Since the dawn of industrial age warfare, commanders have sought ways to maximize the combined effects of maneuver and firepower. A demanding task on battlefields cluttered with horse-drawn artillery and foot infantry, the task became more challenging with the advent of mechanization and flight during the First World War. In the early years of both, the struggle to define the roles of these new weapon systems prevented anything more than ad hoc attempts to synchronize their effects. It would take a tragedy during the Normandy campaign of the Second World War to motivate the Army and its post-war counterpart, the Air Force, to formalize air-ground coordination procedures. Describing these procedures is now the responsibility of joint and service doctrine, but on the topic of commanding, controlling, and synchronizing operational fires, both remain deficient. Most notably, the inability of doctrine to provide clarity and a common philosophy concerning the fire support coordination line has led to confusion and allowed a debate over the purpose and placement of this key fire support coordinating measure to detract from joint interoperability. To compensate for this shortcoming, some components of the joint force have developed the kill box to supplement or potentially replace the fire support coordination line. This paper seeks to evaluate the kill box, determine its utility as a joint fire support coordination measure, and make a recommendation on its role in joint doctrine.
This work has been selected by scholars as being culturally important, and is part of the knowledge base of civilization as we know it. This work was reproduced from the original artifact, and remains as true to the original work as possible. Therefore, you will see the original copyright references, library stamps (as most of these works have been housed in our most important libraries around the world), and other notations in the work.
This work is in the public domain in the United States of America, and possibly other nations. Within the United States, you may freely copy and distribute this work, as no entity (individual or corporate) has a copyright on the body of the work.
As a reproduction of a historical artifact, this work may contain missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. Scholars believe, and we concur, that this work is important enough to be preserved, reproduced, and made generally available to the public. We appreciate your support of the preservation process, and thank you for being an important part of keeping this knowledge alive and relevant.