Appendix C: TC 7-101 Scenario Blueprints

This page is a section of TC 7-101 Exercise Design.

A training scenario blueprint is a pictorial and textual representation of the results of task and countertask analysis. A blueprint is presented as a course of action (COA) sketch with accompanying text. The actions and entities depicted establish the necessary full spectrum training conditions that provide the opportunity to accomplish training objectives.

Scenario Blueprint Concept

The purpose of a scenario blueprint is to serve as a framework of circumstances and situations that will provide the appropriate full spectrum training for leaders and units. Blueprints should not be considered rigid templates and must be modified to accommodate training desired tasks. They are the result of the exercise design process and provide a starting point for battlefield geometry, potential application of the operational variables (PMESII-PT), logical hybrid threat forces, and training conditions. A training scenario blueprint provides an example of the key circumstances, situations, events and actions of a training event with COA sketches and text.

Blueprints are intended to be used in conjunction with TC 7-101 to fully develop comprehensive full spectrum training events. A scenario blueprint provides a basis to assess the resources required to establish the conditions of the operational environment (OE) needed to adequately challenge the training tasks based on task and countertask analysis. Once the desired training unit tasks are determined, exercise planners must design an opposing force (OPFOR) to conduct the appropriate countertasks. A training venue may or may not be resourced with all the personnel, equipment, or facilities necessary to create the OE conditions required to fully train units on desired tasks. In the cases where the resources identified as necessary to adequately challenge training tasks are not available, the commander and training planners must assess training risk and develop mitigation strategies. Using this TC provides a tool for commanders and trainers to determine how much training risk is being accepted and what alternatives are available.

The geostrategic setting for the scenario—commonly known as the “road to war”—is created by exercise planners after all relevant conditions are selected in order to provide a logical framework for understanding the training OE. The strategic setting should reflect the unique character of the available training geography and local requirements. The actual or fictitious adversaries, the description of motivation for activities, and other elements that establish the logic of the OE conditions are added as needed once a training scenario that challenges the training tasks is completed. The identity and motivations of the adversary (real or fictitious) provide a context to the scenario that is necessary but secondary to establishing conditions to adequately challenge training tasks.

Exercise Design

As discussed in chapter 1, the exercise design process begins with the training unit commander selecting his training objectives and the operational theme for the training event. The operational theme may be major combat operations (MCO) or irregular warfare (IW) or a combination. The training objectives are broken down into unit and leader tasks to be trained and the commander’s assessment of the unit’s current training state. An example set of tasks for a heavy brigade combat team (HBCT) conducting offensive operations in a full-spectrum setting might be—

Conduct an Attack.
Conduct Security Operations.
Conduct Lethal and Nonlethal Fire Support.
Conduct Mobility Operations.
Conduct Information Operations.
Conduct Humanitarian and Civic Assistance.
Protect Critical Assets.

Exercise planners examine the training tasks and conduct a countertask analysis to determine what is needed to challenge the tasks at the appropriate level. The countertask analysis includes all the elements of the OE that may be necessary to challenge the tasks. A set of countertasks that challenges the tasks in the above example might be—

Conduct Maneuver Defense.
Conduct Disruption.
Conduct Actions on Contact.
Conduct Counterreconnaissance.
Prepare Obstacles.
Conduct Information Warfare (INFOWAR).
Conduct Insurgent Operations.

With the task and countertask analysis complete, the exercise planners choose an OE, an OPFOR, and a set of courses of action (COAs) that provides the countertasks as a challenging set of conditions. Chapter 2 provides the tools to properly scale the OPFOR and develop the needed OE conditions to support the countertasks developed. It also provides the step-by-step process to fill out the blueprint framework with the detailed planning and resources needed to conduct the countertasks.

Typically, the countertasks suggest a COA. There is not one right solution, so long as the solution chosen challenges the things the unit is trying to accomplish. The sources for OPFOR COAs are the TC 7-100 series. Tactical-level COAs are also listed in appendix B of this TC, which contains the OPFOR Tactical Task List, which is the source for countertasks. Continuing this example, the exercise planners see that the selected countertasks support a particular OPFOR COA. Figure C-1 shows an example of the COA sketch and text (COA statement) that go with the OPFOR countertasks listed above.

