Cover: Alternative Futures and Their Implications for Army Modernization

Alternative Futures and Their Implications for Army Modernization

Published 2003

by John Gordon IV, Brian Nichiporuk

Download

Download eBook for Free

Full Document

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.2 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Summary Only

FormatFile SizeNotes
PDF file 0.1 MB

Use Adobe Acrobat Reader version 10 or higher for the best experience.

Purchase

Purchase Print Copy

 Format Price
Add to Cart Paperback61 pages $23.00

As it carries out its long-term force structure and modernization plans, one useful approach for the Army to take is based on the analysis of “alternative futures.” Having developed several plausible alternative futures (looking out roughly 25 years), the authors describe each one’s possible implications for the Army’s likely missions and the forces required for those missions, discussing the impact on Army modernization plans. The futures range from a benign, relatively peaceful world all the way to a dangerous, chaotic world containing many “failed states.” The research indicated that the creation of medium forces was a good long-range strategy for the Army, since those forces appeared to be relevant in many of the possible futures. Traditional heavy forces were found to be useful in a limited number of the possible futures and should therefore receive relatively fewer modernization resources. Army aviation appeared to be applicable to most of the futures, but there could be a need to shift the balance from attack-type aviation to transport aircraft, depending on which future appeared more likely. In all cases, increased C4ISR seemed to be a very important capability. Even within that category, however, there might be a need to focus C4ISR resources in different ways. For example, in some futures, there would be a need to stress unconventional operations in urban areas rather than systems more applicable to locating conventional enemy forces in open terrain.

Research conducted by

The research described in this report was sponsored by the United States Army and conducted by the RAND Arroyo Center.

This report is part of the RAND documented briefing series. RAND documented briefings are based on research presented to a client, sponsor, or targeted audience in briefing format. Additional information is provided in the documented briefing in the form of the written narration accompanying the briefing charts. All RAND documented briefings undergo rigorous peer review to ensure that they meet high standards for research quality and objectivity. However, they are not expected to be comprehensive and may present preliminary findings. Major research findings are published in the monograph series; supporting or preliminary research is published in the technical report series.

This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law. This representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for noncommercial use only. Unauthorized posting of this publication online is prohibited; linking directly to this product page is encouraged. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of its research documents for commercial purposes. For information on reprint and reuse permissions, please visit www.rand.org/pubs/permissions.

RAND is a nonprofit institution that helps improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. RAND's publications do not necessarily reflect the opinions of its research clients and sponsors.