HF combat net radio lesson learned again

Army Communicator, Spring, 2004 by David M. Fiedler

Recently, at the 2003 Signal Symposium and prior to that in his testimony to the Congress, LTG William "Scott" Wallace, former commanding general of V Corps during the invasion of Iraq, made the following statement about the command, control and communications situation during the Iraq fight. "Despite the introduction of battle-command-on-the-move capabilities that I enjoyed in my assault command post, the vast majority of tactical leaders and CPs (command posts) enjoyed few on-the-move capabilities. Most were tethered to a CP and largely dependant upon line-of-sight communications.

"Case in point. At the corps level the G2 could see individual fighting positions defending a critical bridge because we had a UAV (unmanned-aerial vehicle) leading the lead formations. But we could not get the data down to the unit who was taking the objective because all the CPs were moving. It was a deliberate attack at the corps level, but a movement to contact at the battalion level," Wallace said.

This statement upsets me greatly both as a student of military art, science and history; and as a Signal professional with over 35 years service in all components of the U.S. Army. Wallace's statement when reasonably analyzed can only lead to the conclusion there was a failure in both communications planning and communications execution. The means to provide what Wallace needed (beyond-line-of-sight-on-the-move communications) certainly exist today in our widely deployed family of high-frequency combat net radios and has for many generations. Why then were we not able to improvise, and adapt our existing resources to overcome Wallace's communications problems?

Wallace and the whole Coalition Force in Iraq were magnificently executing classic offensive "Blitzkrieg" operations. In German, Blitzkrieg means lightning war. In the modern tactical sense it includes attacks where the enemy thinks you cannot attack, rapid advances into the heart of enemy forces and territory, and coordinated massive air and artillery attacks that with today's technology also includes missiles, attack helicopters and precision guided weapons. The use of such tactics is intended to stun the enemy and shock them to the point that they can no longer react. The German Army in World War II won most of their great victories with this tactic. Field Marshall's Hans von Seekt, Irwin Rommel and Heinz Guderian (a signal branch officer), are all given credit for inventing and perfecting the Blitzkrieg tactic with military scholars giving the lions share of the credit to Guderian the signalman. Guderian was not only Germany's premier tactician, he eventually became Chief of Staff of the army imagine that happening to a U.S. Signal officer!

Why Guderian from the signal branch? Because, not only was old Heinz a tactical genius who conceived a new combined arms organization to execute the Blitzkrieg concept (the Panzer Division/Corps/ Army) but also in his own words circa 1920: "I realized that I would no longer command from the rear with a telephone (World War I style) but from the front with a radio". Because of Guderian's signal background and position in the high command, he assured that each tank, aircraft, and unit command post in the Panzer force had long-range, mobile, combat-net radio communications of the right type to support its mission. (See Figs. 1 and 2). The same type radio Wallace needed almost 70 years later.

[FIGURES 1-2 OMITTED]

These were in large part the FuG-10 HF operating in the HF 2-18 MHz frequency range. The Guderian designed HF radio nets provided a level of command and control never before achieved on the battlefield. Long-range (HF) Combat-Net Radio made the Panzer Division and its air support the most destructive and efficient combined arms force in history. The U.S. Army learned much from the Germans of the 1930s and 1940s and thanks to officers such as Fox Connor, Ben Lear, George Marshall, Dwight Eisenhower and the always revered George Patton, the U.S. Army could also combine command and control, logistics, firepower and air support and by 1944 could out Blitzkrieg the inventors of the whole idea. We continue to improve this capability to this day as our victories in Iraq prove.

The basic concept of the German combined arms Panzer force refined by the American Army over the last 70 years and given modern technology was the force that Wallace entered Iraq with in 2003. In terms of organization and tactics. Rommel and Guderian would have felt quite at home in V Corps with their rapid movements, ability to see the battlefield, and elaborate methods of command, control and communications between ground and air elements. What would have shocked them all but particularly Guderian with his emphasis on communications, would have been the combat communications failure at the key defended highway bridge that Wallace described, and V Corps' apparent inability to provide timely command, control and intelligence information to its forward elements with the resources it already had. The problem of reaching the battalion Wallace refers to as being unreachable and therefore conducting a movement to contact not a deliberate attack because "all the command posts were moving" is a problem that was solved well before to 1939 in both the German and U.S. armies.

 

BNET TalkbackShare your ideas and expertise on this topic

Please add your comment:

  1. You are currently: a Guest |
  2.  

Basic HTML tags that work in comments are: bold (<b></b>), italic (<i></i>), underline (<u></u>), and hyperlink (<a href></a)

advertisement
Click Here
CXO UnpluggedSmart Business interviews on BNET

See and hear how senior level executives across the Asia Pacific are developing smart business ideas across a variety of sectors. The focus is on the future, and on how businesses need to evolve.

advertisement
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
  • Click Here
advertisement

Content provided in partnership with Thompson Gale