___________ _______ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -~~

—,

~~~~ 

1EVEL

HELD EVALUATION OF THE COMBAT

~

COMMANDER’S GUIDE TO AERIAL SUR VEILLANCE AND RECONNAISSANCE RESOURCES

( UId

~ 

Shvern

HU MAN FACTORS TECHNICAL AREA

1 r

~nnnr~ OCT 24

II u3u~L’

~

uuL.S

~

irJ B

j ~ 

U. S. Army

Research $n~

titute ~

or the Btiiavioral and Social Scienccs

July 1979

Approv d for public rd .... ; dèstrlbufton unlêmltsd

— —--
r

~~~~

U. S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE

FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

A Field Operat ing Agency under the Jur isdiction of the

Deputy Chief of Staff for Personnel

WILLIAM L. HAUSER

JOSEPH ZEIDNER Colonel . U S Army

Technical Director Commander

Ploncu

DI$T~IIUTION: Primsry dis*ributis.~ of this u pon liii been unids by ARI. P1e .d~m.s consipondsncs

coacornin, distribution of sport, so: U. $. Acoty Nassa,cf~ Institute for the Ithoriorsi and Socisi $cisncos

ATTP4~ PE~~I. . 001 f wnlio

~

ver Avenue. s

~ensndrIa Virginia 22333.

fi~

5AL flI

~~~~rn~~d This mport .,_, be dsssrsysU idisn it Is no lsn~~ nisdid. PInist do not utum it to

Ito U. S. Anny ~ssssrth hussitu,, for Isis Iuliorlorsi Sad SeelsI Sctoá..

~a The findings In this upon po not so be osapouui stan OffIcof Osp,n,nsns of Isle ArMy ps.It*i,

UnION co dtelgiuaud by otfuir Suthsrilsd dss~

mons.

- _____
—i

Unclassified -

SECURITY CLASSIFICATION OF THIS PAGE (C),.. D..

~~ EsiI.r.d)

REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE BEFORE COMPLETIN G FORM . REPORT NUMBER 2. GOVT ACCESSION NO 3. RECIPIENT’S CATALOG NUMBER

chnical Paper

~ 80 _____________________________

V~~i

~~~~ ~~ i ’-r-— .

~~

—~~’T~~~’ . ~~~~ . 

_ ~~~~~~~~~~~ 

5. TYPE OF REPOR T & PERIOD COVERED

(f ELD ,

~~~ LUATION OF THE ,

~~ MBAT ~~~MM2IN1%R’ s •

\

IDE ~~~RIAL ~~V~

J(VEILI~~~CE AI RECONNAISSANcE) -- OUR~ES ~ _. ... 6. PERFORMING ORG. REPORT NUMbER

7. AuTHO*(.) C. CONTRACT OR GRAN T NUNBER(.)

ldi/~~vern~~~~~ 

____

I.—.efir ~~~~ WG ORGA ATION NAME AND ADDRESS *0. PROGRAM ELEMENT. PROJECT , TASK

AREA * WoRK UNIT NUMURS

Army Research Institute for the Behavioral ~~~~ ,

Pjj ~~

Social Sciences, 5001 Eisenhower Avenue ‘ (

~~ 

12Q763743A774

o Alexandria, VA 22333 __________________________

II. CONTROLUNG OFFICE NAM E AND ADDRESS —-RtrB~ T CA

U.S. Army Intelligence Center and School f fl Jul~~~~~79

Fort Huachuca, AZ ~~~~~~~~ 

~~ BER GFIAOO -

14. MONITORING AGENCY NAME & ADDRESS(1I dillorwI ft., Cant,.IlIne Otflcs~

) IS. SECURITY CLASS. (of lAS. r

~pott)

Unclassified

—— *5.. DECLASSIFICATION/ DOWNGI*AOIHG SCHEDULE

16. DISTRIbUTION STATEMENT (of eAt. R.port)

Approved for public release; distribution unlunited

*7. DISTRIbUTION STArEMENr(.s ho .b.S,.cS ,., t. ,. d hi Stock 20, I dSU.,we ft. , R.poil)

_____________ 

D DC I IS. SIJPPS.OMINTANY NOTES 

~ ~~~~~ 

( ifl (11?

-- U, OCT 24 1919

*5. kEY WORDS (ConfJ nu dn r.v.r•. .Id. U n.c••a—v wd Sd.ntlty by block nt~~br) 

~~~~~ 

U 1

Aerial surveillance and reconnaissance ~ ~

‘ 

B

AS&R resources

4 Questionnaire

Combat intelligence

Evaluation of manual 20. AUSTRAC7 (Clinlu.. ~~ ..V ’ .. iI* if .

~~~~wp ~~~ l4.oSIfr by block ma,b.e)

~~ ‘~~~~~This research evaluated the Combat Conm*ander’s Guide to Aerial Suzvei].- lance and Reconnaissance Resources on its usefulness, accuracy, clarity, and

completeness. ..

~~ ~~~ An evaluation questionnaire was prepared and distributed, together With

copies of the Com mander ’s Guide, to 100 officers at U.S. Army units in b~

Aroa, Germany , Fort Hood, Tex., and Fort Bragg, N.C. Participants were required to

DO ~~~~ 1173 EDITIOn or I NOV SO Is 0510l ETE 

Unclassified

-

V , V - . SECURITY CLAUIFICATIOM OP Thus PAOE (Saw Oaf. £IW.v.d)

~~~~~~~ ‘~~~~~ • V ’ ~~~~~~~~ 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -~~~~
.—. ~~~~~~~~~~~~ V V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V V • V V V V - V~

V _____ V V - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V__ _V~~._V ,m L ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

r

Unclassified

USGUNTY C&.A*SIFICATION OF YNIS PAGE~

W Oaf. 4af~~~~

20.

have either command experience at the battalion level or above or G3/S3

experience. The questionnaire included a structured evaluation of the

main sections of the Conisander’s Guide as well as a global assessment of

the document. Participants could also elaborate further on their answers

or comnent on topics not specifically addressed in the questionnaire .

Sixty questionnaires were retuxned-—27 from battalion commanders and V

executive officers and 33 primarily from officers in G3/S3 assigrUSents.

The individual sections of the Commander ’s Guide were judged to be mpte

useful than the document as a whole • This seemingly paradoxical result was

obtained with both the str*fZ~

tured rating scales and the open-ended comments.

Raters considered the Cosunander ’s Guide to be more suitable for the G2/S2 than

for the battalion or brigade commander . Raters ’ comments concerning possibly

excessive detail for a commander’s needs are consistent with this finding.

Reference to specific AS&R assets are outdated in many instances. Rapid

changes in the AS&R area dictate frequent revision of any publication that

refers to specific equipuient

The anticipated frequency of use of the Commander ’s Guide would increase

greatly during wartime. If the Ccmnmander’s Guide is revised, fundamental restructuring would be required to achieve high use rates by commanders during

peacetime conditions. A consideration of the type of AS&R information tha t

commanders are able and willing to use , as opposed to what they should ideally

use, would be required.-

~ Othepiise a J~ chn~

i.cai1y exc~ll .

~~ublica~.jcu.. .~~ght

remain unused on the commander ’s shelf or be passed on to his l

~~~~r S2. Unless the user has become familiar with the Commander ’s Guide, its effectiveness

in an emergency is unlikely.

¶

T

• IVVV ’

I — 

V ~

‘ 

•

‘ I

L Accas~

ois v, V - 

NT~ WWtS SSCtIUU~~~ V 

V 

0% OuffS.ctiss D

uNANNOUNcED 0

JUSTIFICATiON _________

~ILWH~/ØMUM~ 01st. AVAIL ~4/or $J’(CIM~

~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~V -

_ -~ ~~~V - 

—‘

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V • V V ~~~~~~~~~~~ __~

____. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Technical Paper 380

FIELD EVALUATION OF THE COMBAT

COMMANDER’S GUIDE TO AERIAL SURVEILLANCE AND RECONNAISSANCE RESOURCES

Uldi Shvern

Harold Martinek, Team Chief

Submitted by:

Edgar M. Johnson, Chief

HUMAN FACTORS TECHNICAL AREA

Approved By:

A. H. Blmbaum, Acting Director

ORGANIZATIONS AND SYSTEMS

RESEARCH LABORATORY

Joseph Zsldner TECHNICAL DIRECTOR

U.S. ARMY RESEARCH INSTITUTE FOR THE BEHAVIORAL AND SOCIAL SCIENCES

5001 EiNnhowsr Avenue, Alexandria, Virginia ~~333 V

Off ice, Deputy Chief of Stiff for Psrsonnel

Dspe Vnsnt of th.Mny

July 1979

Ammy_Project Numbsr Surveillance Systims V

2Q7S3743A774

.

S,,,.,..ad fir ~~~~ ieis.m; 

~~S*VIbU*IOI* URNIeiISd.

-

~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VVV _ _V ~~~~~ ~~~~~ V • V_ V~~ ~~~ V — __________ - 

V
~ - ~~,VV ~~~.

~~~V V_ V~~~~~ ~V~~V V - - ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

V V

ARI Research Reports and Technical Papers are intended for sponsors of

R&D tasks and other research and military agencies. Any findings ready for

V 

implementation at the time of publication are presented in the latter part of

the Brief. Upon completion of a major phase of the task, formal recommendations for official action normally are conveyed to appropriate military

agencies by briefing or Disposition Form.

iv

V

~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VV ~~~~~~ ~V_ ~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ---~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~ --~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ V~~~~~~~~ V V V V ~~~~~V_ ~~V V ~~ - -‘ —

V
- V V VV ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~

FOREWORD

The Human Factors Technical Area of the U.S. Army Research Insti- V

tute for the Behavioral and Social Sciences (AR!) is concerned with the V

greater demands placed on human resources by increasingly complex battlefield systems for acquiring , transmitting , processing , and disseminating V

information . Research in this technical. area focuses on human perform- V

ance probl ems related to interactions within c~~~~nd and control centers,

as we].l as issues of system development. Research is conducted in areas

such as software development , topographic products and procedures, tactical symbo].ogy , user-oriented systems, information management, staff V operations and procedures, decision support , and sensor-system integration and use.

