The Modern Louisiana Maneuvers - US Army Center Of Military History

this responsibility became increasingly onerous
as budgets continued to shrink. Some
members of the Task Force had to remind
those whom the Chief of Staff had directed
to provide funding that they needed to comply.
These reminders usually met with reasonable
success, since none wanted the Chief
to become involved in following up on such
instructions. Once the LAM program was integrated
into the POM for FY 95 and beyond,
the issue of funding became less immediately
pressing and served to institutionalize at least
one aspect of LAM within the Army. The LAM
budget, however, was still subject to the taxes
that DCSOPS imposed on agencies and
MACOMs with increasing frequency to pay
for immediate requirementsY
Related Experimentation­
Battle Lab and Other Activity
The Louisiana Maneuvers process explored
issues at higher levels and enabled
the Army's senior leadership to take a strategic
view of them and to proVide appropriate
gUidance. At the same time, a great deal
of related, lower level, experimentation was
taking place both in the Task Force and in
other parts of the Army. As the Task Force
and other agencies became aware of promising
new technologies, they would frequently
arrange demonstrations to enable the
developers to showcase potential solutions
to Army problems. Various agencies, usually
in conjunction with the Battle Labs, also
mounted Advanced Warfighting Demonstrations
and Experiments as part of their issue
evaluation plans or as part of other efforts
to enhance readiness and training.
The Combat Service Support Battle Lab
at Fort Lee, in concert with AMC and the
DCSLOG, experimented with numerous
technologies, many already commercially
available, to meet its requirement for total
asset visibility, whether in storage or in transit.
Additional investigations into other aspects
of sustainment, such as Split-based
Logistics and the status of and best configuration
for the many kinds of War Reserve
Stocks, also received a great deal of atten-
46
tion from the logistics community. This effort
fed into the AMC-Ied development of
the Logistics Anchor Desk concept for integrating
logistical data from myriad sources
and an orientation on meeting the customer's
needs. In GHQx 94, ULCHI/Focus LENS, AT­
LANTIC RESOLVE, and other command post exercises,
the Log Anchor Desk demonstrated
the ability to control split-based logistics as
well as to monitor the location and inventory
of Army assets.43
In Europe, USAREUR and the Defense
Advanced Research Proj ects Agency
(DARPA) worked together to link constructive,
virtual, and live exercise simulations in
a seamless Synthetic Theater of War (STOW­
Europe, or STOW-E). STOW-E's original purpose
was to raise the training level of
USAREUR units before their combat training
center rotations, but it was found to have
even broader utility as a training and mission
planning and rehearsal tool in the real
world, in both Army and Joint environments.
USAREUR conducted "proof-of-principle" or
verification tests at Grafenwoehr, Germany,
in March 1994, linking several simulations,
and intended an even broader use of STOW­
E in Exercise ATLANTIC RESOLVE (a simulationbased
exercise scenario that replaced
REFORGER) later that year. STOW-E, while a
USAREUR effort, linked well with similar
LAM Task Force and National Simulations
Center work, pro ducing widespread improvements
in the use of DIS-based capabilities
for training, readiness, mission planning,
and mission rehearsal throughout the
Army. 44
Getting the Message Out­
Publicizing LAM and Change
in the Army
Between 1992 and 1994, GEN Sullivan
worked hard to explain his evolving vision
of the 21st century Army and the purpose
of the maneuvers. Through communications
to the Army, appearances before AUSA gatherings,
and testimony to Congress, he sought
to explain the Louisiana Maneuvers to a wide
variety of audiences both inside and outside
The Modern Louisiana Maneuvers