2003 CONOPS, Chapter 9: OPERATIONAL OBSERVATIONS
9.0 OPERATIONAL OBSERVATIONS
This chapter discusses some of the warfighting capabilities developed and executed during recent engagements. Transformation is not always about new systems, but can also include connecting and using old systems in new ways to provide the flexibility required to counter new and unanticipated threats. The surface combatant must bring a full array of capability that is interoperable in the joint warfighting arena. Concepts and systems discussed, if implemented, in previous chapters will provide the surface combatant of the future with these capabilities.
Recent military experiences from Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan have validated many of the concepts of joint network centric warfare in general, and the land attack operational concepts contained within this document in particular.1 Numerous platforms and assets were connected in novel ways, providing new or enhanced operational capabilities to counter the latest threats.
Afghanistan is a landlocked country and surface combatants were not directly involved beyond the initial Tomahawk strikes. It is instructive, however, to understand the evolving characteristics of 21st Century warfare in general, and the rapidly changing land attack capabilities of the other naval and joint forces in particular. The surface combatants will be significant players in the future as they are equipped with the enhanced land attack warfare systems as addressed in this document. As a primary example, targeting information is being provided directly from the sensor to the shooter, and the shooter must be capable of processing this information and rapidly putting ordnance on target.
After action reports from Operation Enduring Freedom have also highlighted many of the issues raised in prior chapters of this document. Some of these issues are over-the-horizon communications; volume of fire versus precision; integration of intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) assets; replenishment at sea; and a common operational picture. Some relevant insights into the evolving characteristics of 21st Century warfare are summarized in the following paragraphs.
Footnote 1: Information contained in this chapter was derived from various open source materials.
9.1 NETWORK CENTRIC WARFARE
Operation Enduring Freedom demonstrated the effectiveness of network centric warfare and the emergence of the first generation of joint sensor, command and control, and engagement grids.
The U.S. was able to monitor the battlefield over extended time periods by using a combination of manned and unmanned aircraft. These sensors provided a continuous flow of information to air and ground targeting systems. Directly linking these targeting systems to the global positioning system (GPS) guided weapons resulted in a significant compression of the sensor-to-shooter targeting cycle and an increase in the precision strike accuracy. A loitering aircraft carrying precision-guided munitions could receive GPS coordinates directly from the ground observers and provide ordnance-on-target within 10 minutes in some cases.
9.1.1 Sensor Grid
The networking and integration of data from the various ISR assets in the theater of operations provided a significant improvement in on-scene, near real-time and persistent situational awareness over the battlefield. The significant new contributors to the ISR asset pool were the Navy’s P-3C Orion maritime patrol aircraft and the unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs). These new assets, when combined with existing photographic and intelligence satellites, the E-3 airborne warning and control system (AWACS), the joint surveillance target attack radar system (JSTARS), and other electronic surveillance and intelligence gathering tactical aircraft, provided the prototype integrated sensor grid that resulted in enhanced mission effectiveness for the U.S. forces in Afghanistan.
A second major achievement was the ability to rapidly transfer data from the intelligence communities’ assets and unique systems to the operational planners and weapon delivery platforms. Significant technical and procedural barriers continue to exist between these systems. However Operation Enduring Freedom exemplifies the movement toward a nearly seamless network centric battlefield.
9.1.1.1 P-3C Maritime Patrol Aircraft
The P-3C is the Navy’s land-based maritime patrol aircraft designed in the 1950s to search for Soviet submarines. The recent addition of a precision surveillance capability enabled the P-3C to gather intelligence, maintain long-term surveillance, and conduct reconnaissance of suspicious targets in the mountainous terrain of a landlocked country. This aircraft also has the capability to fire the stand-off land attack missile (SLAM), act as a communication relay platform, and perform battle damage assessment. The P-3C’s principle value, however, was providing situational awareness over terrain where deep valleys and towering mountains limited visibility. A verbal or electronic message could be sent out as soon as a suspected target was detected.
