~erty of ~.S. Army

INDEX

SECTION I. MISSIONGene'ra1

SECTION II. KEY PERSONNEL

SECTION III. PROGRAMS OF INSTRUCTIONGeneralAccomplishments & Items of Interest

SECTION 'rV. INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGYCEOCFOGO

SECTION V. TRAINING DEVELOPMENTSOTDDCRDTTCAD

SECTION VI. NEW DOCTRINE/CONCEPTSCEO'CFD

.DCDGOTCADDCRDT .

SECTION VII. TRAINING LITERATURE.CFO

DTDGO'

WDTCAO

SECTION VIII. MODIFICATION, DEVELOPMENT, TEST &ACQUISITION OF EQUIPMENT

CFDDCDGODCRDTTCAD

SECTION IX. TRADOC SYSTEMS MANAGERS .TSM, TACFlRETSM, RPVTSM, MLRS

.TSM, COPPERHEADTSM, FlREFINDERTSM, PERSHING IITSM, CANNON

i

Para Page

1-11 1~1

2-1

3-11 3-12 3-4

4-11 4-12 4-13 4-3

5-11 5-12 5-33 5-10

6-11 6-12 6-13 6-24 6-125 6-126 6-12

7-11 7-12 7-13 7-34 7-45 7-4

8-1

1 8-12 8-23 8-24 8-35 8-5

9-1 .1 9-12 9-13 9-24 9-35 9-36 9-47 9-5

ii

SECTION I. MISSION

GENERAL. TllP mission of the US Army Field Artillery School is to provide the means'i~)r-Activ(' Army and Reserv(' Components to achieve required levels of individual and('oll('ctiv('training through n'sid('nt and ('xtension training systt'l1\sand materials; tocI('v('lopanel('valual('cloctrilH'and organizalioll; lo llel('nnilH'rt'quin'Il1('nlsalHI priot"i-tit.ssfor the development of combat materiel. These missions ('nlail tht' foll"owingfunctions:

a. Prepare, conduct, and administer resident and nonresident courses ofinstruction as directed.

b. Provide training support of active Army Units, Army National Guard, ArmyReserve, Reserve Officer Training Corps, and US Marine Corps Reserve elements asdirected.

c. Participate in the review of doctrine, organization, and equipment for whichtraining responsibility has been~assigned, including the development of trainingplans to support new items of materiel, new organizations, or new tactical andtechnical concepts.

d. Review and evaluate new or revised doctrine, tactics, and techniques preparedby other Army agencies or other services, as appropriate .

. e. Develop, distribute, review, and update pertinent instructional packets forother schools in those areas in which USAFAS is designated the proponent school.'

f. Prepare and maintain long-range emergency mobilization plans.g. Prepare and review Army-wide training literature as prescribed in AR 310-3.

,h. Promote interservice and foreign understanding of US Army doctrine, tactics,techniques, organization, and operations by providing instruction and training tomembers of other arms and services of US Armed Forces and to students from foreigncountries, and by participating in standardization programs:

i~ Serve as the user proponent throughout the life cycle of field artill~rysystem materiel. Serve as spokesman for the field artillery in qualitative interpre-tations and definitions in support of the materiel development community.

j. Develop technical data and manufacture all graphical firing'items required'by the services and provide these items to US Army Materiel Development and ReadinessCommand (DARCOM) .for issue to troops world-wide.

k. Provide a repository of publications (library) for the use of students,staff, and faculty in support of other mission requirements.

1. Serve as the "home" of the field artillery.m. Serve through the Commandant as the principal field artillery advisor to the

Commander, TRADOC.

W 2039

1-1

SECT I ON I I. KEY I'I':HSONNEL

COMMANDANT-MG Jack N. Merritt remained as Commandant.

ASSISTANT COMMANDANT. BG Edward A. Dinges remained as Assistant Commandant.

DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMANDANTCOL James P. Holley remained as Deputy Assistant Commandant.

DIRECTOR OF SUPPORT (SECRETARY)COL John J. Ridgway, Jr. remained as Secretary.

DIRECTOR, COMMUNICATIONSELECTRONICS DEPARTMENT (CED)COL Don E. Karr assigned 19 Jun 79 vice COL James H ..Carney, Jr.

DIRECTOR, COUNTERFIRE DEPARTMENT'(CFD)COL Kenneth Kleypas assigned 26 Nov 79 vice COL Jere L. Hickman

DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF COMBAT DEVELOPMENTS (DEC)COL Anthony G. Pokorny assigned 18 May 79 vice COL (P) James E. Drummond.

DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF COURSE DEVELOPMENT AND TFAINING (DCRDT)COL. Thomas J. P. Jones remained as Director.

DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF EVALUATION (DOE),COL Roland B. Rogers assigned 5 Jun 79 vice COL Chester F. Campbell.

DIRECTOR, DIRECTORATE OF TRAINING DEVELOPMENT (DTD)COL George M. Krausz assigned 27 Aug 79 vice LTC Gunnar C. Carlson, Jr., who wasserving as Acting Director.

DIRECTOR, GUNNERY DEPARTMENT (GO)COL James W. Wurman remained as Director.

DIRECTOR, TACTICS/COMBINED ARMS DEPARTMENT (TCAD)COL John E. Donohu~ remained as Director.

DIRECTOR, WEAPONS DEPARTMENT (WD)COL Samuel J. Ady assigned 6 Feb 79 vice COL Jack L. Van Pool.

COMMANDER, USAFAS BRIGADE ,COLWilliam II. Rogers assigned 30 Mar 79 vice COL Robert E. Hunter.

COMMANDER, STAFF AND FACULTY BATTALIONMAJ Graham N. Babb assigned 5 Apr 79 vice LTC Isaac F. Bonifay.

COMMANDER, OFFICER STUDENT BATTALIONLTC Robert E. Lax assigned 23 Jul 79 vice LTC Charles W. Hendrickson.

TRADOC SYSTEM MANAGER, TACFlRECOL Hardy R. Stone III remained.

2-1

TRADOC SYSTEM MANAGER, REMOTELY PILOTED VEHICLE (RPV)COL Sherwin Arculis remained.

TRAnOC SYSTEM MANAGER, GENERAL SUPPORT ROCKET SYSTEM (GSRS)COL Charles J. Buel remained.

TRAnOC SYSTEM MANAGER, COPPERHEADCOL William F. Fitzpatrick assigned 1 Jun 79 vice COL Adalbert E. Toepel.

TRADOC SYSTEM MANAGER, FIREFINDERCOL Richard N. Griffin remained.

TRADOC SYSTEM MANAGER, PERSHING IICOL William R. Owel remained.

TRADOe SYSTEM MANAGER, CANNONeOL James A. Quinlan remained.

TRADoe SYSTEMS MANAGER, CLOSE SUPPORT WEAPONS SYSTEMeOL Kenneth A. Kleypas assigned 2 Aug 79.

2-2

SECTION III. PROGRAMS OF INSTRUCTION

1. GENERAL.On 30 Nov 78, TRADOC discontinued use of the term Course of Instruction' (COI)

and directed use of the term Program of Instruction (POI). USAFAS programed 15,458students to attend 693 classes in 47 courses during FY 79. The initial input was13,140 students. In FY 79, 11,425 students were available for graduation, and.9,984graduated.

a. Program Deletions. The following courses were deleted in 1979:

(1) Field Artillery Cannon Battery Officer, 2E-13A.(2) Tactical Electronic Equipment Maintenance NCO Advanced, 1-31~C42B.

(3) Tactical Communications Systems Operator/Mechanic Course, BTC,101-31V30.

(4) Nuclear and Chemical Target Analysis. Reserve Component, 2E-ASI5HB.

(5) Honest John Missile Crewman, 042-15F10.

b.frame:

Program Additions. The following courses were added during the same time

(1) Field Artillery Cannon Battery Officer, 2E-13E.(2) Tactical Communications Chief NCO Advanced, 101-31V40.(3)' Nuclear and Chemical Target Analysis Nonresident/Resident, 2E-ASI5HB.

(4) Lance Missile Mechanic, 043-F4.(5) Tactical Communications Chief, BTC, 101-31V30 ..

c. Nuclear and Chemical Target Analysis Course Nonresident/Resident. Theletter of transmittal for the establishment of the NCTAC-NR/R was submitted on 9 Nov78. This course superseded the NCTA-CRC (Reserve Component); its target populationencompasses not only the National Guard and Reserves but also active duty officers.This course is quite similar to the self-paced NCTAC resident course with the excep-tion of the training locations. NCTAC/ NRR consists of two phases: Phase I is anACCP which consists of 5 subcourses with an equivalent of 85 credit hours •. Phase IIis a self-paced I-week resident course at Fort Sill exposing the student to classifieddata and procedures. TRADOC approval was granted on 18 Jun 79.

d. Field Artillery Officer Advanced Course.(1) GO/NO GO. GO/NO GO became firmly established. Student' acceptance of

the system has continued to vary from one extreme to the other. The Honors Programitself has turned out to be one of the more palatable systems of those employed bythe various service schools. Several schools have adopted the USAFAS honors programand adapted it to their particular branch.

(2) Validation Examinations. Validation examinations have continued to beemployed. However, decreasing numbers of students have attempte~ to validate the

3-1

-

-

~aterial. The prevalent rationale for not attempting the validation was that theywanted to gain the most possible information. Another possible reason is the declin-ing experience level of the officers entering the course. Validation examinationshave all been made optional.

(3) Enrichment Program. A new enrichment program option was added in1979. FAOAC students were assigned to FAOBC and FACBOC sections to provide guidanceon future Army life. The program has met with moderate success.

e. Operations/Intelligence Course. The US Army Operations/IntelligenceNCO/Specialist Course, for which USAFAS was project manager, was fielded on 22.MayOne month prior to that date, pUblici~y flyers were sent to all combat units in the JNational Guard, Army Reserve, and Actlve Army that had been identified by the schoolsinvolved with the production. Kinton Research has been contracted for a I-year studYof the course and its administration. .

f. Lance Missile ~fechanic. The Lance Missile Mechanic Course was conducted ona ',tempo'raryapproval basis for 50 students in 1978. TRADOC approved the course intlar 79~ However, approval of the MACRIT is required before true training requirementSwill be known.

g. Saudi Arabian National Guard Field Artillery Officer Basic Course(SANGFAOBC). The SANG maintains the security of the Royal Family and providesinternal security for the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. A 1973 memorandum of understandin(MOU) committed the governments of the United States and Saudi Arabia to a moderniza-tion program for the SANG. The program calls for English language training at ,Lackland Air Force Base to be followed by training at appropriate TRADOC serviceschools. In Mar 75, Vinnell Corporation was selected as the prime contractor. TwoVinnell employees have been at USAFAS since Jan 76 to develop and conduct SANGinstruction. Upon arrival at USAFAS, students receive additional English languagetraining with emphasis on artillery terminology. Then they enter the SANG OfficerSpecial Course, conducted by Vinnell Corporation. This course is 55% FAOBC,concurrently with regular OBC students, and 45% specialized instruction, developed 1and conducted by Vinnell. All exams are administered by Vinnell. All costs are tborne ultimately by the government of Saudi Arabia. On 30 Nov 77, representativesDARCOM~. TRADOC, USAFAS, and Vinnell Corporation established the requirement forUSAFAS evaluation and certification, which, in turn, required a TRADOC approvedprogram of instruction. The SANG FAOBC POI was submitted to TRADOC on 8 May 78; itwould be implemented only when both the POI and the new MOU were approved for imple-mentation. The POI was approved by TRADOC on 1 Aug 78, subject to required correc-tions to the POI. TRADOC POI approval was dated 20 Apr 79. The completed MOU wasforwarded to TRADOC on 9 Feb 79. f

\(

h. Basic NCO Course for Combat Arms (BNCOC/CA). Major course reV1Sions were longoing as a result of the review of exported BNCOC/CA conducted in first quarter, F179. Revisions are eliminating the need for volumes of reference notes and use onlythe new "How to Fight" manuals' as task references. Revised individual packets Wereproduced by the AFPP. The new Soldiers' Manuals will require major changes to SkillLevel 3 tasks in BNCOC which are being developed.

i. "Master Mechanic Program (MNP).

(1) The MMP is an o~tgrowth of LTG Kalergis' Tank Forces Managemen~ GroupStudy which recommended that there be a systems-specific mechanic for tank unlts.TtH' Tank Forcps ~1afl;)gpmf'nt Orfi ce under ~IG Lawrence expanded th is concept hy r('co~-m('lIdir.g lhal lhf'rt, hf' syslf'lTI-sppcifie /Iu'chanics for fiv(' major sysl('n1S, 0/1(' of which

l

78;

I ,

received:

of,

iH He! f-prop(.llc'd art i IIf'ry. Systc'ms-speci fic fJlechanic mC':JIIH it fJI('chanic who wi II hetrained in a specific aUlomotive/turr£'t HyHlem and will serve only in that system andhave an MaS peculiar to that system.

(2) In the case of self-propelled artillery, there will be two MOS's~ 45Dfor the turret and 63D for the chassis. The 63D will also be trained on sel~cted :wheeled vehicles. A soldier will require the MaS at entry-level through AlT. ,In thecase of the turret mechanic (MOS 45D), lET will be a 5-week course (modified from thepresent 041-ASIU6, FA Weapons Mechanic); the course for the automotive mechanic 63Dwill approximate 10 weeks.

(3) These proposals were discussed at the Master Mechanic and MaintenanceAdministrator General Officer Meeting at-Fort Lee on 15 Jan 79. At this meeting, adecision was made to begin institutional training for the MMP NLT 1 Oct 80., In orderto meet this milestone, according to the TRADOC ISD model, there would have to be anapproved 'site selection and POI prior to the Jun 79 TRtI upon which to base resourcerequirements.

(4) There were numerous recommendations for training site from the schoolcommandants. However, at the Jun 79 TRtl, TRADOC announced that all skill level 1 .training would be conducted at Fort Knox (Armor School) except MaS 45D to be trainedat Fort Sill; all skill level 3 training would be at Aberdeen Proving Ground (OrdnanceSchool).

(5) Coordination continues so that this course (45DIO) may begin: on theprojected start date, Oct 80.

j. Advanced NCO Courses (ANCOC). In 1978, the TRADOC Commander chartered agroup of senior NCO's to determine what improvements might be made in ANCOC in thisperiod of declining resources. The TRADOC Command Sergeant Major,provided the resultsof the MOS 13B survey to USAFACFS on 4 Dec 78. Ad hoc committee meetings were heldthroughout the first quarter CY 79 to determine methodology. MG Merritt, USAFACFSCommander, submitted a proposed revision to the Field Artillery Cannon NCO AdvancedCourse to GEN Starry, TRADOC Commander, on 22 Mar 79; GEN Starry gave concept approvalon 6 Apr 79. The formal POI submission was made on 15 Jun 79 and implemented'in 'August 79~ This revision restructured the course to fully support NCOES under EP~IS.Revisions included a common subjects phase which all students receive and a separateMOS track of skill level 4 supervisory tasks for each MOS. ,Training objectives andcourse 'content were revised to coincide with the TRADOC CSM's survey on Advanced NCOCourses~ After the first two iterations of this course, further revisions ~ere madeto fine tune the POI.

k. Reduction of Army Training (RATS)/DPS 040. The USAFAS RAT$ proposal wassent to TRADOC on 17 Aug 78. Course length reductions were implemented on 1 Oct 78.The USAFAS RATS proposal received TRADOC approval on 21 Mar 70; course length reduc-tions were addressed by the Jun 79 TRADOC,Review of Manpower (TRtl).

1. Nuclear Subjects.(1) USAFAS forwarded a nuclear training package to TRADOC on 6 Sep' 78.

(2) On 9 Apr 79, GEN Starry published the Action Plan for Integration of,Tactical Nuclear Considerations into TRADOC and directed preparation for implementa-tion. In the first quarter of FY 80, CAC, Fort Leavenworth was designated ~rincipalcoordinator of this effort.

3-3

(3) The missile program manager became the focal point for initiatingUSAFAS implementation. An initial study indicated that the timelines were very.optimistic. It was projected that personnel and trainer availability would ,pushfinal implementation date from 1 Jan 80 to 1 Nov 80.

the

thel(4) The Jun 79 TRM addressed resource implications of increased nuclear

training but did not approve additional resources.

(5) The Commandant, USAFAS approved of as the first course to be imple-mented the Atomic Cannon 8-Inch (ACE) Course. This course will begin in Jan 80.

(6) The addition of two 0-3's to TCAD to assist in the development, ofincreased USAFAS nuclear instruction. Resident training is being developed for theFA Cannon ,Battery Course, the Lance Missile Crewman Course, the Pershing MissileCrewman Course, and for officers assigned to warhead detachments.

m. .Field Artillery Precommand Course. In Oct 78, the class of the formalPrecommand course was conducted. Since that time, six classes have been conductedwith progressively increasing effectiveness. The course, which was approved on12 Jun 79 by the Combined Arms Center and Fort Leavenworth, fulfills the guidelines'specified by CAC as well as providing refresher training on Field Artillery peculiartasks, All administration and course evaluations are provided through DCRDT.upon over one hundred student comments, the success or failure of the course restsprimarily with the escorts and how they respond to the requests from the commanddesignees.

2. ACCONPLISID1ENTS AND ITEMS OF INTEREST.

a. CFD.

(1) The Field Artillery Radar Crewman Course (221-17BI0) was revised inorder that a separate POI could be developed for instruction on Radar Set (AN/TPS-58Course (221-17BIT).

(2) The POI for the Field Artillery Target Acquisition Specialist Course412-17CI0 AIT was approved by TRADOC 14 May 1979.

(3) In Feb 79, DCRDT approved the POI change for FAOBC which is orientedfor land navigation and terrain association. Beginning in June 1979 with FAOBCthe cu'rrentPOI was initiated. The Gunnery Department was tasked with providing alltarget location instruction to FAOBC students.

(4) The Officer Basic Course POI includes the following classes.

AN02AA Basic map reading instructionAN0201 Nap reading examinationAN02AL Field exerciseAN02AK Day land navigation course, gradedAN02Mf Terrain association, motor march, gradedAN02AO Day land navigation course, Rraded

PERIODS825555

30(5) The map n'ading portion of FAOBC has heell increaspd hy CFD lo 11

"I 'It l"S not a critical fractional unit for oraduation of the course.pCrlO( s. b

3-4

l

Based.

8-79~

------

(C» The Survey Divisioll of t1H' Coullterfirt' D('partlll('lIl has cOlllhilll'd till'Survey Hesoun:es and ~lanagem('nlClass (ASOIBF) with Targetillg Division's TargetAcquisition Assets Class (ATOITR) for the Field Artillery Officer Advance Course.

(7) Army and ~Iarine'officers assigned to the Field Artillery TargetAcquisition/Survey Officer Course (FATASOC) of the Counterfire Department are contin-uinl( t.o receive instruction in traditional survey, sound/flash and radar ol',~ratiolls.

(8) The Survey part of the FA Fire Support Specialist Course (FAFSSC 13F)taught hy the Counlerfire Department began One Station Unit Training (OSUT) in Jul78.

(9) The survey part of the map-reading portion of the Tactical Communica-tion Chiefs Advanced Course (TCCAC) taught by the Counterfire Department has beenpicked up by the General Courses Branch. TCCAC receives the same basic instructionas FAFSSC 13F, minus the land navigation course.

(10) A major POI change for 0-13-C42, FA Cannon NCO Advanced Course wassubmitted based on the Ad Hoc Committee's findings using extracts of a survey ,conducted by TRADOe in Sep 78. During the period Jan Feb 79, a committee comprisedof senior NCO's from III CIA, USAFATC and USAFAS reviewed the survey findings onANCOC and made recommendations on the POI revision. The course has been restructuredto fully support NCOES under EPMS. Revisions included a common subjects phase, whichall stud,ents receive, and a separate MOS track of skill ,level 4 supervisory ,tasks ,~oreach MOS (13b, E, F). Training objectives and course content have been revised tocoincide with the recent TRADOC CSM's survey on Advanced NCO Courses. '

(11) A minor POI revision was submitted for 250-0848 Marine ArtilleryOperations Chief Course, changing the objective to conform to USAFAS Reg 1-3.

