Thinking About CAS without Thinking about CAS Doctrine: Selected Interactions of Institutional Processes within the Close Air Support Mission

Abstract

How should the joint force optimize the planning and execution of close air support (CAS)? Previous studies have examined CAS from the perspective of service- and platform-specific procedures. This thesis examines how the joint force, as a cohesive whole, can more optimally deliver lethal firepower against any adversary. Using institutional analysis, three clusters of perverse incentives that hinder joint cohesion are examined. These clusters include the following: (1) the perverse incentives arising from rules of engagement intended to address the conduct of "operations amongst the population," (2) the lack of interoperability arising from the multiplicity of service-specific platforms, and (3) the significant difference between training and real-world execution of CAS. This study reasons that institutions (which include rules, doctrine, practices, standard operating procedures, etc.) within each cluster generate unintended, path-dependent effects deleterious to cohesive joint air support. The thesis then proposes a new approach to CAS that mitigates these threats and fosters joint cohesion.

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
Dec 13, 2013
Accession Number
ADA598983

Entities

People

  • Aaron J. Carlson

Organizations

  • United States Army Command and General Staff College

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • Air Platforms
  • Biomedical
  • Energy and Power Technologies
  • Weapons Technologies

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Aerial Warfare
  • Afghanistan Conflict
  • Air Force
  • Air Power
  • Combat Operations
  • Combat Readiness
  • Contingency Operations (Military)
  • Fighter Aircraft
  • Iraqi-War
  • Lessons Learned
  • Military Organizations
  • Reconnaissance Aircraft
  • Rotary Wing Aircraft
  • Rules Of Engagement
  • Standards
  • Tactical Air Support
  • Warfare

Readers

  • Joint Military Operations and Doctrine.
  • Systems Analysis and Design