For example, during Operation Anaconda in March 2002, the P-3Cs carried Navy SEAL commandos who radioed descriptions of the enemy to fellow special operations troops fighting on the ground. Images from the electrooptical, infrared, and synthetic aperture radar sensors were also sent directly to: (1) ground units via the tactical common data link (TCDL), and (2) senior commanders after routing via satellite communications through the regional operations centers. A megabyte-size jpeg image could be sent in 5–6 minutes. Studies are underway to add a broadband link capability for broadcasting real-time streaming video of time critical targets.
9.1.1.2 Unmanned Aerial Vehicles (UAV)
The Air Force’s Predator was the UAV that had the greatest impact on the prosecution of the war. This UAV played a key role in sharply compressing the time delay between target identification and weapons release from hours to minutes or less. Operators at a ground tactical control station (TCS) provide remote control of the Predator’s airframe and sensors. A satellite link handles communications between the aircraft, ground operators, and anyone receiving the live video imagery. In the ISR mode, Predator is most effective when cued by other intelligence sources and used to provide real-time intelligence on targets that already have been identified. In the target attack mode, Predator realized a major improvement in capability when it was upgraded to provide live video feeds directly to the AC-130 gun ships. These gun ships used the live video to identify targets while en route to the target area, and could immediately fire at the targets once reaching the area. Predator also can illuminate targets by laser designation for attack by precision weapons fired from remote distances and, on occasion, has even carried and fired its own Hellfire missiles at selected targets.
Future improvements call for Predator video to be provided to the cockpits of all Air Force and Navy attack aircraft. Mission planners also want the capability to rapidly integrate all intelligence data, whether from a Predator or other sources, into a single common tactical picture.
The RQ-4A Global Hawk is a long range, high altitude UAV that had its operational debut over Afghanistan. Global Hawk provides broad area surveillance while flying at elevations at or above 60,000 feet, has a range of 1200 miles, can loiter for 24 hours, and carries high resolution radar sensors that can capture images through clouds and darkness. Follow-on versions may collect signals intelligence as well as imagery. In the ISR mode, Global Hawk works in conjunction with the Predator and other intelligence systems to gather a persistent layered picture of the battlefield.
Both the Navy and Marine Corps have completed a major overhaul of their UAVs plans and are preparing to start several new programs. All UAVs will be controlled by the TCS. The Navy intends to pursue three types of UAVs: (1) a long duration, standoff ISR vehicle (possibly a marinized version of the Global Hawk); (2) a penetrating surveillance and strike UAV; and (3) a tactical UAV. However, there is no funded program to provide a UAV capability to surface combatants. The USMC will also seek a tiered approach, focusing on systems that are fully autonomous, TCS compliant, require minimum training and logistics, and are affordable.
9.1.1.3 Targeting
Extensive use of GPS was the most notable targeting improvement. GPS enabled precision strikes from information provided by both operational command centers using near realtime sensor information, and by special operations forces on the ground which directly uplinked real-time precision coordinates to bomber and attack aircraft. The use of GPS coordinates also enabled aircraft to deliver weapons from relatively large standoff distances to either ensure safety or surprise.
The ability of U.S. and British special operations forces (SOF), acting as forward observers, to call in air strikes also provided a significant tactical advantage and immeasurably contributed to the successful and accelerated prosecution of the war. This is an excellent example of the advantages provided by network centric warfare when the decision authority is moved down the chain of command to the personnel in the field.
This capability was enabled by providing the SOFs with: (1) the tactical authority to identify targets and to immediately call in air strikes, and (2) the capability to provide near real-time precision targeting information to loitering attack aircraft carrying precision guided weapons that could be programmed by the aircraft just before weapon launch. This capability was so successful that 84% of the Navy’s attack aircraft did not know the specific targets they were to attack until after they were in the target area.
9.1.2 Command and Control (C2) Grid
The primary command-and-control communications network used today by all services to create an air picture is the joint tactical information distribution system (JTIDS), also known as Link 16. JTIDS primary purpose is to pass targeting data to attack aircraft from airborne and ground sensors. JTIDS also allows numerous sensors and elements to share information sufficiently to provide a common air picture over the battlefield known as the single integrated air picture (SIAP).
