1978Defense Technical Information Center (DTIC)Requires access

Maneuver and Fire Support Study (MANFIST). Volume I. Executive Summary.

B. P. WARD, Hillis,Harry

Open publisher page 0 citations

Abstract

This document is the final report of the Maneuver and Fire Support Study. The purpose of this study was to determine the more cost effective one-battalion add-on to the heavy division: an additional maneuver battalion or an additional field artillery battalion equivalent. This study was conducted in response to ASD consolidated guidance and to provide information for formulation of the FY81-85 POM. A tradeoff evaluation, using TRADOC Standard Scenario Europe I, Seq 2A (Short Warning) for combat developments, was conducted among force increments of field artillery, armor, and mechanized units. Assessments were made at the division level using heavy divisions to form the basis for the investigations. The study was limited to conventional warfare. The Ground Combat Model (GCM), developed by the Combat Operations Analysis Directorate, was used in conjunction with a map exercise for the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness of different force increments. Findings of this study were based in the analysis of the game results for each force alternative. Results indicate that the most promising alternative comprised a balanced mix of maneuver and artillery fire support. (Author)

About this research paper

What this paper is about

This document is the final report of the Maneuver and Fire Support Study. The purpose of this study was to determine the more cost effective one-battalion add-on to the heavy division: an additional maneuver battalion or an additional field artillery battalion equivalent. This study was conducted in response to ASD consolidated guidance and to provide information for formulation of the FY81-85 POM. A tradeoff evaluation, using TRADOC Standard Scenario Europe I, Seq 2A (Short Warning) for combat developments, was conducted among force increments of field artillery, armor, and mechanized units. Assessments were made at the division level using heavy divisions to form the basis for the investigations. The study was limited to conventional warfare. The Ground Combat Model (GCM), developed by the Combat Operations Analysis Directorate, was used in conjunction with a map exercise for the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness of different force increments. Findings of this study were based in the analysis of the game results for each force alternative. Results indicate that the most promising alternative comprised a balanced mix of maneuver and artillery fire support. (Author)

Why it matters

A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

This document is the final report of the Maneuver and Fire Support Study. The purpose of this study was to determine the more cost effective one-battalion add-on to the heavy division: an additional maneuver battalion or an additional field artillery battalion equivalent. This study was conducted in response to ASD consolidated guidance and to provide information for formulation of the FY81-85 POM. A tradeoff evaluation, using TRADOC Standard Scenario Europe I, Seq 2A (Short Warning) for combat developments, was conducted among force increments of field artillery, armor, and mechanized units. Assessments were made at the division level using heavy divisions to form the basis for the investigations. The study was limited to conventional warfare. The Ground Combat Model (GCM), developed by the Combat Operations Analysis Directorate, was used in conjunction with a map exercise for the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness of different force increments. Findings of this study were based in the analysis of the game results for each force alternative. Results indicate that the most promising alternative comprised a balanced mix of maneuver and artillery fire support. (Author)

Key concepts: Artillery, Aeronautics, Engineering, Division (mathematics), Operations research, Ammunition, Computer science, Mathematics

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Maneuver and Fire Support Study (MANFIST). Volume I. Executive Summary. — Research Paper | ScholarLens