(12) The field exercise portion of FAOBC has been modified in order toinclude a practice land navigation course. This course was used to assist studentsthat had little or no previous experience in orienting, navigation and terra1nassociation. In'addition, extra instruction was given to marginal studenti on thecourse prior to a scheduled retest. Map reading for OBC still isn't a criticalfractional unit for course completion, but an overall department average of 70% is amandatory requirement for graduation. Classes 1-79 were used for an OBC POI compar-ison, under the new POI failure rates went from 37% to 13%. Grade averages rose from73 percent' up to 83 percent for classes in OBC classes participating with the newPOI. The results were that the Gunnery Observed Fire scores improved by two points.

(13) The Field Artillery Target Acquisition Survay Officer Course (2E-13D)was revised and updated to confcrm to the ISD model. In addition, a ieducti~n 6f:'ammunition was made. The treds number for Radar was changed since they are now aseparate division. This change required no additional logistical support of fundrequirements. These students will be issued the new Texas Instrument CalculatorTI-59 in January 1980.

(14) The Cannon Fire Direction Specialist Course (13EI0) was reviewed todetermine if instruction in the new FM 6-13E/CM Commander's Manual, MOS 13E, conformedto what was actually being taught. All tasks were covered in the present POI.

(15) The Tactical Fire Direction System (TACFIRE) Operations Spe~ialistCourse was revised to include a 12.5-hour block on Basic Map Reading to be taughtself-paced. This proposed block of instruction has been determined to be best suitedfor this level instruction.

3-5

-

.

. (16) The Field Artillery Firefinder Organizational Maintenance Course(ASIX5) ,was submitted to DCRDT for approval by TRADOC on 19 Nov 79. This courseprovided the enlisted students with the knowledge required to inspect, test andperform organizational maintenance of Field Artillery Firefinder Sets AN/TPQ-36 andAN/TPQ-37. ICH per class: 881.8

(17) The Field Artillery Radar Operator Course (AN/TPS-58) (221-17BIT) andthe Field Artillery Radar Operator Course (221-17BIO) POI's were resubmitted toTRAnOC on 28 Nov 79 to comply with message, ATTN-PR-P, HQ TRAnOC, DTG 072100Z Jun 79subjct: Interim Guidance on Programs of Instruction (POI) for Enlisted Training.This message established guidelines for enlisted POI's to conform to the Commander'S'Manual for each MOS. A listing of all tasks was placed directly under the coversheet of all POI's, to include task number and title, POI file number, and whethertrained in the course to SM standards. POI's also indicate other task or subjectsbeing taught and the rationale.

(18) The Pershing Officer Course (2F-13C) was revised to decrease thesurvey portion of the POI 1.7 hours with no detriment to the content of the course.A POI change to the course of instruction in November 1979, through coordination witbthe Pershing Branch, modifications to the Simplified Survey instruction were made sothat pershing platoon leaders could utilize the available equipment (Missile TO&E)for missile emplOYment. The new survey class takes up 9 out of 14 allotted periods,the remainder being assigned back to Weapons Department. POC class 501-79 receivedthe new POI in November which consists of:

AS08PG

AS08PJAS0801

Intro to Simplified Survey Resection andModified Resection

Resection & Modified ResectionMeaning AnglesSubtenseM-2 compass & M-2 aiming circle declinationCoordinate Adjustment (Pace method)Tape emplacementField ExerciseExamination

Periods

4

32

The Pershing Branch, with approval by DCRDT, advanced the survey portion to thesecond week of the POC course and it will take effect in the April POC class.

(19) Marine Field Artillery Fire Controlman Course (MFAFCC). On 1 Oct 79,the General Courses Branch assumed responsibility for instruction of MFAFCC.

(20) The Specialist Courses Branch completed validation on 25 Oct 79 therevised POI for ASSC. The revised POI adds the following 16 subjects:

(a) Computation with logs.(b) Computing subtense with logs.(c) Computing subtense with the IDIC.(d) Computing ,distance with the DME.(e) Computing horizontal distance with the D~I-60.

]-6

I 1

( f ) S('v c n pIa C t' log s 1lt 6 23 1 .

(~) Army Ephemeris FM 6-300 usage.

(i) f{t'St'cl ion.

(j) Triangulation.

(k) Grid convergence.

(1) Star identification.

(m) Simultaneous observation.

(n) Polaris tabular method.

(0) Polaris Kochab method.

(22) SQT Testing (MOS 82C). A SQT practice for the Hands-On Component(HOC) of the 82C Field Artillery Survey SQT was established in Aug 79. A practicearea identical to the actual test site was established to allow the individual soldierto determine his own proficiency.

(21) GVS-5 Laser Rangefinder. The 82C MOS POI was forwarded to USAFAS on28 Nov 79, requesting approval for fall implementation to start with Class 11-80which begins 30 Jan 80. The addition of 23 tasks extended the course by approximately3 weeks. Because of the significant increase in course length, the CounterfireDepartment requested that the 82C MOS track be deleted from the OSUT program.

(?3) Update of the indoor training facility. During Jul 79, the back roomof building 3075 received the addition of color photos of actual traverse stations inorder to add realism to indoor training or during inclement weather. During November,the OP portion of the 82C course was modified to include the DM-60 for inclementweather and the addition of a new OP flash ranging map.

(24) The Field Artillery Firefinder Operator Course (13RIO) was submittedto DCRDT for approval by TRADOC on 1 Oct 79 and resubmitted 19 Nov 79. This courseprovided enlisted personnel with the knowledge to select and evaluate a radar site;emplace, orient, check, adjust, operate and march order, perform preventive mainte-nance on the AN/TPQ-36 and AN/TPQ-37 radar sets and ancilLary equipment during day' ornight; locate weapons; and perform radar gunnery missions. MOS for which trained:Field Artillery Firefinder Radar Cre\! Member (13R10). ICH per class: 1369.2.

b. wo. Department instructional personnel participated in various conferences,demonstrations, seminars and briefings.

(1) Firing Battery NCO's were involved in several overseas MTT's. Instruc-tion on artillery weapons was provided to Saudi Arabia and North Yemen.

(2) Participation by Firing Battery personnel in the Blue Ribbon Panelsrecommended modification to the 8-inch howitzer has continued. Several tests were'conducted on the proposed modifications and the training projectiles. Based on thesetests, recommendations were furnished to the committee in December.

3-7

-

(3) Firing Battery designed and presented a class to members of BRLat'Aberdeen, Maryland. The purpose of the class was to provide instruction on theand maintenance of field artillery weapons, specifically the breech and firingmechanism, and also to instill an awareness of the safety problems associated .whenmaintenance is not performed or improperly performed.

(4) Personnel of the Logistics Branch participated in the World-WideLogistics Instructor Conference conducted at Fort Lee in September.

(5) Liaison visits by Logistics Branch personnel were made to Fort Riley,Fort Bragg and Fort Carson. Purpose of the visits was to evaluate the effectivenessof the pre-command course with ~revious attendees.

(6) Instruction on the lSKW generator for the TACFIRE course will now begiven by the Logistics Branch.

(7) One officer and ten noncommissioned officers of the Guided MissileDivision culminated a year of hard work, travel and training in conjunction with thedevelopment of the Field Artillery's newest weapon, the Multiple Launch Rocket SysteJThe groups spent the year acquiring expertise on the two competing contractor versio~of the.system and will perform as TRAnOC key instructor personnel during the conduct'of Operational Test I in CY80. Pre-operational test training commenced in JDecember 1979 which included special training to representatives of Great Britain anthe Federal Republic of Germany.

(8) Representatives from the department participated in Project JUICE,.Joint US/Israeli Cooperative Efforts, team visit to Israeli Defense Force inNovember 1979.

c. TCAD.

(1) FACBOC. Students now receive classes on Security in Combat/ CourierDuties a~d Transportation.

(2) POGAF. The class on US Nuclear Weapon Surety Program was modified tOJprovide overview of Army's entire surety program (ILO in depth knowledge of Personnef

Reliability Program).

(3) Nuclear/Chemical Target Analysis Course. The resident phase waswritten in spring of 1979. This phase is TRAnOC approved.

(4) Basic Tactics Branch commenced participation in 15Smm System Live FirExerci~e (WDI2UN). This allows additional instructions for FIST and RSOP operations~

(5) The Combined Arms Team in the Illuminated Defense (TIJ2QD) was deleteJfrom the POI. A Defense CPX (Tl12VC) was substituted to cover defensive operations,.FIST operations, FSO fire pla~ning,and execution of fire plans.'

(6) TACFIRE Training Division, DCD, w~s transferred to TCAD on 1 Oct 79The division provides training for division artilleries and FA brigades which are toreceive TACFIRE equipment. Training is also provided for replacement personnel.Programs of instructio~ include:

(a) TACFIRE Support Course (11 Weeks).

(b) TACFIRE Fire Support Element Course (4 Weeks).

3-8

1 care'

I

...

(c) TACFIRE Command and Staff Course (1 Week 2 Days).(d) TACFIRE Direct Support/General Support Maintenance Course (12

W"(' kR, :\ Days).

(C') Inili~llion of TCAD porlion of MOS 13C AIT POl for 1980.

d. CED.(1) Implemented expanded instruction on the AN/VIC-l Intercommunication

Set to the Tactical Communication Chief Course 31V30.(2) Implemented 16 hours of organizational maintenance instruction on

VINSON speech secure equipment to the Tactical Communication Systems Operator/MechanicCourse 31V10.

3-9

SECTION IV. INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY

1. CEO.

The increase in the student input of the professional course and the programmedVINSON training scheduled to start 1 Oct 79 have impacted on the existing instruc-tional equipment and facilities. The following prepaiations were made:

a. Twenty (20) mobile communication equipment benches were constructed 'tominimize cost and facilitate moving of instructional equipment. Room 104 was recon-figured from a general purpose classroom to an equipment laboratory, using twentymobile benches to accommodate increased TCC student inputs.

b. Twenty (20) mobile communication equipment benches were constructed for usein Room 204 for use in providing VINSON training to all students in the pipeline forEurope. The room was also rewired for DC electrical power.

c. In addition to the twenty (20) mobile training benches, sufficient tacticalcommunication equipment was requisitioned and installed to train up to 40 students ata time on the AN/VIC-I intercommunication system.

d. Room 202 was upgraded from a general purpose classroom to a secure facilityfor use in providing classified instruction.

e. Two audio amplifiers were constructed by the Electronic Support Branch andshipped to Fort Bragg for use in instructing radiotelephone procedures. ~he am~li-fiers allow up to 10 stations per amplifier.

f. The Electronics Division received a M-60 tank mock-up which is used to addrealism to the organizational maintenance provided on FM radios and intercommunicationsets AN/VIC-I.

g. The Electronic Support Branch, Supply and Maintenance Division, designed andbuilt six AN/VRC-46 and -47 training model radios for TCAD in support of the CPXFacility to enable FAOBC, FACBOC, and FAOAC students to become accustomed to usingradios and radiotelephone procedures during terrain board exercises. These are alsoused by III Corps Artillery tenant units to conduct CPX operations.

2. CFD.a. Due to instructor shortages, coupled with an increased student load during

January 19.79,instruction within the Field Artillery Radar Crewman Course and WeaponSupport Radar Repairer Course was conducted during split ~hifts. Instruction waspresented to half of the students in the morning and half of the st~dents ih the .afternoon. Instructors were required to work a 10- to II-hour day in order to accom-modate all students during the JanuaryMarch time frame. As the result of increasedequipment availability and a reduced student to instructor ratio, success in trainingall students was achieved. Several other changes to course design were required inself-paced courses during this period of instructor shortages. Validations" and .revisions to instructional material continued within the Weapon Support Radar RepairerCourse. An instructortraining program was initiated in order to qualify newlyassigned personnel in the maintenance of field artillery radar systems. Remedialtraining during evening hours was initiated for students having difficulty in achiev-ing course standards.

4-1

.,b."CFD Met FAMC Brdnch reviewed and made recommendations on 20 TEC lessons and7 ACCP lessons. Mr. Langston, FAMC-SHE, visited the TEC lesson contractor inCalifornia to coordinat'e and resolve doctrinal difference. TEC Lessons are beingvalidated with new students. The 93F Soldier's and Commander's Manuals were reviewedand validated. The 1979-80 93F SQT was validated.

c. MERC Branch, Met Division, began the production of 21 TV tape presentationsto be used in the MERC and to be exported as TEC aids. All 21 tapes were validatedand sent,to TRADOC.

d. The Target Acquisition Specialist Branch of the Target Division continuedthe self,:,pacedinstruction for 17C10 AlT. Review and revision of self-pac'ed materialcontinued. The Target Acquisition Specialist Branch of the Tgt Div continued totrain OTEA test and player personnel on the GLLD in preparation for Copperhead tests.Both the classified and unclassified Artillery Threat scripts were revised andapproved by Scores. Review and revision of all instructional material, in particularthe Phase II exercise for OAC and the Counterfire Map Exercise (AT**QR), continued.

e. The Survey Specialist Courses Branch of the Survey Division continued theself-paced method of instruction under the TRADOC concept of skill level training.Conversion to One Station Unit Training (OSUT) began in July 1978 and was fullyimplemented by September 1978. The results reflected that the OSUT self-paced courseproduced better soldiers and more proficient surveyors, MOS 82C. By July 1979, thetermination of the 6.S-hour training day was due to more efficient scheduling. The1980 Commander's Manual HOS 82C authorized the addition of computations into thecourse. This manual is the present outline for the Specialist Course Branch's POI.Revision of self-paced instructional material has continued. Each lesson was reviewedand revised as student and instructor comments indicated a problem area. All surveyinstructors qualified to give a one period planetarium show to the general public,Officers Wives' Club, and ROTC and JROTC groups. The show includes a brief historyof astronomy and location of constellations along with ancient day mythology.

f. A complete review of both the FA Radar Crewman and Weapon Support RadarRepairer Courses was conducted and recommended changes submitted as part of theCommandants Training Strategy. These changes were eventually briefed to TRADOC byGeneral Merritt. Recommended changes included:

(1) Increase course lengths.

(2) Implement field training during AlT.

(3) Conduct NCO training at Fort Sill.

(4) Teach Organizational Maintenance to 17B10's.

g. Both Operator and Maintenance Key Instructor Personnel/New EquipmentTraining (KIP/NET) Courses were started for the FIREFINDER AN/TPQ-37 Radar Systemduring Aug 79. The KIP/NET Operator Course was completed in Sep 79 and the KIP/NETMaintenance Course ended on 21 Dec 79.

h. The Weapon Support Radar Repair Course (26B10) flow was redesigned toprovide" one station testing and more troubleshooting reinforcement by review "bugs"throughout the course. To support this effort, one additional radar was transferredfrom RHSB to RMIB.

4-2

i. Programs uf Instruction for the Firefinder Operatur (13RI0) and Organiza-tional Maintenance (13RX5) courses were submitted to THADOC for approval in,Nov 79.

j. The development, editing and processing instructional material created ,~noutstanding challenge as the second half of the calendar year 1979 continued with thesevere loss of personnel. The lowest period bottomed out during the month of Augustwith strength percentages as 0% for officers, 20% warrant officers, 56% enlistedpersonnel and, fortunately, 100% civilian SHE's. The year ended with these percent-ages: officers 100%, warrant officers 80%, enlisted personnel 65%, and civilianSNE's remained at ]00%. In the second half of calendar year 1979, the FAr-ICCBranchexperienced training at over 100% capacity for the first time since the conception ofthe self-paced FAMCC POI. Fortunately, MERC student input remained low and they wereah1e to assist FAMCC Branch wi th instructional and equipment support. Also, the ~lERCBranch was able to, and did, meet their goal of having all MERC-TEC tape presentationsvalidated and on their way to TRADOC prior to 31 Dec 7~.

k.The Target Acquisition Specialist Branch of the Targeting Division continuedself-paced instruction for 17CI0 AlT. The branch continued to write new instructionalmaterial and review and update current instructional material. The student input forthe Target Acquisition Specialist Course in FY 80 has been set at 593, an increase of35% over FY 79.

1. The TEC program for 17C is on schedule with this branch reviewing '46 KitDe'sign Approach (KDA) manuscripts and the approval of 21 draft lessons. '.

m. The AN/GVS-5 laser training was started in Nov 79 for the 17C AIT course.3. GD.

a. Tow Observed Fire Trainers (OFT) (US made) are presently being used'"in Bldg3669, along with the BT-33. However, early next year, Gunnery Department will receivetwo new OFT's, one from Britain and the other from Ireland. These new OFT's will betested to determine if the durability and performance are better than the ones'being'used presently.

b. 13E students are now incorporated with the 13F students on the G034SM fieldexercises. Because of personnel losses in the latter half of the year, it'has becomenecessary to augment the branch with personnel (13E) from III Corps Artillery.' The13E's from III Corps act as one-man-FDC's in support of other branches within thedepartment.

c. The use of self-paced instruction for 13E AIT, FADAC, and FACA continued.Over one-half of all instructional material was reviewed and revised during theperiod. This consisted of: 23 Self-paced study guides; 15 TEC lesso~s; and 8 Slide-audio programs. Additionally, one-half of all nonresident instructional material hasbeen reviewed and revised 'as required. (12 self-paced study guide packets, 6 TEClessons). By using some grouppaced instruction in the 13E POI, this has reduced theneed for a senior instructor in each building (3). It has also eliminated ~he needfor a separate end-of-course examination team of two instructors. . ,

d. Gunnery instruction continued at a brisk pace with 8 FAOBC classes,' 7,FACBOC courses, and 1 FAOBC-RC class being completed during this period.

4-3

\

SECTION V. TRAINING DEVELOPNENTS

1. DTD.a. Training Device Branch.

(1) The Observed Fire Trainer OT II was completed in August 1978 and a .decision was made not to go into production due to poor RAM data. An FDTE,isscheduled,for February-March 1980 to evaluate two British OFT-Type Trainers, theMaster Gunner by Marconi and a device manufactured by Invertron. Efforts continue toachieve a realistic approach to indirect fire engagement simulation for MILES. Anadditional 39 M31 kits were funded to fill active and reserve unit requirements.Watervliet Arsenal is building the kits and expects fielding to take place August-December 1980.

(2) 'Firefinder Training Device. Training Effectiveness Test (TET) wasconducted,at Hughes in August 1979. The Firefinder training device (A17E11) arrivedat Fort Sill in September 1979. The government acceptance test was conducted at FortSill on the training device in October 1979. Phase I of the On-Site User Test (OSUT)was completed on 20 December 197~.

(3) GLLD Training Device. Contract completed to purchase 28 trainers (25for USAFAS, 3 for NETT); BOIP was approved by TRADOC for one trainer per divarty.(Efforts to develop a full-scale moving target for Copperhead live fire were initiatedin early November 1979.)

(4) Artillery Direct Fire Trainer. Fi~lded in fall of 1978; actioninitiated to modify ADFT for use with 8-inch howitzers.

(5) Turret Maintenance Trainer. Item to be built using currently avail-able p~rts; contract awarded in September 1979. 10C scheduled for January 1981.

(6) Low Cost Indirect Fire Training Round. DT I tests completed at Yl~a;round is ballistically matched to M107 He; fuze signature tests at Fort Sill in June1979 were unsuccessful; follow-on test of four alternative designs to enhance fuzesignature scheduled for December 1979. Customer test by FA Board scheduled'forFebruary 1980.

(7) Engagement Simulation. JWG held at Fort Sill in May 1979 to discussDraft TDLOA for an artillery shootable simulator to be used in MILES exercises.Follow-on JWG was held ,in October 1979. TDLOA being revised to reflect JWG's input.

b. Training Analysis Branch.(1) CTEA FASTFIRE. Suspended indefinitely pending HQ, TRADOC action on

other WSTEA efforts which are to proceed.(2) CTEA FASTBACCS. Contract not awarded. No acceptable methodologies

were proposed. Resubmitted to HQ, TRADOC, 7 April 1978 for review prior to forwardingto Harry Diamond Labs. Queried HQ, TRADOC on status of this effort in letter dated17 July 1979--no reply has been received.

(3) CHO Studies Program. Ongoing. FY 80/81 input to DCD Februar~ 1979:

(4) CTEA FAMAS. The study directive for the system will be published inAugust 1980.

5-1

'

(5) CTEA Pershing II. Study directive planning, support andinitiated 1 July 1979.

. (6) CTEA FIREFI~~ER System. The study directive for the system update isexpected in September 1979. The CTEA study was expanded on 1 May 1979 by combiningthe trainer and system CTEA studies. , J

(7) ARTS. The ARTS Team is being dissolved. Only a residual crewto finalize ongoing actions. Future studies for ARTS were terminated lAW HQ, TRADOCguidance at June 1979 TRM.

