There is consensus within the U.S. Army that the Army Airspace Command and Control (A2C2) system is ineffective in coordinating airspace users to accomplish assigned missions. The two comprehensive studies completed within the past decade cite the basic reasons for its failure as the Army's inability to follow its own doctrine. However, critically lacking within the studies is an analysis of the validity of the doctrine itself. The current basis of A2C2 doctrine is the primary reliance upon procedural control, essentially de-conflicting airspace through the use of graphical control measures. The question this monograph addresses is not how should the Army improve its current A2C2 doctrine, but should the Army continue to rely primarily on procedural control as the basis of its A2C2 doctrine? In determining the validity of procedural control as the basis for A2C2 doctrine, this monograph is divided into three major sections. The first section addresses what current A2C2 doctrine is and why it came to rely on procedural control. The second section examines the Army's adherence to current A2C2 doctrine based on the Army's Title 10 responsibilities to organize, train and equip its forces. The third section evaluates the adequacy of procedural control if it were properly organized, trained and equipped. TRADOC Pamphlet 525-5, Force XXI Operations provides the criteria against which procedural control is examined: compatibility with joint operations; inter-connectivity within Army and joint systems; adequacy for current battle command systems; and adequacy for operations with higher tempos. The monograph concludes that while the environment that the Army operates in has changed since the end of the Cold War, the Army should continue to rely on procedural control as the basis of its A2C2 system. Procedural control measures alone cannot meet the demands of the Army as envisioned by TRADOC Pamphlet 525-5, but they provide a sound basis for airspace management given today's resources. The monograph does not provide definitive solutions to the problems identified, but does recommend the direction in which A2C2 doctrine should move in order to meet the changing environment.

ADA 374985 Approved for public release; Distribution is unlimited. The opinions and conclusions expressed herein are those of the student-authors and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College or any other governmental agency. (References to these studies should include the foregoing statement.)