Modernizing to the M2A3 Bradley

Infantry Magazine, Summer, 2002 by Michael Dane Acord

In the midst of the Army Transformation, the heavy force has been the object of some criticism. With the introduction of the future combat system and proposed full fielding by Fiscal Year 2010, one might think the M2A3 Bradley is a waste of taxpayer's dollars. I disagree.

I do agree with one goal of the Objective Force to maintain the lethality of the Legacy Force while increasing strategic responsiveness, but during the transformation, the Legacy Force is responsible for handling emerging threats. The M2A3 brings a combat vehicle that provides increased lethality and survivability to meet those threats.

Before I begin, I must disclose some information and explain the limits of my experience. My opinions are based on my experience as a company commander from January 2000 to May 2001. During those months, I commanded the first company to field the M2A3. I participated in the initial operational testing and evaluation (IOT&E) of the M2A3, during which it was tested against the M2A2 Operation Desert Storm (ODS) version. Additionally, I took the company to the division capstone exercise (DCX) at the National Training Center (NTC) from 1 March 2001 to 1 May 2001. I have completed new equipment training (NET) and the Force XXI Battle Command, Brigade and Below (FBCB2) training. I have spent an inordinate amount of time testing the functions of the M2A3 and employing them in training.

The M2A2 ODS and the M2A3 are similar in their employment. For example, the M2A3 is still employed best as a support-by-fire vehicle for the decisive force, the infantry, squads. But this is not a discussion of vehicle capabilities, but rather a synopsis of the benefits that make the M2A3 worth the cost. I want to highlight two major capabilities, the sights and FBCB2, and provide some tactics, techniques, and procedures (TTPs) to enhance the training and employment of future M2A3 company commanders.

The second-generation FLIR (forward looking infrared) gives the M2A3 precision gunnery capabilities. I conducted two gunneries with the M2A3. In my opinion, the sight capabilities of the M2A3 are vastly improved over earlier models. During our first gunnery, we struggled to overcome habits and TTPs that had been used on earlier BFVs. Only four crews qualified as distinguished. Gunners were frustrated with new concepts such as new sight capabilities (2x and 4x digital zoom) and kinematic lead (the adjustments the ballistic computer uses to fire at a moving target so that you don't have to lead the target using the stadia lines). During the after-action reviews, I recorded new M2A3-specific TTPs and TTPs successfully used by gunners that still applied from earlier models:

On our second gunnery, 100 percent of primary crews shot Distinguished. The primary crews hit all but two targets. The results were amazing, but understandable, for two reasons:

First, we replaced most of our Legacy gunners. We found that young soldiers had good hand-and-eye coordination and aptitude for using the gunner's hand station. Additionally, the young soldiers had no "old" habits that had to be broken. They embraced the new system because they didn't know any other.

Second, during the practice tables, we focused our Bradley crew evaluators (BCEs) on the application of the lessons learned. M2A3 BCEs ride in the crew compartment and evaluate the crew using the squad leader's display (SLD). From there, they see exactly what the gunner sees (the SLD is slaved to the gunner's and commander's sights) and can better give the gunner feedback on proper firing techniques. NOTE: With the new sights and a spotter vehicle, there was no question_whether the target was hit or missed. The results were excellent.

The M2A3--with its enhanced sights (Improved Bradley Acquisition Sights or IBAS and FBCB2--is the premier night fighting system. During the IOT&E, my company (Company B, 2d Squadron. 7th Cavalry) was extremely successful during the day. There were numerous other theories for this, but this is mine: Although my crews had been stabilized since the beginning of my new equipment training (March to October), the company's crews had been together longer. Because 1st Cavalry Division periodically is designated the Division Ready Force, I believe their crews on the average had been together longer and were better trained. The familiar thermal patterns that our gunners had become accustomed to during gunnery, were not as easy to identify during the day. Although we still used our enhanced sights, limited ranges, reduced temperature differences between the vehicles and surrounding terrain, and the proficiency of their crews to acquire targets using additional assets available to them during the day mitigated our technical advantages. The company, using their organic sights, and binoculars, were able to acquire, discriminate, and engage targets to the maximum range of their weapons systems. But during the night, our technical advantage exceeded their tactical advantage. The company had difficulties acquiring and discriminating targets beyond 2.5km with the ISU on the M2A2. To them, we looked like "little red dots." For our gunners, we could clearly see and engage the enemy at our maximum range. We could acquire our adversaries more quickly because the temperature disparity between the vehicle and surrounding terrain was greater. Additionally, the improved sights allowed us to clearly discriminate and engage him before they could fire a shot. In addition to our technical advantage, my battalion commander and I invested a lot of time and resources in night vision (such as helmet mounts for Bradley commanders and focused night training). The IOT&E allowed me to develop TTPs for offensive and defensive missions that would pay off during the upcoming NTC rotation.