US Army: 5 million acres needed for training facilities by 2011

U.S. Army: 5 million acres needed for training facilities by 2011

rawstory.com

In September, Sen. Wayne Allard (R-Colo.) told his fellow Congressmen that “the Army believes it has a current deficit of 2 million acres needed for training, a figure expected to grow by 2011 to 5 million acres.” Five million acres is comprable to 7,812 square miles -- an area about the size of New Jersey.

Now, Colorado is the site of a contested fight between the U.S. Army and longtime ranchers. The military wants to expand the Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site....

(visit the link for the full news article)



[edit on 5-11-2007 by anhinga]

What? The size of NJ? Come on, when does it stop... (rhetorical)

Here's another link:
www.washingtonpost.com...

rawstory.com
(visit the link for the full news article)

Understanding that it is not fair to the land owners and all, it is an issue. Current Military land has protected species areas on them, and we have had to relocate sites around them to preserve it. So much land has been lost to that. Beleive it or not, enviornmental safety is a priority to the Military in general, and in order to keep on training effectively, more land that is less important for preservation reason is required.

We can't exactly go blowing up and driving through endangered species homes and mating grounds. So, some form of compromise has to be made, how else can this be done. If any one has an idea, please contact the DoD and brng them up to speed. I know they would love to hear any and all ideas.

Have they scrapped the idea of using the Dakotas as "Dakistan"?

I thought it was a great idea, it looks like it would be really miserable in the winter. Also the spring and fall.

Also with the environmental thing, I remember a lot of "don't disturb the turtles" stuff at NTC. They used to get really ticky about it.

Some places are overflowing their training areas. I remember hearing about some guys getting shot when they left a training area in the Fayetteville area and took the exercise across the highway, thinking they could exit the crowded test area and come back in elsewhere, which might have worked except a deputy caught them and shot the crap out of them thinking they were turrists.

[edit on 5-11-2007 by Tom Bedlam]

reply to post by ADVISOR


VR?
use simulators, i mean in this day and age strap some 3D thingies and do everything in VR

VR is ok, we have some VR training which simukates the ranges, and driving through Iraq locations in convoy, we have MOUT enviornments which are not electric VR but a mock enviornment. The thing is VR is not efficient training, and can never compensate for hands on actual field conditions. How can VR replicate changing a tire or track in a hostile enviornemnt while it is raining and everythingis covered in mud, all while be shot at and attacked various other weapon systems.

It can't, and won't.

Nothing can replace doing something real life, especially when it comes to training for combat.

reply to post by bodrul


That would make great training for any wars held in your living room..

I think they need something with physical challenges.

I cannot believe people (fearful of a 'nwo') aren't screaming - eminent domain.

"Introducing the law by which the government can appropriate private property."

www.expertlaw.com...

Originally posted by bodrul
reply to post by ADVISOR

 

VR?
use simulators, i mean in this day and age strap some 3D thingies and do everything in VR

Simulators can be used for certain types of training, but they have their limitations. Somethings can only be done the old fashioned way to get the training effect needed. You have to train as you fight, and simulators don't help in that regard. You can use simulators for command post exercises, or engagement simulators, but for maneuver/combined arms training, movement to contact, etc... that has to be done on ground.

Could probably be used to support the NAU.

There's a lot of hot, desert, Middle Eastern-like land in Mexico. A lot of inland areas are unusable for crops and practically void of population.

Our military does a lot of manouvering on civilian land and areas. Mostly only rectrictions are no diggin in and no live ammo... and we try not drive on peoples field while there are still crops. Government pays a little to those affected by this, plus any damages done... just some toughts...