{br} STUCK with your assignment? {br} When is it due? {br} Get FREE assistance. Page Title: {title}{br} Page URL: {url}
UK: +44 748 007-0908, USA: +1 917 810-5386 [email protected]






Subject Administration Pages 7 Style APA


F106 Discussion: Analyzing Force Management Concepts

F104 Question

ASA-ALT needs to profoundly prepare for performance as the Acquisition Program Baseline since failure to meet the key performance parameters (KPPs) could result in the cancellation, reevaluation or reassessment of the JLTV program. Among the impacts that this has on the Total Army component members are a high training needs regarding the technology being used and increased costs for the numerous evaluation and advancement approaches. 

The central aspect of the JLTV program is the development of vehicles that replace the conventional HMMWVs that are currently used by the armed services. The HMMWVs were invented during the Cold Warat a time when the Improvised Explosive Devices (IED) were not major elements in military planning. There is need to enhance these HMMWVs due to the vulnerability to IED and in general, the vehicle’s survivability (Feickert, 2017). Performance is described based on a number of factors such as the weight, survivability, reliability, and maintainability. Two JLTV variants, in this regard, are the two-passenger Combat Support Vehicle (CSV) and the four-passenger combat tactical vehicle (CTV). Also, the JLTV program notes that the operational transportability by aircraft and ship, survivability and strategic are the major JLTV requirements in design. Moreover, the performance component is important as the world is transforming towards technologically advanced aspects thus to the Congress, this is a major development aspect.

The issue of performance is critical in the different phases the JLTV program is evaluated. It is as a result of the requirements that the awarding of the contract is delayed. Some of the changes are attributed to performance which includes mine resistance which is an underbody protection and the vehicle being an all-terrain ambush protected. In addition, the performance related aspects are the foundations of rejecting some of the variants while adopting others for mass production. For instance, the weight issue is used to reject category B variant (Feickert, 2017). Further, the testing is done based on the performance component, and for Congress to be satisfied on the JLTV program and vehicles, vehicle performance will be used. Performance consideration is measured in several ways which include manufacturing readiness levels (MRLs) and technology readiness levels (TRLs).

To the total army, performance component has several implications. Among the implications include the need to train them on the use of these vehicles, more time for the evaluation and testing, and increased costs as a result of adjustments and modification of the requirements. Performance consideration is centered on technological advancements to meet the key performance parameters and key system attributes (F104RA, 2015). With protection, force, and survivability being the KPPs determinants, those of KSAs are energy efficiency and system training. As a result of the technology advancement, agencies and interests include evaluation and testing throughout the entire process. This implies that time, resources and skills are required for the testing and evaluation process. For instance, training is required to the army on the operations and serviceability of the vehicles. To ensure perfection of the advanced vehicles, evaluation is the key which also requires resources and time. To mitigate these impacts of time, cost and training needs, the army needs to monitor and evaluate the development and acquisition process constantly. This is essential to eliminate possible flaws in the process. The training should be overseen by the relevant bodies such as TRADOC which ensures profound integration of the military with the system.

Conclusively, performance component should be well prepared as a result of its contribution to the acceptance or cancellation of the program based on meeting the KPPs and KSAs. As a result of technological advancement, learning needs should be addressed while constant monitoring and evaluation of the acquisition process being done to ensure the vehicles are according to the set specifications.

F105 Question

One of the major resourcing shortfalls that impact the readiness of operational units is insufficient financial resources emanating from the cap reductions. The impacts of this on units include reduced end strength, lack of sufficient training and poor maintenance of the equipment. This shortfall can be averted through careful reconsideration of the cap reductions in the military.

As stated by General Odierno during his address to the Senate Armed Services Committee, the army is being drawn down even before the war is over. The main challenge towards having a prepared and a strong army is on cost reduction of support provided to the army. As a result, the army is unable to deliver a ready and well-trained force that can deter conflict and if necessary, execute the successful major operation (Odierno, 2013). Although the American army has provided enough workforce globally and executed at least ten successful conflicts such as that in Afghanistan, there lacks certainty on the next contingency and where it will arise. Notably, the only lessons are from the past such as World War II. The future remains uncertain thus the need for effective sourcing of the army and readiness. Odierno notes that the more the discretionary cap continues, the weaker the army will be to execute the Defense Strategic Guidance Requirements of 2012 successfully. In addition, this will reduce the force in both structure and end strength.

The reduced support provided to the army has major impacts on their readiness for major operations which may come up in future as the current global environment is uncertain based on its complexity. One of the major effects of the reduced support is poor training which puts the soldiers at risk of facing an unforeseen contingency. For instance, in 2011, the army had initiated training programs to restore the primary warfighting skills among the soldiers. According to the 2013 plan, all brigades not deployed to Afghanistan were to complete the Combat Training Center (CTC) program. As a result of sequestration, this goal was not realized which puts the soldiers at risk in case of future conflicts or contingency (Orderno, 2013). Another aspect is based on reduced number of soldiers. The army has been forced to shrink its numbers while maintaining the Army National Guard constant. As a result of continuous discretionary cap reductions, the army will be forced to reduce to more than 18% in the total army from active army to reserves. This will affect the future contingency operations. Another example of the effect of continuous cap reductions is the maintenance of more than 900 vehicles, 172 aircraft, 10000 communication equipment pieces, and 2000 weapons. The impact is on the combatant war plans and ensuring effective network operations.