One area of special concern is the efficient, effective use of sur- V

veillance and reconnaissance resources. The continued proliferation of

information-gathering equipment , rapid technological changes, and the

demands of modern warfare have dramatically increased the complexity of

the surveillance and reconnaissance system. Skilled and knowledgeable

users and collection managers must insure that the use of this equipment

meets command needs.

The collection manager must understand user needs and procedures

for planning, coordinating, and managing equipment. The tactical commander must understand the capabilities and limitations of the surveillance and reconnaissance system. Previous ARI research (Technical Paper

325) indicated that combat arms students receive little training in

aerial surveillance and reconnaissance (AS&R) resources, and the students

believed they needed more information in this area . To help meet this

demand, AR! developed the “Combat Commander ’s Guide to Aerial Surveillance and Reconnaissance Resources” in 1974 . This report describes a

field evaluation of the Commander’s Guide undertaken to determine its

usefulness to the combat commander; the report also identifies revisions

required because of changes in doctrine and advances in technology .

V

_________ - - - - V 

~~~~~~~~~~ V VV__ ~~ • V VV V -V V V V~~~~~~ V
V ~~~~ - - - - V~VV• ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ :V V~ V~~- -• ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

V - :

Research on sensor systems integration and utilization is conducted

as an in-house effort, augmented through contracts with organizations

selected for their abilities to perform research on sensor systems. The

present in—house research was conducted in response to general requirements of Army Pro)ect 2Q763743A774 and to special requirements of the

U.S. Army Intelligence Center and School, Fort Huachuca , Ariz. Special

requirements are contained in Human Resource Need 78-78, “Evaluation of

the Combat Commander’s Guide to Aerial Surveillance and Reconnaissance

Resources.”

JO EPH ZE~~4ER

hnical Director

I

vi

— ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V -~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ..
V 

~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~ —V--- ~~~~~~~~ V V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ - V_lq

V - V

FIELD EVALUATION OF THE COMBAT COMMANDER’S GUIDE TO

AERIAL SURVEILLANCE AND RECONNAISSANCE RESOURCES

V BRIEF

Requirement:

To evaluate the Commander ’s Guide with respect to its usefulness,

accuracy , clar ity, and completeness and to identify portions that are

obsolete or inaccurate .

V Procedure :

An eva luation questionnaire was prepared and distributed , with copies

of the Commander ’s Guide, to 100 officers at U.S. Army units in Korea,

Germany , Fort Hood , Tex., and Fort Bragg , N.C. Participants were re— :

~ -

quired to have either command experience at the battalion level or above V

or G3/S3 experience. The questionnaire was divided into three parts:

(a) participant background information ; (b) evaluation of six major sec- V

tions of the Commander ’s Guide and field aids (infantry/artillery/armor) ;

and (c) global evaluations of the Commander ’s Guide . Participants could

also elaborate on any of their answers or comment on topics not addressed

in the questionnaire .

Findings:

Of 1.00 questionnaires , 60 were returned-—27 from battalion commanders

and executive officers and 33 primarily from officers in G3/S3 assignments.

There was uniformity in the ratings of the individual sections on V the factors of usefulness, accuracy, clarity , and completeness. On a V

scale of 1 to 4, no factor was rated below 2.60 or above 3.20 for any

section . No section averaged below 2.83 or above 3.1.3 across these four

factors.

Although usefulness—-the most crucial factor——was rated at an average of 2.98 for the individual sections, it scored only 2.17 for the Commander ’s Guide as a whole (with respect to the rater ’s present assignment) . The Commander’s Guide was perceived as being far more useful

“elsewhere in the Army” (average rating of 3.18). With respect to each

of five specific uses listed in the questionnaire , however , a much greater

percentage of the raters judged the Commander ’s Guide to be suitable in

their present assignment than “elsewhere in the Army.” Revision of the

Commander ’s Guide was expected to raise its usefulness only minimally

(from 2.17 to 2.39 on a scale of 1 to 4).

V 

vii

—~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -~~~~ -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ V~ ~~~~~~~~~~ - -
______ 

7~~~~~~~ VV 

- ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

- ________

V V

~~

V~ - - - - - ~• V~V - - ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~

_ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ _ V V ~~~~

The open-ended comments were evenly divided between favorable and

unfavorable when they pertained to individual sections, but when these

comments referred to the Commander ’s Guide as a whole, more than twothirds were unfavorable. Raters considered the Commander ’s Guide most

suitable for the G2/S2, considerably less appropriate for the battalion

or brigade (Bn/Bde ) commander and G3/53, and even less suitable for miiitary intelligence (MI ) officers in general . Obsolescence of references

to AS&R equipment was the most frequently suIx~

itted comment , particuLarly by nonconimanders.

The anticipated frequency of use of the Commander ’s Guide was much

greater for wartime than for peacetime conditions.

Utilization of Findings:

The portions of the Commander ’s Guide dealing with specific AS&R

assets should no longer be used for either reference or training , because

numerous changes have occurred since publication of the Commander ’s Guide

in 1974.

Fundamental restructuring of the Commander ’s Guide is necessary to

obtain high peacetime utilization rates by commanders . However, if references to obsolete AS&R assets and outdated doctrine were updated the

document would retain its original level of usefulness for G2/S2

personnel .

I

}

~~~~~~ 

- 

viii 

V V -- -- a VV V~~~~~~ - - - - S - -
-. - —-

— ~~~~~~~~~~~~ V -

I FIELD EVALUATION OF THE COMBAT COMMANDER’S GUIDE TO V AERIAL SURVEILLANCE AND RECONNAISSANCE RESOURCES

-

V

CONTENTS

Page

V 

INTRODUCTION 1

OBJECTIVE 4

METHOD V

Description of Questionnaire 4

Participants 4

RESULTS S

Description of Participants S

Evaluation of Commander’s Guide 5

General Comments 8

Evaluation of Specific Sections 8

DISCUSSION 12

Usefulness 12

Obsolescence 13

User Population l4~ V 

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION 14

APPENDIX A. QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE USES OF “COMBAT COMMANDER’S

GUIDE TO AERIAL SURVEILLANCE AND RECONNAISSANCE

RESOURCES” 17

B. RATERS ’ COMMENTS 35 V

DISTRIBUTION 41 —

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Main sections of the Commander ’s Guide to Aerial

Surveillance and Reconnaissance Resources 3

2. Frequency of performance of six specified

AS&R activities by participants 6

:1 ix 1 - ~

iIg1J 

- 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V~---~~~~~~~~ -- — V - - ‘4
-

~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

— — - V -

LIST OF TABLES (Continued)

Table 3. Percentages of raters judging the Commander ’s Guide

to be useful for different applications in various

positions 7

4. Percentage of raters expecting given frequency of

use of Commander ’s Guide under two conditions 7

V 5. Percentage of raters indicating that all officers V in specified positions should receive Commander ’s

Guide 8

6. Number of positive and negative comments given by

the raters on the Commander ’s Guide as a whole 9

7. Mean ratings for different sections of the

Commander ’s Guide 9

8. Number of comments on each section of the

Commander ’s Guide by category of comment 10

B—i . Number of raters making various non—unique

comments on the Guide as a whole 35

B—2. Number of raters making various non—unique

comments on section 1 of the Guide 3

B-3 . Number of raters making various non—uni que

comments on section 2 of the Guide 37

B—4 . Number of raters making various non-unique

comments on section 3 of the Guide 38

V B—S. Number of raters making various non-unique

comments on sections 5, 6 , and 7 of the Guide 39

B—6. Number of raters making various non-unique

comments on the field aids 40

V x

•

~V V -V~ - V -~ - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - ~~~ V~~V
______________________-. 

—V- —

( 

~~~~~~~~ 

V

FIELD EVALUATION OF THE COMBAT COMMANDER’S GUIDE TO

AERIAL SURVEILLANCE AND RECONNAISSANCE RESOURCES

INTRODUCTION

The Army Research Institute (ARI ) developed the “Combat Commander ’s

Guide to Aerial Surveillance and Reconnaissance Resources” in 1974 to

supplement the manuals available to combat commanders . Research had found

that combat arms officers received limited training in the use of aerial

surveillance and reconnaissance (AS&R) resources ; these officers believed

they could use more information on the effective use of AS &R. 1

V 

The Commander ’s Guide was developed for the combat commander concur-

- rently with the development of the “Aerial Surveillance and Reconnaissance

- MANAGER” for the G2 air officer (now the surveillance and reconnaissance

officer). The two documents are parallel because similar methodology was - used in their development and each was designed for a specific need in

AS&R.

V 

The Commander ’s Guide was based on material drawn from a number of

manuals and training documents; this material was summarized and integrated

into a convenient format . Distributed worldwide in 1974, the Commander ’s

Guide has been used in the training of military intelligence (MI) active

and reserve officers and has been used as a reference by numerous individuals, units , and organizations throughout the Army .

V The Commander ’s Guide was intended to help the combat commander , pri-

- man ly at battalion and brigade levels, take full advantage of the AS&R

V system. The objectives of the Commander ’s Guide were to (a) describe the

V AS&R system , (b) show commanders how to use the system , and (C) help commanders to visualize what to expect from the AS&R system as they prepare

estimates of the tactical situation .

V The Commander ’s Guide is organized around the capability of the AS&R

system within each of three tactical environments-—offense , defense , and

retrograde . Information is further organized for the infantry , armor , and

artillery branches to permit each to better apply AS&R capability to specific fire and maneuver requirements.

The first section in the Commander ’s Guide , “The Army Aerial Surveillance and Reconnaissance System ,” explains the intelligence cycle and the

steps involved in the AS&R system ’s response to the commander ’s requests

for information .

1

Vecchiotti, R. A., Berry , J. L., & Narva , M . A. Training in Utilization V~ of Surveillance and Reconnaissance Resources by Combat Arms Officers.

ARI Technical Paper 325, September 1978.

1.

L -

~~~~~~~~ --~~ - ~~ ~~~~~V -

~~ - V V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
-

~

The “Aerial Surveillance and Reconnaissance Assets ” section summarizes the functions and capabilities of key personnel and equipment in the

AS&R system. The AS&R organizational structure and the responsibilities

of its components are shown. A series of figures shows the AS&R resource

distribution within various divisions. The section also discusses availability of support from higher echelon.

