ATP-3-09-42 Fire Support for the Brigade Combat Team Download
Page 209 of 308
Planning and Integrating Fires for BCT Operations 1 March 2016 ATP 3-09.42 6-49 TEST THE FEASIBILITY OF THE PLAN 6-174. As the BCT staff, FSCOORD, fires cell planners, and targeting officers develop their courses of action, they apply doctrinal or validated planning factors (such as munitions effects tables) and determine whether time, space and ammunition required for execution will create the commander’s desired effects by fires. Validated planning factors are preferred, because they reflect the current training status of the units involved. If this information is not available, fire support planners use mission training plans standards or rely on previous experience. The planners must have the fire support planning factors available to create a plan that can be executed and that can meet the commander’s guidance. Such fire support calculations, as initially developed earlier, may need to be refined. 6-175. The results of course of action analysis are a refined scheme of fires and associated products for each course of action. During war gaming, the FSCOORD, fires cell planners, and targeting officers refine fire support requirements, related essential elements of friendly information, and high-payoff targets for each course of action and synchronize these items with their results or effects on the S-3 synchronization matrix. This matrix provides the basis for fires input to Paragraph 3e (Scheme of Fires) of and Annex D (FIRES) of the BCT OPLAN or OPORD. 6-176. At this point in the technique, the FSCOORD, fires cell planners, and targeting officers begin to refine the fire support paragraphs to the OPLAN or OPORD. The fire support planners develop specific tasks for fires to create the desired lethal and nonlethal effects. 6-177. The FSCOORD, fires cell planners, and targeting officers may also elect to produce an Annex D, (FIRES). This annex may be necessary to expand on the information contained in subparagraph 3e (Scheme of Fires) of the OPORD. If the information in subparagraph 3e (Scheme of Fires) is deemed adequate, then a separate fires annex is not published. GATHER THE TOOLS 6-178. The tools needed for an effective war game are the draft fire support outputs from course of action development. The FSCOORD, fires cell planners, and targeting officers must finish course of action development as completely as possible before starting course of action analysis. The war-game step of the MDMP provides the final detail and refinement, validates capabilities, and helps synchronize the fires warfighting function with the other warfighting functions. The purpose of the war game is to analyze a course of action, not to create one. However, the war game may identify a previously unforeseen circumstance (task, requirement, or problem) that requires course of action change or a new course of action. 6-179. The war gaming process provides an opportunity to the fire support planners to finalize the scheme of fires: Finalize targeting decisions. Visualize and synchronize fire support with maneuver against enemy courses of action. Test the scheme of fires. Modify the scheme of fires as necessary. 6-180. The war game brings all the members of the targeting working group together to finalize the decisions of the decide function of targeting. For each course of action the FSCOORD, fires cell planners, and targeting officers collect and make available the fires running estimate, fire support portion of event templates and target value analysis (see ATP 3-60) results. For close air support (see JP 3-09.3), important tools that must be gathered include the: Air tasking order and special instructions information. Decisionmaking matrices. Briefing cards and close air support briefs (for example, 9-line briefings). Standard conventional load listings. Aircraft and weapons capabilities information.