(8) CTEA How/Am. Contracted in July 1979 to Litton Mellonics SystemDevelopments Division. Final report received. Follow-on action a~complished inletter to HQ, TRADOC, dated 19 July 1979.

(9) CTEA WSTEA-FO. The profile study (HRN 79-11) contracted to McDonnellDouglas Astronautics Company by ARI to evaluate FO selection and training wascompleted September 1979.

(10) CTEA FlREFINDER Trainer. Study directive received 13 July 1979.Study plan'initiated. CTEA report o/a June 1980.

(11) CTEA COPPERHEAD. Completed. Final Report dated 30 August 1979.(12) CTEA FASTOC. Proposal approved in FY 79 study program. Status

requested from HQ, TRADOC, 17 July 1979; no reply received to date ..

(13) CTEA MLRS. Study plan dated 30 August 1979. Two phase effort willhave a preliminary final report o/a 5 January 1980 (to include costing) and a finalPhase II report o/a 28 March 1980. Phase II is based on an OTP dated 24 September1979.

. (14) POC ARI. The Directorate of Training Developments (TS Div) was'established as POC for Fort Sill on 18 January 1979.

(15) FSMAA (Ongoing). Phase I draft completed 14 December 1979; Phase IIreport due 4th Quarter FY 80.

c. Training Developments Branch.

(1) GVS-5 System Training Development. Training System to support IOCunder development in conjunction with DCRDT.

(2) COPPERHEAD System Training Development. OT II for COPPERHEAD completat Fort Carson May 1979.

(3) Laser Target Designator Training Development. This project has beendropped by. the US Army.

(4) FIREFINDER System Training. ICTP was updated in August 1979. nSUTstarted 13 November 1979 (Phase I) at Fort Sill. IEP completed and approved 18 May1979. TET completed at Hughes in August 1979.

(5) PII System Training Development. DTD activity has increased in thisproject~ PII Training Device requirements are being written. JCTP input completed~

5-2

,coordination.,....••

'.1.' .•

remain,

o

((J) MLI<S Sy:-.;tt'/11 ""'tJj,dll~ f)('veJop/lu'lIl. 'CTP ("olllp'e'l('c!. 'J''J'SP lor O'J' 'Isuhmitl('(l.0'1'J to be conductc(l soon.

2. DCRDT.

a~ Skill Performance Aids (SPA's). Key personnel involved with SPAS andAssistalll Contractin~ Ofric'cr's Representatives (ACOR) attended a course of ins'lru'(,'-l ion concerning lhe~w procedures as presented by USATSC. GSRS, Pershing 1J, ,RPV andFAMAS ar<~ currently being developed under SPAS.

b. Training Extension Courses (TEC). The 33 lessons delivered tllisquarterbrought the total for FY 79 to 98, 120% of the Commandant's Contract. The on-sitedevelopment teams established under the Job Training Package Contract, TEC VII andTEC VIII, have proven highly successful. The concept was adopted by ATSC andinstituted at several other TRADOC schools. USAFAS initiation of this concept hashad significant positive influence in the TEC program, eliminating numerous pitfallsin past contracts and giving much greater guarantee of timely delivery of products.The USAFAS teams are months ahead of schedule with expected early delivery of the 17Cand 15D JTP's by as much as a year. The TEC product media has averaged 65% audio-visual and 35% printed. Audio only production has been insignificant. Based onfeedback from studies, surveys and field visits, USAFAS has shifted the emphasis toproviding material easily usable on the job site, predominantly printed material.This type of training product provided to the supervisor to use in training hispersonnel, gives greater assurance of utilization while still permitting individualstudy.

c. Army Correspondence Course Program (ACCP). The 20 correspondence'subcoursesdeveloped during this period exceeded the Commandant's Contract by 54 percent. Thesesubcourses, developed according to specific tasks,included fire direction, targetacquisition, meteorology, map reading and tactics subjects. Development continues on32 additional subcourses.

d. TACFIRE Advanced Training Program (TATP).(1) TATP development proceeded on a schedule which saw delivery of all

materials in final review form by 31 December. Major concerns included finalizingdelivery parameters not specified in the contract, completing the conversion of JPM'sto TM's as the baseline technical documentation for TACFIRE, refining reproductionand distribution needs for fielding TATP, completion of courseware validations, andpreparation/ reproduction of TATP in version 85 format for training 212th Gp in'March1980. Update to version I format was initiated with much of the effort assisted byflagging word-processed material for later modification.

.(2) Notification was received in December that TACFIRE procurement funds

were cut affecting deployment of TACFIRE as originally scheduled. The full impact ofCongressional action to te,rminate TACFIRE is at this date uncertain.

(3) The following is a list of significant milestones occurring'dur~ng thereport period:

5-3

I

USAFAS initiated update to Version I with input ofFinal Review Material into ~ord processing data base.

.'

Date

14 Jun

11-12 Jul

20 Jun 20 Sep

13-17 Aug

18-19 Sep

26 Sep

Oct 79

1 Nov

31 Dec

31 Dec

31 Dec

31 Dec

Milestone

Meeting at Fort Sill with Litton TATP Manager, EdRoche, to clarify delivery parameters.

Courseware IPR at Fort Sill, Oklahoma. Large GroupTeam Training Validations were conducted.

Team Training Validations were conducted.

ARI provided PLANIT workshop to 11 USAFAS personnel toassist USAFAS in gaining authoring expertise needed toupdate CAI lessons.

Courseware IPR at Van Nuys, CA. Post delivery supportand review/acceptance of final materials were majortopics.

Large Group Individual Courseware Validations completed.,

Start of Litton Post'Delivery Support for PLANITAdvisory Service to USAFAS. Scheduled through end ofFebruary 1980.

As of this date RAYCOMM has received nearly all USAFASinput for the camera ready mechanical masters for TMreproduction by the Army Printing Office. Scheduledcompletion of TM printing in Version I format is 30March 1980.

As of this date all TATP Courseware Material has beenreceived for USAFAS Final Review.

As of this date 90 lessons of 333 Total TATP lessonshave been accepted by USAFAS in final form.

As of this date 50% of TATP printed material has beenplaced in word processing data base.

e. ~Battery Computer System (~CS) Training Progr~m •. Production contract forBCS's being negotiated. Contract is expected to be flnallzed by 1 April 1980. Workon E~M and TM's will commence within 30 days after date of contract.

f. EJucation Television/Department of the Army Audio Visual ProductionProgram (ETV/DMPP) . '

(1) Development, production and validation of the 21-lesson series coveri~MOS 93F10111, Meteorological Equipment Repairer, has,been completed. Packaging anddistribution are awaiting.ArrSC acceptance of the flnal 6 programs.

(2) To date, 10 of the 23 ETV lessons projected for FY 80 in MOS'26BIO,Weapons Support Radar Repair, have been developed--of which 3 have been produced.

.

'~

-

I

,

(3) DAAPP project, "TACFlRE: Improved Fire Support for the Combined ArmsTeam," has been delivered lAW TRADOC Installation Contract.

(4) ETV lesson, "Radar Observed MPI Registration Using Radar SetAN/MPQ-4A," was submitted as the USAFAS entry in the first annual competition for theVincent F. DeRose Award for excellence in educational television production ...'

(5) As a result of a field/assistance visit by DCROT personnel, 4 ETVlessons on the Pershing Missile system were developed and produced as unprogrammedrequirements. An additional 5 programs are in various stages of development/production.

h. Design Division. Firefinder operator and maintenance tasks were designedfrom which programs of instruction were developed. The division continues to monitorthe student critique program. The division was designated the action element for theReview of the Education and Training of Officers (RETO) and an article regarding thatproject has been submitted to the Field Artillery Journal for publication. Thedivision is monitoring the revision of the BNCOC program of instruction. A programof instruction for MOS 13CI0 (TACFlRE) was prepared. Tasks were designed for theM198 Howitzer ~hich will appear in ubsequent editions of the 13B Soldier's 'Manual.Anticipated future work includes design of officer tasks and design of tasks fornumerous items of new equipment.

g. Institutional Training Branch (ITB). The functions of this branch areprimarily devoted to the development of extension training material for USAR Schools.USAR Schools ADT for 1979 was conducted during the period 17 Jun - 28 JuL usingtraining material produced by this branch. Development and production of 90 classpackets, 52 BNCOCjCA task packets, one 13F transition packet, 2 STEPs;/and 3 Level IMOS course packets were accomplished. The Monthly List of Instructional Materialcontinues to be published and distributed. On 1 Oct 79, USAFAS began participationin Phas~ II of the TRADOC Special Configuration Project to reco~figure enlisted MOSresident courses 13E, 13F, 17B, 17C and 82C into self-contain~d', fully exportable,MOS-awarding instructional packages specifically tailored for!presentation by USARSchools. The 2-year project will terminate on 28 Sep 81 at which time USAFAS willassume responsibility for funding and institutionalizing of MOS courses.

i~ Staff and Faculty Development Division.(1) Instructor Training Course, FY 79.

(a) Number trained: CED 13CFD 38GD 7T/CAD 34WD 66MISC 23ALLIES 11TOTAL 192

(b) The Instructor Training Course was redesigned to include moreself-paced modules, with military history and impromptu talks reinstated.

(c) A,TV tape was produced introducing various problems in classmanagement as a basis for student discussion of problem solutions.

5-5~orrls S~ett Library, USAFASProperty of U.S. Army

1

(d) Cross training for depth and flexibility was increased.(2) Counseling,Workshop, FY 79.

(a) Number trained: CEDCFDGDT/CADWDDeRDTTOTAL

15o383

20

(3) English Language Refresher Course.

(a) Four classes per year fulfill the FAOAC requirement.

(b) The Saudi Arabian National Guard (SANG) are now receiving languagrefresher classes prior to scheduled courses.

(c) Input, FY 79. SANG 9FAOAC 58TOTAL 67

(4) Reading Improvement Course.

. (a) Implemented three new classes utilizing "Decisive Battles of theAmerican Revolution" by LTC Joseph B. Mitchell, a graduate of the Field ArtillerySchool.

(b) Implemented two new classes in study skills within the course.(c) Input, FY 79. Started 135; Completed 84.

(5) Instructional Systems Development Course.

(a) Conducted ISDC workshop at Chaplain's School, Ft. Hamilton, NY.Conducted ISDC workshop at Barksdale AFB, LA.

(b) Represented Ft Sill at "Soft Skill" Symposium, JAG School,Charlottsville, VA and again at Hampton, VA.

(c) Attended Job Aids Workshop (Harless), at Atlanta, GA.

(d) Reviewed 158 documents used for SP Instruction in instructionaldepartment.

(e) Produced three SIA programs for SQT Track.

(f) Revised and Published Student Text and Guidance Package for ISnC( Ht' vis ion i s to 0 n tin U 0 11S • )

(g) Numher of student modules: ISDC 39SQT 35Manage S-p 17TOTAL 91

5-6

(h) Number of students trained during FY 79:

ISDC 148

SQT 30

Manage S-p 185

TOTAL 363

(e) The type and number of programs available in the ILC as of theclose of FY 79 were:

(b) Software for the ILC comes from several sources. The fiveacademic departments are tasked with providing a list of programs in their area ofresponsibility that should be made available in the ILC.

(c) Some of the materials come to the ILC from other militaryinstallations. The Army initiated the Training Extension Course Program (TEC) severalyears ago wtih the idea that critical information concerning common military occupa-tion skills (MOS) could be programmed, designed, ar.d self-taught through the use ofmultimedia. ThuS, installations having the primary mission of teaching MOS-producingcourses were tasked with making basic elements of those courses available to otherinstallations through automated slide/audio packages. As the state of the artchanged, so did the format. TEC lessons are now 8-mm filmstrip/audio, viewed on theBessler Cue/See projectors. At present the ILC offers 1100 TEC lessons coveringvarious MaS subject areas.

(d) The ILC is located in Snow Hall (the main academic building) andoccupies almost 3,000 square feet. Plans are to locate the ILC on the lower floor ofthe building to facilitate access. Each of the 32 learning carrels in the ILC isequipped with video cassette players, television sets, 35-mm projectors and screensand audio cassette players.

(a) Types of programs available to the student vary from completeself-improvement courses, (e.g., 18-hour Developmental Reading and Study SkillsCourse) to enrichment programs, to occupational skills courses (e.g., AntennaPrinciples). The ILC is open 60 hours each week and over 2000 programs (from 10minutes to 18 hours each) are available to the enterprising student during dutyhours, evenings, and weekends by request.

(6) Individual Learning Center (ILC). The ILC serves as a general purposemultimedia resource center\for self-paced instructional programs. It differs fromthe library in that none of the programs can be "checked out." All programs must beviewed in the.ILC.

video cassettesslide/audio programsaudio only tapesprogrammed testsTEC lessonsTotal programs

492305

94136

1188

2215

Usage figures have declined in recent years from an average of 1450 patrons eachmonth in 1977 to some 1100 per month in the past year, while total hours.of instruc-

.tion provided have increased, indicating that those students using the ILC are of amore serious purpose than previOUsly.

5-7

I

(f) To keep the staff and faculty advised of new programs acquired bythe lLC, the USAFAS lLC Catalog of Programs is periodically updated and 'distributed.New programs acquired between updates of the catalog are listed as received, on adisplay board in the lLC.

(g) Measurement of the effectiveness of the lLC is accomplishedprimarily through analysis of usage factors and input from patrons, to includerequests for materials not already on hand.

(7) Related Projects.

(a) CACMIS/TRAM1S. On 28 Dec 78, the Director of DCRDT chaired ameeting with the directors of DTD, DOE, DCD and the Chief of RHO to discuss changesrequired for the CACM1S/TRAM1S syst~m.t~ work more effectively. During this meeting,the Staff. and Faculty Development Dl.vl.sl.on,DCRDT, was tasked to produce instructionalprograms to train managers and users of the CACMIS/ TRAMIS system in completing thefive forms used by CACMIS/TRAMIS at Fort Sill. The current status of the CACMIS/TRAMIS programs is outlined below:

Status (as of 4 Jan 80)Program

1. Completing FS Form 242. Completing FS Form 46

" 3. Completing FS Form 44

4 .. Completing FS Form 555

5. 'Completing FS Form 112

CompleteCompleteScript Complete; JPA Complete'

Slides in TASC 'Script Complete; JPA Near Complete.

Slides in TASC 'Rough Draft of Slides and Script Complete

As shown above, the first two programs are complete. They were distributed to ~llDepartments and Directorates of the School on 31 Oct 79. A DF was distributed withthe programs explaining their purpose and how to properly implement them. Very

. little feedback had been received by the close of CY 79. These programs pr~videinstruction at a lower level within the system. They insure that the forms requi.redby 'the system are completed accurately and they do help individuals understand thesystem. The next goal is training for managers. ~ana~ers need to thoroughly under-stand how to make the system work for them. At thl.stl.methere is no instructionavailable at the management level .. In,early CY 80, the director of DCRDT is expectedto solicit ,input from all USAFAS dl.rectorates on the management training needed andthe management by CACMIS tasks that need to be taught.

(b) AIMS. In CY 79, an Instructor Qualification Management File wascreated within the Automated Instructional Management System (AIMS). This file willprovide OSAFAS directors a management tool in determining tra~ning needs and current~training status of all USAFA~ staff and f~culty pers~nnel. Dl.rectors will review

'~ata for their own organizatl.ons and provl.de c~rrectl.ons/up~ates to nCRDT, Staff &Faculty Development Divis~on. ~n CY 80, th: fl.leprogram wl.ll.be revised for greate~flexibility. Directors wl.llbe able to reVl.ewdata by any varl.able, or'any combina-tion of variables, in the program.

(c) Accreditation. The Nort~ Central ~ssociation of Colleges andSchools (NCA) was founded in 1895 •. The NCA l.Sthe. regional a~crediting agency for

b Schools numbering.some 800 l.n19 states. Since the Unlted States does notmem er . h NCA d f. ,have a centralized educational ~u:horlty~ t e ~n lve other regi?nal accreditinagencies are the dominant forces 1n sett1ng e~u~at10nal standards at all levels.benefits of NCA membership include the' recognition of our peers that our School

5-8

-

I.

..

the1

Tht meet~

high educational standards. Membership insures that we have a voice in developingeducational goals and standards for the entire educational community, and the intro-~pective process of gaining and maintaining member status is beneficial to the entireInstitution. The Field Artillery School has applied for membership in the NorthCentral Association and has completed the major portions of the accreditation cycle.Complete institutional self-studies were completed in 1976 and 1979. In November1979, the initial accreditation visit was scheduled for January 1980. The Staff andFaculty Development Division manages the accreditation effort and the relatedactivities with other educational organizations, including the National EducationAssociation and the American Council on Education. These duties are performed by 'thedesignated Educational Liaison Officer.

j. Individual and Collective Training Plans (ICTP). Effective 17 Jan 79, theresponsibility for coordinating and implementing ICTP was passed from DTD to DCRDT.The ICTP is the document which outlines the 'program for all types of individual andunit training for new and developing equipment/systems.

k. I~dividual Training Plan (ITP). TRADOC has recently published Circular,351-3 which outlines responsibilities for developing and implementing Individual

Training Plans Army-wide. The ITP is the commandant's plan for producing and .suPporting required training for a Military Occupational Specialty (MOS) from entryto the highest skill level. UsAFAS is the proponent for CMF 13, the field a'rtilleryportion of the TRADOC-managed lTP process. Within USAFAS, DCRDT is proponent forcoordinating input from other departments and developing the ITP for CMF 13. InAugust, the Commandant's Training Strategy will be presented to the Commander,.TRADOCfor review and approval, which will complete the first phase of the ITP process. Thefirst MOS to be selected for ITP submission is 13C, and it is currently underdevelopment.

1. Automated Instructional Management System (AIMS).(1) USAFAS began eight self-paced training courses over 4 years ago.

USAFAS used instructors to mark off check-sheets as the student completed each module.The majority of students required four to five checks per school day. The task of'student monitoring,using the check-sheet method was not too cumbersome when onlyrelatively few courses were being offered; however, with additional courses alreadyestablished, and incremental expansion in years to come, the student load will'increase and a corresponding increase in instructor time will be experienced if'thecheck-sheet method continues. In 1978, usAFAS acknowledged the need for an 'automatedtraining support system to assist in the overall management of training programs andto relieve instructors of the mundane task of monitoring check-sheets; in effect, .allowing ,them to resume instructional duties of a more relevant nature. The TRADOCdecision in early 1978 was to allow Fort Sill to test the Navy's Versatile TrainingSystem (VTS).

(2) A computer was obtained in August 1978; terminals were iristalled inDecember 1978. Dur1ng FY 79 'and FY 80, the VTS software was modified to fit Armyneeds and renamed the Automated Instruction Management System (AIMS). As AIMS becomesoperational in early CY 80, it will provide the School/Center managers, instructorsadministrators, and support personnel with an interactive computer system with whichthey can obtain the latest student progress report. AIMS will provide trainingschedules, predict student graduation, provide prescriptions for remediation,administer testing and test scoring, and monitor student progress during training.During the third and fourth quarters of FY 80, AIMS will be evaluated for possibleinstallation at all TRADOC schools and Army Training Centers. ,.

5-9

(4)the equipment.concerning thetraining.

(3) The USAREUR NETT arrived for training in September 1979.familiarization with equipment and training materials is ongoing.

m. TACFlRE.

(1) Following the decision in late 1978 to create a new TACFlRE MOS, 13C, Iwork wa~ initiated to design and develop the MOS. The Commandant's Training StrategYProposal was submitted in August 1979. TRAnOC responded in late December. The lET !POI.was submitted to TRADOC in November. I

(2) TCAD officially assumed proponency for TACFlRE in October. The TACFIWTrajning Branch continued instruction under the control of TCAD.

!