The third section of the Commander ’s Guide, “Information Request and

Response,” explains the request procedures, discusses the key items in

the request form, and explains the types of reports available from the

AS&R system. This section also includes an AS&R Information Request Pro—

cedure Check List.

“The Infantry Commander and AS&R” section discusses the aspects of

V AS&R that are most pertinent to the infantry commander ’s role. His information requirement categories are divided into tactical information

and environmental information , which are further subcategorized. Information requirement categories are considered separately for each of the

three major tactical actions of defense, offense, and retrograde . With- V in each tactical action , the informational products of the AS&R system

are given in terms of AS&R mission capability and AS&R reports. The

section concludes with practical exercises for the infantry commander.

Similar sections were developed for the artillery commander and the

armor commander . Table 1 lists the main sections and subsections of the

H Commander ’s Guide.

Smaller format (5 x 7 inches) “field aids” were also prepared for

each of the three combat arms areas. These field aids include summaries

of the first three sections of the Commander ’s Guide and most of the V material found in the appropriate combat arms section . They were de—

signed for portability in situations where the bulkier Commander ’s Guide

is not as convenient.

Although the Commander ’s Guide has been in use for several years, no systematic assessment had been made of its usefulness or of the potential need for- revision and updating . The current research was designed to determine whether the Commander ’s Guide was still fulfilling

its original purpose. A questionnaire was designed to elicit comments

and ratings concerning specific aspects of the Commander ’s Guide . This

V 

assessment technique was chosen because it permitted explicit and efficient evaluation of the most crucial features of the document . The questionnaire approach was previously used for evaluating the “Aerial Surveillance and Reconnaissance MANAGER .”2

2

Bedarf, E. W ., and Potash , L. M. A Field Evaluation of the Aerial Surveillance and Reconnaissance MANAGER . ARI Research Memorandum 75-14,

V 

December 1975.

