FM Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield. CHAPTER 1 . Everyone in the US Army conducts some form of IPB. For example: A rifleman in an infantry . United States Army Command and General Staff College .. Current doctrine accepts that goal, as reflected in FM “IPB is an analytical. FIELD MANUAL Headquarters. Department of the Army. Washington, DC , 8 July INTELLIGENCE PREPARATION OF THE BATTLEFIELD.
|Published (Last):||5 March 2007|
|PDF File Size:||5.54 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||12.18 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
The enemy COA models developed in step 4 are the products that the staff will use to portray the threat in the decision making and targeting processes. Every soldier thinks through an informal IPB procedure, but commanders and staff officers undertake a more formal process.
IPB products also contribute to the development of staff synchronization tools such as the DST and battlefield operating system BOS synchronization matrix, shown in Figure Appendix A discusses in more detail the relationship between IPB and wargaming. The event template identities the NAI where the activity will occur. As the size of the unit increases, the level of detail required in the IPB effort increases significantly. The command’s collection manager uses the results of IPB to develop and implement a collection plan that will satisfy these requirements see IPB and the Collection Management Process.
As part of his initial planning guidance, the commander uses these gaps as a guide to establish his initial intelligence requirements.
FM Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield – Figures B through B
This requires key members of the staff to “huddle” or conduct “mini-wargaming. The IPB which supports the decision making process must also remain dynamic, constantly integrating new information into the initial set of facts and assumptions. Every commander and staff officer needs to think through the effects the environment has on both threat and friendly operations.
He also prepares event templates and matrices that focus intelligence collection on identifying which COA the threat will execute.
Both the event template and event matrix depict the times during which the activity is expected to occur. Collection management synchronizes the activities of organizations and systems to provide intelligence the commander needs to accomplish his COA and targeting efforts.
At this level it requires little formal education beyond realistic field training exercises FTXs against a “savvy” ffm.
This guidance generates additional intelligence requirements in support of each potential friendly 34-30 the targeting process supports.
When the commander selects a particular friendly COA, he also approves and prioritizes the supporting intelligence requirements. The resulting intelligence synchronization matrix ISMas shown in Figuredepicts the collection strategies which support the command’s COA.
Products developed in this step might include, but are not limited to When operating against a new or less well-known threat, he may need to develop his intelligence data bases and threat models concurrently. It is designed to support staff estimates and military decision making. The products developed during IPB are so critical to this cycle and the staff planning effort that it is a distinct function.
As the battle progresses, IPB is used to continuously evaluate the situation facing the command, driving new iterations of the decision making process and the armt step of the intelligence cycle.
This supports the commander’s decisions during COA execution and helps him to quickly confirm or deny the assumptions used during COA development. Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield:: If BDA is required to support the command’s COA, the collection manager plans collection to satisfy that set of requirements as well. The entire staff executes the IPB process. Following staff recommendations, the commander decides upon a COA and issues implementing orders.
The collection manager uses these additional tools to ensure that the collection plan stays synchronized with the command’s operations. Step 2 evaluates the effects of the environment with which both sides must contend. IPB not only enables a staff to put steel on target but ffm helps prioritize and maximize the effects of targeting.
Doctrine Versus Tactics, Techniques, and Procedures. Intelligence synchronization is more than simply ensuring that collection systems of various sorts are operating 24 hours a day.
Once approved by the commander, the specific intelligence required to fill gaps in the command’s knowledge of the battlefield environment and threat situation becomes the command’s initial intelligence requirements. The battle staff then wargames the best friendly response or preemptive action based on the updated set of IPB predictions.
Applying the IPB process helps the commander srmy apply and maximize his combat power at critical points in time and space on 43-130 battlefield by This is primarily 34-1130 discussion of what is known about the threat facts and the results of analysis of those facts assumptions. The enemy is following his own plans and timelines; those determined during staff wargaming are only estimates. Accordingly, the major IPB effort occurs before and during the first of five steps in the decision making process.
Therefore, staffs should ensure they use IPB, wargaming, and intelligence synchronization as dynamic tools rather than as one-time events. The targeting team further refines the event templates and matrices to include the information required to support targeting. The decision to use a sketch instead of an overlay to depict the battlefield’s effects or aemy threat’s available COAs is a matter of TTP.
Some of these involve employment of the ISOS assets under his control. IPB helps the commander identify his intelligence requirements and provides the focus and direction needed to satisfy them.
During this step the command’s collection manager develops collection strategies that will satisfy specific information requirements which support the targeting process. This assessment of the environment always includes an examination of terrain and weather but may also include discussions of the characteristics of geography and infrastructure and their effects on friendly and threat operations.
In this step IPB products enable the commander to assess facts about the battlefield and make assumptions about how friendly and threat forces will interact on the battlefield.
Sometimes the battle will progress in a direction unanticipated during the initial IPB and wargaming. IPB identities the facts and assumptions about the battlefield and the threat that allow effective staff planning. The IPB process is continuous. IPB forms the basis for defining the COAs available to the friendly command and drives the wargaming process that selects and refines them.