Efficiencies from Applying a Rotational Equipping Strategy
ResearchPublished Apr 18, 2011
ResearchPublished Apr 18, 2011
To meet the demands of the past decade of conflict in Iraq and Afghanistan, the Army has adopted a rotational strategy based on the Army Force Generation (ARFORGEN) model. While the Army has adapted many of its policies to the ARFORGEN model, the equipping policies still largely reflect Cold War tradition to provide active, reserve, and National Guard units with 100 percent of their equipment at all times during the ARFORGEN cycle. This report uses a simulation model to analyze how the Army might reduce equipment in early phases of the ARFORGEN cycle, how those changes might be applied across Army units and equipment, and how those changes might affect near- and far-term budgets. The report finds that reducing overall Army authorization levels can reduce near-term procurements totaling billions of dollars across the Future Years Defense Program.
The research described in this report was sponsored by the United States Army and conducted by the RAND Arroyo Center.
This publication is part of the RAND monograph series. RAND monographs were products of RAND from 2003 to 2011 that presented major research findings that addressed the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND monographs were subjected to rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity.
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.