The US military has never been more capable. In the past, we found sophisticated jammers, sensors, and command and control (C2) systems only at the operational level of war (typically as part of the air or maritime components). Today they appear in the backpacks and vehicles of frontline troops. Similarly, although the highest-end capabilities were once tasked only against strategic objectives, today s C2 and data-distribution systems allow operational-level capabilities to provide direct support to ground troops. Even though these capabilities permit unprecedented joint flexibility and recent changes in joint doctrine make possible the joint tasking of tactical assets, many of the latest capabilities remain organized and controlled as if they can support merely a single component.1 Key examples include ground-based signals intelligence sensors and organic airborne reconnaissance assets not organized, trained, or equipped for independent availability to the joint force. As we will see below, such assets as the Army s MQ-1C Gray Eagle or man-portable electronic jammers are intended to deploy as part of a larger single-component force, with little consideration given to their overall joint utility.
Finnishing the Force: Achieving True Flexibility for the Joint Force Commander
2014
29 pages
Report
Keine Angabe
Englisch
Military Intelligence , Military Operations, Strategy, & Tactics , Command and control systems , Joint military activities , Tactical communications , Tactical reconnaissance , Military commanders , Military intelligence , Military personnel , Reprints , Surveillance , Tactical warfare , Tactical weapons , Airborne , Control , Electronics , Jamming , Manportable equipment
Joint Force Maritime Component Commander
NTIS | 2006
|Joint Force Commander and Global Mobility
NTIS | 1998
|Joint Task Force Commander Afloat: Doctrinal Challenges
NTIS | 1997
|