Training andi

In December 1979, Congress cancelled all funds for the procurement of IFunds are available for a partial deployment. Discussions are

deployment plan, acquisition of supplemental funds, and the effect onlI

n. One Station Unit Training (OSUT). The OSUT pilot program for MOS 13E15E 150 and 82C was completed in Nov 78; the final In-Progress Review (IPR) , JcUI~inat;d with a recommendation to adapt OSUT for the five-subject MOS on a permaneUbasis. To that end, the OSUT plan was finalized and forwarded to TRAnoC on 13 Dec 78Staffing at For: Sill i~dicated that the OSUT program would not decrease the funds 1required to traln the flve entry.l~vel courses and that U~AFATC.would require twelve;additional people to support tralnlng under the OSUT conflguratlon. Resource benefitare intangibles: (1) training time is reduced; (2) discharge rates are lower. .j(3) motivation and d~s~ipline.are instilled by the.d~ill s:rgeant throughout ~hestudent's entire tralnlng perlod; (4) the MOS-quallfled drlll sergeants' presenceoffers additional opportunity, outside the classroom.

o. Combined Arms Center Management Information System (CACMIS). CACMIS/TRAMIScontinued to survive based upon its own momentum. The expertise level continued to

. be maintained within a very small core. Despite attempts to facilitate the system,it remained an illusive dream to the lower level user. 1979 was another year wherethe resource management personnel promised to use the information in the system butdiscovered that the material was incomplete and unusable, resulting in excessivemanpower expenditure on a misunderstood system.

3. TCAD. NWED, TCAD had the following:

a. . 3-7 Dec 79. A new 8-inch Nuclear Assembly Course was developed.I-week course will be taught 40 times per year. Course was validated usingArtillery personnel. Classes commence Jan 80 for resident students.

b. Work continues .to develop increased nuclear instructions for all'classes.

...

5-10

ThisIII CorpS

appropriat

ongoiol

13F,i

•

I

\

!

SECTION VI. NEW DOCTRINE/CONCEPTS

Number and basic need were thoroughly investigated.BSTARb.

a. Conducted testing of the organization FM Radio Test Set AN/PRM-34.

c. FAMAS _ AN/TMQ-31 meteorological station deployment and training were

organized.

a. Division Target Acquisition Battalion was constructed and approved by theGeneral Officers' Workshop.

d. Electronics Division assisted the USACEBD in an evaluation of theorganization level FM Radio Test Set AN/PRM-34.

c. Electronics Division assisted CERCOM in the modification of the AN/VIC-land development of a difference kit to be used in the FIST vehicle.

b. Directorate of Training Development, US Army Signal School, placed a workinggroup on TDY with CED for approximately 3 weeks to coordinate writing of 31V10/20 and31V30/40 Soldiers' and Commanders' Manuals.

1. CED.

2. CFD. Review and Analysis personnel were heavily involved with the continuingdevelopment of new material and employment techniques, systems, and the refinement of

.the counterfire doctrine and the development of systems training programs during thisperiod. In this regard, many meetings, exercises, and conferences were attended bythe division. Also a number of significant staff actions were acted upon. The more. '1mportant ones are listed below:

G/VLLD TDY classified Standard A and contract let for 130 sets id earlyContract was let for AN/GRA-114 Radio Data Link in late June.

PADS was type classified and the contract let for nine systems in .earlY

Construction of AN/TPQ-36/37 training facilities was begun in I-See-O'Hall.Much support work completed for "netted radar" concept.Contract to Bendix for FAMAS in March.

h.

f.

e.

d.

(1) The Objective Division Target Acquisition Battalion was constructedand approved by the General Officer's Workshop and HQ TRADOC.

j. Review and Analysis personnel of the Counterfire Department were heavilyinvolved with the continuing development of new material and employment techniques,systems, and the development of system training programs during this period. In thisregard, many meetings, exercises, and conferences were attended by the Division.Also, a number of significant staff actions were acted upon. The more important onesare listed below:

'i.April.

'g.April.

6-1

.(2) FIREFINDER Trainer. The AI7EII AN/TPQ-36/37 Operator Trainer with sijstudent stations was installed and the On-Site User Test was begun.

(6) Netted Ground Radar. Proponency for a netted ground radar was givento Fort Sill and development and emploYment was thoroughly examined.

Distribution of the first buy oflI!

(4) G/VLLD. All equipment and academic proponency for G/VLLD was Jtransferred from the CFn to the Gunnery Department.

(5) FAMAS. The ROC was reviewed and changed significantly to include 1changing from a S-250 shelter to a S-280 shelter and from I\-ton vehicles to 2~-ton Ivehicles. I

Ij1

(3) AN/TNS-IO Sound Ranging Set.AN/TNS-IO's was completed in November 1979.

(7) Analytical Photogramrnetric Positioning System (APPS). The BOIP forAPPS has been officially cancelled. Field artillery units will not receive thePhotolocator System.

(8) PADS. The use of PADS for installing microphone/sound bases wasinvestigated resulting in very promising results.

(9) AN/TPQ-36 and AN/TPQ-37. Serious problems were encountered resultingin fi'elding and test dates being slipped for the FIREFINDER Radars.

(10) RPV. Contract was given to Lockheed 31 Aug 79.

3. DCD. The Directorate of Combat Developments was reorganized in October 1979.The directorate consists of the following divisions:

Materiel DevelopmentDoctrineAnalysisForce StructureTactical Data SystemsPlanning and Coordination

a. Doctrine Developments.

'(1) In the area of doctrine developments, two major initiations were setin motion early this year. First, the TAC NUKE Concept and Action Plan. The efforthad as its goal the formulation of a coherent concept for the employment of tactical"nuclear weapons. That concept has reached maturity and was presented to the General'Officer Tac Nuke Systems Program Review,in late.December 1979. Complementing the t

--development of the concept w~s the detaIled r:fInem:nt a~d publication of the Action,Plan for Integration of TactIcal Nuclear Conslderatlons lnto TRADOC.' The Action

ddressed critical problems and'laid out a 3-year corrective program involVing four~:road categories of effort: mana~ement, doctrinal development, mate;iel development;and resident/nonresident instructlon.

(2) Concurrent with the development of both the TRADoC TAC NUKE Conceptd Action Plan was the development of the Concept for the Engagement of the 2d '

an . b b' d IEchelons. Both concepts have no~ e~n,c~m Ine to pro(uce an Operational Concept fothe Int{'~rated Battlefield. It'lS envISIoned that complete maturation of these

6-2

~

~

Plat!

(3) Review of Doctrinal Literature. The following FM/TC were reviewed:

efforts will result in revision and publication of both doctrinal manuals au" curn'ulwarplans.

(a) FM 101-5, Operations.(b) FM 6-30, The Field Artillery Observer.(c) ARTEP 6-525, General Support Rocket System, Field Artillery

Cd) FM 6-50, The Field Artillery Cannon Battery.

(g) FM 71-2, The Tank and Mechanized Infantry Battalion Task Force.

(h) FM 620, Fire Support in Combined Arms Operations.

(f) ATP 35, Allied Tactical publication, Land Force Tactical Doctrine.(e)' Draft TC 20-32-3, Field,Artillery Delivered Scatterable Mines.

(4) The following Organization and Operations (0&0) concepts were reviewed

or written:

Battery.

(e) Reorganization of Cannon Battalions ((3X8) (Written).

(a) FISTV 0&0 Concept (Reviewed).Cb) GSRS 0&0 Concept (Reviewed).(c) COPPERHEAD 0&0 Concept (Written and Revised).(d) Reviewed and commented on the Unsolicited Proposal by BMY for the

M109 Ammunition Delivery System (ADS). The Field Artillery needs this automated,lightly armored, support vehicle as the accompanying ammo resupply vehicle for'theMIlO and MI09 howitzers.

TitleOptimum EffectivenessDegraded EffectivenessChemicalNuclearBad Weather

12345

Sequence

(5) Scores.(a) After 6 months of preparation, Europe IIIwargaming was initiated

at Fort Leavenworth on 19 Jan 79. Five different starts were initiated only touncover additional data or model problems with each. On 15 Mar 79, Europe III wargam-ing achieved a good start. After the initial gaming results, the decision was madeto divide the Europe III scenari~ into five sequences. The'sequences are:

(b) In addition to the Europe III gaming, preparation is underway todevelop a Bde High Resolution Scenario and a ADPE Laydown scenario.

6-3

Division 86.

(c) Europe IV preparation has begun. Europe IV is an offensivescenario in the future time frame. Europe III and IV forces were deployed using thesame deployment plan. A nuclear and chemical excursion will be conducted.

(d) Europe I, Sequence 2A, covering Force Blue assets were arrayedfor use within AFSM. This additional array provides 54 hours of combat in theArtillery Force Simulation Model.

(6) Developed the Intelligence, Surveillance and Target Acquisition Study,to determine the Army and Field Artillery need for intelligence and targeting systemSIand developed a concept for an integrated system to meet these needs.

(7) Critical Node Analysis of ~he Soviet Field Artillery. This analysisexamined the command control/fire direction, target acquisition and ammunition resup~ply subsystems of the overall Sovit Divi~ional FA.System to identify the criticalnodes of those subsystems, and to determine relative payoffs of suppressing,neutralizing or destroying those nodes.

(8) The MLRS COEA was written and forwarded to TRAnoC and INSCOM forvalidation, and the target array was updated to the developmental time frame.

(9) A basis was established for FA participation in some significantA~my-wide communications efforts as follows:

(a) Established FA requirement for Tactical Satellite communicationsfor nuclear C2 and fire missions.

(b) Established FA requirement for improved HF radios.

(c) FA became a major participant and advocate for PLRS/ JTIDS Hybriddigital. communications system to improve TACFlRE effectiveness.

(d) In conjunction with CACDA, developed the EW concept for

b. Material Development.

(1) Battlefield Surveillance/Target HCQ Radar (BSTAR). HQDA required auser reassessment of the BSTAR program. t~ determi~e if the requi:ement remainscient for continued development. S~ec1f1c OSD gU1dance was prov1ded and enlarged

pe of the reassessment. Two JWG s were conducted at Fort Sill to assign andscoort on specific research tasks. The results of the JWG were briefed at CACDA on~e~ul 79. Since that time, a de~ision.w~s made to ab~ndo~ the BSTAR program inof the netted radar program. Thls.dec1slon wa~ mad: 1n 11gh: of losing FY 80 and 81.funding for the program and potent1al cost savlngs/1ncrease In effectiveness thatnetting concept offers.

(2) Netted Radar Program. Phase of.the DARPA/MIT demonstration of thenetted radar concept was completed at Fort Slll 1n.Jan79. Planning and coordinatio~

currently underway for the Phase II demonstration scheduled for 4Q FY 80.~~:se II will incorporate the net~ing of both gr~llndand air,radar systems. A deci-

.on'was made in September to actIvely pursue this program wIth a requirementsbe generated as soon as possible. Several TRADOC/DARCOM JWG's have met to determ

ntial characteristics' of the system. On 7 Dee 79, CDR TRAnOC made the decision~~s~lace proponency for the program with USAFAS and included USAICS as Cooperative

t USAFAS is currently preparing a draft ROC.proponen .6-4

suffi"'~ thej

' favo.

the 1

.~

1

documJ 1

~

~~

d. Land Navigation Sysu-.m (LNS), I\NS-2000. Thp Singpr-K('arfolt proto,type I.NSwas demonstrated at Fort Sill 16-20 Jul 79. The system was installed in an APC~113AI 16 and 17 July and operated over three 30-KM surveyed courses and then ,Installed in an MI09A2 howitzer over basically the same courses on 18 and 19 July.The LNS was then installed in an M109 howitzer 20 July and a registration missionfired to determine survivability during firing (chg 5, GB). The system was utilizedfor 47.7 miles (76.4KM) in the APC and 51 miles (81.8 KM) in the MI09A2 howitzer.The.courses were over hilly, rolling and flat terrain on various road and cross- .country conditions. The APC averaged 23.22 meters CEP (19 points) horizontal accuracyand the M109A2 average 26.16 meters CEP (19 points). Average azimuth error' of howit-zer tubes was 10.13 mils RMS. However, standard deviation of azimuth error was 3.185mils.

(4) Photolocator/AppS-PI. aT II for the product improved APPS was com-pleted in the configuration which designated the system as a photolocator. The IERidentified 22 issues for testing, 10 of which were met, 2 partially met and 10 notmet. Of five critical issues, four were satisfactorily met. The failure of thesystem to achieve the desired accuracy of 12 meters CEP (horizontal) in the locationof survey control points caused USAFAS to recommend program termination. Continued

,investigation and use of the APPS-PI will become the responsibility of the,EngineerSchool.' A correspondence DEVA IPR c.onvened in Oct 79 and terminated this program.

(5) Field Artillery Meteorological Acquisition System (FAMAS). The FAMASROC has been approved by DA and a contract to build five engineering developmentmodels has been awarded to Bendix Corporation. Although 6 months were lost because,of a protest over the contract award, the material developer milestone schedulemaintains the original laC of 4Q FY 83. DARCOM has changed the official nomenclatureof FAMAS to the Automatic Atmospheric Sounding System, AN/Tt1Q-31. The system enteredthe engineering development phase in August 1979.

(6) Fire Support Team Vehicle (FISTV). The FISTV ROC was tentativelyapproved by HQDA in Jan 1979 pending receipt of the PM's cost profile. In July 79,DCSRDA became concerned about the program costs. In Aug 79, Fort Sill and PMFISTV/PM GLD met to scrub the program to produce a "barebones" vehicle. The scrubbedprogram, although it exceeded the original PM's cost estimate by $6M, was 'approved,in concept,by DCSRDA at a Aug 79 Program Review. It is anticipated that congres-sional support will be obtained by joint action. The PM awarded an engineerln~ ,development contract to Emerson Electric Company in Sep 79.

(7) Global Positioning System (GPS). The fourth of 24 GPS satellites waslaunched in Apr 79 and OT I was conducted at Yuma Proving Ground Jan-Feb 79~ A GPSfield exercise was conducted in conjunction with HELBAT-7 14-16 Mar 79. Theaccuracies were:

Horizontal CEPVertical PEAzimuth RttS

6.31 meters3.6 meters5.53 mils

The purpose of the field exercise was to provide interested Fort Sill personnel withhands-on information and experience with the GPS manpack and to compare GPS data withknown Fort Sill surveyed data.

(8) Night Vision Devices. A FIST Thermal Sight and Night Vision DevicesWorkshop was conducted 9-10 Jan 79. The workshop consisted of an equipment demonstra-tion in conjunction with TCAD exercises (the Combined Arms Team in the Night 'Defenseand Attack). The purpose of the exercise waS to evaluate Night Vision Devices for.

6-5

0

FIST utilizing experienced forward observers and interested personnel comments afterhand~-on experience with the following systems employed in the exercise:

(a) AN/PVS-5, Night Vision Goggles.(b) A.~/TAS-4, Night Sight.

(c) AN/VVS-2, Driver Viewer.

(d) AN/TAS-6, Night Observation DeVice, Long Range.(e) AN/VSG2, Tank Thermal Sight.

(f) AN/TVS-5, Night Vision Device, Crew-Served Weapon .

.(9) Position and Azimuth Determining System (PADS). PADS completed bothOT rIa ~nd DT II in 1978 to validate corrections necessary to improve reliability andmaintainability of the system.

(10) GLLD. On 1 April 1979, the initial production contract for 130GLLD'swas awarded to Hughes Aircraft Company~ Los.A~geles, CA. At apprOXimately 0200 .hours 3 June 1979, Copperhead OT II l1ve f1r1ng was completed after firing a totalof 71'Copperhead rounds. A possible boresight problem with the AN/TAS-4 Thermal. 'Night,Sight used on the GLLD for night ~perations w~s ~dentified during CopperheadOT II. Specifically, the GLLD/TAS-4 fa1led t~ rema1n 1n boresight during several OTexercises. Project Manager, Ground Laser Des1gnators, and the Night Vision andElectro-Optics Laboratories have indicated ~hat opera~o~ error was the probable causeof the boresight problem. The GLLD.New ~qul~ment TraInIng Team (NETT) visited USAREURfrom 22-26 October 197~. ~he Mate~lel.Fle~dlng Plan (MFP) and unit training issueswere discussed, resultIng In the f10a11zatlon of the GLLD MFP and USAFAS/unit GLLDtraining programs.

(11) Programmable Handheld Calculator (PHHC). The Letter Requirement wasapproved on 26 Apr 79. An environmental test.was conducted by TECOM and the finalreport was published in June 1979. An operatIonal test was conducted by TCATA from18 Jan-ll Apr 79 and the final report was published in Sep 79. On 13 Aug 79, TRADOCconcurred with the IPR package. The IPR package was approved on 23 Oct 79 .. A con-tract was signed with Texas Instruments' (TI) on 18 Aug 79. Gunnery programs wered veloped by USAFAS for utilization with the PHIIC. These were placed on FIRMWAREm~dules by TI and are currently being evaluated by USAFAS and TECOM. The LANCE andSURVEY modules have already been evaluated. The BOIP and QQPRI were approved byTRADOC in Nov 79. The system will be ready for fielding in Jan 80. The system willbe fielded as a stock fund item, requiring the unit to expend its own ONA funds.

'(12) The M90 Radar Chronograph was type classified standard in September.The Field Artillery School will incorporate the M90 into its course of instructionbeginning in January. Fielding of this system will represent the achievement of anFA "horseshoe nail."

(13) Test of a design mock-up for ballistic protection on the MIlO howitzerwas started, and actions initiated to follow-up the Blue Ribbon Panel recommendationSfor .tht-" ~t110Al.

•. I

(14) Th(~ MI09A2 howitzer ent~red p~oduction dur~ng 1979 and a progr'am toupgrade MI09 and ~tl09Al to the A3. confIguratIon was also initiated. A TRADOe initia-tive to enhance a Joint US Israeli Cooperative Effort (JUICE) was begull and included

6-6

..

(17) In the area of ammunition, the OT II was completed for the M753 8-inchnuclear projectile, and the ballistics test was completed on the M78S lSS-mm nuclearprojectile. 80th the M795 HE, high-frag, and XM211, low-zone prop charge entered EDafter completion of their IPR's. The M509 program has experienced delays due torocket motor problems, but is expected to have an IOC in 1980. This program isessential to the effectiveness of FA weapons mixes. Without the 8-inch DPICM round ,previous analyses that established numbers of weapons would be suspect. '

.r;

(15) A program to develop a Corps Support Weapons Syst"m (CSWS) was hegunlo replace the Lance whi ch wi 11 complete its 1ife cycle in 1990, and to provide an ,engagement capability for interdiction of the second echelons.

(16) A program to develop a Field Artillery Ammunition Support Vehicle(FAASV) to replace the MS48 Carrier was initiated. The LOA was approved in November.This vehicle is a key element in solving the problems of ammunition handling and theimpact on ammunition rates.

USAFAS p~ rticipa ti on. Also started was a prol\ram to "s tah I i5h ('oml'atib i lityoI' lheM203 propellant charge to the MI09A3 howitzer. Achi"vcment of 30-km cap~l>iliLy forthe M109A2/A3 cannot be achieved until severe RAM problems induced by hlast from thehiRh-zone charge are solved.

(18) Conversion to the upgunned HilOAI 8-inch howitzer was completed in theactive'Army during July 1978. Addition of the new muzzle brake, producing the M110A2began in March 1979 at Fort Riley, Kansas, with fielding in USAREUR to begin this 'fall. 'With the recently type classified M188A1 (zone 9) propelling charge; theMII0A2'wili have a 30-km range capability when firing the rocket assisted projectile(RAP), M6S0. The M6S0 is scheduled to begin reaching the field in the summer of 1980and the MI88Al will follow by approximately 9 months.

(20) The dual-purpose improved conventional munition for the lSS-mffihowitzer,the M483Al, is in production and being stockpiled in CONUS and USAREUR. Developmentof a new design eye-bolt lifting plug for the 155-mm rocket assisted projectile(RAP), M549Al, has been completed and fielding began in November 1979.

(19) The M109A1 conversion program is 100% complete in USAREUR and over 90%complete in CONUS including Reserve component units. The mid life PIP was typeclassified and released for production in December 1977. The new production model,M109A2, and the retrofit model, M209A3, began roll-off in January 1979. The retrofitof 1600(+) howitzers is scheduled to be completed by 3QFY83. The M126 gun'mount hasbeen modified, redesignated the M178 mount, and is being installed on the M109A2/A3.The MI78 mount, coupled with a spindle modification, will permit firing of the M203charge to attain the 30-km range.

c. Force Structure Development.(1) Army 86 Process. Division 86 was a significant achievement in 1979 on

three counts. First~ it prod~ced a badly needed force development perspective withinthe combat developments process. As a result, a force structure capability wasembedded within the institution. This integrating process has supplanted a managementsystem that had become stifled by its own demands on itself. Secondly, the objectiveresults produced more rational and more viable solutions to the problems of modern-izing the force in the field. And, lastly, the introspective process has produced awhole series of supporting sub-analyses that have either answered questions that havebeen elusive in the past or they have prompted different and innovative concepts thatwill continue to nourish the process in subsequent iterations. The results of this

6-7

~

process in 1979 have led to a better understanding of FA requirements and providedthe following significant insights:

(a) The effect of allocating field artillery assets between counter-fire and target-servicing is paramount to survivability of the maneuver force. Forthis reason, the decision-making process should be at the general officer levelwithin the division.

