FORT HOOD,
Texas — When Soldiers on the frontlines are in the midst
of an operation, the last thing they need to be
uncertain about is whether their protective equipment
will hamper their combat effectiveness. Before new equipment gets to the
frontlines, it is put to the test by Soldiers.
Company B, 2nd Battalion, 7th
Cavalry Regiment “Garryowen,” 3rd Armored Brigade Combat
Team, 1st Cavalry Division partnered with the U.S. Army
Operational Test Command to put the Soldier Protection
System through its paces here March 10.
When the Army
is looking to improve or purchase a piece of gear, it
turns to the Army Test and Evaluation Command for a
detailed analysis.
Within the organization is the
OTC, which performs tests while its partner unit, Army
Evaluation Command, collects and analyzes data from the
tests and sends it to the Program Executive Office for a
decision based on the results.
After the SPS passed the
engineer’s test in the labs, OTC had to partner with a
unit most qualified to test the gear. OTC funded the
unit’s training while the Soldiers wore the body armor
and provided candid feedback.
“We are testing new equipment,”
said Lt. Col. Anthony Gianopulos, senior test officer,
maneuver test directorate, OTC. “And if your unit gets
tasked, we are helping you augment your training to get
more proficient in your battle tasks, while
simultaneously you are getting an opportunity to give us
direct feedback on a piece of equipment that the Army is
considering putting in the inventory.”
And the unit jumped at the chance
to play a role in the process of fielding new equipment,
said Lt. Col. Andrew Watson, commander, 2-7 Cav.
“It’s a great win for the
battalion and the brigade, but more importantly [for]
our Soldiers,” said Watson. “They know that this
equipment can go out to their brothers and sisters in
uniform, and this is their opportunity to have that
voice and tell the Army what works and what doesn’t.”
For the tests, OTC wanted the
Soldiers to perform the very same training they always
do in order to produce accurate data on how the system
performs through realistic combat training.
The process began for Garryowen in
February, when they were trained on how to properly wear
the prototype. Then, they loaded into their tactical
vehicles and headed to the field.
Through day and night, rain and
shine, the Soldiers trained and tested the durability of
the gear, and how it affected their mobility.
“Today was the final situational
training exercise of what has been a six-week SPS
testing,” said Capt. James Flannery, commander, Company
B.
At an urban training facility
here, Flannery had his unit attack a mock city, find a
high value target, and eliminate the enemy. The squads
went from room to room, clearing and eliminating enemy
combatants while simultaneously performing basic Soldier
tasks.
“You don’t know if a piece of
equipment is truly effective unless you’re maneuvering
under stress or fire, getting down in the prone,
conducting individual movement techniques, and firing
weapons,” said Flannery. “The only way to get a real,
realistic test on any piece of equipment that we would
use in the Army, is to try to simulate combat situations
as closely as possible to what it’ll be in real life.”
They maneuvered through the rooms,
alleyways and streets as smoke and concussion grenades
deployed in close vicinity, while simultaneously firing
simulation rounds from their M4 carbines.
Soldiers participating in the
testing had a unique opportunity to contribute to the
Army’s acquisition process and have their voices heard,
while also training on their tactical skill sets, said
Staff Sgt. Cesar Serrano, platoon sergeant, Company B.,
and a Compton, California, native.
“The Soldiers have gotten a lot of
great training out of this,” said Serrano. “It helps
them sharpen their skills for our upcoming events, such
as team and squad live-fire exercises. It gave us the
time to dedicate to our Soldiers and our training, so we
can develop our procedures.”
When the unit finished each
training exercise, Soldiers were asked for their honest
opinions regarding performing with the armor.
“This is definitely equipment that
we will be using in the future, if it gets approved,”
said Serrano. “So…if we don’t give accurate
information, we [will] probably have Soldiers in the
future wearing armor that doesn’t benefit them and
doesn’t provide the ability to do their jobs. So, we
have to give 100 percent when we are doing this.”