Understanding the relationship between commu- nications and command and control makes it clear that the network is indispensable to those who require it to accomplish the mission. As the United States continues to adapt to the Informa- tion Age, the trend of increasingly relying upon a communications network will endure. In many respects, the Marine Corps can no longer satisfac- torily conduct military operations and achieve End state: Communications concepts are tested
through war games and the communications concept is further refined.
End state: The chosen communications concept becomes the basis of the final communications plan.
End state: Communications plan is delivered to the receiver through the most effective and efficient means.
End state: Personnel are prepared to execute the plan.
desired effects without the ability to rapidly and reliably exchange information. It falls on commu- nicators to create and sustain the network despite the dynamic nature of the battlespace and the vexing circumstances within it.
Besides the effects of enemy action and equip- ment failure, there are many challenges that shape how the network is created and sustained. First, the overriding importance of the network in enabling command and control raises visibility of the presence and status of the network. When the network is degraded, it may detrimentally impact combat operations and expose the force to vulnerability. Consequently, its proper func- tion becomes a concern not just for communica- tors but for the commander, his staff, and the Marines who rely upon it. Second, the pressure to provide a reliable, adaptable network based on frequently unarticulated requirements engenders an atmosphere of confusion. Uncertainty in a competitive environment is amplified by the need to satisfy elusive—yet essential—require- ments. Third, limited resources to satisfy both known and unknown requirements create ten- sion between ends and means. The ends, at times, appear endless, while the means, as always, are finite.
Both communicators and those who are sup- ported face these and similar challenges: they are emblematic of the different factors and conditions that confound command and control in the broad- est sense. Recognizing this, it follows that efforts to create and sustain a network are susceptible to the same kinds of philosophies, processes, and procedures that define command and control in an expeditionary maneuver warfare environment. The same C2 doctrine articulated in MCDP 6 applies to communications just as easily as it does to fires, aircraft, or maneuvering units. There are unique circumstances associated with communications that create tension when apply- ing mission command and control to creating and sustaining a network. A network, by definition, is the interconnected arrangement of different systems. These interrelationships call for careful
coordination, exacting attention to detail, and direction that can require high degrees of speci- ficity. Like any complex system, the dynamic interactions of its various parts may create cha- otic, seemingly uncontrollable conditions that can cascade and reverberate throughout the force. A virus, downloaded on a single computer on a data network, can quickly multiply and infect the entire network. An incorrectly per- formed changeover of a COMSEC key can elim- inate a unit’s ability to communicate on a pivotal SCR net. The loss of a generator supporting a satellite terminal can isolate a unit from external connectivity. An equipment setting configured wrongly can deactivate a redundant link that pro- vides a key information pathway for a unit once or twice removed.
Communications cannot be viewed in isolation, as conditions affecting it in one part of the bat- tlespace influence conditions that affect it else- where. Both physical and electronic interactions make communications susceptible to even the most minor problems. Priorities must be set in the type and volume of voice or data passed over net- works to ensure that networks do not become taxed beyond their capabilities.
Communications control (COMMCON) repre- sents command and control of the network. The COMMCON process controls—through decen- tralized execution—the organization, direction, coordination, planning, and employment of com- munications resources in order to plan, install, operate, and maintain a communications network responsive to MAGTF operational requirements. While COMMCON is the delegated authority of the G-6/S-6, communications is a function of command and overall responsibility is retained by the commander. The COMMCON process, then, is reflective of command requirements at each level of the chain of command.
There are three functional areas comprising COMMCON: systems planning and engineering, operational systems control, and TECHCON. In a deployed environment, COMMCON is exerted through the arrangement of communications units
and agencies throughout the chain of command to ensure MAGTF communication commonality and fulfillment of functional responsibilities. The MAGTF or major subordinate command commu- nications control center (xCCC) represents the communications planning focal point for a MAGTF and its MSCs. Meanwhile, operational SYSCON centers and TECHCON facilities implement plans and orders and manage the day- to-day functioning of communications networks.