(b) Targeting parameters will change as command~rs' guidance changes.

artillery.(c) A target acquisition battalion is required in the heavy division

(d) Target servicing and counterfire must be managed and executed atdivision level.

(e) If "smart munitions" are available in adequate numbers, 36 GSRSlaunchers in the division will probably be adequate; otherWise, 45 launchers will berequired to satisfy the GSRS requirements.

(f) Delay of enemy second echelons will not be sUfficient; destructiOor at least neutralization, is necessary.

(g) Augmentation of both the division and corps TOC's will be neces-sary in order to accomplish interdiction and counterfire, and to manage and executeSEAD in,support of air assets performing both tasks.

(h) A corps support weapons system (CSWS) is neded to perform,in~erdiction 50-180 kilometers beyond the FEBA.

(i) A tactical command control headquarters is needed for corpsartillery in order to perform the many wartime missions.

(2) ,Significant by-products of the DIV 86 process resulted fromas"follows:

(a) Artillery Ammunition Expenditure Rates. Legal Mix V and thepreviously published ammunition rates and require~ents"study establi~hed ammunitionrates and requirements; however, the rates establlshed by these studles were repre-

entative of a single day of intense combat. In an effort to obtain more useful:mmunition expenditure rates representing longer periods of engagement, the ArtillerYAmmunitiori Expenditures Rate Study established usage rates over time.

(b) Battle Report on Soviet Field Artillery Critical NOdes. TheField ArtIllery has long realized that pursuing the destruction of Soviet artillerytubes will result in failure due to the quantity and hardness of Soviet artillery. Astudy examined the command/fi~e di~e~t~on, ta~get acq~isition and ammunition resuppli

bsystems of the overall Sovlet dlvlslonal fleld artlilery systems to identifysu , f h b .ritical and less critical nodes 0 t ose su systesm, and to determine the relative~ayoffs of neutralizing or destroying those nodes.

(c) Division 86 TACNUKE Study. As a result of a tasking from CG,TRADOe, 'DIVISION 86 included nuclear con~iderations .. To accomplish this tasking, aDIVISION 86 analysis subg~oup was establlshed to examlne the candidate divisionalstructures in a nuclear rnvironment. USAFAS support to this task force ensured that

-

sllbanalysi.

the employment of nuclear weapons was in consonance with evolving nuclear doctrineand .in fact, stimulated an Army-wide resurgence in tactical nuclear doctrine. '

(d) ISTA. A study of intelligence, surveillance, and target acquisi-tion was conducted to determine whether the division has enough of the right kinds ofsensors; whether they are properly linked and, if not, what changes should be made.

(3) As a result of the force structuring momentum gained from the DIV 86proces~, efforts were begun in late 1979 to develop approp'riate structures for theLIGHT DIVISION 86 and HEAVY CORPS 86. These force design exercises will accommodatedevelopmental high technology systems in organizations to maximize and optimizemanpower and provide the basic force characteristics required for contingencydeployment and employment.

(4) Development of FA Organizations.(a) Standard Tactical Wheeled Vehicle Requirements (TACV-Addendum)

effort. This TACV-Addendum compared tactical wheeled vehicles (5- to IO-ton'payloadrange) in resupply of ammunition from the Corps operated ammunition supply point(ASP) and Division operated ammunition transfer point (ATP) to the weapons and trackedammunition carries in armor, artillery and mechanized infantry battalions.

(b) . The General Support Rocket System (GSRS), TOE, and the new' ~lain~tenance Battery and Division Target Acquisition Battalion CD TAB) organizatIons weredesigned.

(c) The following new TOE's were developed:

6-385H6-386H6-387H6-389H

6-700M6-701M6-797M6-12SM

,6-126M6-127M6-129M

FA Bn, ISS-rnm SP'(3 x 8)HHBFiring BtryService BtryAir Assault Division ArtilleryHHBAviation Target Acquisition Battery

,FA Bn, IS5mm (T) (M198)HHBFiring Btry-Service Btry

(d) The following TOE's were revised:

6-18SH6-186H6-375H6-376H

'6-307H6006-307H6206-600H6-602H6-62SH6-6266-627

FA Bn, lOSrnm, (T) Sep Light Inf BdeHHBFA Bn, lSS-mm SP, Sep Arm/lnf (m) Bd~HHBTarget Acquisition Btry Arm/lnf MechTarget Acquisition,Btry Airborne DivPershing Brigade (PIA)HHB Pershing BrigadeFA Bn, Pershing (PIA)HHB Firing Btry

6-9

-

(e) The following FA QQPRI were developed:Radio Data Link GRA-114FIST-VSquad Automatic WeaponProgrammable Handheld Calculator (PHHC)AN/TPQ-36 Radar (FIREFINDER)Mount Pedestal Vehicle for Ml13AlMLRS

(f) Additional non-proponent QQPRI were developed as follows:PQQPRIFQQPRIFQQPRIAQQPRIFQQPRIFQQPRIWaiver QQPRI

d. Studies/Analysis.

(1) COEA.

Truck Cargo 10 Ton7actical Opns System (TOS)Commercial Utility and Cargo Vehicles'Aircraft SurvivabilityAir Traffic Control Central AN/TSW-7AElectronic Fuze Setter H36E1Cartridge 10Smm

(a) The Copperhead COEA was concluded. The final 0&0 concept wascompleted in May, OT II was completed in June, and.the ASARC/ DSARC in December,.effect~ of smoke on th: perfo~mance ~f ~l~ctro-oPtlca~ systems, Copperhead being oneof these, have become lncreaslngly slgnlflcant; and slmultaneously,.the COEA teamshas expended a lot of time and effort stu~ying the effects of smoke on the performanCof the Copperhead round. The recommendatlon that the ground designator support forCopperhead be 1 GLLD/FIST and 18 Divisional Designators has been accepted and~nc~rporated in CSSG II.

(b) MLRS COEA. The MLRS COEA was initiated in 1979 to support anASARC/DARC decision in 1980. The study will rely heavily on effectiveness analysesperfor'med by TRASANA, MISAA, and Sandia Labs (Livermore, CA). The logistical.is being undertaken concurrently by the Log Center. ~he COEA is scheduled forcompletion in February 1980.

(2) Studies.

(a) The USAFAS launched the Fire Support Mission Area Analysisduring 1979. The analysis will exa~ine c~rrent and fut~re concepts, doctrine andmateriel in the fire support area, lncludlng other servlces, national and NATO assetSto identify fire support needs. The study will analyze the fire support system toprovide adequate and timely t~rget servi~ing, counterfire, SEAn and interdictionmissions. The study effort wlll focus'flrst on the currently fielded systems andtheir deficiencies in satisfying the fire support needs. The next step will examinethe programmed forces out to 1~90 and :heir potenti~l capability to satisfy thesedeficiencies. The last step wlll examlne technologlcal opportunities that may beavailable in the 1990-2000 time frame .. T~e.Phase I ~eport of the study will providef'stimates of current fire support capabilitIes and needs and will be completed inJanuary 1980. Thp Pha~e II n~port wi~l be completed by June 1980, and will extendthe Phl.1s(' I effort to Include evaluation of prograrnnwd forcp pott'llt.jalcapahi lit it'S

to satisfy the fire support requ~remen~s. The study will provide recommended

6-10

The)

analysi.

(FSMAftI

act.iol1~

'I

(ll) Joint S('(.'ondEdwlon Interdiction (J-SEI) Study. TIt(' USAFAS hasjoint-,twilh LIlt-liSAI'in the ,Ioint Second Ech,.lonlnll-nliclioll Slt"ly to ,kvelol' joinlconcel'lH, I'nll'"dllrl-Halld/or syslem rt'<Iuirt-lIIt-ntsto intt'nlid se,'ond "dlt'\llnHin aEuropean sceuario, This is a joint TACTRADOC study which is beiu!\ a,'colllplisht-,1hy allArmy-Air Force study team at the Tactical Fighter Warfare Center, Nellis Ai~ ForceBase, Nevada, Director, DCD, is a co-director of the study, USAFAS has providedsuport in concept development and has assisted in development of study methodology~In particular, model modifications required to play field artillery with higherfidelity are being developed by USAFAS, This study will have far-reaching influenceon joint service doctrine and procedures and may influence both Army and Air Forcesystem development for the future. In addition, this study, as one of the firstjoint TAC/TRADOC initiatives, will provide the framework for future cooperativeefforts between the services.

in the areas of doctrine, organization and JIIat(~rit'l to l'orn'l't fin' support dt'.fi-ciencies. The study results will support tht' d(-'velopmenl of IH'W dOl'triIH' and tal'til's,product improvement programs, or new materiel requirements.

, (e) The Fire Suppression Symposium was held this year to find 'aunified 'approach for modeling the suppressive effects of fires on the modern' battle-field. Presently, ,there does not exist a consensus in the analytical approach forquantifying the suppressive effects of fires; consequently, there exists a variety ofmodels, each of which treats suppression differently. The end product of the'suppres-sion symposium process is the unification of the analytical community in its effortsto quantify the suppressive effects of fires.

Cd) Field Artillery School Model Improvement Program (FAS HIP).Considerable effort is being expended to develop a two-sided field artillery modelwith 'emphasis on target acquisition and field artillery tactics. The two-sided modelwill be a division sized simulation of the target acquisition and firing process forboth friendly and enemy artillery forces. A low resolution ground game will be 'included in the model to provide added realism and some measure of the effect ofartillery on the central battle. This model will provide analytic answers to manyquestions which have in the past been answered largely subjectively. Special emphasisis being placed on data setup and model speed so that it can provide rapid responseto the wide variety of artillery combat development problems. ' '

Cc) In conjunction with USAFAS suport of the TRADOC DIV 86 effort,analysis, to include computer simulation and offline analysis of alternative ~ieldartillery organizations, was conducted .

(

e. Test and Evaluation.

(a) Helbat. The HELBAT-7 field experiment was conducted at Fort Sillduring the period 20 Feb 20 Mar 79. The experiment was considered to be a,successby all involved and data reduction is currently underway. The HELBAT-7 final reportis scheduled for completion and distribution prior to the close of CY-79. Initialplanning and coordination have begun for HELBAT-8 with dates, location and objectivesto be determined. .., ,

(1) , Results from 1979 Operational Tests (OT) conducted at specified LifeCycle System Management Model (LCSMM) milestones are normally. reflected in the pro-gress report for materiel systems. The following additional T&E events not mentionedin previous sections occurred in 1979:

6-11

.

-

(c) FAASV CEP. A CEP of the BMY armored ammunition resupply(a modified MI09) was conducted for USAFAS by the USAFABD in November 1979.indicate that the FAASV concept is viable as a replacement for the M548 andpursued as a high-priority materiel requirement.

(b) Field Artillery Crew Test (FACT). A decision paper was preparedcontaining mini-studies/analysis of possible test locations and sample sizes. Thispaper recommended that Fort Hood appeared to be the most economical and practicaltest location and that the 8-section 155-mm Howitzer Battery was the best sample sizefor the dry-fire phase and a 4-section firing platoon, and the best sample size forthe live fire phase. The USAFACS has agreed to conduct the test in 1980. Interimwork is being pursued by ARI. The test details have not been finalized.

vehicleResults

should be

I4. Gll. SQT testing is being done with FACA class 4-79. Skill Level 4 Hands-On andWritten Components are given to the students prior to receiving and afte'r receiving Iinstruction. Tests are performed on the two sets of scores as well as linear corre-lation between the final score and class grades. This testing is being conducted bythe bra~ch to provide SQT writers with validation input. More important to thebr~nch, this testing, with its analysis, will evaluate the validity of the FACA POIvis-a-vis the SQT. This program will be continued indefinitely depending on thesuccess of this first test.

5. TCAD. TCAD participated in:

a. The development of new and altered doctrine and concepts for several areasof fire support (e.g., FIST, fire planning, and fire support coordination).

b.

c.

Division 86 documents.

The 3x8 FA Bn concept.

d., The TRADOC directed Close Support Study Group (CSSG) II effort to developand improve fire support doctrine/organizations for brigade through company size

. elements. The completion of TV Tape 6-107 (TACFIRE) during Oct 79. Tape is concernewith improved fire support for combined arms teams. The performance of multiple 'I

po~t~publication reviews for new training literature of the other arms and servicesand of the standardization communities. These reviews were primarily concerned withnew doctrine and concepts for fire support oper4tions.6. DCRDT.

a. 'Commandant's Training Strategy.

(1) As discussed by GEN Starry and MG Merrit on 3 Apr 79 and formalized b~GEN Starry's tasking letter of 1 May 79, TRADOC School Commandants were directed to jdevelop a comprehensive training strategy for the MaS for which they are proponent,to do so by CMF, and to focus this effort on the cumulative and interactive effectunits of the three major TRADOC products in enlisted training: initial ~ntry trainid(lET) graduates, the Noncommissioned Officers Educational System (NCOES) graduates,and trainin~ support materials of all kinds. Analyses were directed to be dividedin t () Lt,' n'(' par l s :

(a) I)('lt'rmint', within prps('ntly avai lahlt' n'SOllrl'('S, lhE' hpsl haLIIJ('('amon~ lET, NCOES and tr;li~ing support \tJhichwill maximize tht' ahility of units toachieve-and maintain stated ARTE~ standards and the Soldier's Manual (SM) standards

6-12

•

1 in

(2) The Assistant Commandant and Commandant were briefed in July 79 andinput presented to them was briefed to CG, TRADOC in Aug 79 at the Commandant'sConference at Fort Leavenworth. TRADOC has not yet applied to the Fort Sillsubmission.

. .(c) Assess the extent to which specific CMF restructuring could

narrow any gap between capabilities and requirements. Specify the rationale for anyproposed changes and the estimated resource implications.

(b) Determine the training and training base resources required toassure units the ability to achieve and maintain prescribed ARTEP and SM standards,using eMF as presently structured.

which feed ARTEP standards. If tradeoffs cannot produce improvements within availableresources, explain why they cannot.

6-13

: \ \

SECTION VII. THAINING 1.1TEHATliHE

1. CFD.

(I) FM 6-121, Field Artillery Target Acquisition. A rewrite was begun 'I/HI

will be sent to printer lQ FY 80.

3. The Counterfire Department has developed the following training literatureand texts:

(2) FM 6-2, Field Artillery Survey. Published by HQDA 20 Sep 78, thepublication supersedes FM 62, 19 Jun 70 and rescinds DA Form 4378, June 1975.

(3) FM 6-50, The FA Cannon Battery. Chapter 9, "Hasty Survey Techniques."

(4) FM 6-300, Army Ephemeris 1979 •. Published by Hq, DA 29 Sep 78,supersedes FM 6-300, 29 Aug 77.

(5)' AS-MT, Practical Exercises for Artillery Survey.(6) AS-MT/A, Solutions to Practical Exercises for Field Artillery Survey.(7) AS-SS/HO, Survey Supervision's Guide, May 1979. Provides surveyors

with a quick reference for general survey information.(8) FM 6-40, Chapter 8, "Hasty Traverse."

c. The revised Sound & Flash Ranging Manual, FM 6-122, was. printed in April1979. The final draft of the 1980 edition of the 17C10/20 Soldier's Manual was .approved and ~ent to printer in July 1979. The TEC program for 17C10 is on sch~duleand the 'first lesson should be ready by January 1981. The following NRID packetshave been revised: Introduction to Sound and Flash Ranging; Field Artillery .Targeting~ and Field Artillery Radar.

d. The Meteorology Division of the Counterfire Department continued developmentof change one for FM 6-15, writing FM 6-16-2, FM 6-16-3 and other doctrinal' .publications.

b. The new FM 6-15, Artillery Meteorology, was issued and in January correctionsthat will be Change One were initiated. Likewise FM 6-16, Tables for ArtilleryMeteorology (Electronic Type 3) and FM 6-16-1, Met Tables for Sound Ranging, werefielded. In addition, the complete draft series of Commander's/ Soldier's Manualsfor MOS 93F for 1979 SQT testing were coordinated with DTD. After this second versionwas printed, the Field Artillery Met Crewmember, MOS 93F, was selected to be the .pilot MOS on a new type of CM/SM for the 1980's. The second version was set aside andthe effort in March became a race against time as the schedule called for the printerto receive the 1980's version as camera ready mechanicals in August 1979. Intra andinter department coordination was with pencil copies typed drafts, etc., and theprinter's deadline was met. '

2. DTD.a. SQT' s.

(1) Camera Ready Mechanicals (CRM's) of the first revision of Soldier'sand Commander's Manuals for MOS's 13D, 13E, 13F, lSD, 17C, 82C, and 93F have been

7-1

-

forwarded to TRAnOC for printing and distribution. Camera Ready Mechanicals for theinitial Soldier's and Commander's Manuals for MaS 26B have been forwarded to TRADOC.

(2) Skill Qualification Tests products for CMF 13 for 1980, third versionare in various stages of completion. The third version of the SQT will reflecttechnical and/or doctrinal changes and only those changes necessary to provide acleaned-up version. SQT administration for CMF 13 in 1980 and 1981 will be spreadover a nine month period. The 1982 SQT (fifth version) will be available over ai2-month period. The SQT availability dates for CMF 13 testing in 1980 and 1981 areas follows:

(A-Availability date; E-End date)

17B/C/82C/93FA DATE E DATE1 Aug 80 30 Apr 81

15D/E/JE DATE28 Feb 81

A DATE1 Jun 80

13B/E/FE DATE31 Dec 80

A DATE1 Apr 80

(3) In addition to developing SQT for CMF 13 (artillery), USAFAS alsodevelops SQT's for MaS 21G (CMF 27) and MaS 26B (CMF 29). SQT availability dates for21G and 26B are as follows:

21G 26BA DATEI.Jun80

E DATE31 Dee 80

A DATE1 Oct 80

E DATE30 Apr 81

(4) Skill Qualification Tests for the next several years will be under-going a considerable amount of revision. The current plan for future development isto decrease the total number of tasks the soldier will be tested on and to decreasethe number of tasks tested in the written component (Skill Component) and increasethe'hand~on and performance certification (Job Site Component) testing.

(5) Individual Training Division proposed a pilot program, approved byTRADOC designed to evaluate the concept of putting the SQT in the Soldier's Manual.

"The SQT/SM concept seeks to improve the content of current SM's by adding test itemsboth a Hands-On and Written item for each task. Implementation of the concept willalso require the addition of annexes to Commander's Manuals that provide instructionsfor the set-up, evaluation and scoring of each HOC. The pilot SM, using MaS 93FSkill Levels 1 and 2, will be available to soldi~rs in Feb 80.

b. ARTEP's.

(I) A DA print of ARTEP 6-302, Divisiou Artillery/FA Brigade, was PUbliShe

jin June 1919.

'°(2) A DA print of ARTEP 6-615, PERSHING, was published in .June 1919.

(3) The revision of ARTEP 6-301, Field Artillery Target Acquisition BatteJand ARTEP 6-595, LANCE, have been, completed and were sent in September 1979 to USATSC

for DA print and distribution in January 1980. I(4) Three revisions of cannon ARTEP's 6-105, 6-165, and 6-365 were publistJin September 1979.

7-2

-

(5) ARTEP 6-165 (TACFIRE) and 6-365 (TACFIRE) were printed at Fort Sill inApril 1979 in coordinating draft to introduce those changes with the increased capa-bility of TACFIRE. Both ARTEP were printed in pocket-size form for validation by the1st CAV Div Arty and units at Fort Sill. " "

(6) ARTEP 6-302 (TACFlRE) is currently being staffed for a coordinatingdraft to be printed in April 1980.

(7) ARTEP 6-500 (Warhead Detachment) is being staffed for a 1981 printing.

(8) ARTEP 6-525 (MLRS) has been printed in Draft Test Edition to supportoperational system testing.

