DO is dead, hail Enhanced Company Operations!

[Fuchs]

from somewhere else:

Discussion on Military.com on Distributed Ops Concept Evolves into Enhanced Company Ops

[jcustis]

What is perhaps more interesting Fuchs, is the statement I remember reading about earlier that said the platoon was the smallest element for independent level operations.

I think that when the price tag came in for the gear required to outfit everyone in a DO fashion, it was simply too much.

[Ken White]

Sure, there's a cost -- but the operative phrase was, as Fuchs pointed out "not comfortable with." That's partly a matter of trust, partly a matter of perception and tradition, partly (mostly?) a fear of what could go wrong. Anyway you slice it, it is, IMO, a regression. A really sad one I hate to see at that...

I think that anyone who said "the platoon was the smallest element for independent level operations" was stating their preference, not a fact. I'd also suggest that appears to me to be a very cautious, even over-cautious, approach to warfare.

Long ago on a galaxy far away, I worked with a unit in combat that refused to go anywhere or do anything in less than Company strength. After a few months I went to another unit that routinely operated at Platoon level and never hesitated to kick out Squads or even Fire Teams (and also to ignore the directive that one could not operate out of range of US Artillery) The only two firm rules in that unit was that one could not stay in one place for 24 hours, you had to move even if it was only tens of meters; and never to do the same thing twice. Other than that, Units were left alone to do their jobs. No doubt in my mind which was the more effective unit. Surprisingly -- or not -- the latter unit had lower casualties overall...

[jcustis]

A regression indeed. Maybe it is brought on in part by the same concerns that leave us encumbered with too many "pillows" that prevent us from outmatching the mobility of the current crop of bad guys.

Maybe it is because folks choose to ignore the solid lessons that line our collective history of modern war, from the LRDG, LRRPs, RLI, and on and on. We are talking about some brave men who faced daunting odds, and not always because the enemy was tough to find, but because if he found you he could bring in airpower to hunt you down, or he was also very adept at moving and fighting light.

Maybe it's because we'd need to get a whole lot better at training to the basics, which you and I agree is something not done well. The basics are so, so critical to the business of indpendent operations.

I'm not sure the highers ups can stomach another Lone Survivor scenario.

[Ken White]

sum it up pretty well. We'll see. One can always hope a change will occur and trickle down...

[Norfolk]

Glad the Death Certificate has been written for DO; sad that the USMC has found it easier to go to "Enhanced Company Operations". Granted, the USMC has perhaps the best Rifle Company layout in the business, and there are a lot of (other) Infantrymen out there who experience a noticeable Pavlovian response to Marine Infantry TO&E's. But I just don't understand why the USMC doesn't feel comfortable using Platoons to go out and whack the enemy; use your Squads to find em', then bring in the rest of the Platoon to finish 'em. And if things go really wrong, you've got a Platoon (or at least the remnants thereof) to fight your way out, not just a Squad.

But using an entire Company? The enemy will see (or hear) you coming long before you can get to grips with them. Enhanced Company Operations or not (whatever that is) still ends up tending to sacrifice or at least compromise the most important tactical attributes that small-units require (and should exploit to the max when possible) - surprise and agility.

Before I finish, I just want to to make clear that this wasn't a swipe at the Marines, or any other Army that prefers to use Companies where Platoons will do. As anyone can see in places from Fallujah to Garmser, the Marines are unsurpassed at getting it right at the tactical level, combining as they do all Arms right down to Battalion/MEU-level in a way that noone else does, and giving them a battlefield superiority that few can match at that level. I'm just saying that given all this, it does not make any sense that the Marines would see fit to be satisfied with this and not go whole hog to achieve tactical superiority and dominance at all tactical levels, from Battalion all the way down. Something just doesn't fit here. Why?

[Baguba]

From Vol. 21, No. 27, July 7, 2008 of www.InsideDefense.com’s: Inside the Navy.

"The Marine Corps calls the idea of dispersing Marine companies throughout a battlefield and equipping them to maneuver independently “enhanced company operations” (ECO). The concept was approved by senior service officials in April. It is the next iteration of the distributed operations concept, which called for breaking up units into much smaller groups for the same type of decentralized warfighting. “Our enemies will use large forces if it’s to their benefit in a certain area, but for the most part it’s going to be irregular warfare. And our companies, through enhanced company operations, will be trained and equipped better to fight both,” Murray said. “They can be distributed -- fight in a small, distributed unit -- or they can come together and fight in a more traditional manner.”

I would argue with around $630 million dollars of congressional funds allocated to DO as a concept and its related equipment and training, it is not dead. I doubt the Marine Corps wants to give all that money back.
What has DO influence so far?
1) ALL 36 Battalion T/E's have had a DO/IBEPP increase.
2) There has been an increased throughput at SOI(W), SOI(E) and 3d Marine Regimental Schools for Infantry Squad Leaders Course (ISLC).
3) MTT’s are traveling around the Corps teaching the Bn's leadership T3 so they can run their own Tactical Small Unit Leaders (TSULC) course [read fire team leaders course at Bn level].
4) Combat Hunter is being implemented from all entry level training (TBS, MCRD) to career level Schools in a building block approach.
5) Increase funding for new optics, OTH amphib vehicles, and tilt rotor planes has be allocated.
6) Enhanced Company Operations has been developed as a parallel course for the Marine Corps to get to DO, once technology, training and manpower can catch up.
7) DO is not a unit, it is a capability. This is not the Army's 10th Mountain that doesn't train in the mountains. It is a type of operation, a distributed one.
8) This evolution from the Sea Dragon experiments in the 90’s that have continued to be improved and transformed into DO, to the platoon that tested out some of the capabilities in Afghanistan, to ECO is a natural evolution to a level of proficiency we want our forces to get to in the near term.

So gents, I would argue it is not dead, we are still working on it. However, as administrations, change and CMC change the troughs and peaks of interest for DO vary, but the DO wave is still moving along

[jcustis]

It would seem that you happened upon this thread via a google string on your work, or have been lurking all along. What Quantico command might you be out of, and what aspects of DO are you working on? It helps readers put things in context.

And please humor me a bit. Is DO simply a term for employing good common sense across tactics, training, and equipping? I ask because it seemed that in 2006 there was the DO faddishness, as if we had no historians within our ranks anymore. It made me shrug my shoulders and ask "so what?"

[Baguba]

I actually did happen upon this thread by a Google search as I was looking for information on ECO. I have been following this concept since I saw Marines running around with PDA in Pendleton in 96' to being immersed in LOE1 from MCWL and following the conferences and papers since.