Scenario Blueprint Examples

This appendix provides six examples to explain how scenario blueprints are designed and used. The first example, which describes the process in detail, is a continuation of the exercise design example above. The remaining five examples are provided for illustrative purposes. The six examples each individually focus on an emphasized aspect of full spectrum operations. Three of the examples do so within an MCO operational theme and three within an IW operational theme. All six examples are based on an HBCT conducting tasks relevant to the operational theme. Each scenario blueprint provides for an emphasis on training one component of full spectrum operations with the other components present but not the training focus. However, training tasks associated with the non-emphasis components will be included in the design and conditions established that provide the opportunity to train those designated tasks.

MCO Blueprint Examples

The following are three examples of scenario blueprints with an MCO operational theme. One example has an offensive emphasis, one a defensive emphasis, and the other a stability operations emphasis for the training unit.

MCO Blueprint Example 1: Offensive Emphasis Blueprint

For illustrative purposes, this blueprint is based on the example of training unit tasks and OPFOR countertasks in paragraphs C-4 and C-5 above. In this case, the OPFOR chooses to conduct a maneuver defense involving a combination of regular military and insurgent forces. (See figure C-1.)

Figure C-1. MCO Blueprint COA sketch (example 1)

Course of Action: OPFOR Maneuver Defense. The OPFOR disrupts command and control (C2) and security forces to deny effective situational understanding and provide freedom of maneuver to the contact force. The disruption force consisting of an infantry-based detachment including special-purpose forces (SPF) teams and affiliated insurgent forces—

Fixes the reconnaissance squadron.
Conducts deception, electronic warfare, and perception management.
Forces the early deployment of the combined arms battalions.
Destroys intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (ISR) assets.

The contact force consists of an infantry-based detachment with supporting artillery and information warfare (INFOWAR) assets. It delays the combined arms detachments and forces the HBCT to slow and deploy its fires, sustainment and C2 assets in areas vulnerable to attack by OPFOR fires and the disruption force. The shielding force consists of an antitank-based detachment with supporting artillery and INFOWAR assets. It fixes the two combined arms battalions by conducting attack by fire and permits the contact force to conduct a retrograde to pre-planned battle positions. When this retrograde is complete, the shielding force becomes the new contact force, and the maneuver is repeated until the HBCT’s attack is culminated and is vulnerable to counterattack.

By this point, an initial depiction of the exercise scenario and the sequence of events has emerged. However, the scenario has to be constructed to accommodate training area terrain and constraints. The scenario developer fits the depiction to the terrain and timeline for the training event. The end result is a training event that contains all the components of full spectrum operations in a realistic OE.

MCO Blueprint Example 2: Defensive Emphasis Blueprint

In this blueprint, the OPFOR chose to use a dispersed attack to overcome some of the U.S. advantages in ISR, close air support, and other stand-off fires. (See figure C-2.) If the training tasks called for the training unit to operate without those enablers, the OPFOR might have chosen to conduct an integrated attack.

Figure C-2. MCO Blueprint COA sketch (example 2)

Course of Action: OPFOR Dispersed Attack. The OPFOR disrupts C2 and security forces to prevent effective response to other actions and deny effective situational understanding. The disruption force consisting of a reconnaissance battalion, two antitank batteries, an INFOWAR unit, guerrillas, and a supporting rocket launcher battery—

Fixes the reconnaissance squadron.
Conducts deception, electronic warfare, and perception management.
Blocks quick reaction force (QRF) and reserve routes.
Destroys ISR assets.

The OPFOR fixes the two combined arms battalions by conducting attacks with three combined arms detachments. The mission of the fixing force is to prevent either combined arms battalion from repositioning significant combat power to protect the HBCT’s C2 and sustainment assets from attack. The OPFOR conducts an air assault to destroy HBCT C2 and fires assets in order to permit effective action by the exploitation force. The air assault consists of a battalion-size infantry and antitank detachment augmented by INFOWAR elements. The OPFOR destroys the HBCT’s sustainment capability by attacking the brigade support area (BSA) with an exploitation force consisting of six SPF teams, an artillery battalion, an air defense battery, and affiliated guerrilla forces.