(9) Draft Test ARTEP are being developed on three new systems, i.e.,Firefinder Radars, Remotely piloted Vehicle (RPV) , Automatic Atmospheric SoundingSystem (AASS), and Copperhead.

(10) The division assumed USAFAS proponency for development of the FArequirements for the National Training Center. A proposed prestock (POMCUS) wasrecommended to TRADOC and FORSCOM. The decision to fire live Copperhead roundssparked a joint CT-TS proposal to consider firing during the live fire module at NTC.DCRDT will develop a range for Fort Sill with CT to attempt to find a feasible rangefor Fort Irwin. TCATA supports this development. CT participated in the developmen-tal IPR for the live fire module at Fort Irwin. The scenario will be presented inFeb 80.

c. FM's/TC's.(1) In September, camera-ready mechanicals (CRM) were produced and sent to

TRADOC for Change 1 of the Field Artillery's capstone How-to-Fight manual, FM 6-20,Fire Support in Combined Arms Operations. DA printing and field distribution of thischange are expected during the second quarter of FY 80. Another How-to-Fight manual,FM 6-20-1, Field Artillery Cannon .Battalion, was printed and distributed to,the fieldin December. The third Field Artillery How-to-Fight manual, FM 6-20-2, DivisionArtillery, Field Artillery Brigade, and FA Section (Corps), was sent to TRADOC forapproval in December. Field distribution is expected during the last quarter ofFY 80. .

(2) In June, FM 6-40-4, Lance Missile Gunnery, was fielded.(3) In June, the camera ready mechanicals ,for FM 6-1, TACFIRE Operations,

were also prepared and sent to TRADOC. DA printing and distribution of this'FM werecompleted in December.

(4) Finally, fielding of TT 6-20-7/TAC Pam 5021, Forward Air Controller/Fire Support Team (FAC/FIST) Operations, was completed in December.

3. GD.a. The revised FM 6-40 was distr~buted to the fi~ld in 1979, with FM 6-30 beIng

distributed in 1978. Comments/correctIons and suggestIons for improve-ment of FM 6-40have been received ~rom f~eld.commanders and others. These comments are presentlybeing reviewed for InclusIon Into Change 1, FM 6-40. Change 1 to FM 6-30 was devel-oped and is presently being published. Plans indicate that FM 6-30 will become a""How to Fight" manual in 1981. It should be noted that since the distribution of/thefield manuals, all reference notes formerly used in resident instruction have been

7-3

eliminated. The only references required in resident instruction are FM 6~40 andFM 6-30.

b. Self-paced literature is being used extensively. It is excellent forto Reserve/National Guard units that request training literature. At present time,'there are 15 career course level packets, and 35 AIT level packets available.

4. wo. The Weapons Department developed the following training literature andtexts:

a. Change 1, FM 650, The FA Cannon Battery.

b. AR 365-63, Regulations for Firing Ammunition for Training, Target Practiceand Comb~t. Chapter 11, "Field Artillery."

c. RN WCXXRV. Radar Chronograph M-90. Developed in conjunction with GunneryDepartment.

d. FA Cannon Weapon Systems Handbook (at the printer).

5. TCAD.

a. TCAD provided subject matter expertise in the development of:(1) Change 1, FM 620.

(2) Draft FM 6202.

(3) Draft 6-Series ARTEP's.

b. TCAD provided subject matter expertise in reviewing training literaturedeveloped by outside agencies (USAFAS and other).

c. TCAD provided subject matter expertise for standardization literature'(STANAG's, QSTAG's and Allied Tactical Publications).

7-4

sending

SECTION VIII.MODIFICATION, DEVELOPMENT, TEST AND ACQUISITON OF EQUIPMENT

1. CFD.a. T1-59 Handheld Calculator.

(1) If the schedule ou'tlined in the current development schedule is met,the calculator course of instruction.(POI) date will be January 1980. To meet thisschedule it is currently envisioned that DARCOM would designate an appropriate depotto distribute the calculators to the various units. The calculator package would .consist of a calculator, survey chip, a user's manual, a maintenance manual and themanufacturer's manual.

(2) Within the Survey Division, the new calculator will replace the exist-ing instruction that is being given for the SR-S6. Thus, no additional instructionaltime will be required in the survey and sound and flash courses. Some effort will berequired in the Survey Division to develop a self-paced course of instruction.. (3) At the current time, the FA School will receive approximately 300calculators and 20 printers to implement resident training. This schedule is obvi-ously,closely tied to equipment delivery and normally, the School is the first unitto be equipped with new equipment~

(4) By early 1980, Field.Artillery Survey Sections will be able to replacethe SR-56 HHC and other computers wIth the computer set, Field Artillery, General.The set will consist of a TI-59 PHHC, a preprogrammed module, a user's manual twotypes of power adaptors, magnetic cards, a USAFAS pepared handout consisting ~f 'unique user data and one copy of each of the thirteen new survey forms. The thirteenforms for use with the calculator are 5 X 8 inches and their numbers correspond withthe numbered programs. Until the new forms are approved and published by the'Department of the Army, they cannot be ordered and must be locally reproduced.

b. PADS, positions AZi~uth.Deter~ining Syst:m. In September 1978, the ArtilleryBoard approved PADS for use 1n.11ne U?1ts to pr?v1de accurate survey without dependingon battalion survey~rs. The f1rst un1t t? rec:1ve the PADS is the Field ArtillerySchool, Counterfire Department, and the f1rst 1nstrument is to arrive in August 1979.Plans for instructor training have begun and PADS will be taught starting in FATASOeand MAOCe classes. The PADS is developed for use in the cannon battalion, TAB bat-talion'and at divarty level. The Counterfire Department had received on loan fromLitton Industries one PADS for use in having key personnel and instructors conduct. aninformal systems evaluation. The first KIP/NET (Key Instructor Personnel/ New Equip-ment Training) course was constructed during the week of 10-14 September, and will beconducted periodically until CF~ recei~es the six production model PADS systems.Institutional training at CFD wIll begIn.90 days.after receipt.of the six PADS systemsand will enable trained operators to be.In the. fIeld when the equipment i~ iriitiallyissued' to the units. CFD began conductIng an Informal system evaluation 'on PADS on17 Sep 79 which will ~ontinue ~hrough Dec 79. Results of the evaluation will be usedto establish future doctrine for Field Arti~lery survey and to establish accuracycriterion for the PADS system. The evalaution was scheduled for completion in Dec 79.

c. APPS, Analytical Photogrammetric Positioning System. Tests on the APPSwere conducted in May 1978 at Fort Sill and Fort Huachuca, and were completed byOctober 1978. The process review in February 1979 disapproved the APPS for use inthe field artillery survey system. The Targeting Division is still consid~rin~somepossible uses. In November 1979, the APPS was sent back to the contractor in' '

8-1

Maryland. An APPS system may be returned to CFD in the future to exploit any possibletargeting applications for the system.

d. XM90 Velocimeter., Two instructors of Radar Division of the Weapon SupportRadar Repairer Course (104-26BI0) attended a factory training course at Lear Siegler'Astronics Division in Santa Monica, CA. This course provided direct support andgeneral support maintenance training on the XM90 velocimeter. This equipment isscheduled to replace the M36 radar chronograph during the later part of calendar year1980., .

e. Sound/Flash Ranging. The R&A Division developed sound/flash ranging pro-grams for the Texas Instruments 59 hand-held calculators. Program chips are beingprepared for issue with TI-59 to sound/flash platoons.

. f. Survey Information Centers and Missile Units will receive the computer setmissile ,(containing a printer, RC-IOOA). A print routine has been programmed intothe survey module and will produce a hard copy of printing headings, survey 4ata andrequired data.

2. DCD." . a. Conversion to the upgunned MIIOAI 8-inch howitzer was completed in theactive Army during July 1978. Addition of the new muzzle brake, producing the MII0A2began in ,March 1979 at Fort Riley, Kansas, with fielding in USAREUR to begin thisfall.' With the recently type classified M188AI (zone 9) propelling charge, the~1110A2 will have a 30 Km range capability when firing the rocket assisted projectile(RAP), N650. The M650 is scheduled to begin reaching the field in the summer of 1980and the MI88Al will follow by approximately 9 months.

b. The MI09Al conversion program is 100% complete in USAREUR and over 90%complete in CONUS including Reserve component units. The mid life PIP was typeclassified and released for production in December 1977. The new production model,MI09A2 .'and the retrofit model, M209A3, began roll-off in January 1979. The retrofit. ,of 1600(+) howitzers is scheduled to be completed by 3QFY83. A program to extend theMI09A2/A3 range capability to 30 Km is underway with an FDTE scheduled for October1979 at Fort Sill. The M126 gun mount has been modified, redesignated the M178mount, and is being installed on the MI09A2/A3. The M178 mount coupled with a spind!modification will permit firing of the H203 charGe to attain the 30 Km range. I

c. The dual-purpose improved conventional munition for the 155mmhowitzer, theM483Al, is,in production and being stockpiled in CONUS and USAREUR. Development ofnew design eye-bolt lifting plug for the 155mm rocket assisted projectile (RAP),M549Al, has been completed and fielding should begin in November 1979. Initiallyfielded p~ojectiles will be TNT filled until desensitization of the new Compositionfiller has been completed.,

3. GD.a. COPPERHEAD OT II. The Copperhead Operational Test II was cond~cted atFot

Carson, CO, during May-June. The test results are presently being evaluated.Reference Notes (GD04DJ and GD04DK), concerning technical and tactical employmentprocedures on Copperhead and G/VLLD missions, were developed and published duringthis period.

H-2

I

all

al.

h. Battery COIllPlIlt'f :iyslt'm (Bel). Op(.,-alioll:d T('t->l .,1 tltc' W::; W.IS ('Olldll('l('"at Fort Sill ill May. A large' lIumher of sollwan' prohl('lI\s Wc'f(' iclPIIL i I it'cl. Dt',v('loPII~('"l

continues on schedule.c. Hand-Held Calculator (HHC). In February 1979, a HEL funded Mobile Tiaining

.Team was' dispatched to the 8th lnf Div FRG, to conduct a HHC Advance Concept Test.Results of the ACT were favorable and helped document the JIBe pot('ntial. TeATAconducted an independent Concept Evaluation Plan in ~1arC'h1979. In June' 197t), lht'Letter Requirement was signed by DARCOH and ~mulator programming efforts wen' started.Cannon artillery programs include the follOWIng: Gunnery, HB/~IPI, tIET, MATH,. TGPCISPEC CORR, 14.5, RAP. Emulator programming and debugging were completed by October,1979, with all magnetic tapes returned to Texas Instruments for inclusion into proto-type modules (chips). First prototype modules were received in November 1979. Themodules were tested to verify accuracy of content~ and.acce~ted. Additional weaponsystems were verified by December 1979. The Spec1al S1tuatlons prototype module wasreceived in December 1979 and is co~cur:ent~y ,in.the process.of verification. Depart-ment of the Army requisition author1zat10n 1S st111 forthcomlng and expected inJanuary 1980. A reference note, part of the module kit, will soon be in publication.The in-process review and subsequent procurement of TI-59 continues to progresssmoothly with a January 1980 fielding date anticipated.

d.' 'FADAC. The requirement to support FADAC's until at least the 1989 time-frame was identified and corrective actions were taken. Research of FADAC's availa-bility and maintainability resulted in an increased FADAC awareness at all levels. "Additional research is ongoing to develop a FADAC support plan for the 1980'timeperiod .

a. FIREFINDER. The FIREFINDER Radar system is in the process of being testedand work toward developing a resident POI is in progress. "New-Look" manuals will b~incorporated into training key instructor personnel and should be an improvement overthe old FM format. A new MO~ has been approved, for the FIREFINDER Radar system ..Personnel completing the resldent course for operators will be awarded an MOS of !.

.e. Revision 6. Improvements to h~w~tzers and the proliferation of p~ojectilesand propellants necessitated a FADAC Revls10n 6 progra~. Through the elimination ofmatrix 2 and the combination of functions, additional memory and program capabilitywas achieved. ARRADCOM completed the MI09Al and MII0A2 Revis ion 6 in April and ",,forwarded them to TECOM for testing. Priority of tape development was switched 'tothe MI10A2 in May 1979, in order to meet the system IOC. The MI09Al Revision 6 ". ,contains provisional FCI for the MI09Al propellants and will not be released untilMI09Al testing i~ completed.

f. Ballistic Similitude Testing for M785. Phase I and Phase II of a similitudetest'to determine the feasibility of using a conventional round as a spotter roundfor the new M785 round was conducted. Results are currently under study ..

g. Velocimeter (M90). Deve~opment of a reference note and a muzzle velocitycorrection table for the M90 veloClmeter was completed. Units will receive a ,copy ofeach when they receive the M90.

h. FASCAM. Development of firing data procedures resulted in the developmentof FASCAM tabular firing tables, graphical firing tables, graphical site tables andinstructional support methods which are available for issue to the field. ' '4. DCRDT. Program Managers ~ontinued their involvement in the supervision of th~ .new equipment acquisition process.

8-3

"

13RIO; .the organizational maintenance will carry an MOS of 13RXI ASI and the DS/GSwill be a 26B20 KI.

b. Multiple Launcher Rocket System (MLRS).

(I) In a memorandum for the Secretary of the Army dated 14 February 1977,the Secretary of Defense authorized the Army to proceed with the development of theMultiple Launcher Rocket System (MLRS) with a M42 dual-purpose submumition warhead.The Secretary of Defense also directed the Army to continue to study ways to accel-erate production and to give high priority to the attainment of standardizations ofthe system, or at least interoperability with key NATO allies.

(2) At a special ASARC on I April 77, a program alternative was approvedto respond to the desire for an accelerated production program and earlier lOCo Thisalternative was reveiwed by representatives of the DSARC principals and is'consideredconsistent with direction provided by the 14 February 1979 DSARC memorandum. Thealternative was also briefed to staff representatives of the house and senate authori~z~tion committees and the appropriations committees to insure consistency withCongressional views. The selected alternative provides for advanced development(validation) and options for engineering development, if required, or early productio~if development risks have been satisfactorily reduced during validation .

.(3) The options for the selected alternative began with competitiveadv~nced development (validation) which was initiated in September 1977. Two contraC~tors, Boeing and Vought, were selected for the prototype development effort. Eachare fabricating and testing three prototype launcher systems with associated flighttest equipment. Upon completion of contractor and government engineering developmenttests' and DT/OT, a decision will be made to either proceed with low rate initialproduction or continue with engineering development.

(4) Both system prime contractors have successfully completed componenttests such as motor development, warhead sled, wind tunnel, fire control development,SPLL integration, etc, and progressed to system flight tests at White Sands MissileRange. Both contractors initiated their firing program by launching instrumentedrockets from single tubes, then from "fixed" launch pod containers (LP/C's), andfinally' 'from the SPLL's. Both contractors have success-fully launched rockets withtactical 'configured warheads with inert submunitions and successfully demonstratedtotal system performance.

(5) The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the United State~,United Kingdom, France and Germany was signed on 11 June 1979. Both GE and the UKhave representatives in the project manager's office and AT II mine warhead develop-ment planning and component work has been initiated in GE and the US. The German,French and United Kingdom Liaison Officers at Fort Sill are serving as a focal pointfor the excbange of the MOU participant nations. The four nation MOU will prove ofenormous benefit to all four nations and others in NATO if it is pursued with thesame good faith which ha characterized the past year. The MOU reduces the developmeOcosts significantly by assessing e~ch participant a pro-rata share and it enhancesthe strength of NATO.

c. Pershing II (PII).

(1) The hinational Pershing force in Europe (thr('e us Battalions .1nd twoFHG Wings) has as its assigned role the provision of tacti,al nuclear support to thecentral European (AFCENT) region ~f NATO. Within this role there are two basicmissions assigned to the Pershing forc~. The primary mission is in SACEUR's

8-4

Schedull

(6) Individual MOS training for the missile crewman and organizationalmaintenance specialist and organizational maintenance technician (214E) and PershingOfficer for Pershing II will be conducted by USAFAS. Pershing Branch personnel(Weapons Department), will attend New Equipment Training conducted by the contractorin preparation for instructing the institutional programs of instruction (POI).

(7) To the extent possible, contractor SPA training materials will be usedin conjunction with materials developed by government agencies subject matter expertsto support resident and nonresident training for Pershing II.

(5) The PIa Programmer Test Station, Sequential Launch Adapter Azimuth. d 'Reference System, power station, aSSOCiate ground networks, and power station equiva-

lent are to be eliminated with the advent of the PII.

(4) The PII hardware for the firing battery consists of new first andsecond stage propulsion sections, the new RV, and the PII GSE. This PII equipmentconsisti of a modified PIa erector launcher (EL), a new power source on the EL tra2-tor, a new Platoon Control Central (PCC), a new reference scene generation van newground networks and containers. The intermediate maintenance level equipment ~onsistsof a modified Systems Components Test Station (SCTS), dollies, slings, and powersource.

(3) The major item being introduced by the PII system is the reentryvehicle, consisting of a guidance and control/adapter (G&C/A) section, warhead sec-tion, and radar section. Two new propulsion sections are introduced to increaserange and reliability. Requirements related to accuracy, yield and penetrabilitydrive the development of the reentry vehicle (RV). Requirements which principallyimpact the ground support equipment (GSE) include life cycle cost, employment flexi-bility survivability, etc. Minimization of life cycle cost is achieved by minimizing

, h.personnel and equipment. The hardware concept ac ieves these requirements.

Strike Plan (SSP). The secondary mission is to provide genera I support wilh nucle'arfires to both NORTHAG and CENTAG.

(2) The PII system, incorporating a radar area correlator controlledreentry vehicle, provides high accuracy in delivery of warheads. In addition to high

'accuracy, the type of warhead configuration provides for reduction of collateraldamage with minimum impact on civilian personnel.

5. TCAD. TCAD provided:3. Subject matter expertise in the testing of COPPERHEAD.b. Subject matter expertise for. FASCAM developments.

'c. Assistance in developing concepts for a FIST vehicle.

8-5

SECTION IX. TRADOC SYSTEMS MANAGEHS

c. DARCOM established Fort Sill as the Post Deployment Software Support (PDSS)center for TACFIRE, the Battery Computer System (BCS), and the Digital Message Device(DMD) on 7 June'1979. The basis of issue plan (BOIP) for TACFIRE was updated andapproved on 16 June 1979. '

d. Since December 197B, the TACFlRE instruction group has conducted two commandand staff courses (7 days), one direct'support maintenance course (10 weeks) twofire ,support courses (11 weeks each), and one fire support element course (4'weeks).

e. In September 1979. HQDA approved the recommendations of the DEVA-IPR forBCS full scale production and type classification.

£.. The TACFIRE Instructor Group was transferred from DCD to TCAD on 1 Oct' 79.

b. TVT 6-016 was approved as the first TACFIRE audio visual in May 1979. TheBattery Computer System operational Tes~ II, completed.at Fort Sill on 11 May 1979~will provide information to the August in-p~ogress reView for a production decision.The follow on evaluation (FOE) of TACFlRE with software enhancements was completed on2B May 1979. The primary FOE test areas were communications, management, fire missionprioritization, and fire mission responsiveness.

1. 15M TA~~.a. '1'111' first TACFIKE ('quipped unit (J/77th FA, 1st Cavalry Division) par-

Ueipated in Ileforger duriug .January and February 1979. Th" G"rman g('n('ralstaffwitn('ssed a TACFlRE field demonstration during their February 1979 visit to For.tSill ...

f. A contract was awarded to Harris Corporation of Melbourne, Florida, on IMay 1979 to build the modula~ integrat:d.communica~ion and navigation system (IMICNS)which will provide the RPV WIth an antI-Jam data lInk.

d. In an effort to identify possible future requirements and applications ofRPV/Drone technologies. the TSM initiated action on 1 May 1979 to "structure" thediversified efforts and concepts of the DARCOM and TRADOC communities into a consoli-dated and prioritized approach to RPV development. This action has not yet ,beenconcluded.

e. The revised rationalization, standardization, and interoperability (RS~)plan for the RPV was published in May 1979.

b. The first annual update of the RPV TSM charter was approved by GeneralStarry, CG, TRADOC.

c. The Aquila RPV was used for IR spectrum measurements. The results of thiseffort confirmed analytical results that were obtained earlier.

a. The Aquila STD completed its 2IBth flight and ended RPV participation inHELBAT VII at Fort Sill. The system was returned to Fort Huachuca and placed instorage.

