Joint Doctrine for Amphibious Operations - Historic Naval Ships ...

Fire Support Planning and Coordinationassessment of the desired effects. Theseeffects can be expressed in terms of typesof targets, priorities, and restrictions, andmay be both lethal and nonlethal. Thecommander’s objectives, guidance, andintent provide the critical basis in thetargeting process.•• Phase II — Target Development,Validation, Nomination, andPrioritization. Phase II analyzespotential targets , their components, andelements in order to determine theirsignificance and relevance based on thecommander’s objectives, guidance, andintent. Targeting strategies are studiedin order to determine the best way toachieve the desired effect and statedobjectives. Integrating the intelligenceplanning, collection, execution, andanalysis cycle is essential to support thetargeting effort. Targets are prioritizedbased on the commander’s prioritizedobjectives and guidance and thennominated through the targeting boardof the amphibious force for approval bythe designated commander.•• Phase III — Capabilities Analysis.Phase III is a predictive analysis toestimate the most likely outcome whenusing a lethal or nonlethal capability toachieve an effect against a specific target.Once the predictive analysis isaccomplished, target and weapon pairingis conducted.•• Phase IV — Commander’s Decisionand Force Assignment. Phase IVincludes the development of detailedmission orders, TA, target validation,identification of overall mission supportrequirements, and rehearsals as needed.•• Phase V — Mission Planning andForce Execution. Phase V involves theeffective coordination, deconfliction, andsynchronization to maximize the effectsagainst targets.•• Phase VI — Combat Assessment.Phase VI is the assessment of the degreeof success attained in the application offires. Combat assessment is composed ofthree interrelated components: (1) battledamage assessment; (2) munitions effectassessment; and (3) future COA or reattackrecommendations. This phase isthe commander’s primary feedbackmechanism within the targeting process.Assessment mechanisms must be able toprovide the commander with a methodto gauge the level of success in obtainingdesired effects, particularly when thoseeffects are psychological vice physicalin nature.• Targeting Board for the AmphibiousForce. The amphibious force normallyconducts an integrated targetingboard to provide broad fire supportand targeting oversight functions.These functions may include:coordinating desired effects; providingtargeting guidance and priorities(targeting objectives, high-value andhigh-payoff targets); identifying no strikeor prohibited targets; preparing theamphibious target list; evaluating theeffectiveness of fires; and establishingand shifting of FSCMs. The designatedcommander during the period withinwhich the targets are attacked has finalapproval authority over the fire supportplan and target list. Those targets to beserviced by organic assets are passed tothe appropriate agencies for servicing.Targets identified for servicing by nonorganicattack systems are forwarded tothe next higher-level targeting board forconsideration. The amphibious force willprovide, at a minimum, liaison officersto this targeting board (i.e., componentlevel)and may provide liaison officersVII-7