V V 2

V ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V - ~~ V V V ~~~~~~~~~~ V L ~~
~~~~~~ V V ~~~~~ V~~~~V V V V 

1

Table 1

Main Sections of the Commander ’s Guide to

Aerial Surveillance and Reconnaissance Resources

Section Title

1 The Army Surveillance and Reconnaissance System

1.1 The Intelligence Cycle

1.2 The AS&R Response to the Combat Commander

2 Aerial Surveillance and Reconnaissance Assets

2.1 AS&R Organizational Structure

2.2 AS&R Key Personnel

2.3 AS&R Equipment

2.4 Capabilities of the Basic Aerial Sensors

3 Information Request and Response

V 3.1 Request Procedures

3.2 The Request Form V 

V 

3.3 Types of Reports

- - 4 Information Request Check List

5 The Infantry Commander and AS&R

5.1 Information Categories/Product Matrix

5.2 Interaction of Infantry Commander with Other Comba t Arms

5.3 The Infantry Commander Unique Requirements for AS&R in a

Defensive Situation

5.4 The Infantry Commander Unique Requirements for AS&R in an

Offensive Situation

5.5 The Infantry Commander Unique Requirements for AS&R in a

Retrograde Situation

5.6 Practical Exercises for the Infantry Commander

6 The Artillery Commander and AS&R (subsections similar to those

in Section 5)

7 The Armor Commander and AS&R (subsections similar to those in

Section 5)

V 3
________ 

V

OBJECTIVE

To determine the usefulness of the Commander ’s Guide and iden tify

any shortcominqs , including obsolete information . V

METHOD V

Description of Questionnaire

Organization. The questionnaire is organized into three sections

(see Appendix A). The first section consists of items relating to the

respondent’s background, including rank , current and previous position ,

related assignments, previous AS&R training , and specific current duties.

The second section permits a specific rating of each major section of the

Commander ’s Guide on accuracy, completeness , usefulness, and clarity. In

addition , open—ended questions allow the rater to identify errors, omissions, or obsolete portions. The final section of the questionnaire in- V

volves a global evaluation of the Commander ’s Guide as well as ratings

of type of utilization , frequency of use, usefulness of the Commander ’s

Guide as it is, and usefulness after modifications recommended by the

rater . Space is also provided for additional comments or elaborations of

previous answers.

Questionnaire response types. The types of responses required for tne

questionnaire items can be categorized as follows:

• Rating. Various features of the Commander ’s Guide are rated on

a 4—point scale. Some questions pertaining to frequency of

certain activities use a 7-point scale.

• Choosing among alternatives. The participant is required to

choose the most appropriate of the alternatives listed below the

question .

• Filling in the blanks. A brief answer is required from the

participant.

• Free re~~~ ise. The participant may answer the question in any V

way . The answer can be brief or lengthy .

Participants

The questionnaire , as well as a copy of the Commander ’s Guide, was

distributed to 100 officers at U.S. Army units in Korea, Germany , Fort

Hood , Tex., and Fort Bragg, N.C . The participants were required to have

command experience at the battalion level or above or G3/S3 experience .

4

- ~ ~A_LILI_lVV~~~~~J - - V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~ _ ~ V~~ V~~~~~ _V V _ V —
V 

~ — V~ V -~~~-

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V V V. V ~~~~~. - V~~~V~V V V V VVV V

r

IV

RESULTS

In responding to the questionnaire, participants rated each of the

major sections of the Commander ’s Guide and the field aids before rating

the Commander ’s Guide as a whole. For clarity, the results are presented

in reverse order , preceded by a description of the participants. The V questionnaire in Appendix A shows the distribution of responses for each

of the ratings. V

Description of Participants

Of the 100 questionnaires distributed, 60 were completed and returned. Of these 60 participants, 27 were lieutenant colonels (LTC), and

V 33 were of lower rank , primarily majors. Most of the LTCs were battalion

commanders, but several were executive officers. Those below the LTC

rank were primarily in G3/S3 assignments, although several were in S2

assignments. For simplicity , all LTCs are referred to as commanders ,

f the rest as noncommancters.

Three commanders and 12 noncommanders had received formal training

in AS&R; similarly, 4 commanders and 11 noncommanders had previous assignments in AS&R. There was almost a complete correspondence between

personnel having received formal training and having had previous assignments in AS&R.

V Raters were asked to indicate how frequently they performed each of

• six activities described in the Commander ’s Guide concerning AS&R capability for providing tactical information . Both commanders and noncom—

manders performed most of these activities between once a month and once

a year (Table 2); only four commanders and three noncommanders indicated

that they performed these activities less than once a year . Thus, the

Commander ’s Guide appears to support the AS&R tasks that these officers

encounter as part of their duties.

Evaluation of Commander ’s Guide

The usefulness of the Commander ’s Guide in the rater ’s present position was j udged , on the average , to be 2.17 on a scale of 1 to 4 (1 = not

useful , 2 = somewhat useful , 3 = useful , 4 = very useful) . This rating V places the Commander ’s Guide at just above the “somewhat useful” level .

Ratings varied little between commanders (2.08) and noncommanders (2.25) .

Greater usefulness was seen for the Commander ’s Guide “ elsewnere in V

the Army ” however (an average rating of 3.18) . Only 38 of the 59 officers

rating the usefulness of the Commander ’s Guide in their present positions

rated it for application elsewhere in the Army . This much hi gher rating

5

L_ V .i 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~V~ VV V V• VV - -- V ~~V VVV -
V ~ V • V

V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~V~~~V V V - V V ~4k VVV ~=~~V V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V - V ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

did not result from any strong tendency of the less favorably disposedraters to skip this item, since these 38 raters had assessed the useful- V

ness of the Commander’s Guide in their present position to be 2.26. The V

23 officers who assessed the usefulness of the Commander ’s Guide “elsewhere in the Armed Forces ” assigned it an average rating of 2.78.

Table 2

Frequency of Performance of Six Specified

AS&R Activities by Participants

Frequency

More than Once a month Less than

Position once a month to once a year once a year

Commanders 10 80 66

Nonconunanders 29 117 49

Total 39 197 115

Despite the higher ratings of usefulness of the Commander ’s Guide

“ elsewhere in the Army ” than in the rater ’s present position , a much

greater percentage of the raters indicated various specific types of uses

as feasible in their present positions than elsewhere. For instance, 70%

judged the Commander ’s Guide to be usable as a desk reference in their

present positions , whereas only 17% indorsed this use elsewhere in the

Army (Table 3). None of the specific uses was judged applicable elsewhere in the Army or in othe r services by 65% of the raters. It appeared V

that the raters considered the Commander ’s Guide more useful in some vague,

general sense than for the five purposes listed in the questionnaire .

Another measure of the perceived usefulness of the Commander ’s Guide V is anticipated frequency of use. Less than one-tenth of the raters expected to use the Commande r ’s Guide more often tha n once a month , and

nearly one-fourth expected to use it less than once a year . Dur ing wartime, however , frequency of use would change substantially. Although

20% of the raters would still use it less than once a year , 55% of them

would use it more than once a month (Table 4).

6 I V 

V

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V V ~~~~~~VV _ V V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~
- -V__V V VV - — V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Table 3 V

Percentages of Raters Judging the Commander ’s Guide to be

Useful for Different Applications in Various Positions

Position

Current Previous Elsewhere Elsewhere in

Application position position in Army armed forces

Desk reference 70.6 58.6 17.2 6.9

Preparation of

instructional

materials 46.6 43.1 19.0 3.4

Self—training aid 69.0 51.7 22.4 3.4

Aid in exercises 75.5 70.3 19.0 3.4

Aid in operational V

setting 58.6 51.7 17.2 1.7

V Table 4

Percentage of Raters Expecting Given Frequency of

Use of Commander ’s Guide Under Two Conditions

V Expected frequency of use V

More than once Once a month Less than V

Condition a month to once a year once a year

Currently 8.3 68.3 23.4

During wartime 55 25 20

Almost all commanders and nonconimanders thought that G2/S2 personnel should receive the Commander ’s Guide . The “Aerial Surveillance and V

Reconnaissance MANAGER” was written for the G2/S2 staff , however , and the

Commander ’s Guide probably lacks sufficient detail to serve G2/S2 needs .

The resp ondents ’ reactions reflect a common tendency , when faced with

areas of overlapping responsibility , to assume that the other person is

more interested in topics tha t fall in that overlap . Only 63% of the

commanders and less than 80% of the noncoemianders viewed commanders , the

target audience for the Commander ’s Guide , as appropriate recipients of

this document (Table 5). An almost identical percentage of raters m di- V

V cated that all G3/S3 personnel should receive the Commander ’s Guide .

7

~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ V~ _ •V~V_V ~VVVV~ V _ V~V • V •~V~~V VV

~V VV ~~VVV 

~~V V~~ VV — ~~~~~~~~~ V • ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VV-V -
V V - V - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

(

Raters felt that the Commander ’s Guide should receive a wider distribution than would be indicated by ratings of anticipated frequency of usage.

Table 5

Percentage of Raters Indicating That All Officers in

Specified Positions Should Receive Commander ’s Guide

Recipient position

Bn&Bde MI

Rater position commander G2/S2 G3/S3 officers

Commander 63.0 96.3 59.3 51.9

Noncontmander 78.8 97.0 78.8 60.6

Apparently, revising the manual to correct the errors, updating it

to reflect changes in AS&R , and making other modifications would have

only a slight effect on the Commander ’s Guide ’s perceived usefulness;

the usefulness rating in this case rises to only 2.39 from the original

2.17.

General Comments

The raters volunteered 77 “free responses” on the Commander ’s Guide

as a whole . The comments were categorized as very positive, positive,

negative , and very negative . Over two—thirds of the responses were V

judged to be negative or very negative . Table 6 shows the number of

responses in each category , with an illustrative example for each category . The categories constitute a rough ordinal scale, and not all

comments within a given category are equally positive or negative.

Evaluation of Specific Sections

The ratings of each of six major sections of the Commander ’s Guide

and of the field aids (for infantry , artillery , and armor) on each of the

four rating factors were uniform (Table 7). The one exception was the

relatively low rating given the AS&R Assets section on accuracy (2.60 on

a scale of 1 to 4). The other 35 ratings ranged from 2.79 to 3.20 , with V

24 ratings falling between 2.92 and 3.09. This narrow range of ratings

could indicate either uniform quality of the different sections or a

failure of the raters to evaluate each section indep endently. The one

exception (AS&R Assets) was rated lower on accuracy , because many of the

V raters noticed that the lists of aerial assets had become obsolete . V

8 V

-V VVV ~ _______________ V~~~~~ & V V VVVV~~V&~ VV~~~~V~~ V V~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ • V V V - 

~

V ~_ VVV V_VVV VVV ~~~~~ •V_V V V_ - ~ V V .~~
___ —~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ 

V~V V

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ VV__V - V ~~V~~~~~ fl4~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _,V V_. _~~_ V

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ T - ‘ V

F

Table 6

Number of Positive and Negative Comments Given

by the Raters on the Commander ’s Guide as a Whole

Rating No. of comments Example V

Very positive 3 Publication is clear , understandable ,

and will be a valuable aid to corn- V

manders and key staff.

Positive 21 Document is well written .

Negative 45 AS&R Assets need to be updated .

Very negative 8 Recommend Guide be eliminated.

Table 7

Mean Ratings for Different Sections of the Commander ’s Guide

Section Accuracy Completeness Usefulness Clarity

1——Army AS&R System 3.03 2.98 3.15 3.05

2——AS&R Assets 2.60 2.79 2.92 3.02

3--Information Request and

Response 3.13 3.20 3.11 3.09

5--Infantry Commander and

AS&R 3. 13 3.02 2.94 3.09

6--Artillery Commander and

AS&R 3.07 2.96 2.87 2.93

7--Armor Commander and AS&R 3.09 3.05 2.92 3.00

Field Aid to AS&R Utilization V

(I nfantry) 2.96 2.88 2.98 3.00

Field Aid to AS&R Utilization

(Artillery) 2.88 2.88 2.93 2.89 V

Field Aid to AS&R Utilization

(Armor) 3.02 2.98 2.96 3.00

9 ~~~~~~

V V ~~~~~~~~~~ V . - 

I V
V ~~V -

~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ .LVn.V,VV V V V V V~~V V ~V V V V V V % V ~ V V V V ~~E~~ VI& V~ V V~~~~VV~

VW V V*V V f ~~~~~ V ,W0tA - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Raters were encouraged to identify the features that were either

positive or negative in each section . Of the 60 participants, only 6

did not offer specific comments. Participants made 191 positive and 197

negative comments . These comments are, of course , opinions; no systema—

tic evaluation of their validity was made. Similarly , no assessment of

the relative significance of the different comments was made. Some raters

questioned the value of an entire section , whereas others only suggested

a minor change in the same section . For instance, a claim that a section

is misleading is a serious charge , but the mention of a typographical

error is trivial .

V The negative comments were categorized as relating to obsolescence, -

•

inaccuracies, or other deficiencies . Obsolescence refers to items that

were true at the time the Commander ’s Guide was prepared but are not true

currently. Inaccuracies are items that were not true at the time the V V manual was prepared. All rater assertions of inaccuracy were placed in V that category except those known to refer to obsolescence . Deficiencies

include such items as typographical errors, the need to cover additional

topics, inappropriateness of some topics for a commander , unsatisfactory

presentation style, and insufficient or excessive detail. Table 8 shows

the number of comments in each category for each section .

Table 8

Number of Comments on Each Section of the Commander ’s

Guide by Category of Comment

Category of comment

Section Favorable Obsolete Inaccurate Deficient

V 

1——Army AS&R System 35 3 6 17

2——A5&R Assets 34 54 15 21

3--Information Request

and Response 31 1 7 9

V 5, 6, 7——Infantry!

Artillery/Armor V

Commander and AS&R 54 5 6 21 

Field aids 37 12 2 18

Total 191 7.., 36 86 - V

)

10

K V V ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ —~~~ V ~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -
- - - V -- - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~

r

The following paragraphs summarize the most frequent comments on

each section of the Commander ’s Guide and the field aids. These and

other comments are further summarized and listed according to frequency

in Appendix B.

Section 1--Th e Army AS&R System. The chief advantages of this section were that it provided good introductory background material (15 responses) and was a useful summary of the AS&R intelligence cycle (8 responses). Five raters approved of its briefness or conciseness (5 pages).

However , four raters judged it to be too lengthy or detailed , and three

considered it too detailed for a commander .

Section 2——AS&R Assets. This section evoked the most free responses .

More raters (24) commented on the obsolescence of the aircraft inventory

than on any other feature. Commanders appeared to be less aware of this

problem , since only 7 of 27 mentioned it; however , over half (17 of 33)

of the nonconmtanders noted the obsolescence. The next most common re— V

V sponse (16 raters) described this section as a complete , concise guide

to AS&R assets. Evidently, these two characterizations are not mutually V

exclusive, since 7 raters made both of these judgments. Five additional

responses indicated that the charts (tables) were particularly useful V

V and handy . A total of 14 raters mentioned that the radar inventory , the V organizational structure, or the aircraft capability had changed . Si-milarly, two raters mentioned the need to include the Combat Electronic

Warfare Intelligence (CEWI) battalion in this section. Two others felt

that more discussion was needed on side-looking airborne radar/infrared

(SLAR/IR) . Despite the relative obsolescence of the hardware lists, this

section was not rated low on usefulness; apparently the raters felt the

section was still helpful .

Section 3-—Information Request and Response. Most comments concerning this section were favorable . The clarity of presentation of intelligence request procedures and channels was mentioned by 14 raters. Six

others praised the step—by—step guide to report preparation and form use. V Three comments mentioned the practice of each division or major command

using its own AS&R request format rather than the one illustrated in this

section. Two raters felt the material was not oriented toward the battalion level , whereas two others thought it was a good reference or

V summary for the battalion or brigade S2.

Sections 5, 6, and 7--The Infantry/Artillery/Armor Commander and

AS&R. The comments for these sections are combined because the sections

are identically organized and the material is similar . In addition , most

of the raters indicated that identical comments applied to all three sections. The AS&R information matrices were the most popular feature, with

12 raters mentioning their usefulness. Seven others considered these

sections to be a good guide with respect to AS&R information during tactical operations. Two or three complained , in each case , that doctrine

was not current; reconnaissance mission time would not be as great as

11

___

a____
______

V V ~ 1⁄4 V~~~~~ V - - V V V VVV V~_ V V V

indicated ; sections were not useful for the combat commander (S2 deals

with these areas); the sections were too repetitious; and the material

was too general, obvious , or intuitive .

Field Aids. The field aids were praised for their clarity , conciseness, and compactness by 14 raters. Nine thought the pocket-size format V

was helpful , but two others maintained that the field aid was too large V

to fit in a pocket. Nine raters noted that the equipment references

were obsolete, and two noted that the organization was obsolete. Five

reviewers thought the matrices were useful .

DISCUSSION

Usefulness, obsolescence , and appropriate user population were the

main issues emerging from an analysis of responses to the questionnaire .

Only in the case of obsolescence were the responses consistent and unambiguous. Usefulness proved to be particularly difficult to assess; the

apparent inconsistency of ratings suggests the use of caution in drawing V

conclusions. Unless the user population is also considered , usefulness

cannot be adequately described.

Usefulness

Although the Commander ’s Guide as a whole was rated as somewhat

useful in the rater ’s current position (2.17) , the individual sections

received much higher ratings of usefulness (between 2.87 and 3.15) . This

is not necessarily a paradoxical case of the whole being less than the sum

(or average) of its parts. In making the global evaluations, the evaluators were specifically instructed to assess the usefulness of the Corn—

mander’s Guide in a specific context——their current positions. No such

context was provided for the ratings of individual sections, leaving the

raters free to j udge usefulness with respect to any position they deemed

appropriate.

The high rating (3.18) given the Commander ’s Guide for usefulness

elsewhere in the Army also suggests that the apparently contradictory

findings may be the result of differences in perspective of the raters

when responding to different sections of the questionnaire . This hypothesis, however, is undermined by the low percentage of raters that con- V 

sider the Commander ’s Guide to be useful elsewhere in the Army for f ive

specific applications (Table 3). In fact, for each specific application

H the Commander’s Guide was judged to V’be most useful in the rater ’s current

position.

It is possible that a “halo ” effect was involved in evaluating m dividual sections: The relatively high ratings assigned to accuracy , cornpleteness , and clarity may have caused some evaluators to think it would

be inconsistent to rate usefulness any lower.

12

____ -

~~ ~

V - — ~~~~~~~~~ —SV

- -- 

___ - - - V
_____ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - V V V~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

V 

An alternate measure of usefulness of the Commander ’s Guide is the

expected frequency of use (Table 4). Even during wartime , 20% of the

raters (33% of the commanders) would use it less than once a year (perhaps meaning “never”). This indication of perceived usefulness is more

consistent with the global evaluation of the Commander ’s Guide than with

the ratings of the individual sections. It is also consistent with the

bulk of negative comments on the Commander’s Guide as a whole (Table 5).

Nevertheless, the fact that 55% of the raters would use the Commander ’s

Guide more than once a month in wartime (compared to less than 10% who

t would use it that frequently in peacetime) suggests that there is a basic

disagreement concerning the usefulness of this document. Clearly , the

raters who would use the Commander ’s Guide during wartime consider that

it has some utility . Just as clearly , the 20% of the raters who would not V

use it, even under those conditions, consider it useless .

The contradictory findings concerning the usefulness of the Commander ’s Guide preclude any sweeping generalization; each rating depended

- I greatly on the measure considered arid its context. If a “best” assessment of usefulness must be selected , it would probably be frequency of

use , because of its construct validity . High frequency of use implies ,

arid perhaps comprises, high usefulness. Warfare constitutes the most V meaningful context for evaluating a document intended for combat commanders; rate of use in this environment surely has greater significance

than anywhere else. Granted these basic premises , the Commander ’s Guide V

can be characterized as useful to most of the raters, although 20% of

the raters rejected it even for wartime application .

Obsolescence

Continuing innovations in AS&R equipment inevitably make inventory

listings obsolete. Annual revision is probably necessary to keep equipment lists current. Less frequent updates are adequate if specific referV - 

ences to model numbers of equipment or quantities of items per various

unit sizes are omitted or minimized ; this approach could be a viable option, since many of the raters considered the Commander ’s Guide too detailed for a battalion or brigade commander. Because barely one-fourth

of the commanders indicated that equipment listings were obsolete, it is V probable that commanders do not directly use much of the specific information in the Commander ’s Guide . (Whether they should do so is a question

‘I beyond the scope of this discussion.)

Organizational structure and doctrine change less rapidly than equip- V ment. Because such changes affect a commander more directly , however ,

there would be a greater need to update those portions of the Commander ’s

Guide as changes occur.

13 

_____ 

i

~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ — ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ V VV_ - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ IVJ
V~~~~~~~~~ V~~~~~~V_ 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~V V - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~

User Population

Although the Commander ’s Guide was developed for use by combat commanders, most raters considered it more suitable for the G2/S2 than for

the commander. It was considered as suitable for the G3/S3 as for the

commander , and only moderately less appropriate for MI officers in genV eral. These opinions may be a reasonably accurate reflection of the probable use of the Commander’s Guide by various categories of personnel.

V V Whether this coincides with the best use of this document is a separate

issue. In any case, the participants believed that commanders would not

V be the document ’s primary users.

Any revision and updating of the Commander ’s Guide will need to be

based on a reconsideration of the target audience and a reexamination of

the information requirements of that audience. A distinction should be

made between “best possible results” and “best results possible” ; that

V is, even if it can be demonstrated that a commander (or S2, G3 , etc.)

V needs certain information , it may be better to provide some less useful

‘ - 1 information if such information is more likely to be used. The potential usefulness of a revised Commander ’s Guide is irrelevant if use

proves to be low.

SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

To determine the usefulness of the Commander ’s Guide and to identify

shortcomings, an evaluation questionnaire was distributed to 100 Army

officers to permit systematic and comprehensive assessment of the docu— V ment. Sixty questionnaires were returned--27 from battalion commanders V 

or executive officers, and 33 primarily from officers in G3/S3

assignments .

The individual sections of the Commander ’s Guide were judged to be

more useful than the document as a whole. This seemingly paradoxical

result was obtained with both the structured rating scales and the openended comments .

Raters considered the Commander ’s Guide to be more suitable for the

G2/S2 than for the battalion or brigade commander. Their comments concerning possibly excessive detail for a commander ’s needs are consistent

with this finding .

References to specific AS&R assets are outdated in many instances. V Recent and continuing rapid changes in the AS&R area require frequent

revision of any publication that refers to specific equipment. Revision

of the Commander ’s Guide to reflect recent changes in AS&R assets and

doctrine would probably have little effect on its use by commanders .

- The raters felt tha t revising the Commander ’s Guide according to their

recommendations would raise its usefulness only minimally .

H 1 

14

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V~~V~~~~V - V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
- V V V V ~~~~~~~~~VV V

V 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ________________

The anticipated frequency of use of the Commander ’s Guide increase greatly during wartime. If the Commander ’s Guide were revised ,

it would need fundamental restructuring to achieve high use rates by

commanders during peacetime conditions. A consideration of the type of

AS&R information that commanders are able and willing to use, as opposed V to what they should ideally use, would be required . Otherwise , a technically excellent publication might remain unused on the commander ’s

shelf or be passed on to his G2 or S2. Unless the user has become familiar with the Commander ’s Guide , its effective use in an emergency is

unlikely .

15

V V V V . ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - -
r?

~: ~~~~ r rr — ~~~~~~~~~

— V V~ VV

APPENDIX A

QUESTIONNAIRE ON THE USES OF “COMBAT COMMANDER ’S

GUIDE TO AERIAL SURVEILLANCE AND RECONNAISSANCE RESOURCES”

Background Information

V 

- 

NANI~ _~~V V~~~~~~ V (optional)

V~~ - “ ~~~~~ (optional)

V I -

V 

ORGANIZATION__________________________________

RAN K (check one)

V V V V~~~~~~ V~~~~~~~~~~ ( ’) CPT

_~~ q (2) MAJ

- V~~~~4J... . 

(3) LTC