The joint composite tracking network (JCTN) is also being developed to track and engage potential targets. The Navy’s cooperative engagement capability (CEC) system that consolidates multiple sensor data into single composite track provides a major element of the JCTN capability to Navy units.
Military actions in Afghanistan highlighted the recurring problem of communicating with mobile ground units. Also identified as an issue is the increasing demand for bandwidth to support many of the new systems coming on line. Some digital communications systems were found to not always be interoperable. This mountainous terrain made it difficult for troops who tried to use line-of-sight communications, forcing them to use expensive military and commercial satellites instead.
Despite the problems noted above, communications links were responsible for providing unprecedented connectivity between a vast array of sensors, shooters, and decision makers. The Navy and Air Force also employed satellite uplinks and downlinks to establish communications between forces on the ground and air assets overhead. These links provided the sensor video feeds that were relayed as targeting information to the shooters.
9.1.3 Engagement Grid
Precision-guided weapons, together with the ability to either laser designate the target or rapidly provide GPS coordinates for the target, greatly contributed to overall mission effectiveness. Precision-guided munitions accounted for more than 60% of the ordnance expended in Afghanistan. The most notable weapon was the air-delivered precision guided 2,000 pound joint direct attack munition (JDAM), which has a circular error probable of under 30 feet. JDAM can be delivered by the Air Force’s long-range bombers, as well as by Air Force and Navy tactical aircraft. JDAM will soon be supplemented by a 500-pound version that will reduce collateral damage.
The next generation precision-guided munition, providing a launch-and-leave capability, was successfully tested in December 2001 at the China Lake test facility. The AGM-154C unitary warhead variant of the joint standoff weapon (JSOW-C) was launched at 20,000 feet, flew autonomously with the aid of GPS navigation for approximately 20 nautical miles, located the target using an imaging infrared seeker, and hit the desired aimpoint. The JSOW-C also will be the first U.S. weapon to incorporate the broach penetration multiple warhead, developed by BAE Systems.
A new thermobaric bomb was also quickly designed and first used in combat on a tunnel at the start of Operation Anaconda in March 2002. This weapon was specifically developed to counter the enemy’s use of the vast cave complexes in the Afghanistan mountains as a sanctuary. The bomb releases and then detonates a fine cloud of highly explosive chemicals, creating a massive shock wave that destroys everything inside a cave, bunker, or building.
Precision-guided munitions, however, are not always the best choice for area targets such as extended and fortified trench lines protecting cities and strongholds. Vietnam style carpetbombing using “dumb” bombs once again proved highly effective against these target types. There is no substitute for sustained volume of fire (i.e., a large number of bombs covering a large target area) for degrading the enemy’s ability to fight.
The emerging land attack capabilities of the surface combatant will enhance the variety of “arrows in the quiver” of the warfighter. This will also allow more appropriate weapon to target pairing than is presently available in many situations.
9.2 JOINT OPERATIONS
The 1991 Gulf War proved that a lot of work was still required before the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marine Corps forces, as well as coalition forces, were truly interoperable. Major efforts in establishing joint organizations, communications, doctrine, procedures, and training since that time have proved highly effective. In Afghanistan joint interoperability allowed all the commanders in the region, as well as the Pentagon, to see the common operational picture on their desktop computers. All of the communications and most of the weapons were common, as well as the tactics, techniques and procedures for engaging targets. Forward ground observers calling in strikes saw almost no difference between Navy, Marine Corps, Air Force, or Coalition aircraft.
Unlike Desert Storm and Allied Force, several nearby nations with modern airports refused access to U.S. military forces for Operation Enduring Freedom. This decision severely limited the U.S. Air Force’s ability to stage tactical air strikes from land bases relatively close to the battlefield. Common systems and joint training enabled this missing component to be replaced with sea-based forces, and throughout the military campaign the Naval forces provided critical capabilities to support joint and combined operations. U.S. surface combatants and U.S. and Royal Navy submarines started the retaliatory action on 7 October 2001 with the launch of more than 70 Tomahawk cruise missiles against targets in Afghanistan. Navy and Marine Corps attack and support aircraft, teamed with long-range Air Force B-2 bombers (flying from the U.S.) and B-1 and B-52 bombers (flying from Diego Garcia in the Indian Ocean), next mounted an around-the-clock air campaign directed by Army General Tommy Franks, commander in chief of the U.S. Central Command. Navy and Marine Corps aircraft were refueled in flight several times during their 6–10 hour missions by a fleet of U.S. and Royal Air Force aerial tankers.
