VOLUME I Multinational Maritime Tactical Instructions and Procedures

MTP 1(D), Vol. I
8705 EXECUTION
a. Commonality. The Task Force Commander must strive for commonality in communications
and data links, which will be the threads that hold the organization together. Factors that will be critical in
communications and will impinge on data link operations are as follows:
(1) Number of Transmitters/Receivers.
(2) Availability of satellite communications facilities.
(3) Availability and compatibility of secure speech equipment.
(4) Data handling capacity of the circuits available.
(5) Location and environmental factors.
(6) Cryptologic equipment and keying material.
(7) Operator’s ability in the designated common language.
(8) Portable equipment (for use by liaison officers, etc.).
In data link terms, the capacity of the host AIO system is often the critical factor. Where different
links exist every effort should be made to ensure that data forwarding facilities are available. However, all
units should be aware that certain elements of data may be stripped during this process. This area should be
examined during pre-sail conferences. These factors apply equally to air units.
b. Contingency Planning. At an early stage contingency planning should be carried out to cater
for all likely incidents and tested against the fullest range of “what if” scenarios in tactical discussions involving
all participants. Such plans will be heavily influenced by ROE considerations and special attention
should be paid to:
(1) Identification Criteria — elements required for identification of a contact. Standard schemes
exist (see Chapter 6, Table 6-1) but should be reexamined to ensure that ROE requirements are met. Unit
capabilities in this respect may differ (e.g., availability of IFF Mode IV, height-finding). Care must
therefore be taken to ensure that ROE are not breached as a result of a unit attempting to achieve the necessary
criteria. In situations short of all-out hostility it may be expedient to use the terms Contact of Interest
and Critical Contact of Interest or Possible Violator. For unambiguous link information exchange
an identification matrix will then be required (these additional identities cannot be exchanged via ink).
Use of specific codewords (changing or fixed) for individual units or types of unit may also assist in clarity
of picture compilation. The use of a predetermined set of PIF/DI codes (either via link or voice reporting)
may also assist in information exchange. All of these will require definition in the Task Force
Commander’s instructions.
(2) Recognition Confidence Levels — the level and criteria required for achieving recognition
should also be examined in the light of ROE.
(3) Weapon Release Criteria — this will require most careful definition in order to reflect ROE
intentions. This subject may require clarification discussions at the task definition stage with those issuing
the original directive.
(4) Weapon of Choice — having considered the ROE it may be desirable/necessary to specify
which weapons and types of ammunition may be used in each circumstance. In general, in these situations
weapons with man-in-the-loop target acquisition or engagement at short (visual) ranges will allow
8-44 CHANGE 2