- ~~~~V _ (4) COL

CURRENT POSITION (check one)

(1) Brigade Commander

________ (2) Battalion Commander

(3) G3/S3

- 

,Z

~ 

(4) Other (please specify)

PREVIOU S POSITION ______________________________

~ tvbct*ukt ~~~~~~~~~~~

PT V

17

— 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ —~~ — — —
V — V V

Have you had previous aasignmants in aerial surveillance and reconnaissance V

(AS & R)? If so, please list.

Position Date

Have you received any formal training in AS & R? If so, please list.

Scho )l/Course Date

How I ten do your duties require you to do the following: (Circle one

numb ~

r for each activity)

a. Obtain information about specif Ic AS & R assets anc~ their capabilities.

[.•

~~ 

‘ral ti,nes once a week two or three a month several time s nce or twice less than once a veck tth esaweek a year a year a year L

~ 

2 3 3 4 (g, 6 IC,

b. Consider the AS & R mission capabilities for tactIc al information

categories (e.g., ~Veapons, vehicles) for different tactical actions.

I several time s once a week two or three !

~~~ e a month several times nce or twice less than once a week times a week a year a year a year

22 43 “ 4 ~~~~~~~~ 116 7

c. Consider the AS & R reports available or obtainable for tactical information categories for different tactical actions.

V 

~cvo r ,l timi’s once a week two or three once a month severa l times once or twice less than onc~~~~1 V

I s

~~~ek limes a week .

~~ear a y.ar a~~ear V

L~~~ i O

~~ .25 s 116 V

18

~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

__ ~

_V~~ V V~ - -VVV V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ——t -
______ ~

V~~~~~ V V_ ~~~~~~

- V~~~~~~~~~~~~•~V fl~~VV ~~ V~~V V V VV ~~ ~~~~~ ‘t

~~~~~~~ -a ,. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ —

d, Consider ~he AS & R mission capabilities for environmantal information

categories (e.g., topography , vegetat ion) for different tVlctical actions .

[ several times once a week two or three on~e a month several t i*.s once or twice lees than once

a week tiass a week a year a year a year

12 2) 3 ‘/ 4 I7

~~~ 

/

~‘ /6 J

~~ 

7

e. Consider the AS & R report available or obtainable for environmental

i tformation categories for different tactical action ..

s.,ver al times once a week two or three once a month several times once or twice lea. than once a week times a week a year a year a year

1 2 1 , ______ / 5 $ /

~

, 6 7

V f. Prepare lesson plans for AS & R training.

- several ti*t s once a week two or three onc,~ a month s.

~

vera l times once or twice jiess tha n once a week t imes a week a year a year a year

- C) i __ / 3 / 4 ____ II) 6 ____

/

‘I

_________ 

V

______________________ 

19 

________________

~~~~ 

— ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - ~~~~ —~~~~~~ ~~—- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~

V -~~~~
- — ~~~~~~~ -V - V VV V V~~

’V -

— V

-

PART I

Rate each of the major sections of the Cosusander ’s Guide on accuracy,

completeness , usefulness, and clarity . (Circle one al ternative in each row.)

V I . The A rmy Aerial Surveillance and Reconnaissance System (Section 1).

a. I~~te i. a - 

a:curate

2 -

~~ 

J__

accura te 

ac~~~~te 

~

not 3 somewhat q 1 complete 3? very g 4

b. complete complete 2 3 comple te

not somewhat .23 useful 7.1~ very /‘f V 

V c. useful useful 

2 3 

usef ul 

~ V

1~~~ not 3 somewhat (‘ clear 3(. very js

d. L clear 

1 

clear clear

What arc the chief advantages of this section?

Wha t are the main defects (e.g., errors , omissions) of this section?

- Ple;se list. V

Are portions of this section obsolete? _____________ If so, indicate -

vhi~’h ones .

I

i

V 20

— V~~~~V

~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ - ~~~~~~~~~~~~ V V~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ — - V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
— V — — V V V~

V VVV&~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ V ~~~~~~~~~~~~ _VV ~V - - --‘ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~V~~~V V4~VV*VVV ~~~~~~~~~~~~ i -r’

- 2. Aerial Surveillance and Reconnaissance Assets (Section 2).

a. •ccurate i q 

- 

: a ~~ 2 ~~~ accurate 

~ j accurate 

~

4 cc~~~ ete~~~~ j g co.p1.t. 3~( 

co~~~~te V J

~ 

L ~~~~~ 

useful 

2 -~~ I ~~~~~

‘

3 somewhat ~

1 f clear very // V d. 

[

clear clear 

2 

clear

4 V

What are the chief advantages of this section?

What iire the main defects (e.g., errors omissions) of this section?

Please list. V

Are portions of this section obsolete? __________ If so, indicate which V

ones .

21

