Movement Control in the Division AO
"The MC issues lead off the discussions [at the Combined Arms Doctrine Directorate (CADD) on Fort Leavenworth] on 9 November. During this initial session, CADD admitted that their initial position concerning movements within the division AO was in error. The division cannot abrogate its responsibility for movements and MC within its area of operations. They also accepted the requirement for an MCT in support of the DTO. The remaining issues were to answer how MC elements would be employed within the division AO. The assembled group explored how these elements would be arrayed on the battlefield and what functions they would perform. The CASCOM team spent the remainder of the afternoon preparing a briefing that captured and presented scenarios demonstrating how divisional MC will work.
On 10 November, we presented the briefing to the CADD Director. Our restated line of reasoning met with his approval, and he instructed his staff to update draft division doctrine, FMI 3-91, and provide a revised decision paper for the CAC Commander’s signature outlining MC operations in the division AO. Key points reiterated during the briefing were:
- The division cannot abrogate to a subordinate headquarters its responsibilities with respect to MC in its area of operations.
- A modular MCT placed in support and under the supervision of the DTO fills an important capability gap in the division.- The DTO/MCT must be placed with a C2 headquarters to gain and maintain situational awareness and information for the Common Operational Picture (COP). (e.g. TACs, BCTs, CSB(ME))
- There remains a requirement for frequent, direct coordination between the division G3 and the DTO. The DTO will be positioned at the C2 node that best allows him to complete his mission.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home