2. TSM RPV.

9-1

g. ,The RPV entered Full Scale Engineering Development (FSED) in Sep 79. TheED ~ontract was awarded to Lockheed Missile and Space Co.

h. Contracts were awarded to Hcneywell and Westinghouse for advanced develop-ment FLIR systems to provide an expanded capability for day-night operations ,indegraded environments.

i. The TSM-RPV analysis and prioritization of future missions will continue in1980.3. 'TSM, MLRS.

a. Under competitive contract in the validation phase, both contractors (BoeingCo and Vought Corp) have successfully completed component tests such as rocket motordevelopment, warhead sled, wind tunnel, fire control development, launcher/carrierintegration, etc., and have progressed to system test firings at White Sands MissileRange (WSMR). Firing programs were initiated with single tube launchings, and haveprogressed to firings from "fixed" launch pad containers (LP/C's), and finally tofirings from the self-propelled launchers (SPLL's). TRADOC instructors have been,identified at Weapons Dept, USAFAS, and have been incorporated into the validationprocess to gain subject matter expertise on the systems.

b. Training devices to support institutional and exportable (field use) train-ing have been identified. Facilities requirements have been identified to supportUSAFAS training.

c. Draft technical manuals have been received for the carrier vehicle. (FMC)and both MLRS systems. The validation process for SPA materials has begun with smallgroup trials.

d. Operational Testing (OT I) 'will be conducted at Ft Sill and WSMR from 7 JaOto 18 Feb 80. The tested unit will be a MLRS battery (-). Documentation to supporttesting has been submitted, largely in draft form, with final documents to be 'submitted by Sep 79.

. e. The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) for a Multiple Launch Rocket System(MLRS/GSRS) was signed on 11 Jun 79 by the United States, France, Germany, and theUnited Kingdom, signifying a multinational commitment to develop the system. Meetingof the MOU Logistics Working Group and the Fire Control System Interface TechnicalGroup were held in Feb 79; and meetings of the Training and Operational EmplOYmentWorking Group and the Fire Control System Interface Technical Group were held in Apt79. The TSM'briefed the NATO Panel IV members on the system; and visited USAREUR,London, and Paris concerning ammunition resupply in Jun 79.

f. Tne MLRS program is progressing on schedule. Scoring of tpst firings begaOin Sep 79. Based on progress to date, it is expected that the required accuracy andreliability will be demonstrated in accordance with the validation objectives.

g. The source for manpower ~paces to field MLRS continues to be one'of themajor concerns. If the ~ILRSproves to be as effective as anticipated, it will cer-tainly be easier to make' this decision. Delaying the decision heyond Jun 80, howevecould adversely affect the planned 10C. A meeting was held at Ft Sill in May 79 toevaluate space requirements to support the fielded system. DIVISION 86 studies arcunder way at USAFAS to deter:mine field artillery force structure levels, includingMLRS projections through 1986.

9-2

h.. I'rel'arati011 I()r 0'1'-1 schedu led I()r ./allllary 1')80 I'ruclllC('cIva I icia l i011 () Itraining materials, trainillg of subject matter experts, and formation of a testdirectorate. ASARC/DSARC III will be held during April/May 1980 with an anticipateddecision to enter low-rate production.

i. On 15 December 1979, the Secretary of Defense approved the reco~endationof the'DSARC III to produce Copperhead on a limited basis. Production is to commenceat a rate of 200 ~ounds per month until a reliability of 0.8 is demonstrated.

g. The Secretary of the Army approved the ASARC III recommendation to typeclassify STANDARD the XM712 Copperhead and to enter production.

h. The Copperhead COEA was completed and distrib~ted to the field on1 October 1979.

f. The Copperhead Mission Element Needs Statement (MENS) was reaffirmed byHQDA in July.

e.fired.tests."

d. Initial coordination was established with the Navy in reference to theorganization and operations (0 and 0) concept of the Copperhead system.

During Operational Test II (OT II) at Fort Carson, CO, 71 rounds wereThe results were 29 scored as hits, 40 scored as misses and 2 declared as "no

b. GLLD IPR. GLLD production decision was deferred until completion ofCopperhead COEA studies.

c. Exercise HELBAT VII, integrating live Copperhead fires with TACFIRE, wasconcluded on 31 March. Two hits were attained out of five rounds fired.

a. Two weeks of Operational Test (OT) training were cOllducted at Fort Sill illpreparation for OT II.

c; USAFAS' preparation for training moved one step closer to completion withthe installation of the first of three FIREFINDER operator training devices in

b. AN/TPQ-36, Mortar Locating Radar. Engineering development model #1 wasreconfigured in.Jan 79 to resemble the production configuration. FOE I with thereconfigured EDM #1 was conducted Jut Aug 79 at Ft Campbell, KY. Production contractfor D423A 10KW, 400HZ t'!rhillf;was init~ated 1 Feb 79 by MERADCOM. FOE II objectivesare to be incorporated In major FDTE wIth FIREFINDER and TACFIRE at Ft Hood, 1st QtrCY 81. .

a. AN/TPQ-37, Artillery Locating Radar. Hughes Aircraft Company delivered thefirst low rate initial production (LRIP) radar to Ft Sill in Jan 79 for contractortesting. The tests were completed and radar returned to HAC for software validationand verification. LRIP #2 completed Government acceptance tests in Jul 79 and remainsat Ft Sill for new equipment.trainin? course. aT III/laC training is projected forcompletion Mar 80.with aT III followIng Apr May 80 at Ft Hood. ASARC IlIa isscheduled for Aug 80. Planning is on going for fielding Q36 and Q37.

5. ISM FIREFINDER.

9-3

-

-

i-SEE-O-Hall in Oct 79 and the completion of key instructor courses for FIREFINDERmaintenance in Dec 79.6. TSM PERSHING II.

a .. The period of 1 Jan 79 to 31 Dec 79 was devoted to entering full scaleengineering development after successfully accomplishing the Milestone II decisionpoint at the DSARC conducted in December 1978.

b. A pilot program to test the Extension Training Material (ETM) concept inthe Pershing System was developed and a contract for the pilot program was signed inJanuary 1979.

c. The Acquisition Plan was updat~d in January to reflect the DSARCconfiguration and funding program.

d. The memorandum stating the DSARC decision was received in February 1979followed shortly by formal full scale Engineering Development contract signing atRedstone Arsenal, Alabama.

e. The initial version of the Test and Evaluation Master Plan (TEMP) w~sproduced and forwarded to DOD in February 1979 concurrent with accomplishing an .update of the Coordinated Test Plan (CTP).

'. f. : A supplement to the Concept Formulation Package was published in Marchreflecting those changes required by the DSARC directed system configuration.

g. The request for initiation of Phase 3 development of the warhead sectionscrossed the DOD-DOE interface in March 1979, signalling the start of full scale .development of the Pershing II warheads.

h. The Approved Required Operational Capabilities (ROC) was published byTRAD9C, 23 March 1979.

i. An effort to evaluate possible reduction in manpower requirements forPershing II was jointly initiated by TRADOC, DARCOM, and USAREUR as a result of DAtasking. The report was completed in November and forward~d to DA.

j. In April, an agreementhindPrdinc~Plepbetwh:en OTEA and DOE ~as coordinated bythe TSM to utilize prototype war ea s. urlng ers lng OT II to both satisfy.OTEA

. t d provide data on the Items to OTEA.requlremen san.k. A study to further justify the ne:d and effectiveness of the earth penetratO

(EP) warhead was initiated in May 1979 asdlrected by the DSARC. This study wascompleted in N~vember 1979 and the results reported back to the ASARC principals inDecember.

1. A study to determine the requirement for the highest yield for the airburstwarhead for PII a result in the new system range was also initiated in May. 1979.sad' h '1'The results of the study were incorporate lnt e mt ltary characteristics onlheRequired Operational Capability.

m. . A Pre-IPR to identify the candidate sys:ems for replacing the PershingAN/TRC-BOB trophospheric radio.set was conducted 1n June 1979. Several potentialsystems were looked at and under fina~ review by USAREUR.

9-4

II. Pl'rshillg n'qllin'I1WlIls for a prilllP IIIUv('r alld a r('c:OVC'J'Y vt'ldc!t'wC'f(' ,ltlt/c'd

to the ROC for the lO-ton truck.0.' Designs for a Pershing Platoon Control Center were completed and P!ot~type

construction begun.

p.

q.

r.

Nuclear hardening criteria for the Pershing system were agreed upon.

The Outline Individual and Collective Training Plan was updated in December,

The training aids and devices for Pershing II were identified in October.

s. Draft equipment publications were reviewed within USAFAS and commentsfurnished to the contractor.

7. 15M CANNON.a. Completed and forwarded to TRADOC the independent evaluation report for the

FDTE of the M198 155mm towed howitzer.b. Hosted and chaired a joint working group to finalize the brigadel division

support weapon system mission element ne~d statement (MENS).

c. FOE for M198 completed at Fort Bragg, N.C.

d. MG Merritt, USAFAS Commandant, approved MENS and forwarded it to TRADOC forreview and transmittal to DA.

e. T5M visited the SP-70 test site in Germany to participate in evaluating thedevelopment of that weapon as a part of the ESPAWS program.

f. Participated in final RAM scoring for operational testing of the productionmodels of the M198. Howitzer exceeded minimum reliability criteria.

g; Evaluated proposals for DARPA advanced indirect fire system. Participatedin consideration of'the proposals for the DA-DARPA program at DA. Program pared tofocus on advanced seeker technology for artillery delivered projectiles.

h. M198 initial operational capability with 1/73 FA at Fort Bragg, N.C.; unithad 16 of required 18 weapons.

i. Participated with ARRADCOM in presenting briefing on ESPAWS program to: LTGKeith. The DCS for RDA informally approved of the program's direction and approach.

j. Participated in review of FA helmet program at NARADCOM. looking for asingle solution to FA and armor requirements.

k Presented a briefing on/user requirements (ESPAWS program) to industryrepres~ntatives at the bidder's conference hosted by ARRADCOM. Industry will submitproposals to improve the existing FA howitzer system in August 1979.

9-57, '."J

SECT iON X. MUTUAL SUPPORT PROGRA~tS

To USMC FA Symposium". One representative.

To USAIS, Ft Benning, GA. Leadership Conference. Two

To 5th Bn, 206 FA, III ARNG, IL. One representative.

To 428th FA Bde, USAR, So Bend, IN. Two representatives.

8-14 Apr

9-11 Feb

2-4 Feb To 2d Bn, 24th Marines, USMCR, Chicago, IL. Two representatives.

9-12 Feb

12-16 Jan To 1st Maneuver Tng Cmd, USAR, Denver, CO. One representative.

g.

e.

c.

d.

b.

a.

f. 6-8 Marrepresentatives.

I. DCD. In support of the concepts analysis agency (CAA), DCD provided data and areview of methodology for CAA's wartime ammunition requirements study (WARRAMP). Newmunitions, such as FASCAH, and new weapons system, such as GSRS, were the focus ofthis update.2. TCAD. TCAD provided the following mutual support:

12-16 Jan To 142 FA Bde, Ark ARNG. Two representatives.

i. 11-13 May To 14th Marines and 2d Bn, 14th Marines, US~tCR, Dallas, TX, Tworepresentatives.

h~ 19-21 Apr To 14th Marine's Artillery Conference, USHCR, Dallas, TX Tworepresentatives.

j. 18-21 May To 3d Bn, 23d Marines USMCR, New Orleans, LA. Tworepresentatives.

3. CFD.a. CFD sent representative to serve as the meteorology representative at the

9th Quadrupartite Working Group - Surface to Surface Artillery - Montreal, Canada.b. Representatives are continuing the make coordination visits to the Field

Artillery Met Acquisition System (FAMAS) contractor.c. The Counterfire Branch of the Targeting Division conducted a Field Artillery

Target Acquisition Conference on 23-25 October 1979. The conference was well attendedas 15 active duty a~d 7 national guard target acquisition batteries were represented.There was an excellent exchange of information between the Commanders and the USAField Artillery School.

10-1

~

SECTION XI. CONFERENCES/SE~lINARS/ORIENTATIONS

1. DCD.a. The NATO artillery procedures working party held its 9th meeting at

Riverwalk House in London, England from 2-5 April 1979, and at the Royal School ofArtill~ry, Larkhill on 6 April 197~ .. Th: working par:y.has advanced significantly.toward'the established goal of ratlfication of an ambltlouS schedule of STANAGdevelopment. The working party is expanding it~ area of interest'to develop anallied publication whic~ will inc1u~e those art~llery-related S~ANAGs consideredessential for multi-natlonal operatlons• Alsoln development wlll be STANAGs forsuppression of enemy air defense and laser procedure. Italy offered'to host a meetingin 1981.

b. On 23 March 1979, the Commanding General, DARCOM, (General Guthrie) hostedan ABCA (America, Britain, Canada, Australia) sympQsium at DARCOM HQs. Attendeesincluded the US chairman, of various QWG's and US POC's of QWG's whose chairmen wereother than US. The theme of the symposium was how to improve U.S. performance in theABCA FORA, and to insure consistency of U.S. positions in the NATO/panel FORA. EachQWG representative was given the.opport~nity to brief.the group as to how ABCA/NATOinteroperability functioned at hlS partlcular agency/lnstallation. GEN Guthriecautioned the standing chairmen and POC's ~o insure that implementation details ofOSTAGs/STANAGs into training literature were being carried out as agreed.

c, On 8 May 1979, the senior U.S. Washington standardization office; for ~CA,and principal member to the NATO Armaments Army Group, MG LUNN, hosted a symposium atthe Pentagon. Attendees included U.S. representatives from all NATO panels and otherselected individuals. This meeting was a continuation of the DCSRADA/DARCOM/TRADOCinterface in coordination of representatives of agencies ar.d individuals to the var-ious NATO and ABCA panels, and working parties/groups to insure a single coordinatedUnited States position at the various meetings.

d. Due to a heavy influx of training literature development that includedchanges/revisions to field artillery field manuals, implementation of U.S.-RatifiedSTANAGs/QSTAGs was significant during this period. Most notable included the ,implementation of the following standardization agreements (STANAGs) and their .comparable QSTAGs:

(1) STANAG 2147 (QSTAG 221) Target numbering system.

(2) STANAG 2887 (QSTAG 217) Tactical tasks and responsibilitiesfor control of artillery.

(3) STANAG 2099 Fire coordination in support ofland forces.

2. SECRETARY (SAO). The Field Artillery School entertained a considerable numberof US and Allied vi.itors in 1979. ,During the year 106 US active and retired generalofficers visite~;.of th:se, ~3 visited d~ring the period July through December. Thedistinguished Vlsltors ln thlS category lnclude General Jones, Chairman of the JointChiefs of Staff; General Vessey, Vice Chief of Staff.of-the.Army; General ..Shoemaker,Cdr FORSCOM; General Starry, Cdr TRADOC; General Guthrie, Cdr DARCOM; General (Ret)Blanchard; and General (Ret) Spivy. Civilian dignataries visiting the Schooi in 1979number-18; of these, the most notable were: Dr. LaBerge, Under Secretary of theArmy; Dr. Pierre, Assistant Secretary of the Army; Mr. Nelson, Assistant Secretary ofthe Army; Mr. Hardison, Deputy Under Secretary of the Army; Senator Boren Oklahoma., ' . ,

11-1

-

-

-

~

and Dr. Banowsky, President of Oklahoma University. In addition, 274 Allied officersvisited the School during 1979; 223 visited during the period July through.December.Numerous separate itineraries and conferences were planned and executed during thelast half of 1979. The conferences included:

a. World Safety Conference to discuss AR 385-63. USAFAS assisted the FortSill Safety Office in conducting subject conference during 15-19 January. AR 385-63was discussed for final evaluation by representatives from all interested agencies,world-wide.

b. Intelligence Day. Intelligence Day was conducted on 31 January forOAC 1-79 and 2-79. The conference provided the Advanced Course students an overvieWof intelligence operations on the national level intelligence organizations.Briefings were given by general officers or admirals from ACSI-DA, NSA and DlA.

c. German/American Staff Talks VI. The staff talks were conducted at FortSill during 11-15 February. These talks bring together, on a recurring basis,national level representatives to discuss and resolve issues on standardability andinteroperability of developmental items.

d. Leadership SYmposium. A leadership sYmposium was conducted for AdvancedCourse students in Classes 2-79 and 3-79 on 11-12 April. The sYmposium exposes thestudents to leadership techniques and allows open discussion of leadership problems.Four guest speakers participated: General Guthrie, LTG Gard, LTG Meyer and CSM JoneS.

e. Suppression Symposium, 24-25 July 1979. This meeting, called by the CG,brought in active and retired military general officers, plus civilian dignataries,to assist in solving problems concerned with suppression of enemy fires.

f. Senior Field Artillery Council, 25-26 July 1979. This group, consisting ofhigh ranking active and retired general officers, plus civilian dignataries, met forthe second time, to assist in planning the future for the Field Artillery.

g. Leadership Symposium, 12-13 September 1979. A leadership symposium wasconducted for Advanced Course students in Classes 3-79 and 4-79. The sYmposiumexposes ~he students to leadership techniques and allows open discussion of leadershiPproblems. The four guest speakers were: LTG Fuller, MG Hall, MG Cavazos and CSMWren.

h. National Security Industrial Association (NSIA), 25-26 September 1979. TheSchool hosted a meeting of the NSIA; attendance was 230 civilian industry represen-tatives. The meeting was designed to provide a forum for the Army to review withindustry its current and future Field Artillery Systems capabilities, problems andrequirements.

i. Fire Support Conference, 23-25 October 1979. The annual Fire SupportConference was attended by over 120 personnel from active units, reserve components,ROTC and Readiness regions. This annual conference strives to update personnel onthe latest trends in equipment, doctrin~, and.tactics.

j. Civilian Aides to Secretary of the Army, 7-10 No~ember 1979. The 20 Aidesto the 5th Army area met at Fort Sill. These conferences, held periodically through~out the Army area provide close ties between the civilian aides and the militarybases in their area of concern. .

11-2

combined,

k. Intelligence Day, 11 December 1979. Intelligence day was t'onducted forAdvanced Course students in Classes 3-79 and 4-79. The conference provides thestudents an overview of intelligence operations on the national level. Briefingswere given hy MG Tho~npson, MG Larkin, and BG freeze.

1... Nuclear System Program Review, 18-19 December 1979. The System Heview was 1atteniled by 1;)0 officers, 53 of whomare general officers. General Vessey,. G'l;neraiStarry, GeneraI~~hoemaker and General G~thrie were the disti~guished conferees. Theconference brought",together representatl.ves from the Army, Air Force and Marines, todiscuss issues pert'~ining to nuclear training, tactics and doctrine.

3. TCAD. TCAD made the following visits:

a.

b.

2-6 Apr8-16 Oct

To the 9th Artillery Procedures Working Party in London.

To FA element of V Corps, Germany.c. 15-18 Oct To HQ USAREUR to brief TACFIRE training needs. To HQ 8th Mech

Div for predeployrnent command briefing.d. 22-26 Oct To Ft Monmouth, NJ, for evaluation of NORDEN proposal for

B~ttery Computer System (BCS) training and publications.

8-9 Nov' For CG, USAIS, Ft Benning, GA.

22-26 Oct Attended Engineer Instructor's Conference, Ft Belvoir, VA.

24-25 Oct To USAC&GSC, Ft Leavenworth, KS.

28-31 Oct Attended TRADOC Ethics Conference, Ft Hamilton, NY.

1 Nov For CG, USMRMS, Ft Knox, KY.

7 Nov for Deputy CG, CACDA, Ft Leavenworth, KS.

e.

f~g.

h.

i.

j.

k.1.

9-10 Nov

1516 Nov

To Ft Knox, KY, to participate in Hellfire discussions.

For DCSCD, TRADOC, Ft Monroe, VA.

Im. 26-30 Nov To Litton, Van Nuys, CA, for TACFIRE advanced t.raining program

PLANIT and team training software final delivery demonstration.n. 30 Nov To 1st Mech Div, Ft Riley, KS, for Predeployment Command Briefing.

o. 3-5 Dec Attended Infantry Instructor's Conference, Ft Benning, GA.

p. 1011 Dec For CG, USAAVNS, Ft Rucker, AL.

q. 21 Dec For CG, CAC, Ft Leavenworth, KS.