MCO Blueprint Example 3: Stability Operations Emphasis Blueprint

In this blueprint, none of the countertasks chosen include conduct of combat operations by conventional, regular military forces. Therefore, the OPFOR COA focuses on guerrilla operations (see figure C-3).

Figure C-3. MCO Blueprint COA sketch (example 3)

Course of Action: OPFOR Guerrilla Operations. The OPFOR disrupts C2 and security forces to deny effective situational understanding and provide freedom of maneuver to the guerrilla force. The disruption force, including guerrilla elements and SPF teams—

Fixes the reconnaissance squadron (not shown).
Conducts deception, electronic warfare, and perception management.
Prevents effective sustainment.
Prevents the creation of stable civil functions.

OPFOR conventional force remnants occupy defensive positions or move toward sanctuary— international border or rugged terrain. The conventional force near the international border is prepared to provide aid to guerrilla elements as needed.

IW Blueprint Examples

The following are three examples of scenario blueprints with an IW operational theme. (See figures C-4 through C-6.) One example has an offensive emphasis, one a defensive emphasis, and one a stability operations emphasis for the training unit.

IW Blueprint Example 1: Offensive Emphasis Blueprint

In this blueprint, the countertasks required are executed primarily by regular military forces conducting an area defense, with affiliated guerrilla elements acting as part of the disruption force. (See figure C-4.)

Figure C-4. IW Blueprint COA sketch (example 1)

Course of Action: OPFOR Area Defense. The OPFOR disrupts C2 and security forces to deny effective situational understanding and provide freedom of maneuver to the main defense force. The disruption force outside the complex battle position (CBP) of the main defense force—

Fixes the reconnaissance squadron (only part of which is shown in figure C-4).
Conducts deception, electronic warfare, and perception management.
Forces the early deployment of the combined arms battalions; and destroys ISR assets.

The main defense force consists of an infantry-based detachment with supporting engineer and air defense assets. It defends from a CBP and protects OPFOR C2, INFOWAR, fires, and sustainment from enemy attack.

The OPFOR reserve blocks the enemy shaping force and permits freedom of maneuver to the counterattack and main defense forces. The counterattack force blocks the decisive force and permits the protected force (C2, INFOWAR, fires, and sustainment assets) to destroy the HBCT’s sustainment and C2 assets and then exfiltrate to remain viable for future battles.

IW Blueprint Example 2: Defensive Emphasis Blueprint

In this blueprint, the countertasks are executed by guerilla forces attacking a perimeter defense. (See figure C-5.)

Figure C-5. IW Blueprint COA sketch (example 2)

Course of Action: OPFOR Integrated Attack. The OPFOR disrupts C2 and security forces to prevent effective response to other actions and deny effective situational understanding. The disruption force (not shown)—

Fixes the reconnaissance squadron.
Conducts deception, electronic warfare, and perception management.
Blocks reserve routes.
Destroys ISR assets.

The OPFOR fixes the three combined arms battalions by conducting attacks with multiple guerrilla elements with supporting fires and antitank assets. The mission of the fixing force is to prevent any of the combined arms battalions from repositioning significant combat power to protect the HBCT’s C2 and sustainment assets from attack. The OPFOR conducts an assault with a guerrilla element to destroy HBCT C2 and fires assets, to permit effective action by the exploitation force. The OPFOR destroys the HBCT’s sustainment capability by attacking the BSA with an exploitation force consisting of guerrilla forces.

IW Blueprint Example 3: Stability Operations Emphasis Blueprint

In this blueprint, the countertasks required are those that oppose stability action. Some of these countertasks will be executed by noncombatant actors opposed to creation of a stable environment due to political, ethnic, or religious motivations. (See figure C-6.)

Figure C-6. IW Blueprint COA sketch (example 3)

Course of Action: OPFOR Guerrilla Operations. The OPFOR disrupts C2 and security forces to deny effective situational understanding and provide freedom of maneuver to the guerrilla force. The disruption force fixes the reconnaissance squadron (not shown); conducts deception, electronic warfare, and perception management; prevents effective sustainment; and prevents the creation of stable civil functions.