ABSTRACT

The concept of Command Post Anywhere (CPA) revolves around the ability to disperse the Command Post (CP) to footprint among one's forces in order to achieve pervasive command presence, such that the CP no longer presents a significant target for the enemy to detect and destroy. With CPA, every functional cell of the Brigade CP operates physically apart from one another over wide distances in an area of operation, but is still connected wirelessly with one another via TeamSight - a collaborative environment consisting of a team operating picture and a suite of communications tools. This concept was field-tested in an experiment in conjunction with an Armoured Brigade CP exercise conducted at Shoalwater Bay Training Area (Queensland, Australia) from 21 to 23 October 2004.

In evaluating the feasibility of CPA, several aspects were considered; sensemaking ability, situation awareness, operational tempo and survivability. The findings from this experiment, as determined by three measures (communication activity, situation awareness assessments and contextual inquiry) successfully demonstrated that CPA, supported TeamSight, is indeed a viable concept.

Mervyn Cheah
Chew Lock Pin
Elsie Toh
Gwenda Fong
Cheryl Ann Teh

INTRODUCTION

A Command Post (CP) is an organisation of people and systems by which a commander exercises his command and control (C2) of forces. We often associate it with fixed physical structures but this mental construct is based on yesterday's technology and equipment that require fixed structures to contain and operate. In the age of network-enabled warfare, a CP is more appropriately seen as an information structure supporting rich communication and collaboration between a commander and his staff, regardless of physical separation. Modern technology affords the ability to reconstitute existing structures to overcome physical constraints and to improve the information flow between key personnel in a CP.

BACKGROUND

The concept of Command Post Anywhere (CPA) is an effort to move away from traditional tenets of what constitutes a CP, of which the major ones are described below.

Physical Co-location

It has long been accepted that a CP serves the function of a physical meeting place for the commander to confer with his staff. Each Principal Staff Officer (PSO) has dedicated sources of information and areas of expertise to assist the commander in decision making. Hence, there is a need for the command team to meet for the purpose of knowledge sharing. Currently, the primary means to support the complex and interactive nature of discussions is face-to-face communication among a physically co-located team. However, with modern technology offering greater bandwidths for communication and data throughput, it is possible for individuals who are physically separated to communicate and collaborate via these tools as if they were physically co-located.

Command Brief

In a similar vein, the practice of conducting a command brief at periodic intervals - gathering of the principal staff to update one another and the commander on recent developments exists in today's CP. However, this may not be necessary if the team members were constantly communicating with one another via communication and collaboration tools. Collation and analysis of information can be performed and disseminated in real time among the command staff, instead of waiting for the scheduled briefings, which is the current practice.

Hierarchical Command Structure

A conventional CP is organised hierarchically in order to handle the high complexity of war fighting by delegation of authority to sub-commands - the principle of divide and conquer. This need for centralised command is a function of the complexity of the problem space. It is manifested in the way PSOs currently update and receive guidance from the commander primarily at the scheduled command briefs, instead of being able to exchange information continually between cells (including the commander's cell). With the availability of an information structure that facilitates the lateral exchange of information, adaptive teams predicated on self-synchronisation could be constituted to better manage the complexities of warfighting.

Sequential Planning

In addition, it is assumed that hierarchical CPs have to work in sequence, i.e. higher commands cascade plans downwards to ensure higher-HQ intent is fulfilled by ground units. A process strings together the decision products of these hierarchical CPs. Hence, the Operations Order developed by a Brigade is handed to the Battalion HQ, which in turn will develop their sub-level intent and plans and so on. While some parallel planning is attempted today, the process is by and large sequential to ensure that coordination points are properly dealt with. This could be a result of current technology not being able to support the high degree of coordination required between horizontal domains and vertical command structures for parallel planning to take place.

Brigade Main and Tactical CP

Lastly, and perhaps most importantly, an organisation like the Brigade commands and controls forces spanning 15km - 30km in depth and 10km - 20km in width. With such a wide area of operation, a Brigade CP is often separated into the Main and Tactical CPs. The Brigade Commander is usually positioned right up at the front with his manoeuvre units to enable him to directly experience the battle, provide a command presence, and to make critical decisions regarding the activation of reserves or request for reinforcements. It would however be impractical for the commander to bring his entire command team with him as it would be too big a target and very immobile; hence, only the Fire Support Coordinator (FSCOORD) and the Intelligence (S2) cell follow him, while the rest remain stationary at the Brigade Main CP to manage resources. Clearly, in such an arrangement, the mobility of the commander and his team is constrained by the ability to establish communication links between the manoeuvre forces, the Brigade Main CP and the commander.