Search results

Every uniformed service member, whether Active Component (AC) or Reserve Component (RC), must complete ancillary or general military training (GMT) requirements prescribed by his or her service. Individual services direct some topics, and some are stipulated by the U.S. Department of Defense (DoD). DoD has identified a need to reduce cyclic mandatory training requirements (especially for the RCs), thus reducing the training burden on the services and making the most of available training time. The RAND National Defense Research Institute was asked to examine the services' mandatory military training requirements and examine options to standardize requirements and reduce the training burden. This report responds to that request by providing a common definition of GMT and examining both the guidance that directs GMT completion and the services' approaches to conducting GMT. The authors identified GMT requirements directed by law and policy and interviewed service AC and RC subject-matter experts

The U.S. military must be able to move large amounts of military cargo on time lines dictated by the operational plans of combatant commanders when fighting in areas far removed from U.S. territory. To meet these transportation requirements when the need arises, the U.S. Navy maintains a fleet of 61 commercial-standard ships-the strategic sealift fleet. This fleet must be maintained to a certain level of readiness to respond when the need arises. The Office of the Chief of Naval Operations (OPNAV) was interested in whether the readiness targets for the fleet are being achieved and how the management of this fleet affects readiness. Strategic sealift is maintained by two different organizations-the Military Sealift Command (MSC) and the Maritime Administration (MARAD)-under different readiness management constructs. The ships in both fleets are held to the same readiness standard. Although these two fleets are held to the same standard, they report different readiness levels. The authors addressed six questions that apply to sealift readiness requirements and the mechanisms for generating this readiness. To conduct this analysis, they used a mix of data reported in various systems and the assessments of subject matter experts. They determined that, though organizational management plays a role, many other factors also have a substantial effect on strategic sealift readiness-including requirements determination, material readiness, and personnel readiness. The research team concluded that each of these areas can be improved in ways that could collectively increase strategic sealift readiness and makes recommendations toward that end

This report assesses in what ways and to what degree unmanned surface vehicles (USVs) are suitable for supporting U.S. Navy missions and functions. It briefly characterizes the current and emerging USV marketplaces to provide a baseline for near-term capabilities, describes USV concepts of employment to support diverse U.S. Navy missions and functions, and evaluates these concepts of employment to identify specific missions and functions for which they are highly suitable. USVs offer several particular strengths relative to other platforms, including the ability to interact both above and below the waterline, enabling them to serve as critical nodes for cross-domain networks. They also have potentially longer endurance, larger payloads, and higher power outputs than comparably sized unmanned air or undersea vehicles. Additionally, their greater risk tolerance compared with manned systems makes them desirable platforms for overcoming adversaries' anti-access and area-denial measures. These strengths make USVs particularly suitable for missions such as characterizing the physical environment, observation and collection regarding adversaries, mine warfare, military deception/information operations/electronic warfare, defense against small boats, testing and training, search and rescue, and the support of other unmanned vehicles. However, USVs need advanced autonomy and assured communications to complete complex missions, as well as any missions in complex environments. Autonomous seakeeping and maritime traffic avoidance are USV-specific capabilities that likely need to be developed with U.S. Navy involvement. Also, optional manning and payload modularity can enhance the desirability of USV programs