It’s official: Army unveils brown beret, new patch for military advisers....

[Astronomy]

Which is why... ultimately... inevitably... I give these new formations a half-life of about 3-4 years. Other things will take priority and they'll be downsized or discarded. Much as the Lightfighter Infantry concept of yesteryear.

It's not that there isn't a need, but that there'll be little institutional patronage for the SFABs (either in the Army or Congress) during future hard fought budget battles. Or seriously attritional real ones.

[gavin]

Originally Posted by Astronomy

Which is why... ultimately... inevitably... I give these new formations a half-life of about 3-4 years. Other things will take priority and they'll be downsized or discarded. Much as the Lightfighter Infantry concept of yesteryear.

It's not that there isn't a need, but that there'll be little institutional patronage during future hard fought budget battles. Or seriously attritional real ones.

I concur. We have a poor span of attention these days.

[MixedLoad]

Originally Posted by RangerJurena

It's like the damn high and tight issue, CSM Birch had the stroke to implement what many of us had been yelling about for years. Seems the Boys have adapted to that change quite well.

One of the greatest men I've ever met and someone I still reach out to regularly for advice. Had it not been for Ironhead god knows what the GWOT would have looked like for the Regiment.

[SN]

Originally Posted by Astronomy

Which is why... ultimately... inevitably... I give these new formations a half-life of about 3-4 years. Other things will take priority and they'll be downsized or discarded. Much as the Lightfighter Infantry concept of yesteryear.

It's not that there isn't a need, but that there'll be little institutional patronage for the SFABs (either in the Army or Congress) during future hard fought budget battles. Or seriously attritional real ones.

or sucked into SOCOM some how, lots of new CSM/LTC/COL slots would suddenly be available.

[KW Driver]

I said elsewhere

I think by the time the last active BDE gets fielded, they'll be disbanded to plus up conventional combat arms units to focus on near-peer threats.

[Ace]

Originally Posted by 1RiserSlip

That's the ugliest thing I've ever seen. It looks like a Pterodactyl took a shit on his head.

I disagree.... (MultiNation Forces and Observers)

[Gsniper]

Lightfighter Infantry concept of yesteryear.

Yep, and then Desert Storm came and went and it was gone like a fart in the wind.

[1RiserSlip]

I'd rather wear an old OD patrol cap any day.

[btq96r]

Lost in the debate on what type of headgear they're being issued for garrison activities, is the fact that the 1st SFAB will just be the latest coat of paint we slap onto the rusting hulk of a war we're anchored to in Afghanistan.

I'm in congruence that conventional troops can be organized and tasked as trainers, and that they could do the job well enough. But I don't see an brigade level command for such making any headway in Afghanistan.

[Max Power]

Originally Posted by gavin

I'm not getting too wrapped around the axle on this one, for the following reasons:

1) There is far more demand for theater security cooperation than SOF can handle, and much of it does not require SOF. We have been using a hodgepodge of GPF forces to execute a lot of it, which degrades the GPF element's readiness and ability to conduct their true mission set. I think the SFAB is a good concept, if executed properly.
2) It is difficult to attract good personnel to a new and untested concept, and for good reason. If the new and untested concept doesn't gain traction, folks that volunteered for it suffer career consequences (see the AF-PAK hands program, any version of the multiple failed Warrior Transition Units). Guess what...uniform bling can attract folks to come give it a try.
3) Hats. I can't get excited about hats. In the Army, I've had a black hat for a while, then a maroon hat for a brief time, and, for the last 22 years, a green hat. Hats. They don't make the man, so they can give the SFAB any hat they want. The SFAB will succeed or fail based on a bunch of factors...and the hat is not one of them.

I have a notoriously cynical outlook...and I wholeheartedly support the SFAB concept, and their hats.

Well said. To add, the beret matches the one that 6 SOS is starting to wear, as well. So it makes sense from a security cooperation side of things.

[1RiserSlip]

Originally Posted by Ace

I disagree.... (MultiNation Forces and Observers)

I wore the UN beret for 6 months in the early 80's. Didn't like it either.

[Buaya Darat]

Originally Posted by Max Power

Well said. To add, the beret matches the one that 6 SOS is starting to wear, as well. So it makes sense from a security cooperation side of things.

Splitting hairs, I know - the CAA beret is a darker shade called "charcoal brown" (at least the flash isn't crazy big like SFAB's appears to be, lol).

Just for background:

The CAA beret got it's kickstart in July 2017 when President Trump was presented with a prototype after a meeting at the White House to discuss FID activities in Afghanistan.

The SFAB beret was still green at that point; I'm fairly certain that once SFAB was switched to brown there was no attempt at deconfliction from the Air Force or CAA community.

http://www.afsoc.af.mil/News/Article-Display/article/1410562/quiet-professionals-don-brown-beret/

[agonyea]

Just what we need more parades, more berets, more uniforms, more patches, and of course more badges!
No time for training and of course no more wars!

[gavin]

Originally Posted by agonyea

Just what we need more parades, more berets, more uniforms, more patches, and of course more badges!
No time for training and of course no more wars!

Despite your sarcasm, you are getting at the core of the issue, which is that Army leadership (and the rest of the military and associated elected and appointed officials) need to figure out what the priorities are, and focus on funding and accomplishing those...sounds simple, but apparently is far from it.

[1RiserSlip]

You mean something liking finding out what the mission is before task organizing?

[gavin]

Originally Posted by 1RiserSlip

You mean something liking finding out what the mission is before task organizing?

Heresy!

[Polypro]

At least the patch looks better than these guys'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milita...Advisory_Group

[Sapperdeep]

We've got ODAs that would give anything to deploy to a war zone and do SFA. Instead they will have to sit back and watch their brothers fight and die while they are sent on a Nordic skiing "deployment". Meanwhile the new SFAB gets to deploy soon to the stan for missions that should be filled by ODAs only.

Everybody wants to be an ODA these days, Marsoc, seals. Will ranger bn add FID to their high speed FM??

UGHHHHHHHHHHHHHH.

[gavin]

Originally Posted by Sapperdeep

We've got ODAs that would give anything to deploy to a war zone and do SFA. Instead they will have to sit back and watch their brothers fight and die while they are sent on a Nordic skiing "deployment". Meanwhile the new SFAB gets to deploy soon to the stan for missions that should be filled by ODAs.

You know this already, but I’ll remind you. That is a result of policy decisions, etc on regional engagement. Even if SFAB did not exist, TSC deployments for SF would continue, and the AF missions would not be filled.

The guys stuck skiing in Norway, well, would they rather be back watching mud dry in Mali?

[Sharky]

Originally Posted by Sapperdeep

Will ranger bn add FID to their high speed FM??

Nope. I don't ever see that happening. They have done some "Mentor" stuff in AFG but very mission specific. Not something that would be part of their METL. I think they will continue doing what they do best, kicking down doors and putting bodies on the floor.