Command and control of air operations has also been a major challenge within the joint and coalition forces, right up through the 1999 Kosovo campaign. In Afghanistan, the combined forces air component commander (CFACC) provided a high degree of joint interoperability and coalition integration to optimize the use all available air assets.
9.3 TRANSFORMATIONAL CAPABILITIES
The battle underway in Afghanistan, the opening conflict of the 21st century, is an early illustration of the far-reaching transformation sweeping the joint military forces. Transformation is not always about new systems, but can also include connecting and using old systems in new ways to provide the flexibility required to counter new and unanticipated threats. The best symbol of this new mix of the modern and the mundane may be the lumbering 50-year-old B-52 strategic bomber, once considered a relic of the cold war, providing 35 tons of volume fire and close air support to troops on horseback. In this case some of these troops were special operations forces (SOFs) equipped with satellite phones and GPS devices capable of providing real-time precision targeting information to the bombers.
Combining the B-52s (along with tactical aircraft) with the SOFs produced dramatic results as the Afghan Northern Alliance, outnumbered two-to-one by a dedicated and well-resourced foe, was able to overrun the entire country within weeks.
The naval forces provided additional examples of transformational capabilities. By early January 2002 the naval services had flown 75% of the strike sorties carried out over Afghanistan from carriers operating more than 400 miles away. The quality of the strikes also improved as well.
During Desert Storm the Navy averaged 10 aircraft per target. In Afghanistan one aircraft could take out two targets. The Marine Corps also showed the potential for ship-to-objective maneuver by flying more than 400 miles inland to an expeditionary site south of Kandahar, quickly seizing the Kandahar airfield needed for future operations, and conducting mobile hunterkiller patrols (similar to those practiced during the Hunter Warrior experiments in 1997) to block enemy escape routes. In addition, the aircraft carrier USS Kitty Hawk deployed with a minimal air wing to serve as a floating special operations base in the North Arabian Sea.
The growing capability of the fleet’s Tomahawk cruise missile, originally developed as part of the nuclear arsenal, is also indicative of the Navy’s steady transformation. The Tomahawk has transformed cruisers and destroyers from principally defensive escorts into critical components of long-range strike, and eventually will support time critical strike and requests for fire support.
The Tomahawk targeting cycle was three days during Desert Storm in 1991. In the 1999 operations in Kosovo (allied force), the targeting cycle was reduced to about 100 minutes. For Enduring Freedom, it was reduced to about 30 minutes in some cases. The introduction of the Tactical Tomahawk weapon control system in 2004 will allow onboard mission planning and execution, and near real-time targeting and retargeting when the missile is in flight.
9.4 CONCLUSIONS
9.4.1 Special Circumstances
The significance of the lessons learned from the current conflict must be carefully considered in light of the special circumstances involved. Although the current success in Afghanistan has been dramatic, the success has depended on three primary factors.
First, as the French learned during the German blitzkrieg in the opening days of World War II, war cannot be reduced to forward observers and artillery. This tactic worked well in Afghanistan because the spotters had the support of the local population and could travel easily. This will not be possible if the local population is hostile.
Second, complete air superiority was established very early in the theater of operations. This freedom provided the airborne surveillance assets, special operations forces, attack aircraft, and heavy bombers with the ability to operate together unimpeded and achieve maximum effectiveness. Complete air superiority may not be available in future conflicts against a country with a sophisticated air defense capability. Serbian air defense forces were well trained, resilient, highly mobile, concealed, and patient, and provided a sustained (although degraded) capability throughout the 78-day campaign.
