![]() ![]() Sustainability is another clear requirement: if logistics, maintenance, or other factors prevent the NSFS from being able to respond to prolonged or multiple requests, NSFS won’t be available when needed. This is actually a loosening of the previous requirement, which mandated the 2.5 minute response to be until weapon impact. The current requirement is 2.5 minutes from call to fire until weapon response. This requires a response time of minutes against emerging threats or mobile targets. Timeliness is important because of the fluid nature of a battlefield, especially if forces are calling for fire against emerging threats. ![]() Having insufficient fire support could be a telling disadvantage for forces coming ashore initially, or during sustained operations.įire support needs to be timely, sustainable and effective. If NSFS has been required for these low intensity and regional wars, is their any reason to believe it won’t be required in similar situations in the future, or in a major war? While it may be far preferable to land troops where an enemy is not, an adversary will react or options for deploying troops from sea to shore may be limited. All these conflicts involved naval assets providing NSFS. The US Army’s ATP 3-09.42 lists naval fire support as one of the most likely means of fire support during airborne operations. Examples of these operations can be seen in recent history off Korea, Vietnam, Falkland Islands, Lebanon, Iraq and Yemen. ![]() Shaping the littoral environment, raids, choke points, forced entries, sustained operations near the coast and protecting or reclaiming disputed islands or coastal areas are all operations in which land forces may have to rely on heavy fire support delivered from offshore. ![]() Projecting power from carriers or launching cruise missile strikes is one thing but when Marines or Special Operations forces need support, are air and cruise missiles really the best option? What is the USN doing about Naval Surface Fire Support (NSFS) requirements? battleships. The ability of the US Navy (and others) to support troops ashore frequently comes up for discussion. The Navy has had no credible surface fire support capability since it retired. This article is the first of a two-part discussion Part 1: Where we are and how did we get here? ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |