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):||6 January 2011|
|PDF File Size:||4.2 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||20.10 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Enemy capabilities and vulnerabilities identified during evaluation of the threat allow the commander and staff to make assumptions about the relative capabilities of the friendly command.
IPB forms the basis for defining the COAs available to the friendly command and drives the wargaming process that selects and refines them. When operating against a new or 34–130 well-known threat, he may need to develop his intelligence data bases and threat models concurrently.
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. Sometimes the battle will progress in a direction unanticipated during the initial IPB and wargaming. The battle staff then wargames the best friendly response or preemptive action based on the updated set of IPB predictions. Furthermore, every staff officer should prepare detailed IPB products tailored for his own functional area.
Both the event template and event matrix depict the times during which the activity is expected to occur.
FM – Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield –
Collection management synchronizes the activities of organizations and systems to provide intelligence 344-130 commander needs to accomplish his COA and targeting efforts. IPB products also enable staffs to exploit the modem technology of the ISOS by focusing collection systems that now provide near-real-time NRT information in sufficient accuracy to conduct direct targeting.
IPB identifies facts and assumptions about the battlefield environment and the threat. The products of IPB are the basis of the intelligence estimate.
The intelligence estimate forms the basis for the facts and assumptions of the decision making process, driving the other staff estimates and the remaining steps in the decision making process. Figure shows an example attack guidance matrix.
The results and products of IPB, conveyed in the intelligence estimate, are essential elements of the decision making process.
The details these tools provide are the basis of an effective intelligence collection plan. Every 34130 and every member of the staff needs to understand and apply IPB during the staff planning process. As part of COA analysis and comparison, or immediately after, the staff generally starts the targeting process with a targeting conference.
Army Publishing Directorate
Refined and updated requirements result from staff wargaming and selection of a particular friendly COA. This assessment of the 34-310 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. Therefore, staffs should ensure they use IPB, wargaming, and intelligence synchronization as dynamic tools rather than as one-time events.
Threat evaluation also provides the detailed information on the threat’s current dispositions, recent activities, equipment, and organizational capabilities the staff needs to complete their own staff estimates and planning. The targeting process results in targeting guidance that supports the command’s COA.
Such decisions can only be made within the context of a given situation. The relationship of the IPB process to each step in the decision making process is discussed below see Figure The staff continues to estimate the situation as 34130 operation progresses, adapting the command’s COA to unforeseen changes in the situation.
Characteristics of geography include general characteristics of the terrain and weather, as well as such factors as politics, civilian press, local population, and demographics.
This enables staff planning and the development of friendly COAs. He also approves the list of intelligence requirements associated with that COA and identities the most important as priority intelligence requirements PIR. Here you summarize the effects of the battlefield environment on friendly and enemy COAs, list the set of probable threat COAs in order of probability of adoptionand list the threat’s exploitable vulnerabilities. As the operation unfolds and the enemy’s intentions become more clear, reinitiate the IPB and decision making processes as needed.
Describe the Battlefield’s Effects. During this step the command’s collection manager develops collection strategies that will satisfy specific information requirements which support the targeting process. Accordingly, the major IPB effort occurs before and during the first of five steps in the f, making process. IPB products also contribute to the development of staff synchronization tools such as the DST and battlefield operating system BOS synchronization matrix, 344-130 in Figure IPB helps the commander identify his intelligence requirements and provides the focus and direction needed to satisfy them.
The commander bases his initial intelligence requirements on the critical gaps identified during IPB in the mission analysis step of the decision making process. Using the results of staff wargaming and IPB as a guide, they decide IPB is a systematic, continuous process of analyzing the threat and environment in a specific geographic area.
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. Generally, these are analyzed in more detail for areas within the command’s area of operations AO and battle space than for other areas in the AI. As intelligence confirms or denies planning assumptions on the battlefield environment or the threat’s COA, a continuous IPB process identifies new intelligence requirements.
Figure shows this wargaming. IPB contributes to complete staff synchronization and the successful completion of 344-130 other staff processeswhich are described below. They are to develop Appendix A discusses in more detail the relationship between IPB and wargaming.
New decisions and COAs lead to updating and refining the collection plan, intelligence synchronization, and new decision support tools. When the commander selects a particular friendly COA, arrmy also approves and prioritizes the supporting intelligence requirements. Finally, the commander leads the IPB effort.
The IPB which supports the decision making process must also remain dynamic, constantly integrating new information into the initial set of facts and assumptions. The targeting team further refines the event templates and matrices to include the information required to support targeting.