MDMP Step 3, Step 4, Step 5, Step 6, Step 7, FOOTSTOMPS solved Questions and Answers

MDMP Step 3, Step 4, Step 5, Step 6, Step 7, FOOTSTOMPS solved Questions and Answers Course Of Action (COA) is a broad potential solution to an identified problem COA Analysis (Wargaming) is a disciplined process, with rules and steps that attempt to visualize the flow of the operation, given the force's strengths and dispositions, the enemy's capabilities, and possible COAs; the impact and requirements of civilians in the area of operations; and other aspects of the situation Each critical event within a proposed COA should be war-gamed using the action, reaction, and counteraction methods of friendly and enemy forces interaction. Purpose of COA Analysis To identify difficulties or coordination problems as well as probable consequences of planned actions for each COA being considered COA Analysis Input Updated running estimates. Revised commander's planning guidance. COA statements and sketches. Updated assumptions. COA Analysis Process Gather the tools. List all friendly forces. List assumptions. List known critical events and decision points. Select the war-gaming method. Select a technique to record and display results. War-game the operation and assess the results. Conduct a war-game briefing (optional). COA Analysis Output Refined courses of action. Potential decision points. War-game results (such as): Decision support template (DST) and decision support matrix (DSM). Synchronization matrix. Potential branches and sequels. Updated running estimates. Updated assumptions. Critical Event is an event that directly influences mission accomplishment. •Significant actions or decisions •Complicated actions requiring detailed study •Essential tasks Decision Point a point in space and time when the commander or staff anticipates making a key decision concerning a specific course of action. •Friendly force •Status of ongoing operations •CCIRs 3 War Gaming Methods Box Method Belt Method (preferred) Avenue-in-depth Method Belt Method .broken into phase lines (phases) .sectioning objectives .thinks about every phase to the objective (war gaming from start to finish) Box Method isolates concern to just the box (planning just in the box) Avenue-in-depth method .Only concerned with just your avenue through the objectives (kind of like a more in depth box) .Staying in your lane pg 126 on 6-0 Counteractions are the first side's responses to reactions Reactions are the opposing side's actions in response. With regard to stability operations, the war-game tests the effects of action, including intended and unintended effects, as they stimulate anticipated responses from civilians and civil institutions. Actions are those events initiated by the side with the initiative Sequence of Action-Reaction-Counteraction continues until the critical event is completed or until the commander decides to use another COA to accomplish the mission. 3 Different CA Perspectives of a COA 1. Feasibility of each COA from a CAO perspective 2. Civil considerations integrated into each COA 3. Assessment of CAO concept of support against the CAO MOEs and MOPs COA Comparison is an objective process to evaluate COAs independently and against set evaluation criteria developed during mission analysis and refined during COA development. COA Comparison Purpose To identify the strengths and weaknesses of COAs, enable selecting a COA with the highest probability of success, and further developing it in an OPLAN or OPORD. COA Comparison Input Updated running estimates. Refined COAs. Evaluation criteria. War-game results. Updated assumptions. COA Comparison Process Conduct advantages and disadvantages analysis. Compare COAs. Conduct a COA decision briefing. COA Comparison Output Evaluated COAs. Recommended COAs. Updated running estimates. Updated assumptions. Decision Matrix Most common method of COA comparison SHOULD NOT BE SOLE REASON FOR SELECTING COA Quantitative analysis of subjective weights COA Approval Input Updated running estimates. Evaluated COAs. Recommended COA. Updated assumptions. COA Approval Process Commander selects a COA. Commander issues final planning guidance. Issues WARNORD #3. COA Approval Output Commander-approved COA and any modifications. Final planning guidance including: Refined commander's intent (if necessary). New CCIRs to support execution. Priorities for warfighting functions, orders preparation, rehearsal, and preparation, priorities for resources, and risk. Updated assumptions. WARNORD # 3. COA Approval After evaluating products from the decision briefing, the commander selects the COA to best accomplish the mission COA Approval Purpose To receive the commander's decision on which COA to execute. COA Development planners use the problem statement, mission statement, commander's intent, planning guidance, and the various knowledge products developed during mission analysis. A prospective COA must be screened for validity Think ASCOPE as CA operators COA Development Purpose To generate options for subsequent analysis and comparison that satisfy the commander's intent and planning guidance COA Screening Criteria 1. Feasible 2. Acceptable 3. Suitable 4. Distinguishable 5. Complete Feasible The COA can accomplish the mission within the established time, space, and resource limitations Acceptable The COA must balance cost and risk with the advantage gained. Suitable The COA can accomplish the mission within the commander's intent and planning guidance. Distinguishable Each COA must differ significantly from the others (such as scheme of maneuver, lines of effort, phasing, use of the reserve, and task organization) Complete COA must incorporate— How the decisive operation leads to mission accomplishment. How shaping operations create and preserve conditions for success of the decisive operation or effort. How sustaining operations enable shaping and decisive operations or efforts. How to account for offensive, defensive, and stability or defense support of civil authorities tasks. Tasks to be performed and conditions to be achieved. COA Development Input Approved mission statement. Initial commander's intent, planning guidance, CCIRs, and EEFIs. Updated IPB products and running estimates. Assumptions. COA evaluation criteria. COA Development Process Assess relative combat power. Generate options. Array forces. Develop a broad concept. Assign headquarters. Prepare COA statements and sketches. Conduct COA briefing. Select or modify COAs for continued analysis.