Composite Warfare Commander (CWC) implications for Force XXI tactical command and control (C2).
William G. Braun
Abstract
William G. Braun
Abstract
This monograph examines the Navy's Composite Warfare Commander doctrine, and attempts to determine potentially relevant adaptations for Army Force XXI tactical command and control. Initially the monograph conducts a detailed study of the Navy's Composite Warfare Commander doctrine, the Army's Automated Battle Command System architecture, and Army Battle Command doctrine. These studies are compared and analyzed to determine implications of: command by negation philosophy as a guide to senior commanders, the different environments in which the Army and Navy command and control systems operate, and implications of a functional command model, on future Army tactical command and control. It concludes that the Army should adopt the command by negation philosophy as a tenant to Battle Command doctrine. This tenet focuses on the senior commander's responsibility to establish an environment conducive to controlling and encouraging subordinate initiative. Second, it suggests the Army should resource the function of directed telescopes and liaison officers. Third, it recommends the Battle Labs explore organizational structures based on functional commands, and test those structures for validity. Finally, it admonishes that change should only progress at a pace that advances in technology and funding can support.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
This monograph examines the Navy's Composite Warfare Commander doctrine, and attempts to determine potentially relevant adaptations for Army Force XXI tactical command and control. Initially the monograph conducts a detailed study of the Navy's Composite Warfare Commander doctrine, the Army's Automated Battle Command System architecture, and Army Battle Command doctrine. These studies are compared and analyzed to determine implications of: command by negation philosophy as a guide to senior commanders, the different environments in which the Army and Navy command and control systems operate, and implications of a functional command model, on future Army tactical command and control. It concludes that the Army should adopt the command by negation philosophy as a tenant to Battle Command doctrine. This tenet focuses on the senior commander's responsibility to establish an environment conducive to controlling and encouraging subordinate initiative. Second, it suggests the Army should resource the function of directed telescopes and liaison officers. Third, it recommends the Battle Labs explore organizational structures based on functional commands, and test those structures for validity. Finally, it admonishes that change should only progress at a pace that advances in technology and funding can support.
Key concepts: Battle, Command and control, Navy, Doctrine, Engineering, Aeronautics, Military doctrine, Operations research