Third, climate did not significantly impact the campaign. In Kosovo nearly 70% of the battlefield was covered 50% of the time with low clouds and fog. This rendered electro-optical and infrared sensors and human eyeballs useless in detecting and identifying most targets. Forested mountainous terrain had an equally adverse effect on all-weather radar. Precision strikes are only as good as the ISR systems that provide the targeting information. Over the past ten years, the quantity and capability of the precision strike weapons has outpaced the capability of the supporting ISR structure. Target concealment, deception, and mobility as well as weather, terrain, and air defenses will make the ISR problem even more difficult.
9.4.2 Land Based Versus Sea Based Aircraft
The Afghanistan campaign has convincingly demonstrated that the long-running debate of the effectiveness of land-based bombers versus seabased aircraft has no place in the 21st century joint operations. The air campaign was remarkable for the degree of seamless interoperability and mutual support between the Air Force and Navy-Marine Corps team’s aviation assets.
Because of their larger payloads, the Air Force’s B-1, B-2, and B-52 long-range bombers carried most of the munitions into the theater of operations, and Air Force’s tanker, surveillance, and transport aircraft were also key to operational effectiveness. U.S. Navy and Marine Corps’ F/A-18s, F-14s, and AV-8B Harriers flew most of the strike sorties, however, providing a round the- clock strike capability and escorts for other U.S. and coalition aircraft. The Navy’s EA-6Bs, E-2Cs, S-3s, and P-3Cs provided critical support to the overall campaign as well.
The long ranges involved in all air support missions put a large strain on both the aircraft and aircrews as well the supporting aircraft, such as the air tankers. This was true for both land and sea based aircraft.
9.4.3 Joint Flexibility
Future conflicts will require strategic, operational, and tactical flexibility and synergy between the joint military services to achieve national objectives. This flexibility will enable each service to leverage its unique synergies on the unpredictable modern battlefield. No single weapon system is sufficient in and of itself. The warfighter must be provided with a variety of weapon delivery systems, coupled with a high quality ISR capability, to ensure success on nearly every future battlefield. A good example of this flexibility is the blurring of the traditional line between the intelligence community and the tactical operators as the connectivity of the systems is improved. In Afghanistan this flexibility resulted in the rapid fusion of data received from the various ISR assets into tactically useful information, and the rapid passing of these intelligence products to mission planners and even weapon delivery platforms to rapidly engage targets.
The new challenge will be contending with uncertainty. Planners cannot design specific forces for specific scenarios because they can no longer predict circumstances and adversaries with any precision. No one was pondering a major campaign in Afghanistan on 10 September 2001. The U.S. requires strategically agile forces that offer a broad range of capabilities while avoiding fixed airfields, forward bases, and ports that the enemy can strike back at. This force includes long-range airpower, highly maneuverable ground forces, and forward presence with a full spectrum naval fires capability.
9.4.4 Surface Combatant Contributions
Forward presence has little point unless the ships represent significant striking power. The Aegis combatants will provide a moderate land attack capability with the existing and programmed gun and missile systems. However, these same platforms can provide a transformational land attack capability by digitally connecting the existing sensor, command and control, mission planning, and engagement components. This connectivity would provide a true network centric warfare capability against time critical targets as well as provide a sustained and distributed fire support capability to support the maneuvering forces on the ground. Once these systems are fully netted, surface combatants will have the capability to conduct early, responsive, and precision tactical, operational, and strategic land attack missions while supporting the arrival of follow-on naval, joint, and coalition forces.
The new land attack capability of the surface combatants will provide additional options for engaging enemy targets. Many targets may also be more optimally engaged with munitions such as ERGM or LRLAP vice some air delivered ordnance. This means that the target is appropriately engaged but with a cheaper yet similarly effective munition. These costs include the overall wear on the aircraft and support systems as well as the risk to the aircrew. Additionally, sea based fires may be more responsive to engaging a time sensitive target since they are available during day and night as well as during periods of reduced visibility.
Afghanistan is unique because it is a land-locked country and Tomahawk is the only surface combatant weapon with sufficient range to reach potential targets. Future conflicts may find a large percentage of targets within range of all of the surface combatant’s land attack weapons, and may pose a sophisticated air threat. In this case, a long-range and robust land attack capability from both gun and missile systems would be highly valuable.



LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks
Reply With Quote
Share this thread with friends: