TWS Meeting Minutes 22 November
Posted on: November 22,2019TECOM Warfighting Society
Agenda and minutes: TWS 22 Nov 2019
Board of Officers:
-Director: LtCol Nathan Dmochowski
-Secretary/Librarian: Mr. Chris Woodbridge
-Information Officer: LtCol Roy Draa
-Wargaming Officer: Dr. Ben Jensen
Attendees: LtCol Dmochowski, Col Woodbridge (ret), LtCol Roy Draa, Mr. Lehmann (MCWL), Mr. Don Vandergriff, Mr. Russ Evans (CSC CDET), Dr. Ben Jensen
Dialed in: Maj Kent (PACFLT), Mr. Riccio (CLNC CDET Warfighting Chapter), Maj Robichaux (Naval Integration, DCI), LtCol Ryan Benson (Req/Assessment Branch, CDD), LCDR John Ruggiero (NECC, N3), Mr. Mark Riccio (CLNC CDET Chapter), LtCol Scott Cuomo, Capt Walker Mills
1. TWC Business
a. Finalizing script for TWS promotional video with STRATCOM. Will be released to total force once complete.
b. TWS website (MCA&F) and online collaboration tool (Concept Board), getting finalized. Once complete we will load all the content and send out the link.
2. Previous discussion:
22 Nov Minutes:
EABO OAG: Lead is DC CD&I (CDD), formed out of the Maritime Working Group. Working to coordinate USMC/Navy POCs at the action officer level. LCDR Ruggiero and LtCol Ryan Benson are leads for coordination. TECOM Warfighting Society can/will contribute to EABO OAG, however, will be at the UNCLASS level.
Tie in with US Army, requirement for EABs in the Pacific will be more than the USMC can source, this will be a Joint mission with the Army? Will require INTEROPERABILITY for EABO/Inside Forces.
“Pushing red to blue kill box” EABs/Inside Forces could push enemy forces into Naval kill boxes in the littorals. Possible TTP for USMC support to sea control/denial.
Deception packages/TTPs will be critical to success of Inside Forces. Need to develop and/or re-invigorate TTPs for our inside forces. Specific capabilities may quickly lead to a classified discussion, however, TWS should explore deception at the conceptual level ISO EABO.
Is “Littoral Maneuver” a term we need to explore? If so, what does it mean? Is it different from our current understanding of maneuver?
EAB/Inside Forces are “a ship that doesn’t sink” for C2 purposes and approval of fires, integrated into the integrated maritime defense.
TWS Wargaming Plan:
Contact Layer:
-Integrate with SAW wargame to examine EABO/Inside Forces role in the contact layer. How do we establish an EAB? What is our plan to integrate our sea control/denial capabilities with our MDT allies and partners?
“Our engagement with our MDT allies will look like how we plan to fight.”
Scenario needs to articulate how inside forces have been trained to transition from steady-state contact layer (Security Cooperation/FID) to blunt layer (support the Navy in sea control/denial). Credible deterrent. Also integrate current/future MDT allies (get away from using “host nation”) capabilities to fight in the contact/blunt layers.
USMC needs to adjust exercise design to support transition from contact to blunt ISO our MDT allies. This will change our forces/capabilities we deploy as inside forces in support of TSC. This will be a large shift in how we think about our forward deployed forces, they would need to be deployed with full combat loads and resources available to conduct EABO.
Transition from contact to blunt:
Will fight the Heavy/Light Littoral Combat Team, need to include a DDG for an air defense platform, using configuration TBD but based off of our “tin can” graphics.
Wargames conducted by SAW/CSC, focused on details of how to shoot ships from a shore based platform. Shoot, displace, re-arm. Ammunition capacity becomes an issue, where do we store it? How is it distributed to firing platforms? Will this require infrastructure investment on host nation soil?
EABs potentially NOT survivable from a cruise missile attack, ammunition and fuel storage vulnerable
Littoral Combat Team:
-Needs to be larger than what is depicted in our “tin can graphics” with addition of more robust air defense capability
-one month into contact layer in an exercise posture
-More forces embarked than ashore
-Mix up packages to simulate networked sensor/shooter fight
-Experiment with sensor/shooter networks
Previous discussion from Nov meeting minutes:
-Littoral Combat Team:
-Forward positioned conducting security cooperation and man/trained/equipped to transition to EABO.
-Need to articulate how LCTs are supported with Logistics. (Maj Pena/NEXLOG). Need to for the concept of support with the Navy.
-Ground/Aviation/Navy logistics
-Pre-positioned logistics?
-Use current inventory of merchant ships and/or Army ships as logistics platforms?
-Potential for LCT to operate with an allied/partner force (AUS platoon as the maneuver element?)
-Inclusion of the Coast Guard will be key to EABO/Inside Forces, must be part of Navy/USMC doctrine, especially C2 (Composite Warfare construct)
-Coast Guard should be part of the LCT, will assist with providing access for the joint force in conducting security cooperation and EABO
-USMC has a gap in taking an operating concept and translating to man/train/educate/equip. Recommend the service begins experimentation focused on the TRAIN/EDUCATE and NOT exclusively on the EQUIP. Training and educating the force will take time, however, will also institutionalize the operating concept.
-Need to conduct more wargaming via Command to refine required capabilities, potential focus could include decoys, force laydown (current and future), NECC, logistics, etc.
f. Future Events
1) Build and conduct wargame simulations via Command to refine Littoral Combat Group/Team requirements/capabilities
2) IPR to CG TECOM, tentatively scheduled for 13 Dec.
3) Review/publish C2 paper from CLNC CDET Chapter
