Some Results from SV06 Seminar and EW05 War Game

Background SV06 –Seminar/Wargame 1 st look by war fighters at SV06 Concept EW05 Annual USMC Title X War Game –Classified Wargame looking at Operational level Distributed Operations (DO)

SV06 Objectives 1.Identify 2006 MEU capability Shortfalls. 2.Identify potential changes to "echelons above the platoon.” 3.Identify issues for follow-on experimentations / study.

Identify 2006 MEU capability Shortfalls. 1.Specialized attachments: linguists, vehicle mechanics, crew served weps, etc required depending on mission. 2.TTP’s for extended missions TBD 3.Additional Crew Served Weps needed 4.Attachments require more comm gear

ID potential changes to "echelons above the platoon.” 1.No substantial changes ID’d in SV06 context. MSSG and ACE will be stretched to support. 2.Broader DO Concept may need to revisit this.

ID issues for follow-on experimentations / study. A wide variety of issues reported but need further examination.

SV06 WG Impact on Concept DO Forces probably can not remain undetected and must train for Overt Ops. Positive Identification and Likely Enemy Intent (PID/LIT) require closing with potentially hostile forces. Must also have enhanced direct fire capabilities in addition to robust indirect fires. 14 days is a realistic time frame vice 3 days for operations. The degree of dispersion and need for mobility need further examination.

SV06 WG Impact on Concept SOF / DO Coordination needs to be addressed. DO in MOUT only briefly addressed, other experiments indicate minimum of Company-sized DO force for MOUT. C2 of Squads must remain with the Platoon. TACON determined by HQ controlling AO MEU organic fires insufficient for 24/7 coverage. Naval and Joint fires needed to fill gaps.

SV06 Overview Revealed need to refine concept, equipment and training plan. However game was limited by only one scenario and heavily influenced by recent Afghanistan experience limiting the examination of unique seabasing requirements.

Conclusion “I don’t know what it is but I want some!” a Troop Cdr from OEF

EW05 Objectives 1.To assess the application of DO to the Conduct of GWOT. 2.To assess and refine the draft USMC DO Concept 3.To further define the operational characteristics and dynamics, organizational innovations and impacts, and technologies and related capabilities essential to successful DO in the GWOT 4.To assess Joint and Interagency issues associated with planning and conducting DO in the GWOT

4 Focus Areas Counter-proliferation Conventional Combat Counter-terrorism Stability and Support Ops / Counter Insurgency

Selected Results DO generally appropriate for all 4 focus areas across the spectrum of operations DO seems most appropriate for: SASO, COIN and CT Increased potential for actionable Intel Better match to enemy unit size 20XX DO Squads maybe able to link allies into Blue ISR.

DO Challenges SA – ISR and Fusion –DO can improve SA but needs good SA for initial insertion –Actionable Info requires ability to rapidly collect, analyze and disseminate Intel. Large CAS bill ($$) Larger Joint Fires bill ($$) Large Mobility & Sustainment bill ($$) Training and Ed maybe biggest challenge

Take-Aways DO a better way to gain and maintain contact DO enhances collection of actionable Intel DO is additive capability that complements SOF freeing them up for specialized missions –BASF: “DO isn’t SOF but makes SOF better.” DO maybe inappropriate for –Areas with large hostile civilian population –Areas where Enemy as superior mobility

Questions?