~~~~~~~ _-~~~~~~ - —,—~ -—~~~ V

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V-- - - - - -
V - V V_ _

~~- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~

V —

V VVV ~~ V - V~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

3. information Request and Response (Section 3).

a. ~~ccurate 1 ~ 

- 

accurate 

2 ~~ accurate 

~~~~~ 

accurate

o SOU~Wh*t complete ~~~ very

b. complete 1 complete 2 3 complete

useful

1 b{ 

$oUSj

~~t 

/2 1 useful 

~~7 ~~~:f Ul

4 j

d. f clear 

1 

so

c~:

~

at

2 ~~~ 

clear C eaX

4

’

~ ’J

What ~re the chief advantages of this section?

What are the main defects (e.g., errors, omissions) of this section?

Please list .

Are portion. of this section obsolete? ______________If so, indicate

which ones.

22

- ~~~~~~~~~~
_____ — V _V_~~_ V~

_ ~~~

~~~~ ~~~ ••U~~

upUIuI.p,,.. ___~.- -.— __ ~~~V_ ~ _~V~ V -V ~~VVV V V VV ~~ ~~VV ~ V

1’

4. The Infantry Co nder and AS & R (Section 5).

~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 11

~

!!

~ 

‘

~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 1

~~

?J ~ cc~~~ste 

~~~~ Af[ compists ~~

r- -

~~ 

LI! . soaeWba~ j

~ c useful ~~~- 

~~~~ I useful 

2 J 3 

iful

r I ~~~~~~~ c1ca; 4.[cl.ar

l — 

2 - ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~

clear

4

What are the chief advantages of this section? V

What are the main defects (e.g., errors omissions) of this section?

Plea~e list.

Ate ~ortiona of this section obsolete? __________ If so, indicate t whici ones.

23

- ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~ —-

~~~~~~~~~

-. 

- — — - -V ~~— -—— -.
V V -V - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V~ V V V V V V - V VV ~ V V~ V

V 

V 

—.--_ -------- V ____V*______

6. The Armor Commander and AS & R (Section 7).

a. V4

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

te ~~ 01 accurate 2 

accurate 

~~~ 

ac:~~~te 

V

b. I c ~

1.te ~ 

complete 2 ~~~ 

- 

complete - 

CO t C

- not •ome~

s?nat io l useful ~~~~~~~~~ very

c. useful 1 

useful 

2 -— 

useful

not 1) somewhat clear 33 very ~‘ d. F clear clear 

2 

c ear

What are the chief advantages of this section?

What are the main defects (e.g., errors , omissions) of this section?

Please list.

Are portions of this section obsolete? ________ If so, indicate which ones .

~~~~i V V V V V V ~~~~~~~~~ V V VVV V~~~ V V~~~~ VV V V V V V V V V V~V V~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ V V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ J
___ - - - V.’

______________________ V ~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~

5. The Artillery Commander and AS & R (Section 6).

a. 1 

accurate 

accurate

not somewhat 7 complete ~~~~~~ 

very V

b . complete 1 complete 2 

~ L complete

r ~~~ .2. somewhat /0 useful .26 1 very g I V

c. useful useful. _2 ~ 

useful

41. [ clear 

1 

.e~~ 2 

~~I 

clear 

4 ~ J

What are the chief advantages of this section?

What are the main defects (e.g., errors, omissions) of this section?

Please list.

Are p.

~

rtions of this section obsolete? ___________ If so, indicate

which ones.

V 

j

24

_____ —V .-, ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V V . V V V V~~~~~~ V V V
- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - ~~~~~~ VV V V V~ 

V - V V - V V V ~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

7. Commander’s Field Aid to AS 6 R Utilization (Infantry).

not - 

somewhat ccurate 

~~~~ 

very ~ a. accurate 1 accurate 2 3 

accurate

b. complete

s 

~~ 2 

g complete

_ _

21

1_

co~~ .te 

~ J

c. useful 

11 

somewhat ‘7 useful J :

~ 4~~~

( not 

~ 

somewhat 3 clear very 7 d. L clear clear 

2 3 

clear 

—

What: are the chief advantages of this section?

What are the main defects (e.g., errors, omissions) of this section?

Please list.

Are portions of this section obsolete? _________ If so, indicate

which ones.

26
_____________________ V _V.__ ~~ VV V

~

V V ~ ___ V V

- - - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

8. C~~~ nder ’s Field Aid to AS 6 R Utilization (Artillery).

a 

V 

2 

accurate 

3

~~’1 accurate

b. [ 1 L ~

.

1 “

~J 

~~~~~~ 7J complete

_3 J

C5II~ 1ttS

4

~~~

.J V~~~~~~~~~~

ul iJ~~~ t

~~7J~ 3 1 “

~

4 i V [

ciear 

~ ~r.

~~

t’ 

2 ~~~ 

~~~~~ Clear. ~

_if

V What are the chief advantages of this section?

Wha t are the main defects (e.g., errors, omissions) of this section? V

Please list. V 

V

Are portions of this section obsolete? __________ If so, indicate

which ones.

27

V ~V - V - V - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
- 

V

9. Comm .inder ’s Field Aid to AS 6 R Utilization (Armor) .

~ accurate 1 2 qJ accurate 

accurate

r not / somewhat 

71 complete .3o very g

b. 

~~~~ ~~. 

complete 2 3 complete V

V 

r not / ‘ somewhat ~

‘ use~ ui. 3,

~ very

c. useful useful 

2 3 

useful

f V not / somewhat 5 V

~clear 35 very ‘7 d. clear clear 

2 3 

clear

V What ar~ the chief advantages of this section?

V 

What ar t’ the main defects (e.g., errors , omissions) of this section?

Are port ions of this section obsolete? _______— If so, indicate

WhiCh ones.

- - ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ VV V ~~~~~~~~~~~ V~~~~~~~~~~~~
- -- __•_i-

~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ - -

~~~~~~

PART II

f 1. How could the Commander ’s Guide be used? Check all that apply :

1 2 3 4

In your In your Elsewhere Elsewhere V 

current previous in the in the V

position position Army * Armed

________ ________________________ _________ ______— Services V ** a. As a desk reference 

3

~~f /

V

b. Ti prepare instructional

-

~~ 

V 

V V ~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

materials 

~~ 7 _____ /1 ______ 

V

e. As a sel _ training aid ,

~~~ __________

-

, 

d. As an ait during exercises 35 /1 __________

e. As an ai in operational

sett ngs ________ 

3

~ 

/0 /

f. Othe r (p l .~ase specify)

* Plea:;e specif y —_______________________

V ** Pleas e specify —
- . ~~~~ V~~~~~ V V

_____________ - V V — - V ~~~V - V_ V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I

~~. How often do you expect to use the Commander ’s Guide on the average? 

V

Cir cle one :

severa l times once a meek tme or thr ee - once a month meveral t imes once or twice lee. than once I I a veek tiaea a meak a y..r s issy a y.ar

1 1 22j ~~~l3 

~~ 

4

~~~~?5 ~

4~3 6~~~~~~~~ 7 H

3. In the event of an. outbreak of hostilities how often would you expect to

use the Commander ’s Guide on the average? Circle one : I

V [ several time. once a vesk two or three osce a month several times once or tvice less than once

a vesk ( tI.s a me.k a year 5 75cr a ysar ‘

-1 L - ~

i 1 / 21 // 3 ~~~~~~~~ 6 7

Who should receive the Commander ’s Guide ? Check all that apply : V

_ ja) All battalion and brigade commanders

,_ .. (b) All G2/S2

_______________ (c) All G3/S3

c3 I (d) All MI officers j

cQ~ 

/ ,__ _ (e) Othe r (please specify) ________________________________

V

VI

V I

30

I ~~

-

~~~~~~~~- -— - ~~~~~~ V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ V~~ ~~ V V V V~~~ _V~~~~~~~ - V V ~~~~~~~~~~~ — 
V - •

~~~“~ — ‘ V

C — — ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~ -

~~V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

5. Rate the usefulness of the Commander ’s Guide.

a. In your present position

not somewhat I very

useful useful i useful useful

1(0 1. ~~

1 2 1 ,g 3 41 4

b. Iii your previous position

nt somewhat very

useful useful useful useful

~~1O ~

. / 5 2 ~

233 ‘74

c. lsewhere in the Army

‘Please specif y) _______________________________________

not somewhat very

useful useful ~~eful useful

L ô 1

’ ‘7 2 /r/ 3 /~)i

4

d . Elsewhere in the Armed Services

I

(Please specif y) ________________________________________

sc’ newhV3t very ust-ful useful useful usef ul

L.

~~ 

72 g 3

_ ____ ____

V VU
- - VVV ~~ V 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

- _V V VVV_V,_VVV~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V_ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

~

VVV_~~~~~~

6. 1 r tht changes you have recommended to the Cnuuuander ’s Cu 4 th’ :Ire V made, how useful would it then bc? V

V a. In your present position

not somewhat very

useful useful useful

~~~‘7l /(. 2 /3 3 5 4

1,. In your present position V

I

~ ’ot somewhat verytint’ fu ~ u’;(’ tui . use f Iii useful V 

5_~ ‘~~‘ 2 3 4

V • Elsewhere in the Army

(I lease specify) _____________________________________________

I’

~~~ot somewhat very

us(’ful useful useful useful V

[_Oi 2 /33

t. Elsewhere in the Armed Services

(Please specify) __________________________________ ______

not somewhat very

usnful useful useful useful

1 5 2 7 3 c

~~ 4

7. What is th. approximate amount of time you have spent reviewing the

Commander ’s Guide?

