MSTP LESSONS LEARNED

1

MSTP LESSONS LEARNED

2
Purpose

• Understand the problems related to MEF
• command and control during previous exercises
• Discuss solutions to overcome potential
• problems during this MEFEX

3
Lessons Learned

• Planning
• Top-Down Planning
• Single Battle Concept
• Integrated Planning
• Orders Development
• Information Management
• Intelligence
• Assessment
• Fires
• IO/C2W
• Logistics
• Rear Area Operations
• Relationship to the Component

4

• Top-Down Planning

Commanders Battlespace Area Evaluation
Focuses the planning effort
5
Single Battle

• MEF often subdivides battlespace
• and fails to focus a unified effort.
• No MEF level scheme of maneuver
• with multiple GCEs.
• Lack of guidance on decisive actions
• and shaping objectives dilutes
• staff / MSC focus.

• Use of main effort, supporting efforts, and
  reserve.
• Poor articulation of the plan (Orders
  Development/Transition).
• Warfighting Functions stove piped.
• MSC CONOPS do not add up to MEF mission.

Single battle ACTION ANYWHERE IS RELATED TO
ACTION EVERYWHERE ELSE
6
Integrated Planning
OPT

• No principal staff involvement in the OPT.
• Lack of adequate representation and LNOs.
• Lack of detailed planning.

C/S and principals directly involved
7
Orders Development

• Different versions of orders and appendixes
  posted on web pages.
• Briefings and briefing slides being used as
  authoritative documents, and often in conflict
  with the OPORD.
• No Orders Crosswalk or Reconciliation.
• FRAGORD published without a Basic OPORD

• Order is the ONLY authoritative document
• Use SOPs
• TERMINOLOGY

8
Information Management

• No Information Management Plan
• Too much raw data
• Repetitive / redundant information

Understanding (Situational Awareness)
Knowledge (Focused Information)
Information (Processed data)
Command Staff involvement in IM Plan
9
Intelligence

• Threat Assessment
• IPB
• Enemy COAs
• COGs
• HVTs
• Collection Plan
• PIRs
• DPs
• Support to Targeting
• Dissemination

Intelligence Drives Planning and Operations
10
Assessment
How we doin?
?
MEF/MSCs fail to plan for assessment (tasks,
objectives, endstates lack definition and
achievable conditions.)

• Assign staff responsibility
• Planned from the outset

11
Fires

• Link to Planners and Executors
• Intelligence
• ATO Cycle
• Joint Boards

MEF FIRES
C2
MEF Commanders Influence on the Current Battle
12
IO/C2W
Incredible potentialmust become our asymmetric
point of main effortbut not yet understood by
war fighters. Properly executed, IO could have
halved the length of the campaign. A force
multiplier.
Admiral James Ellis, Commander, JTF Noble Anvil
Has to be tied into the Joint Force Commanders
IO Plan
13
Logistics

• Lack of detailed logistics planning
• RSOI considerations

• Staff Estimates
• Planning Factors
• Consumption Rates
• Movement Control Plan

14
Rear Area Operations

• Not planned as part of the single battle by
• the OPT

• Command and Control
• MEF Staff / Coordinator / Commander?
• Specified functions to be accomplished
• Tasks / Authority / Resources

15
Relationships
CINC/JFC
MEF LNO Team
Staff Link to HHQs
MARFOR
OPT Link to HHQs
Adjacent
Force Fires
MEF LNO Team
Understand Command Relationships and Other
Authorities
16
MARINE CORPS PLANNING PROCESS
17
Summary

• Planning
• Top-Down Planning
• Single Battle Concept
• Integrated Planning
• Orders Development
• Information Management
• Intelligence
• Assessment
• Fires
• IO/C2W
• Logistics
• Rear Area Operations
• Relationship to the Component

Planning constitutes half of Command and
Control MCDP 5