Comments on: Division Restructuring Study https://www.isegoria.net/2014/09/division-restructuring-study/ From the ancient Greek for equality in freedom of speech; an eclectic mix of thoughts, large and small Thu, 30 Apr 2026 20:25:16 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.6.1 By: Space Nookie https://www.isegoria.net/2014/09/division-restructuring-study/comment-page-1/#comment-1564953 Space Nookie Mon, 22 Sep 2014 16:55:23 +0000 http://www.isegoria.net/?p=36008#comment-1564953 Well, the interview took place in 1977, so it’s that period between the end of the draft/Vietnam and the Reagan build-up when the quality of recruits is generally agreed to be extremely poor. The all-volunteer force was new and on the verge of failing. Also before the introduction of simulator training. Also before the Montgomery GI bill (1984), which brought in a lot of college-bound recruits at the enlisted level. In period context, one college graduate per tank was probably realistic.

]]> By: Handle https://www.isegoria.net/2014/09/division-restructuring-study/comment-page-1/#comment-1564509 Handle Mon, 22 Sep 2014 12:45:10 +0000 http://www.isegoria.net/?p=36008#comment-1564509 It’s interesting to see how poorly this assessment turned out to be. The XM-1 of course became the Abrams, which we still use over 40 years later in a much-improved version but based mainly on the same fundamental design.

There is certainly a lot more technology for your average tanker to master in the modern Abrams — radios, gps units, firing computers — and yet we have good experience with privates of average intelligence being able to handle those functions perfectly adequately — no need for all those extra warrants and lieutenants.

Comparing any ground vehicle to an aviation platform (where, yes, above-average training and intellect for quick decision making in a complex, multi-variable environment is required), is really kind of silly, and the more you think about it, the more I start to question what Gen. DePuy was thinking.

]]>