Addressing this shortfall is through doing away with the cap reductions and ensuring decision-making on issues related to the army is left to Congress, the secretary of defense and the commander in chief. This will ensure that every decision is well discussed and thought before being implemented. For instance the cap reductions effects can only be well explained by the commander in chief who is aware of all the aspects involved. Through a sufficient decision space, important issues such as training and equipment maintenance will be implemented thus ensuring the army is readily prepared for future unforeseen contingencies.

In conclusion, the army is a major organ in ensuring the welfare of a country, and despite the future success, the dynamic world is filled with uncertainties. As a result, critical aspects such as army training and funding should be fostered through eliminating the cap reductions as reforms and allowing the military to make better decisions that impact it positively.

F106 Question

The reliance of the army on contract support in regards to the ongoing budget costs and force reductions has a negative impact on the military with some of the impacts being weakness in handling future contingencies, exposure of the military operations and incompetence in tackling future challenges. In addition, the civilian contracts are exposed to other risks which the military would effectively handle. In this regard, this reliance should be reduced, and the army equipped with more skills and resources to enhance their preparedness for contingencies.

The military arm of power has been considered one of the major targets for cutting budgets and force reductions. Currently, operations are being prepared by airmen, sailors, soldiers and civilian contractors. Civilian contractors who are working for private companies are regarded as part of the military which assists in carrying most of the operations from communications to health (Zybura, 2002). The increased reliance on the contractors to perform support functions in both war and peacetime has resulted in the majority of civilians being involved. An important aspect to note is that the contractors are not under the control and command of the military. In addition, they are salaried by different companies that are not military. In case of a threat, the contractors are exposed to dangers and hazards similar to those of the military forces. In addition, the aspect of involving the contractors in the military operations poses a threat to its privacy. Further, it is expected that the military must understand the functions and limitations of the contractors and since the contractors cannot be a replacement of the military, this distinction must clearly be understood.

The negative impact of contractors on the military operations is based on risks involved in exposing the military, having costs that can be decreased further, reducing end strength and challenging readiness to unforeseen contingencies. As the contractors become more engaged in the military operations, they are exposed to adverse effects which they are not trained to perform. As a result, more civilian casualties are involved in case of a situation. Another negative impact is that using contractors does not guarantee cost reductions. Some of the tasks can be handled by the military, in particular, the base functions (Serbu, 2015). Another negative impact of the cost reductions through contracting is that most of the administrative and leadership positions are reduced which impacts the training and combat efficiency. Through the involvement of majority external bodies and agencies in managing the military, the protocols, and procedures involved in ensuring effective military operations affect the preparedness of this arm of power. The continued cost reductions through contracting also pose a threat to the skills, modernization and equipping of the military. As suggested by General Odierno, continued sequestration compels the army to reduce its end strength. As a result, modernization comes to a standstill while the training programs become unfounded resulting in reduced readiness rates.

One of the mitigation strategies that can be used to decrease the reliance on contract support is reconsidering the proposed reforms of cap reductions. In addition, effective training of the military to equip them with diversified skills such as those on communication technology will aid in reducing the over-reliance on the contractors. Since the contractors are included in the military operations, it is important to have policy reforms that ensure the military as the commanders and controllers of all operations.

In conclusion, the proposed reforms including those of cutting budget costs through contracting have a negative impact on the military’s operations such as reduced end strength and unpreparedness to tackle future challenges. The military arm of power remains a critical aspect of the country thus its independence is critical if readiness to tackle unforeseen contingencies is to be achieved. (2017) study employed, there are very little room for generalizing the study’s findings.  


F104RA (2015). Developing Material Capabilities. S Army Command And General Staff College U.S. Army Command and General Staff School Command and General Staff Officer’s Course (CGSOC) Common Core. F100: Managing Army Change

Feickert, A. (2017). Joint light tactical vehicle (JLTV): Background and issues for Congress. Congressional Research Service Washington United States.

Odierno, R. T. (2013). Planning for Sequestration in Fiscal Year 2014 and Perspectives of the Military Services on the Strategic Choices and Management Revie. Recorded Statement. Retrieved from http://docs.house.gov/meetings/AS/AS00/20130918/101291/HHRG-113-AS00-Wstate-OdiernoUSAR-20130918.pdf

Serbu, J. (2015). Army Plans Large Reductions in Service Contract Support. Retrieved from https://federalnewsradio.com/congress/2015/03/army-plans-large-reductions-in-service-contract-support/

Zybura, M. A. (2002). Contractor Support: Will the Army’s Continued Reliance on Contractors Negatively Impact Future Military Operations? Army command and general staff Coll fort Leavenworth Ks.


Related Samples

WeCreativez WhatsApp Support
Our customer support team is here to answer your questions. Ask us anything!
👋 Hi, how can I help?