Practical Sustainment Concepts for the Non-Linear Battlespace

More documents

Recommendations

Info

typically in Figure 1(a). Here, the ground is broken up into the familiar echelons, from the Comm Z in the rear, where personnel and materiel are prepared and maintained, up to the FEBA where manoeuvre forces fight the battle in the F Echelon. Figure 1(b) shows how the presumed level of threat increases closer to the front, as one gets closer to the fight. Consequently, we can deduce in Figure 1(c) that the requirement for mobility increases from rear to front. (a) (b) (c) Figure 1: Sustainment based on the linear battlefield In each echelon, there is a separate, dedicated sustainment organization that performs a specific role as a function of the threat. In the Comm Z, operational support organizations within the Canadian Support Group (CSG) exchange materiel, personnel, and services freely in and out of theatre through the airport of disembarkation (APOD). As threat is low, there is no requirement to achieve protection through mobility, so the opportunity exists to develop static, more complex, support infrastructure. The CSG exchanges resources with the service battalion in or near the brigade support area (BSA) through long administrative convoys. The service battalion, in a still fairly secure environment, can perform complex tasks while remaining somewhat mobile. Through delivery points (DP) and commodity points (Com Pt), resources are exchanged with manoeuvre unit administration companies (Admin Coy), and the increasingly hostile environment limits the complexity of support possible. Resources are then transferred with forward combat teams through additional DP, but now in an unstable environment, and with only mobile support facilities available. Finally, combat team integral support (IS) organizations provide the most limited level of support to the fighting troops in the F Echelon, where the battlefield is rife with enemy activity. There is a definite relationship between protection and the level of production, and sustainment organizations have to be tailored specifically to the threat environment, as shown in Figure 2. 46 Canadian Army Journal Vol. 11.2 Summer 2008
Figure 2: Sustainment tasks as a function of ground in the linear battlefield As the ground in a linear battlefield is held and managed by a given organization, normally a manoeuvre element, that commander usually takes command of all other organizations that operate on the same terrain. Sustainment organizations are no exception, and consequently, the command and control of sustainment resources is highly decentralized, focused on the support to the parent organization. The flow of sustainment resources tends to be coordinated along a forward-rearward axis, and the sharing of resources between adjacent (flank) units or formations is exceptional. Finally, because a large portion of sustainment actions are conducted in areas of lower threat, day-to-day sustainment actions can be largely coordinated along a technical (J/G4) chain. This coordination is normally done independently from the operational (J/G3) chain of command, which is focused on the manoeuvre battle. Sustainment in the Non-Linear Battlespace In COIN operations, there is no defined FEBA, as the threat of insurgent activity is present throughout the operational area. The FEBA in Afghanistan is effectively right outside the Kandahar Airfield (KAF) gate, and surrounding every tactical infrastructure developed on the ground. Consequently, there is no single area outside KAF in which materials and resources can be moved about without a requirement for force protection. In the linear model above, it is as if all levels of support operations, from the Comm Z to the fighting troops, are now potentially operating in the same time and space, completely immersed in a potentially threatening environment. In the linear model sustainment operations can be seen as a carrot or core sample taken at the intersection of all sustainment echelons along a given line from the Comm Z to the F echelon. In other words, it is as if we were to look at the model in Figure 1 from the right, where the threat picture is high and unstable, and regroup all elements from the rear to the front into a solitary node, as shown in Figure 3. Canadian Army Journal Vol. 11.2 Summer 2008 47
Page 1: PRACTICAL SUSTAINMENT CONCEPTS FOR
Page 5 and 6: Figure 4: Sustainment tasks on node
Page 7 and 8: Table 1 further illustrates that th
Page 9 and 10: The Hierarchy of Nodes A few observ
Page 11 and 12: which was essentially a task-tailor
Page 13 and 14: for sustainment doctrine will permi
Page 15 and 16: manoeuvre organization, in addition
Page 17 and 18: sustainment picture. It will be nec

Practical Sustainment Concepts for the Non-Linear Battlespace

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?