The U.S. Army paratroopers assigned to the 173rd Brigade Support Battalion, 173rd Airborne Brigade prepare to board an Air Force C-130 Hercules aircraft assigned to the 86th Airlift Wing at Aviano Air Base in preparation for the airborne operation on Juliet Drop Zone in Pordenone, Italy, May 22, 2018. The 173rd Airborne Brigade of the U.S. Army Contingency response force in Europe, capable of projecting ready forces anywhere in the USA. European, Africa or Central Commands areas of responsibility. (U. S. Army photo by Davide Dalla Massara)
The U.S. Army is preparing to more fully reveals her strategic shift in the direction of “Multi-Domain Operations” in the coming weeks as part of a long-term effort to further operationalize joint warfare techniques and tactics.
Senior Army strategists tell Warrior Maven this emerging strategic shift, which is expected to fully roll out at the upcoming annual Association of the U.S. Army Symposium, represents an important next step in the strategic evolution rather than the often-discussed “Multi-Domain Battle – free initiative.
The arrival of the long-range sensors and precision fire on the part of the potential near-peer opponents reinforces the need for the AMERICAN army to work in real-time on air, sea and land domains. In addition, the emergence of new newer domains, such as cyber, space and the electromagnetic sphere are, of course, an indispensable element of this push to operationalize cross-domain warfare.
The nuances of this shift in the direction of “operationalizing” cross-domain fires will be further explained in an essay by Training and Doctrine Command Commander Gen. Steven Townsend called “Accelerating Multi-Domain Operations: Development of an Idea.”
Published by the Modern War Institute at West Point, Townsend’s essay outlines the Army’s transition to a more complex, joint war-fighting environment characterized by rapidly changing high-tech threats, growing risks of digital and electronic warfare attacks and fast connection between the air, land, sea, and cyber domains.
“In combat, fighters can win time and space and they show a side to the ground, but they do not win wars. The world in which we work today is not defined by the battles, but due to the ongoing competition that runs different rates in and out of armed conflict,” Townsend writes.
Townsend’s essay explores the unique reality that modern warfare is not limited to, the “kinetic” attacks or linear mechanized formations, but a mixture of interrelated variables in a wide range of conflict areas.
“Winning in competition is achieved not by winning battles, but by means of carrying out integrated activities and campaigns. Operations are more comprehensive, to bring together diverse tactical actions,” Townsend writes.
As part of the Army of the achievement of the strategic objectives, the Army and the Navy are operating together in the Pacific in the course of the past year. The services have worked to prevent the fire from Army artillery from the Navy ships, send targeting data to the country of the weapons of the Navy sensors and use coastal missiles to destroy enemy ships at sea, service leaders said.
“The Army is looking at the shooting of artillery from Navy ships. Innovation is taking existing things and changing them to do something new,” Maj. Gen. John Ferrari, Director, Program Analysis and Evaluation, G-8, told the Warrior Maven in an interview earlier this year.
Ferrari explained that the experimental “teams” are the combining of air-defense units, ground combat units, cyber-units and artillery units and brings them together in the operation.
“ of what we do is the integration of the Navy. The Naval threat to the Pacific is one of the most important threats, so that the Army is doing multi-domain battle. The Pacific is inherently Joint. There is very little that we do that is not done with other services,” Ferrari said.
Much of the ongoing work includes the integration of the combat units in the past have been used in a more separated or single-focus on fashion. Combs field artillery, a brigade headquarters, air defense, Navy assets, and ISR units in a single operation, for example, represents the nature of the experiments that are currently underway.
“Instead of three battalions of artillery, you will have pieces of these things – then go out and use it,” Ferrari said.
Tactically speaking, the firing precision of artillery ships can the possible introduction of a number of interesting advantages. The Navy is now exploring weapons such as long range precision guided ammunition for the deck-mounted 5-inch guns, the ship fired offensive weapons, such as the advanced Long-Range Anti-Ship Missile (LRASM), the Maritime Tomahawk and an over-the-horizon weapon for the Littoral Combat Ship and a Frigate.
