Preserving Modern Warfare History with a Searchable Ground Combat Database
Guest Contributor
In an era where digital information floods our screens daily, the challenge of preserving meaningful, firsthand records of modern warfare has become more urgent than ever. The Battle Research Group, a nonprofit founded by retired Marine Corps major Ben Connable, is tackling this challenge head-on. By creating a searchable ground combat database and conducting in-depth battle studies, the organization is working to ensure that the lessons of war—both past and present—are not lost to time. This effort is especially crucial in the case of the war in Ukraine, a conflict that is both highly visible and alarmingly ephemeral in its documentation. The initiative not only bridges the gap between real-time reporting and historical record but also brings renewed focus to combined arms warfare and its enduring relevance.
One of the group’s standout efforts is its independent study of the Battle of Irpin River, a pivotal early engagement in Ukraine’s defense against Russian aggression. Led by James Sladden, a British military veteran and former RAND Corporation researcher, the study aimed to capture the tactical and strategic elements of the battle before they faded from memory. Sladden, who visited Ukraine twice for the project, was struck by the contrast between the war’s conventional nature—featuring tanks, trenches, and artillery—and the insurgent conflicts that have dominated recent military thinking. “Big war, conventional war, was, for at least my generation, seen as sort of consigned to the history books,” he noted.
I found this detail striking: despite the war’s immense digital footprint, much of its primary source material is at risk of vanishing. Sladden observed that battle orders sent via encrypted messaging apps and photos stored on personal devices often disappear or are deleted, leaving little behind for future historians. “There’s very little on paper,” he said. “In 30, 40, 50 years, when historians really start to do the first big histories of this war, I don’t know what they’re going to have available to them.”
This concern over the loss of firsthand war records became a driving force behind the founding of the Battle Research Group. Connable, reflecting on his time at RAND and other defense think tanks, described a growing frustration with the lack of primary-source research on modern conflicts like those in Syria, Iraq, and Ukraine. “We were losing real opportunities to learn from modern warfare,” he said, noting that much of the current analysis relies on second- or third-hand information.
To address this, the group has developed the Ground Combat Database, a searchable collection of over 600 entries documenting combined arms battles. The database is currently accessible via an online spreadsheet and available in an unlocked version upon request. It serves as both a research tool and an educational resource, helping military professionals and scholars analyze and compare battles across different regions and time periods. This approach emphasizes the importance of understanding war in a global context, rather than through a narrow or time-bound lens.
The Irpin River study, published in the British Army Review in 2024, has already made a significant impact. According to Connable, the initial print run was completely distributed, and a second is underway. The study has been adopted as professional military education material by at least one U.S. Army corps and is being used in tabletop exercises at multiple military colleges. This level of engagement underscores the demand for detailed, field-based research on contemporary battles.
Connable believes that some current U.S. military strategies may be based on incomplete or exaggerated interpretations of battlefield dynamics. He pointed to the rapid push to integrate drones into every aspect of warfighting as an example. While drones have proven useful, he cautioned against overestimating their effectiveness based on selective data from Ukraine. “All the traditional functions and elements of warfighting can still be relevant: infantry, armor, artillery, manned aircraft,” he said. “And drones can be useful and important simultaneously. So it’s not about one or the other.”
The group’s mission is not limited to recent conflicts. Connable expressed interest in expanding the database to include battles from World War II, as well as more comprehensive studies from Iraq and Afghanistan. Future fieldwork may take researchers to countries such as the Philippines, Mozambique, and Sri Lanka—anywhere they can reasonably gain access. The goal is to build a robust, comparative understanding of war that transcends geography and time.
This commitment to preserving and analyzing the realities of combat is both timely and essential. In a digital age where information is abundant but often fleeting, efforts like those of the Battle Research Group provide a crucial anchor. They ensure that the complexities of warfare are not reduced to headlines or social media posts but are studied, understood, and remembered with the depth they deserve.
