|
|
|
|
| LEADER |
03323nam a2200385 u 4500 |
| 001 |
EB001843266 |
| 003 |
EBX01000000000000001007255 |
| 005 |
00000000000000.0 |
| 007 |
tu||||||||||||||||||||| |
| 008 |
180730 r ||| eng |
| 020 |
|
|
|z 9780833082169
|
| 020 |
|
|
|a 9780833082169
|
| 020 |
|
|
|z 0833082167
|
| 020 |
|
|
|a 0833082167
|
| 050 |
|
4 |
|a UD483
|
| 100 |
1 |
|
|a Gordon, John
|
| 245 |
0 |
0 |
|a Enhanced Army airborne forces
|h Elektronische Ressource
|b a new joint operational capability
|c John Gordon IV, Agnes Gereben Schaefer, David A. Shlapak, Caroline Baxter, Scott Boston, Michael McGee, Todd Nichols, Elizabeth Tencza
|
| 260 |
|
|
|a Santa Monica, Calif.
|b RAND
|c 2014, [2014]
|
| 300 |
|
|
|a xxvi, 106 pages
|b color illustrations
|
| 505 |
0 |
|
|a Includes bibliographical references (pages 103-106)
|
| 505 |
0 |
|
|a Introduction -- Overview of the current airborne force -- Threats to today's airborne forces -- A proposed airborne light armored infantry force -- Airlift issues and requirements -- Potential uses for airborne light armored infantry forces -- Issues related to the implementation of the new concept -- Conclusions and recommendations -- Appendixes -- Bibliography
|
| 651 |
|
4 |
|a United States / fast
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a Airborne operations (Military science)
|
| 653 |
|
|
|a HISTORY / Military / Aviation
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Schaefer, Agnes Gereben
|e [author]
|
| 700 |
1 |
|
|a Shlapak, David A.
|e [author]
|
| 041 |
0 |
7 |
|a eng
|2 ISO 639-2
|
| 989 |
|
|
|b ZDB-39-JOA
|a JSTOR Open Access Books
|
| 490 |
0 |
|
|a RAND Corporation research report series
|
| 500 |
|
|
|a "Prepared for the United States Army."
|
| 776 |
|
|
|z 083309002X
|
| 776 |
|
|
|z 9780833090027
|
| 856 |
4 |
0 |
|u https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7249/j.ctt14bs1w5
|x Verlag
|3 Volltext
|
| 082 |
0 |
|
|a 356.1660973
|
| 520 |
|
|
|a At the request of U.S. Army Training and Doctrine Command, a RAND research team examined options to increase the mobility, protection, and firepower of the Army's airborne forces, given likely future missions and threats, identifying a concept for enhancing today's forces by adding a light armored infantry capability. Because the Army requested near-term options, the new concept incorporates equipment and platforms that are already available within the U.S. Department of Defense. The near-term focus also meant that the current Air Force airlift fleet was an important consideration, since Army airborne forces rely on Air Force transport aircraft to deploy. The research team examined notional future brigade- and battalion-sized airborne units, including the numbers and types of vehicles that would be needed to create an airborne light armored force that could be airdropped or air-landed from Air Force transport planes. The primary light armored vehicle possibilities studied were the Stryker (currently used by the Army) and the Light Armored Vehicle, second generation (LAV-II, used by the Marine Corps and the militaries of several other nations). Each family of vehicles would have advantages and disadvantages for the Army's airborne force, with the LAV-II provisionally identified as the preferred candidate. A tabletop exercise with subject-matter experts, using scenarios developed through a review of historical Army missions, identified how the addition of light armor could enhance the performance of airborne units
|