The First Five Years Are The Hardest

So… Five years ago, after a half decade of reading and commenting at various blogs, I decided that just maybe, I had something to say. I don’t think I’ve ever come up with anything terribly profound, but I do like to think I’ve added a little something to the conversation.

Along the way, I’ve picked up some terrific commenters, a handful of fantastic co-authors, and a core of loyal readers, to whom I’m very grateful.

I’ve had an a few Ace-O-Lanches, and even an Instalanche. Incredibly, the blog has also been cited as a source in Wikipedia. The very post cited, ironically, drew heavily from the very wiki entry that now cites us.

My  very first post was quite modest.

The first person to ever enlighten me to the word “Blog” was Hugh Hewitt. I knew him from Church. What I didn’t know was that he was a prominent radio personality and early political center-right blogger. Finally, after reading and commenting all over the blogosphere for five years, I giving this a try. Ideally, I’d like to bring my perspectives on politics and the military to bear on the issues of the day.

And, of course, included a typo.

The blog tends to get anywhere from 2-3000 page views a day, with around 1000 to 1500 unique visitors. The blog very recently passed 5,000,000 pageviews.  The single best day of traffic?  Well, Marge Helgenberger showed up in the news one day. And the blog happened to be right near the top for image searches, garnering us a nice 51,073 views.

I’ve written on serious issues, and silly ones alike. I’ve tried to share with the civilian a small taste of what Army life is, and isn’t.

One thing I didn’t realize before starting was that writing the blog is very much a learning experience. Reading about something might cause you to think, but writing about it will definitely force you to think. I may be wrong quite often, and perhaps my thinking on some subjects is shallow, but at least I’ve pondered a bit. And I’ve learned so much.

I’m a very shy, quiet person. Socializing with new acquaintances is hard for me. But the process of writing for the blog has actually made that somewhat easier.  It has given me greater insight into myself, and my fellow man.  I may gnash my teeth at much of the idiocy that seems to surround us all, but I’m also able to note the many, many wonderful Americans around the internets, and indeed, the many fine folks from around the world that I’ve also been fortunate enough to interact with and make friends with.

It has been, and continues to be, my pleasure and privilege to write for you.

Thank you.

John Boyd And The OODA Loop

I was reminded today that Hugh Hewitt still hasn’t returned my biography of John Boyd that I loaned him a decade ago. I’m starting to think it won’t be forthcoming.

John Boyd went from  a brash young fighter pilot, to a tactical thinker who (with others) greatly changed the way the US thought about, and trained, fighter tactics. He also, based on his tactical thought, had a good deal of influence in the decision to design and purchase the F-16, a plane optimized to fight using his E/M(or Energy/Maneuverability) theory of fighter combat.

That alone would have made him a pretty memorable fellow. But building on his tactical thought, he leveraged that to an operational and strategic level theory that has been popular in both military and civilian circles for some time now. His theory became know as the “OODA Loop.”

Boyd posited that we respond to any situation or environment via a process with four elements.

  1. Observe
  2. Orient
  3. Decide
  4. Act

We observe a situation via our senses, or other methods of gathering information. We orient this information this information based on past experiences, culture, analysis, an our heritage. We make a decision based on this orientation, and then act to fulfill the decision.

But the process is not linear, as read above, but rather continuous, with each element generated feedback in the process, hence the term “loop.”

http://xbradtc.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/11_ooda_loop.png?w=300

Click to greatly embiggenfy.

The goal of consciously using an OODA loop in combat is to speed up the process of making a decision. By running through the cycle faster than an opponent, his previous observations, orientations and decisions are rendered useless by the newest observations (that is, the results of your decisions and actions). By continuously operating inside an opponent’s decision cycle, his level of chaos and confusion is greatly increased, and the validity of his own OODA loop is degraded until such time as it is worthless.

The Army has never specifically, doctrinally endorsed the OODA loop, though virtually every field grade officer is familiar with the concept. In AirLand Battle, the term of art used was “agility” which, rather than a purely physical concept, was very much a mental one, sharing the same goal, the ability to adjust to conditions and make and execute decisions faster than the enemy.

The current Army capstone doctrine no longer lists agility as one of the tenets of warfare, but does list adaptability:

ADAPTABILITY
28. Army leaders accept that no prefabricated solutions to tactical or operational problems exist. Army leaders must adapt their thinking, their formations, and their employment techniques to the specific situation they face. This requires an adaptable mind, a willingness to accept prudent risk in unfamiliar or rapidly changing situations, and an ability to adjust based on continuous assessment. Perhaps equally important, Army leaders seek to deprive the enemy of the ability to adapt by disrupting communications, forcing the enemy to continually react to new U.S. operations, and
denying the enemy an uncontested sanctuary, in space or time, for reflection. Adaptability is essential to seizing, retaining, and exploiting the initiative based on relevant understanding of the specific situation. For example, Army leaders demonstrate adaptability while adjusting the balance of lethal and nonlethal actions necessary to achieve a position of relative advantage and set conditions for conflict resolution within their area of operations.
29. Adaptation requires an understanding of the operational environment. While impossible to have a perfect understanding, Army leaders make every effort to gain and maintain as thorough an understanding as possible given the time allowed. They also use the Army’s information networks to share their understanding. Understanding a specific situation requires interactive learning—intentionally and repeatedly interacting with the operational environment so to test and refine multiple hypotheses. Army leaders expand
their understanding of potential operational environments through broad education, training, personal study, and collaboration with interagency partners. Rapid learning while in combat depends on life-long education, consistent training, and study habits that leaders had prior to combat.

You don’t have to dig deep in those two paragraphs to find analogs to the four processes of Boyd’s loop.

For a theory first applied to the realm of jet fighter combat, where 90 seconds is an eternity, it actually found its greatest fanbase in the Marine Corps, where he is often credited with helping (along with a great many others) reviving Marine interest in maneuver warfare.

And while the OODA loop is a popular subject among many business managers, they tend to be the of the fad of the moment type presentations. Boyd, on the other hand, was very much a numbers guy. He and two other folks, dubbed the “Fighter Mafia” developed much of the theory while working on the LFX program, that later became the F-16 and eventually spawned the F-18. Of the two other members, one was a fighter pilot and the other was a civilian statistician. Boyd himself was an industrial engineer.  They approached the theory from a systems analysis point of view.

Interestingly, as one of the more influential strategists of the second half of the 20th Century, Boyd never wrote a book on strategy. Rather, he spread his gospel via a series of briefings. These slide decks are a good resource, but sadly, without the context of actually having Boyd brief them, much is lost.

Boyd died in 1997.

A collection of his briefings can be found here.