TA.3 AIR DEFENSE BOS
3.3 Integrate Air Defense Fires
*
Air defense task organization not based on the threat nor organized to achieve
the commander's priorities.
PROBLEM: Brigades often expect an air attack along an identified red air avenue against a high priority unit, yet the brigade task organizes air defense according to habitual association.
Techniques:
1. Once enemy air capabilities and air avenues of approach have been determined, the limited air defense assets should be allocated based on the threat. (FM 44-100, Appendix C; FM 44-64, Appendix A)
2. Ensure air defense liaisons stress the importance of massing air defense to meet the expected air threat.
*
Commanders do not doctrinally integrate air defense in their plans.
PROBLEMS:
1. Brigade staffs misunderstand the purpose and limitations involved when establishing command and support relationships.
2. Air defense employment principles and guidelines are not followed during planning:
- Air defense principles -- mass, mix, mobility, integration -- are seldom considered during the planning process.
- Air defense employment guidelines of mutual support versus overlapping coverage and weighted versus balanced coverage are not planned according to systems capabilities and terrain restrictions.
3. Allocation of Stinger teams under armor versus MANPADS teams is not doctrinally based.
Procedures:
1. Command relationships address the formal command chain (assigned or attached) and also TO& affiliation. (organic v. OPCON)
2. Support relationships define specific responsibilities; the establishment of priorities, positioning of assets, and the responsibility for administrative and logistical support.
3. Address realistic support relationships and survivability concerns during the planning process.
4. DOCTRINE:
- Support relationships: FM 101-5, Section 9, Appendix G.
- Air defense planning: FM 44-64.
TA.2
Fire Support BOS Narrative
TA.6
Mobility/Survivability BOS & NBC Narrative
|
NEWSLETTER
|
| Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list |
|
|
|
