ATP-3-09-12 Field Artillery Counterfire and Weapons Locating Radar Operations Download
Page 53 of 150
Employment Considerations for Weapons Locating Radars 26 October 2021 ATP 3-09.12 4-15 most difficult planning decisions. This is due to advancements in the adversary’s electronic intelligence and electronic attack systems that are now able to instantaneous/near-instantaneous acquire and engage friendly WLRs from the moment of active cueing. Continuous cueing is not recommended in a high EW threat environment. Additionally, implementing an on-off schedule (such as 30 seconds on /30 seconds off) may not be an effective survivability practice when engaged with a peer/near-peer adversary due to advancements in technology. The targeting, counterfire, and intelligence officers' recommendation of cueing guidance to the commander is based on the enemy's current electronic intelligence capability. Both authority to cue and priority for cueing requirements must be clearly understood and documented. 4-40. Planned random schedules based solely on hours of the day are not recommended and are usually ineffective. Unnecessary cueing subjects the WLR to enemy direction finding. Therefore, cueing should be event driven to provide maximum support during critical phases of the battle. 4-41. The controlling HQ establishes cueing guidance, to include authorized cueing agents, communication links, and conditions under which the WLR may be cued. Radar cueing instructions are listed in the RDO and the TA Tab. When cueing agents, other than FA assets are designated, cueing guidance should be given in the base order as coordinating instructions or tasks to subordinate units. 4-42. The critical factor when planning WLR cueing is responsiveness. Cueing should allow the WLR to locate enemy positions during initial volleys of fire, preferably the first rounds. There are two techniques for cueing; situational (proactive) and demand (reactive). Situational and demand cueing may be used separately or in combination. Situational Cueing 4-43. Situational cueing is the preferred technique for cueing WLRs and is the most responsive. This method ties cueing to events or triggers that are determined during IPB and the planning process. For example, during the execution of offensive operations an event or trigger may be a breaching or air-assault operation. When executing defensive operations, cueing may be tied to suspected enemy phases of fire depicted on the decision support template. Situational cueing focuses the WLR on the commander's intent and what is critical. Demand Cueing 4-44. Demand cueing is the activation of WLRs once the enemy is known to have begun firing. For demand cueing to be effective, cueing agents must be designated and a responsive communication system between the cueing agents and WLR established. Specific cueing guidance must also be established to fully exploit the WLRs capabilities and minimize or eliminate unnecessary radiation. The situation will dictate who best can cue the WLR and the specific conditions under which it should be cued. Possible cueing agents may include: Forward observers. Aerial observers. Scouts. Intelligence officers. FSOs. Counterfire officers and targeting officers. 4-45. Cueing must be based on real-time information so that the WLR has a high probability of tracking projectiles. Consider the situation when a task force FSO is designated as a cueing agent. The following events occur: The task force assembly area receives hostile artillery fires. The task force FSO immediately cues the WLR. The WLR responds and locates the hostile artillery firing on the task force. The WLR transmits a call for fire to the COS or TPS. The FA BN executes the call for fire.