— _hours

V 32 V

________ _____________ 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ — - ~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~ V - - ~~~

8. OtIu’r t omments. Please feel free te make remarks on Lopt’s not

eovcred by the above questions. If you wish to amplify any of your previous

answers you are encouraged to do that , also. Finally , if there are

V particular err ors or omissions in the Commander ’s Guide that you haven’t

V mentioned pre~iously , or if you have any fur ther changes or additions to

• st~~gest , please do so here . If more space is required , please use

- ath itional sheets.

V 

33 77:5175

• V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~VV V V V~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V V
-V V VV V~~~~ V V V V ~~~~~~ V V V _________

~~~~~~~ V V 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~ - - V V ~~~~~ V~~V~~V~~V - ~

V ~~V V V V ~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ — V

fVi

~~~~

- APPENDIX B

t

~ - RATERS ’ COMMENTS

Table B—i

Number of Raters Making Various Non-Unique

Comments on the Guide as a Whole

No. of raters Comment

7 Guide should be geared to S2, not commander

5 AS&R assets, organization , or terms need updating

V 4 Guide is too detailed for commanders; should not be V

V used by them

3 Publication is valuable aid to commanders and key

staff

2 Field aid is sufficient at Bn level V

V 2 Document is useful to personnel not familiar with

AS&R

I

I

ii

35 

_____

___ V V V V V V 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V V V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V V~~~~~~ -

