MOUT Training and the IPB

Infantry Magazine, May-August, 2000 by Gary L. Brohawn, FREDERICK J. DuPONT

Defining the battlefield effects. By defining the battlefield effects, we determine what effects the environment will have on those operating in it. This assessment must be applied to soldiers, weapons, equipment, and training, from both the enemy and friendly perspectives. It is not uncommon for a certain characteristic of one environment to have a great effect on one force and little or none on another. One example that we find in subterranean conditions is limited visibility. Based on this analysis, we may determine the need for additional training in the use of night vision devices.

Evaluating the threat. Evaluating the threat will identify doctrine, tactics, high-value targets, and threat capabilities. Identifying these capabilities will help leaders focus and identify their training requirements for urban operations. Again using the subterranean example, if we determine that one enemy tactic is to booby-trap subterranean passages, we will then determine the importance of training our personnel in the detection and neutralization of these devices. This process can also be used at this point in determining whether this area should be avoided; that is, are the risks greater than the advantages? The commander may determine that an area is too risky and choose to isolate it instead of entering it. The time saved by not training on subterranean movement techniques can then be used for other training requirements. On the other hand, if the commander determines that the benefits of controlling the subterranean plane are vital to mission success, he has used the IPB process to identify critica l task training.

Determining enemy courses of action. During the process of determining the enemy's probable course of action, we attempt to determine his desired end-state or objective. This step in the IPB process allows us to look at our training plan realistically and determine what effect it may have on that objective. If the plan calls for training on something that will have little or no effect on the enemy's accomplishment of his goals, we will then want to focus our training on an area that does. For example, we could spend a great deal of time training for subterranean operations before discovering that the enemy does not need subterranean passages to achieve his objective. We will have wasted valuable training time and resources and received no benefit from our efforts. This step in the IPB process helps to keep us focused on what is truly important--mission accomplishment.

We have provided some examples of how the IPB process can help leaders identify, focus, and justify training requirements. The accompanying chart will help identify where this process can be incorporated into the development of focused, meaningful training.

Military forces have always applied some form of intelligence analysis to help them plan and conduct operations. If the statement "we fight as we train" is true, it only makes sense to use this same process when developing training requirements. While this process can be applied to any environment or condition, it is critical for urban operations. The complexities found on urban terrain demand this type of approach to ensure that our soldiers are properly trained to fight, survive, and win.