Something like a Army Tactical Missile Systems missile, Multiple Launch Rocket Systems, or GPS-guided Excalibur 155m artillery brings the ability to in addition to the existing ship-fired Navy weapon systems.
A high U.S. military official declared that the Army artillery, surface ships in addition to the existing Navy weapons may provide new dimensions to the area of attack options available to commanders. Tomahawk and LRASM, for instance, can fly lower and somewhat parallel to the surface to escape the enemy’s defensive systems — something that is possible can be strengthened by the country-fired weapons.
Country-fired artillery was also able to lend combat support enhanced layered defensive weapons for Navy ships, such as SeaRAM, Evolved Sea Sparrow Missile and Rolling Airframe Missile, among others. These interceptors, it seems, can be enhanced by the potential use of ground-fired weapons on naval ships.
“The mix of all of the presents multiple dilemmas for the enemy,” a senior official told the Warrior.
Navy commanders are “all in” on that earlier with the help of F-18’s to identify objectives for the country the weapons in the exercises in recent years, such as Noble Eagle, Alaska, and senior military officials have described.
As part of the cross-domain effort, the Army and the Navy are looking to improve the ways to connect with their respective networks; senior Pentagon leaders often say that the “joint effects” in the fight can be challenged by a lack of integration between the various services of the’ tactical ISR, target acquisition and fire control systems.”
For example, the Navy and the integrated sensor network known as Cooperative Engagement Capability connects targeting and ISR nodes about the power. The emphasis now is to connect this kind of systems, for example, the weapons of the Army, such as mass redundancies Patriot missile and the Theater High Altitude Area Defense, or THAAD, missile defense and weapons.
In addition, the Army’s Integrated Battle Command Systems is itself a similar combat theater sensor network in which different radar, command and control and weapons “knots” are network to accelerate real-time data sharing. A part of the maturation of this system, according to the Army, and Northrop Grumman, developers, for further extension of ibc’s and cue air force and Navy assets in a given theater of operations.
A senior Army weapons developer told Warrior – “it’s about target acquisition and reach. Maybe target acquisition comes from a ship, and I do surface fires in the country. We need to experiment with sensors.”
In a previously written Army paper with the title “Multi-Domain Battle: Evolution of Combined Arms for the 21st Century 2025-2040,” former TRADOC Commander Gen. David Perkins writes:
“It (Multi-Domain Battle) increases the targeting landscape on the basis of the extended range and lethality delivered on the range of the built-in air defenses, cross-domain fire support, and cyber/electronic warfare systems. We need to solve the physics of this extensive battleground and understanding the opportunities each area can offer in terms of the echelon, the speed and the range.”
Perkins and other high-ranking Pentagon strategists have explained Multi-Domain of the Struggle which now leads to a “Multi-Domain Operations” — as a modern extension of the Cold War, AirLand Battle Strategy which sought to integrate the air and ground attacks to counter with a Soviet attack in Europe.
“AirLand Battle started with the development of the concept of the” extended battlefield.” Multi-Domain fight efforts to integrate capabilities, in such a way that to counteract one, the enemy must become more vulnerable to other, the creation and use of windows temporary advantage, Perkins writes in “Multi-Domain Battle: Joint Combined Arms Concept for the 21st Century.”
Army – Air Force
The Army and the air force have been working on a new, joint war-gaming operation to assess future combat scenarios and, ultimately, co-author of a new inter-service cross-domain of the combating of the doctrine.
Within this concept, the Army and the air force commanders are the launch of a new series of tabletop exercises to repeat, and the exploration of future warfare scenarios – the nature of the conflicts expected to need technologically advanced Army-air force integration.
In a Pentagon report, the joint wargaming effort is described as something that will “to a doctrine and the concept that we can agree on.”
— Read Warrior’s Previous Story on this Army-air force Effort CLICK HERE —
“The F-35 is doing ISR and may be able to deliver a weapon on the same flight. We can then use what they can generate on the ground, fusing sensors and target acquisition with land-based assets that can deliver effects,” a senior defence official told Warrior.
More Weapons and Technology – WARRIOR MAVEN (CLICK HERE)–