 V
V 

- ~~~~~~~~ 

-V - - — —~~—--—~~- -——------ 

~

—- 

I

Table B-2 j

I

Number of Raters Making Various Non-Unique

Comments on Section 1 of the Guide

No. of raters Comment V

*

15 Good background material , broad overview, good

introduction , outline

8 Useful summary of AS&R flow , intelligence cycle, - interaction , relationship

5 Brief, concise, succinct

4 Too lengthy, detailed , complex

4 Presents overall system , system organization, function

3 Not aimed at Bn or Bde level V

3 Too detailed for commander 

j ~~~~~~~~~ V V V V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

V~~~~V j ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~

__ V V 

LV
V - V V_ -V V~~~~~~~~~~ VV_ VV ~ V V > V VV V ~

VVV

~~ ‘~ V~~~~~~~ V V V ~~~~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ -V

V 

Table 8-3

Number of Raters Making Various Non-Unique

Comments on Section 2 of the Guide

No. of raters Comment

24 Aircraft inventory is obsolete

16 Complete, concise guide to AS&R assets

6 Radar inventory is obsolete

5 Charts are useful, handy

5 Organizational structure has changed

3 Aircraft capability , performance factors obsolete

It

2 Too much detail for commander

2 CEWI Rn needs to be included

2 UGS are now called REMS

2 Assets mentioned are not really available

2 More discussion is needed on SLAR/IR

_ L V ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ _ 
________ V VV

~~ - V V -

— ___k_,_,,

Table B-4

Number of Raters Making Various Non-Unique

Comments on Section 3 of the Guide V

No. of raters Comment - -

V 14 Gives request procedure , channels of information

clearly 1’ -

6 Excellent step by step guide to report preparation , -

explains form use

3 Each division or major command uses own format

2 Concise, clear

2 Not orien ted toward Sn

2 Good background information

2 Good summary , reference for Bn/Bde S2

4 I
V~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~

—‘—

I

Table 8-5

Number of Raters Making Varioub Non-Unique

Comments on Sections 5, 6, and 7 of the Guide

No. of raters Comment

12 Matrices , diagrams, charts are useful

7 Good guide to assets during tactical operations and V

V what information , guidelines to request

3 Doctrine is not current

3 Sensor or terminal capability is not current or not - correct

3 Good as guide, is basic , gets down to nuts and bolts V

3 Reconnaissance missions time won ’t be this great

2 Concise

2 Not useful for combat commander--S2 deals with these -

areas

2 Practical exercises are useful V

2 Helps in use of rest of sections

2 Too general, obvious, intuitive

2 Repetitious

H

H
— V ~

V~V - — -

~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~

Table 8-6

Number of Raters Making Various Non-Unique

Comments on the Field Aids

No. of raters Comment

14 Concise, clear , compact

9 Po~ tet size is helpful

9 Equipnent references are obsolete

5 Figures, charts, matrices are useful

2 Organization is obsolete

2 Too large to fit in pocket

2 Same errors as in main volume

40

V 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
_____ V V V V V V

_________________ - -

DISTRIBUTION

V API OistriIsu~

io.i List

4 OASD IM &RA) 7 HOUSACDEC. Ft Ord. ATTN : Library V 2 I’IOOA IDAMIVCSZ I I HOU$ACDEC Ft Ord , ATTh: ATEC-EX-E V H ~~~~ Factors

1 1100* IOAPE ~55~ V 2 USAEEC. Ft Benjamin Harrison, ATTN : Iibra, y

I 1400* IDAMA ARI I USAPACDC, Ft Bei,j amiii Harrison , ATTN: ATCP VVHR

1 HODA (DAPEVHRE .PO) 1 USA Comm-Elect Sd . Ft Moninouth , ATTN: ATSN -EA

1 HODA ISGRDVID) 1 USAEC. Ft Manmouth , ATTN : AMSE L V CT HOP

I USAEC, FtManmout h , ATTN: AMSEL-PA P

1 HODA IDAPC-PMZ VA) 1 USAEC. Ft Monmouth , AiTh : AM SELVV VSI_CB

I HOOA IDACH.PP2VAI 1 USAEC. Ft MonrnoUth, AiTh: C, Fad Di, Br

1 HODA IDAPEVHRE) 1 t.’SA Materials Sys Anal Agcy . Aberdeen, ATTN: AMX SY -P

V 1 HODA (DAPE•MPO•CI 1 Ecigewood Arterial, Aberdeen , ATTN: SAREA- 81- H

I 1400* (DAPE VOW) 1 USA Ord Ctr & Sets. Aberdeen , ATTN: ATSL-TEM-C

1 1400A (DAPE-HRL) 2 USA Hum Engr Lab, Aberdeen, ATTN : library/Dir

I 1400* (OAPE•CPS) I USA Combat Arms Trig Sd, Ft Banning, ATI’N: Ad Supervisor

1 1400A )DAFDVMFA) 1 USA Infantry Hum Rich Unit . Ft Binning, ATI’N: Chief

V 1 HOOA (OARD ARS-P) 1 USA Infantry Sd. Ft Banning, AiiM: STEBC~ VTE~ VT

1 HODA (OAPC-PAS-A) 1 USASMA. Ft Bliss , ATTN : ATSS--LRC

1 HODA IDUSAVORI I USA Air Def Sch, Ft Bliss, ATTN: ATSA CTD ME

I 1100* IOAMOV POR t 1 USA Air Def Sets, Ft Bi ts. AiiM: Tech Lib V 

I 1400* IOASGI I USA Air Del Sd, Ft Bliss , AiiM: FILES

1 1100* (DA1O.PtI 1 USA Air Del Sd, Ft Blisi , ATTN : STEBO--PO

1 CIii,’t, Consult Div )DA.OTSG), Meii,hi, MD 1 USA Cmd & General Stf Collage. Ft Leavenworth, AiiM: Lib

1 Mit Asst. Hum Ret , 000R&E . OAD (E&LS) 1 USA Cmd a General Set College, Ft Leavenworth, ATTh: ATSW-SE-l. V 

V I 00 IJSARAL . APO Seattlr , AiiM: A RAGPVR 1 USA Cmd & General Sif College, Ft Leaverswnrtl,, AiiM: Ed Aitei,o’

1 HO First Army, ATTN: AFKA .Oi TI 1 lISA Cnmt,ined Arine Cmbt 0ev Art , Ft leav. u,*orth, ATTN: OepCdr

V 7 HO Fifth Army, Ft San, Houston I USA Combined Ann. Cnibt 0ev Act. Ft L.avenws,tts. ATTN: CCS

1 Oi’, Army Set Studies Ofc , AiiM: OAVCSA I DSP) 1 USA Combined Ann. Cites 0ev Act. Ft I ..i...rtt s. ATTN: ATCASA

1 Oh Chief of Sit , Studies Ole I USA Combined Arms Cmbt 0ev Act, Ft LeavensswTh . AiiM: ATCAC’ -E

I 0(’SPER , AIIM : CPS/OCP I USA Cnmbinrd Arm s Cmbt 0ev Act. Ft Leavenworth , AiiM: ATCAC( -1 l

1 FIts Army Lili , Pentaqor,, ATIN; RSB Chief 1 USAECOM. Night Vision Lab, Ft Belvoir, ATiM: AMSEL—NV—S0

1 The Army Lib , Pentagon, AiiM: ANRAL 3 USA Computer Syt Cmd . Ft B.lvoir, AiiM: Tech Library

1 Oft , Atet Sect of the Army IR&0) 1 USAMERDC . Ft Bolvoir. AiiM: STSFB—0O

1 Tee), Support Otc, o~cs 1 USA Eng Sets, Ft Belvoir, AnN: Library

I USASA. Arlington . AIiM: IARD.T I USA Topographic Lab. Ft Belvoir. ATTN: ETL TO—S

1 USA Rsch Ole. Durham, ATTN: Life Sciences Dir 1 USA Topographic Lab , Ft Belvoir. ATTN : STINFO Center

7 LJSARIEM .Nalirk , AT’TN: SGRD~

UE CA 1 USA irmograplsic lab,Ft8elvotr. AIIM: ETL GSL

I (15* 1 Fl’, Ii Cl~yiomi, Al FM: ~

;ir it : MOA I lISA himtrllu p’nc” Cl, A Set,, Ft Hmm.mdvwa, AIiM: CTO MS

I USAIMA . Ft Bragg, AIIM: AISU-CTDOM 1 USA Intelligence Ct, & Sets , Ft Huachuca, ATTN : ATS—CTD—MS

V 1 USAIMA, Ft Bragg, A iiM; Marrj uat LIII 1 USA Intelligence CIr & SePt , Ft Huachuca, ATTN: ATSI—TE

V 1 US WAC Ctr & Sets , Ft McClellan , AiiM: Lib I USA Intelligence Ctr & Sets , Ft Huachuca, AiiM: ATSI- TEX—G S

I US WAC CI, & Set,, Ft McClellan , Aim: mg Dir I USA Intelligence Ctr & Sets , Ft lluactsuce, AIiM: ATSI—CTS-OR

1 USA Quartermaster Sets , Ft Lee. ATTN : ATSM.TE I USA Intelligence Ctr a Sets , Ft Huadeuca, ATIM: ATSI_CTDV Di

- 1 Intelligence Material 0ev Ole, EWL, Ft Holabi,d 1 USA Intelligence Ctr & Sets, Ft Huadsuca , AiiM: ATSI-CiD-CS

I USA SE Signal Sets , Ft Gordon, ATIN: ATSO.EA 1 USA IntellIgence Ctr & Sets, Ft Huachuca, ATTN: DAS/SRD

1 USA Chaplaisi Ct, & Sets, Ft Hamilton, Aim: ATSC.TEVRD I USA Intelligence Ctr & Sets , Ft Huadeuca, AiiM: ATSI-TEM V

V I USA’T SCH, Ft Euttis. AiIM: E duc Advisor I USA Intelligence Cu & Set’, Ft l4uachuca, AiiM: Library

1 USA War College, Carlisle Barracks , AiiM: Lib 1 COR , HO Ft Huacisuca, AiiM: Tech Ret Div

7 WRAIR, Nrtirr,psyrtiiat, ~

t DIV 2 CDR , USA Elsctronic Pr,g Grd, AiIM: STEEP Mi—S V

- 

1 1 DLI , SOA, Mnnter.rj I HO, ICATA AiiM: Ted, Library

1 USA Concept Anal P~cy. Bethesda, AIIM : MOCAM R 1 HO. TCATA, AiIM: AT CAT’OP’O, Ft Hood V I USA Concept Anal Agcy, Bethesda, AiIM: MOCA .JF 1 USA Recruiting Cmd. Ft Sheridan , AT’T’N: USARCPM’P

1 USA Arctic Test d r . APO Seatt le, ATTN: S’T’EAC PL.Ml 1 Senior Army Ada., USAFAGOOI’TAC, (1gb, AF Abs FId NOV I

1 USA Arctic Test Ctr, APO Seattle. AIiM: AMSTE.PL.TS 1 HO, USARPAC. DCSPER, APO SF ~~~~ AiIM: GPPE-SE

I LISA Armemant Cmd. Redstone An,nul. AIiM: ATSK-TEM I Siimaon Lib~ 

Academy of Health Sciences. Ft Sam Hnuston

1 USA Arma m ent Cmd . Rode Island, AiiM: AMSAR iOC I MarIne Corp. bitt., AiiM: D.sn’MCI

1 FAA-NAFEC, Atlantic City, AIIM: Library I ItO, USMC, Co,,wnindant AIiM : Code M’TMT

V 

- I FAAVNAFEC , Atlantic City , AiiM: Human Engr Br I HO. USMC, Canwnendint, ATTN : Cods MPI 20 1U

I FAA P~,anautlcaI Ctr , Oklahoma City, AIiM : AAC.440 2 USCO Academy, New London , Aim: Adittli alo,.

V 2 USA Rd Arty Sch, Ft Sill, AiiM: LIbrary 2 USCO Academy. New London. AIIM: Libra’y

I USA Armor Sets, Ft Knox, ATIN: Library I USCG Training Cs, NV . ATTN: CO

1 (ISA Armor Sets, Ft Knox, AiiM: ATSB.04.F I USCG Training Ctr , NY , ATTN : (due Sec Ole

I USA Armor Sets, Ft K nox, AiiM: AISSOT TP I USCG, P~~d’ioI Ret U,, DC. ATTN: OP 1/52

I LISA Aimor Sets, Ft Knox, ATTN: ATSS.CD.AD I HO Mid Range B~. MC Dat, Ovanticu, AiIM: PU Div V

-

_~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V~~~~ V~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ V __-_- rn - — — -~~~~~~—~~~~~~~~~~~~ - ___ ~ — —-
-

~

t ~ 

- , 

- - — - 

~—

1 US Marine Corps 

Lmaiinn 

Ole, AMC. Alexandria. ATIM’ AMCGS -r I Def & Civil Inst of Enviro Mad

icine, Canada

1 USATRADOC. Ft Monroe, 

AiiM : AiRO-ED I AIR CRESS, Kensi

ngton, 

AIIM: Info SW Br

6 USA1’RADOC, Ft Monroe, 

AIiM: AIPR - AD I Militasrpsykalogiik 1jan.51., Copenhagen

I USATRAOOC, Ft Monroe, 

AIiM: ATTS--EA I Military Attach.. French Embassy. 

AiiM: Doe Sac

I USA Forces Cmnd , Ft McPherson, AT

TN: Library I Mede

cin Chef, C.E.R.P.A

,—A

,ienel, Toulon/Naval France

2 USA Aviation lest Sd, Ft 

Rocker, ATTN : SIEBG-PO I 

Pm, Scientific Off . 

AppI Hum Engr Rich Div . Ministry

1 USA Agry for Aviation Safety , Ft Rocker , 

AIiM: Library of Defense. New Delhi

1 USA 

Agry for Aviation Safety, Ft Rucker, 

AiiN: Educ Advisor 1 P.r. Rich Ofc Libr ar y, AKA, Israel Defen

ge Forces

I USA Aviation Sets , Ft 

Rucker, AIIM: PD Drawer o I 

Ministerse van Dafartele, 000

P/KL Md Socia&

1 HOUSA Aviation Sys Cmd, St Louis, ATTN : AMSAV—ZDR 

Psychologlseh. Zaken. 

TIle Hague. Netherlands

2 USA Aviation 

S’j.s 

Teit Aer., Edwards APR, AIIM: SAV

1E -.I

1 USA Air Del Sets, Ft Mis’

., AIIM : ATSA TEM

1 USA Am, Mulishly Rsth & 

Dry Lab, 

Moffett FIst , AT1N: SAVOL 

.AS

1 USA Aviation Sd~, Ret Ing Mgt , Ft Rucker, ATTN: ATS

1-T—RTM

1 USA Aviation Sc),. CO. Ft Rucksr, 

AiiM: AIS1’-D-A

1 HO, DARCOM, Alex

andria , 

AIIM: AMXCO-TL ~~

1 HO, 

DARCOM . Alexandria , 

AiiM: COR

I US Military Academy, West Point, ATTN: Serials Unit

1 US Military Academy. West Point, 

AIIM: Ofc of Mitt Ldrstip

1 US Military Acad.my , 

West Point, AIIM: MAOR

I USA 

Standaidi,ation Gp, UK , FPO NY , 

AIIM: MASE-GC

I Ofc of Naval Rich, Arlington , 

AiIM: Code 452

3 Ole of Naval Rids, Ar

lington, 

AiiM: Cod. 458

1 Ole of Naval Rich, Arhngton, 

AT1N: Code 450

1 Ole of Naval Rids. Arlington, 

AIIM: Code 441

1 Naval Aerospc Med Ret Lab, Pen

sacola, 

AIIM: Acous Sch Div

1 Navil Ai,o,l,c Med Ret Lab, Pensacola, AIIM: Code 151

1 Naval Airowc Med Ret Lab, Pensacola , ATTM: Code LB

1 Chief of 

NavPs,rs, AiiN: Pers.OR

I NAVAIRSTA, Norfolk, AIIM: Safety CII

1 Ness Oceanographic, DC, AIIM: Cods 6251, Charts & Tech

1 Center of Naval Anal, AT

’TN: Doe Ctr

1 Nav&r$ysCom; AIIM: AIR--5313C

1 NavSuMed,

ATTN: 113

I N.ahiellccpterSubSqua 2. FPO SF 

96601

I AFHRI. (Fl) Williams AFB

1 AFI4RI. (ii) Lo~~y AFB

1 AFHR L (AS) WPAFB. OH 2 AFHRLIDOJZ ) Broolts AFB

1 AFHRL 

(

DOJN ) Lackland AFB - 

-

I HOUSAF (IN

YSO)

I HQUSAF (DPXXA)

1 AFVIG 

IRD) Randoloh 

APS

3 AMRL (HE) WPAFB. OH - 

-

2 AF I nst of Tech , WPAF

B. OH, ATTN: ENE ISL

1 ATC (XPTD) 

R andolph AFB

I USAF AeroMed Lib, Brorilts AFB (SU

L-4), AiIM: DOC SEC

1 AFOSR 4NL

) . Arlington

• 

AP Log Cmd, McClell

an AFB, 

AIIM: ALC/DPCRB

1 Air Force Academy, dO, 

AiiM: Dept of Bet Sen

5 NavPers&DsvCtr, Sen Diego

2 Navy Mad Nauropsycl’siatric Rich Unit, San Diego

1 May Electronic Lab, San Die

go, AIIM: Res Lab

1 Mar IrmigCen. San Diego, 

AIIM: Code 9000— Lib

1 NaePostGraScts. Monterey. 

AiIM: Cods B6Aa

I Na,PogGr

~~

ch, Monterey. 

AIIM: Cod. 2124

I MrsvirngEqulpCtr, Orlando. 

AIiM: Tech Lib

I US Dupe of Labor. DC, AIIM: Manpower Admin

1 US Dept of ,lvstic

e, DC. AiiM: Drug Enforce Admin

1 Nat Bur of Standards, DC, 

AIIM : Computer Info Section

I Nat Cl.adng Hou e for MN- info, Rockvllle

I Denver Federal 

Ci,, Likewood, AIIM: SLM

12 Defense DocumentatIon 

C.nwv

4 Div Psych. Army Hg, Russell 

Olca, Canberra

I Scientific Ada,, 

Mit Sd, Army Hg, Russell 

Ofcs, Canberra

I Mil wd Air Attache, Aus

trian Embassy

I 

C.nt,e di Retherchi Des Facieurs, Ifun

sain. de Ia Defense

Natinn*, Brmne

els

2 

Canedigo Joint Staff Washington

I C/Air $teff , Royal Canadian AF , 

AIIM: Pars Sad Anal Sr

3 Chief , Canadian Del Rich Staff , Aim: CFCNDS

(W)

I British Del Stall , British Embassy. Washington 

— ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ 

~~~~~~~~~~

—

-

~

-

~

-

~~~~~~~~~ _ ________________ ~ 

j