11-3

SECTION XII. STlJDIES/EVf\l.lIf\'I'IONS/I'J«UECTS

1. CFD.a. CFD continued mission of supporting MOC Branch at Chanute AFB, IL in train-

ing the RDTE community's required met observers. Strength of personnel provide~ toChanute remains at five of the authorized six instructors.

b. The Met Division completed required coo:dinations to have assigned two 26Lsto OJT into DS/GS Rawinsonde System AN/GMD-l repaIrers. One each from the 225 andthe 226 Maint Co's. Formally received the DS/GS support mission of repairing all'Rawinsonde System AN/GMD-l components as agent of DIO, for DIO, as the two membersfrom the 225th and 226th are DIO members, for met equipment of 75th, 212th, and FABoard.

c. During this period ~letDivision supported "Operation SESAME," a Departmentof Defense approved support of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric AdministrationSevere Storms experiment. The division's support effort was one complete RawindsondeSystem AN/GMD-l, three,Radiosonde Recorders, two Control/Recorders, and served as theprimary maintenance repair facility for all participating units using the AN/G~m-lsystems on a reimbursable basis. Supporting equipment of the USMC, USAR, ARNG,NASCAR (National Sciences Center for Atmospheric Research Boulder, CO), and partici-pating active Army met sections who brought equipment to I-See-O Hall for repair from28 Mar _ 10 June. During this period equipment in the classroom not in immediatestudent use was put in "Green" condition and administratively stored until required.

d. The Meteorology Division of the Counterfire Department completed and vali-dated 22 TV programs for field export,use on MERC subjects. Five of the 22 programshave been accepted by the Army Training Support Center, Ft Eustis, VA.

e. The Meteorology Division of the Counterfire Department met maintenance'repaired equipment for Fort Bragg, Fort Campbell, and Fort Knox as well as the repair-ing of components that were mailed to the department. CW2 Palmer was sent TOY for 17days to Alaska as the met evaluator of the 1st Bn 37th Arty, Fort Richardson ARTEP.

f. A detailed review of NRID packets was conducted., g. ' The Counterfire Department refined and finalized the concepts and doctrine

for today's and tomorrow's battlefield. The objective division for the Division '86Study was finalized and from that effort evolved the Objective Division TargetAcquisition Battalion.

2. DOE.a. The Field Artillery Evaluation Plan for FY 79 was written and published

early in the calendar year. The plan states the purpose, responsibilities, 'philoso-phy, and methodology of evaluation in the Field Artillery School. It also contains asection of fact sheets on on-going and completed evaluation projects.

b. Evaluation of 1978 Skill Qualification Test (SQT) for MOS 13B (Tracks 1through 5), 82C, 15E, 15J, 17B, and 17C were completed in CY 79. Additionally inCY 79, the SQT Management Reports were evaluated and an SQT Executive Summary andEvaluation Model summarizing the results of the evaluation for all the 1978'SkillQualification Test was completed. These reports were furnished to appropriatedUSAFAS agencies, HQ TRADOC, and all other TRADOC Directorates of Evaluation. Majorrecommendations include improvements in the Written, Hands-On and Performance

12-1

-

Cert~fication Components, improved administration of SQT, and more timely distributionof management reports. Results of the evaluation will be used by the Directorate ofTrain~ng ~evelopment in improving future iterations of the SQT.

c .. Evaluations were initiated in CY 79 for the CMF 13 Skill QualificationTests that had not previously been evaluated. These studies will include all SQT forMOS 13F and 21G plus SQT of all other CMF 13 MOS. These evaluations are designed todetermine th~ problems encountered by the test site managers, scorers, and examineeswith the Written and Hands-On Components. Reports for some of these SQT are. cur-rentlybeing written and data for the rest of the SQT are presently being collected.

d. The external phase of the Soldier's Manual evaluations begun in CY 78 werecontinued in CY 79. The external phase will determine if the Soldier's Manuals arevalid and useful documents for the users. Manuals to be evaluated include MOS 13B,13E, 13F, 17B, 17C, 82C, and 93F (Soldier's Manual evaluations for MOS lSD, 15E, 15Jand 21G were completed in FY 78.) Data for these MOS have been collected and analysiSand ~eport writing is progressing .

.e. The external evaluation of the Artillery Survey Specialist Course (ASSC,82CI0), completed in Dec 78, was printed and distributed during Jan 1980 to appropri-ate USAFAS agencies, HQTRADOC, other TRAnOC Directorates of Evaluation, and divisionartillerjes participating in the study. The study provided indicators for modifyingthe course to satisfy the survey needs of the units and to better insure the propermix of 82C training.

f. An internal evaluation of the artillery portion of the Precommand Course(PCG) , entitled Field Artillery Precommand Course (FAPCC), Phase II was completed.inDecembe~ 1979. Data from interim reports on each iteration of the course were usedfor {mmediate refinement of the course's Program of Instruction (POI). According therecent classes, the course has evolved into a well-designed, well-presented coursethat is meeting the needs of future commanders. The evaluation report is beingpublished and should be disseminated to appropriate agencies in Jan 80. FortLeavenworth was proponent for the external evaluation of the PCC.

g. The Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the Embedded Figures List 'iri Predict-ing the Performance of Enlisted (13F) Forward Observers was completed in June 79.(This was a follow-up to the Evaluation of Forward Observers conducted by theUniversity of Oklahoma.) The purpose of the evaluation was to determine the efficacyof using the Embedded Figures Test to select students for the 13F Course. It wasdetermined that the predictive value of the Embedded Figures Test was not any greaterthan that of the ASVAB FA Score which is presently used to select students for thecourse.

h. The External Evaluation of the Field Artillery Fire Support SpecialistCourse, completed in October 1979, was printed and distributed to appropriate USAFASagencies, HQ TRADOC, TRADOC Directorates of Evaluation and appropriate divisionartilleries. The evaluation indicated'areas in the 13F Course POI where increasedtraining is necessary to prepare Fire Support Specialists for their initial assign-ments and recommended areas where training modifications should be made.

i. As part of the ongoing series of evaluations of the Field Artillery OfficerBasic Course/program of instruction, internal evaluations of the Field ArtilleryTarg~t Acquisition Course and Lance Officer Course were conducted. Results of th~evaluations were provided the Direc~orate of Course Development and Training formodifications of the course as appropriate. External evaluations of the OfficerBasic Course, Pershing Officer, Pershing Officer and Cannon Officer courses were

12-2

initiated. Data have been collected and analysis and report writing should becomplete by the end of January 1980.

.i. In November 1979, DOE conducted an evaluation of the 1979 Fire Sup'port.' .Conference. Attcildees (totalinK approximately 110) were Kiven the option of providingtheirc1ssessments of the various aspects of the conference, but only 16 of th('.110elected to complete and return the feedback forms provided. This was too small asample to draw conclusions representative of the larger group. The evaluation wascompleted however, for the purpose of indicating trends. Copies of the final.reportdated 13 NOv 79 were sent to the Assistant Commandant and the Director of Course .-Development and Training.

k. An analysis of human failures in the MIlO weapons system was initiated andcompleted. Data were derived from the Artillery Data Collection program and based onincident reports collected over a 2-year (77-79) time frame. Certain patterns wereidentified and provided to the field for corrective ~ction as necessary.

1. The evaluation, "The Analysis of Human Failure Identified by the ArtilleryData Collection Program: M109," was based on data derived from the ARRCOM DataCollection program. The purpose of the evaluation is to determine patterns amongincidences of materiel failures which were attributable to human failure in operatoror organizational maintenance. Of the 967 h,uman failure incidences repor~~~, 688were judged to be the results of operator/crew failure and 279 were judged to be theresults of mechanic failure when carrying out maintenance. Further analysis ofpatterns'is presently being conducted.

m. On 10 Oct 79 at the request of the Meteorological Division of theCounterfire Department, DOE initiated an external evaluation of the Field ArtilleryMeteorological Crewman Course (FAMCC, 93FIO). The purpose of the evaluati'on'is to,determine if graduates of the course are able to: sufficiently perform (in thefield) tasks taught in the course; fulfill all met crewman requirements of the unit;and progress in the 93F MOS. Questionnaires to be used in the evaluation have beendesigned and are scheduled to be mailed to FAMCC graduates and their supervisors inMarch~ Proposed date for the final report is 30 Aug 80.

n. An evaluation of the Basic Noncommissioned Officer Course (BNCOC) was begunin CY 79. The purpose of the evaluation is to determine if BNCOC is an effectivemeans of improving performance of soldiers and what course improvements, if any, canbe made.

o. The Directorate of Evaluation provided assistance in the inte'rpre£ation ofsurvey ,data for the Army War College and in formulating questionnaires for theCopperhead Operational Test II and for Fort Leavenworth's external evaluation of thePrecommand Course.

p. On 9-11 April 79, Mr. McBride attended a jointly sponsored meeting of theNational Council on Measurement in Education (NCME) and the American/ EducationalResearch Association (AERA) held in San Francisco, CA. Some of the presentationsattended dealt with the following subjects: Criterion-Referenced Testing; Evaluatingthe Implementation of an Instructional Design Across Settings; Minimum CompetencyTesting; Vocational Education Evaluation; Application of the Rasch Model; and , "Instructional Development for the 80's.

q. During the week of October 1519, Jack Anthony and Helen Belletti attendedthe Annual Conference of the Military Testing Association in San Diego, CA. High-lights,of the conference included presentations on the following subjects:

12-3

Perfo.rmance Testing, Training Effectiveness, Task Analysis, Soft Skill Analysis, andSelection and Validation. The DOE Evaluation of the Effectiveness of the EmbeddedFigures Test in Predicting the Performance of Enlisted (13F) Forward Observers waspresented during the session on Selection and Validation.

3. TCAD. TCAD provided the following contributions:

a. Provided the officer-in-charge and.membership for 'the Close Support StudyGroup (CSSG) II. The group ~lso includes members from other TRADOC communities., Thestudy group is concerned with improvements for Fire Support Teams (FISTs) and firesupport sections.

b. Provided a maneuver evaluator for the summer training conducted at FtChaffee, Arkansas.

c. Provided membership to the group concerned with Division 86.

d. Authored a proposed draft STANAG for the suppression of enemy air defenses.

e. Provided subject matter expertise to DTD for Army Research Institute's(ARI's) study of computer administered MOS 13C skill qualification tests (SQT's).

f; Provided subject matter expertise to ART for study of MOS 13F skills.g. Provided membership on CSSG!I.

,..

12-4

SECTION XIII. MISCELLANEOUS

1. CED.As a result of Electronics Division instigated action, the number of errone-

ousl/~warded ASI F7 (FADAC Mechanic) personnel assign ..d worldwide was reduced thronghDA MILPERCEN action. "

b. On 15 Aug 79, the Basic El~ctronics Branch, Electronics.Division, initiateda student training enlightenment perlod at the end of each academlc day. Its purposeis to answer prominent student questions and conduct conventional instruction onpoints of critical interest to the 31V10 course.

c. The department provided personnel for a TRADOC new equipment training team,which presented instruction on VINSON secure voice equipment to USAREUR personnel.

d. Five newly commissioned Warrant Officers became students in the POMGAFcourse along with twelve'GAF students. They received five weeks of college-level'electr~nics theory from the Electronics Division.

2. SECRETARY.a. ARD.

(1) Changes in program.(a) The Field Artillery Officer Basic Course graduations were discon-

tinued effective with Class 3-79. The students now attend their formal graduationceremony at the end of their follow-on Cannon Battery, Lance, Pershing or TargetAcquisition/Survey Officer Courses. In addition the Academic Evaluation Reports(AER) for OBC and follow-on track have been combined to the advantage of the studentand USAFAS.

(b) In the past, active Army officers who failed to achieve Honors inthe OBC but subsequently exerted extra effort and achieved Honors in the follow-oncourse received no recognition other than at the graduation ceremonies. There wereexceptions, such as the Distinguished and Honor graduates who received letters ofcommendation signed by the Assistant Commandant for their permanent MPRJ. Theseletters were normally limited to three to four officers per class. Conversely, thosestudents who performed adequately in OBC and then no longer applied themselves as aresult of their realization that there would be no AER rendered on them in the follow-on track, became, at .times, a hindrance to fellow students. No action,other than a"report of training or marginally academically deficient officers, or letter to theirgaining Commanders cou~d be rendered.

(c) Another positive offshoot is a significant decrease in nonratedtime on the officer's first OER after the follow-on track. Previously, the entirefollow-on track period was listed as nonrated time, (except for FATASOC), causi~g adistraction in the initial OERs for new officers.

(d) The Assistant Commandant directed additional academic efforts bemade to increase the quality of Officer Basic Course students. To accomplish thisthe USAFAS faculty advisor program has been strengthened by adding a company gradeadvisor to each OBC class section. There is also a mandatory study hall for OBCstudents with less than 80% subcourse averages. In addition, the FAS Briga~e has

13-1

"

increased general military training requirements to assist in fielding more roundedand better qualified officers.

. (e) To assist the Division in meeting its reporting requirements,several weekly and monthly reports hive been completely automated using existingUSAFAS ADP equipment. Further automation is currently becoming available with theintroduction of the Real-time Automotive Information Management System .. It is antici-pated that the batch-process TREDS system will be phased out by the end of CY 1980.

(2) Student Input and Attrition. Approximately 15,133 students wereprogrammed to attend 681 classes in 54 courses during the year. The actual input waS12,386 students of which 10,823 graduated. Though a slight decrease was noted inacademic failures, there was a slight increase in administrative attritions .. While 9courses experienced an excessive attrition during CY 1979, two of these had a rate inexcess of 30%. The overall academic attrition for the School decreased from 8.8% ~nCY 1978 to 8.3% in CY 1979, which places the School well below the acceptable 10%rate. The administrative attrition for CY 1979 showed an increase to 4.3% from 3.2%

-in CY 1978.

b. RMO.

. (1) Due to actual and anticipated reduction of funds, US Army FieldArtillery. School (USAFAS) reexamined the organization to determine the best, mostfeasible way to accomplish the mission despite ever-increasing shortages of authorizedpersonnel .

.(2) Assigned missions were accomplished within the requirements recogniz~dby the TRADOC Review of Manpower (TRM) and allocations by.the Fort Sill Contract forFY 79.

(a) Authorizations for Dec 1979 was TDA 479:OFF498

WO38

ENL929

GS351

WG61

TOTAL1877

(b) TDA 280 is in the system and has been used for requisitioningsince 31 October 1979.

(3) The expenditures for operation of the USAFAS approximated $42.0 millionin FY 79. The expenditures by appropriation consisted of $9.4 million for operationand maintenance, Army; $23.9 million for military personnel, Army; and $8.7 millionfor procurement authority (Ammunition Equipment).

(4) The USAFAS purchased 12 IBM word processors ($132,817) and 8 Saxonpaper copiers ($21,B~0) at the end of FY 79 thus eliminating annual rental for thesemachines starting with FY 80.3. TCAD. TCAD was involved in the following miscellaneous actions:

a. Effective with FAOBC 3-79, mandatory study hall was instituted for somecourse students. Students with an average below 80% were required to attend a 2-hourstudy period nightly, Monday Thursday.

b. Period was characterized by tremendous losses in instructor personnel.

1]-2

-

-

c. Emphasis was commenced for organizational effectiveness (DE) training.

. ;

d. Work commenced to implement the battalion training management system (BTMS)into command and staff instruction.

e. Developed and submitted a proposed "fire support" portion of draft ATP-35,Land Force Tactical Doctrine.

t.. Continued work on draft STANAG 2930, Suppression of Enemy Air Defenses(SEAn) by Artillery.

g. Hosted a meeting of all USAFAS allied liaison officers. The purpose of themeeting was to discuss artillery survivability.

h. Produced several FA Journal articles.i. Conducted its first NCTACN-RR phase during period 20-24 Aug 79.

4. Qf@.!.a. Morris Swett Library. A total of 496 documents has been input t~ the

USAFAS archives program. School departments ..increased their contribution to the.institution's memory. Two bibliographic on-line computer systems were added. Thesetap the holdings of the Lockheed Corp and the Defense Technical Information Centerand increase local library dimensions on a dramatic scale. Ten artillery-relatedbibliographies and the Field Artillery Journal were provided the National TechnicalInformation Service. The Field Artilleryman, the Field Artillery Journal from 1973,and associated indexes were sent to University Microfilms, IntI for addition to theirmicrofilm offering. Fifteen persons (the library staff augm~nted by other ~iv{sionpersonnel) expended 693 hours in performing the first official library inventory i.n68 years. A total of 1,033 accountable items were reported. The grand total oflibrary items rose to 198,660.

b. Reserve Component Division.(1) Resident Staff Refresher Courses. Approximately 250 reserve component

students underwent 350 periods of refresher USAFAS academic instruction in 7specially-tailored week-long resident refresher courses.

(2) Mobile Training Teams (MTT). During the 2nd half of CY 79, 8 MTTsinvolving 14 instructors from USAFAS traveled to home stations or training' sites ofReserve Components and Active Army units to conduct training assistance. USAFAS'personnel participated in two overseas MTTs, one to North Yemen for ~lIOIAI trainingand one to Saudi Arabia for mechanized infantry brigade artillery liaison training.Coordination continues for MTTs to Thailand, Lebanon, and Nigeria. .

(3) USAR Schools. Plans and programming of USAR Schools for USAFAScontinually reviewed by individuals of RCD and coordinated with individuals inITB~TDD.

(a) IDT. The inactive duty training was supported with class packetscovering the BOAC instructional area of air ground operations. (Second Year) Also 6Level 1 MOS course packets (I3B, I3E, I3F, I7B, 17C, and 82C) were distributed to beused during IDT. Proposed POI for IDT was being reviewed by USAFAS.

13-3

(b) ADT. The US Army Reserve Schools program professionally providedAUT instruction in all four phases of the Advanced Officer Course and Command andGeneral Staff Course to Reserve Component and Active Army personnel. The ReserveComponen~s Division provided liaison, facilities, administrative and logisticalsupport for over 291 staff and faculty and 365 students; a tremendous accomplishmentconsidering the USAR Schools' short ADT duration of two months (July & August).Plans are now complete for the 1980 USAR Schools ADT. Pre-camp conference scheduledfor.27 Mar 80. The schedule for next year's ADT is as shown below:SCHOOL MISSION STUDENT DATES NO STUDENTS TOTAL4157 FAOAC lA, II, IV, VI 15 Jun 28 Jun 30 ea ph 120

MOS 13B/13E 30 ea MOS 604154 FAOAC lA, II, IV, VI 29 Jun 12 Jul 25 ea ph 100

WOSC IV 100"4155 FAOAC lA, II, IV, VI 13 Jul 26 Jul 40 ea ph 1604156 C&GSC 27 Jul 9 Aug 3004158 C&GSC 10 Aug 23 Aug 300

(4) ROTC/USMA. The ROTC support program continues as before, now,underthe Reserve Components Division, to carry out the responsibilities for support of FAROTC ~nits (LaSalle College of Philadelphia and VMI in Lexington, VA), 273 other ROTCu'niis, and USMA.

(a) The ROTC program was supported through an annual review, 'revision,production, and control of distribution of (1) FA Orientation Manuscript, completewith 35-mm color slides for use during branch instruction in MS III, and (2) FASupplements to theTRADOC Instructor Guides for MS II, III, and IV, the core of themilitary service instruction for the sophomore, junior, and senior years,respectively.

(b) Orientation and promotional booklets, brochures, pamphlets,posters, and letters were produced and distributed to all ROTC detachments and toUSMA.

(c) During Sep-Dec, letters were sent to BG Bagnal, Dep Supt of USMA;BG Adams, BG Fye, BG Gordon and other FA officers on ROTC duty; Active and ReserveComponent FA Commanders; and FA representatives in Readiness Regions and Groups,requesting assistance in "Selling the Field Artillery" to cadets. Positive responsewas received. An information program using Periodic List of Instructional Material'.began.

(5) Annual Training (AT). One battalion received met and radar trainingduring AT. USAFAS provided training for approximately 16 personnel utilizing'approximately 150 manhours of instructor time.

13-4

-

-

-

-

-

(ATSF-SE-AD)

FOR THE COMMANDANT:

OFFICIAL:

/2u )J( 0 eI:..PAT MOCKAssistant Secretary

DISTRIBUTION:A

JOHN J. RIDGWAY, JR.Colonel, Field ArtillerySecretary

______________________________ .J..i_R'I'l!W

~