ADP-3-19 FIRES Warfighting Function Download
Page 33 of 52
Integrate Army, Multinational, and Joint Fires 31 July 2019 ADP 3-19 3-5 arms rehearsal to allow for detailed synchronization of the warfighting function prior to combining them. They can also be conducted after the combined arms rehearsal to work out final details of any issues identified during the combined arms rehearsal. 3-25. The combined arms rehearsal brings together all subordinate units to rehearse the plan with the commander and staff. The effects of fires must be fully synchronized with the other warfighting functions during the combined arms rehearsal. In particular, this is the best time to ensure fires is synchronized with maneuver. The combined arms rehearsal must include timings and triggers for the creation of effects. The commander should also take advantage of the combined arms rehearsal to rehearse branches to the plan if some effects aren’t created as planned. 3-26. During battle drill or standard operating procedures rehearsals, commanders and staffs should rehearse battle drills they are likely to use. Within the fires warfighting function, this should include the processing of missions to create effects from the sensor to the delivery system. These should include technical rehearsals that test the ability of the unit to use their primary, alternate, contingency, and emergency means of communication to command and control assets within the fires warfighting function. FIRES ASSESSMENT 3-27. Assessment is the determination of the progress toward accomplishing a task, creating an effects, or achieving an objective (JP 3-0). Assessment takes place throughout the operations process, allowing the commander and staff to analyze collected information to make decisions that allow the unit to create required effects and achieve objectives. Assessment consists of three activities: monitoring, evaluating, and recommending or directing action for improvement. Monitoring is continuous observation of those conditions relevant to the current operation (ADP 5-0). It begins during planning as the staff gathers available information to conduct analysis. Evaluating is using criteria to judge progress toward desired conditions and determining why the current degree of progress exists (ADP 5-0). 3-28. Assessment requires determination of the required measures of performance (MOPs) and measures of effectiveness (MOEs) for the desired effects. A measure of performance is a criterion used to assess friendly actions that is tied to measuring task accomplishment (JP 3-0). An example of a MOP may be a question like “Was this target engaged with in accordance with pre-determined target selection standards and the attack guidance matrix?” A measure of effectiveness is a criterion used to assess changes in system behavior, capability, or operational environment that is tied to measuring the attainment of an end state, achievement of an objective, or creation of an effects (JP 3-0). An example of a MOE may be a question like “Did degradation of enemy air defense command and control systems allow the air component freedom of maneuver during the required time period?” Collection requirements for MOPs and MOEs must be built into the unit’s information collection plan. 3-29. Monitoring contributes to target development, gathering information about designated targets to allow for engagement of those targets. This will include describing the target as well as how the target is linked to other targets and capabilities within the OE. The commander and staff will use this information to determine where and when to strike the target and with what delivery system in order to create the required effect. 3-30. During and after engagement of a target, assessment continues with the confirmation of effects created against the target and an initial BDA. The three components of BDA are the physical damage assessment, the functional damage assessment, and the target system assessment. The physical damage assessment is the quantitative extent of physical damage to the target. The functional damage assessment weights the ability of the target to perform its mission against the mission objective established against the target. Target system assessment is a broad assessment of the effectiveness of all types of engagement against a target system. The initial BDA will focus on physical damage assessment while the remaining BDA are developed later. BDA should drive several decisions by the commander, including the need to reattack the target, adjustments to attack guidance to improve effectiveness in the future, and the need to shift to a branch plan if the required effect could not be created. TARGETING 3-31. Commanders and staffs integrate the warfighting functions and synchronize the force to adapt to changing circumstances throughout the operations process. They use several integrating processes to do this.