CONTEMPORARY OPERATING ENVIRONMENT FORCE (COEFOR)
VOLUME 3 – STATEMENT OF REQUIREMENT (SOR)
SECTION 2 – OVERVIEW AND PARTNERING APPROACH
Ser
ITEM
REMARKS
(a)
2.1
(b)
Introduction. The British Army must train in a realistic environment which challenges our commanders to think innovatively, punishes dogma and tests readiness of deploying troops, whether training for generic
operations, or a specific operation such as Afghanistan. The UK Land Warfare Centre has created environments, both generic and specific – a Contemporary Operating Environment Scenario (COESCEN) and
Afghanistan Scenario (AFSCEN), to be used at Collective Training Establishments (CTEs) in the UK, Germany, Kenya and Canada. Supporting these scenarios is a Contemporary Operating Environment Force
(COEFOR). The COEFOR provides the conditions to develop the mental agility and competence necessary to prevail in the diverse complexity of current and future conflicts. The COEFOR will allow CTEs to
represent current and emerging threats, and a wide variety of challenges and opportunities from the world’s conflict zones, with particular emphasis on areas where the UK or her allies are most likely to operate. The
COEFOR will be flexible, so that during periods of high tempo (such as Afghanistan) the training environment can be optimised to provide the correct balance between Hybrid Foundation Training (HFT) and Mission
Specific Training (MST). This cursor will be moveable when commitments veer back towards the contingent.
Current Training Progression. British Army training has evolved significantly over the past 10 years, and in particular over the past 5. In conceptual terms, training is approached in what is termed the ‘Adaptive
Foundation’. Force Elements (FE) are trained for generic challenges, individually and collectively, in what is termed ‘Hybrid Foundation Training’ or ‘Training for a War’. This creates a wide range of foundation skills
that can be built upon for further more specific scenarios. Mission Specific Training is that training that builds upon the foundation and prepares FEs for a specific operation or environment. It is often termed ‘Training
for the War’. This conceptual approach to training is translated into physical activity through the Campaign – Formation Readiness Mechanism (C-FORM). C-FORM is a training progression that takes FEs through the
adaptive foundation to prepare them for operations. The figure below shows the progression:
(c)
2.2
6 Months
Ops
Recovery
HFT
HFT
MST
MST
Final Prep
Ops
24 Months
a. Hybrid Foundation Training (HFT). Hybrid Foundation Training begins post the return of FEs from operations and a period of Recovery. A combination of individual and collective training, it delivers conceptual
and physical training from the individual soldier through section, platoon and company level to battalion and battlegroup level training. Set within a generic scenario, though representative of the ‘Hybrid’ nature of
contemporary conflict, it creates the foundation upon which mission specific training is built for current operations in Afghanistan, or contingent operations post Afghanistan. HFT culminates in battlegroup level
exercises in Canada, Kenya and the UK. This contract will provide COEFOR for conceptual level training within HFT, and the UK based battlegroup training event – Ex Wessex Thunder on SPTA.
b. Mission Specific Training (MST). Mission Specific Training is currently focussed at operations in Afghanistan. Post 2014, MST will be focussed at contingency operations with a volume and scale far lower than at
present. MST is designed to build on the foundation of HFT and deliver a set of conceptual and physical blocks of training to prepare FEs for the specific environment. This set of training events is progressive with a
common scenario that runs throughout. It is supported by the COEFOR, which through realistic representation replicates the environment in which FEs will operate. The balance of COEFOR will lean very heavily
towards MST until the end of 2014, after which it will swing back towards HFT.
c. Training Events. The current training progression across both HFT and MST is shown below. Each training event that requires COEFOR support will be described in detail within the technical requirement of this
SOR.
CT 1 Unit
Trg/Education
CT2 Unit
Trg
HFT HFT
HFT
FTX
FTX CT1 Trgtaff COIN
CAST
& LFTT Staff Trg
Cadre
MST
ARB/TCC MST CASTMST LFTT
CSTTX
3 -2 - 1
CFX
CT5 CPX CALFEX CT5 CPX
MST FTX
2.3
COEFOR Support – Vision.
a. Introduction. In the main, the COEFOR will be the physical manifestation of the COESCEN in HFT and the operational theatre in Mission Specific Training (MST) – currently the AFSCEN. The COEFOR will
represent uniformed forces (military, paramilitary and police) ranging from allied through neutral to opposing. It will represent bodies such as other government departments, non governmental organisations, private
military contractors, casualties, information and the media. The COEFOR will replicate the breadth and depth of a civilian population, including its customs, dress, tribal dynamics, and will be able to effectively
represent the true complexities of communities, religions, tribes and the key personalities of the COESCEN. The contract will deliver a wide range of role players in a dynamic, intelligent and flexible manner. In
addition, the COEFOR will also support conceptual training – language and cultural – as well as delivering enabling support to training events – demonstration troops etc.
b. Capabilities. COEFOR support to each training event will draw upon an agile workforce of role players with a wide range of capabilities, delivered by the contractor. Each role player will be dressed and equipped
appropriately dependant on the role and environment. In addition, the richness of the environment will be replicated through appropriate props – market stalls as an example. Role players will fall in to 3 broad
categories, and a number of specific capabilities:

Representation of the Indigenous Population. An understanding of the indigenous population is central to Counter Insurgency Operations (COIN) because it enables the counter-insurgent to identify and
comprehend the population’s grievances, fissures and hooks and then to separate the insurgent from that population. This allows commanders to make better decisions concerning how they protect the
population, neutralise the insurgent and contribute to wider political and economic development activities. It underpins the planning and conduct of COIN operations and without it the population cannot be
secured, indigenous forces cannot be partnered effectively, the insurgent cannot be identified or neutralised, or popular support gained and maintained. FEs need to train throughout MST within an accurate
indigenous population, which includes an accurate representation of indigenous key leaders and the insurgency network. They need to be presented with a population that can replicate the language, culture,
structures, frictions and dynamics of the population in which they must operate. They need to be able to practise analyzing the population and determining how to influence it to achieve tactical and
operational success. For AFSCEN, need to have a population with whom they can interact whilst operating with a force representing the Afghan National Security Forces. Within HFT, and post the cessation
of operations in Afghanistan, this indigenous population will need to represent the operating principles within the COESCEN and the likely areas of operation in future conflict.

Representation of the Afghan National Security Forces (ANSF). Transition in Afghanistan will be conditions based and will occur only when the Afghan National Security Forces are able to assume
responsibility for the security of Afghanistan. The capacity building of the ANSF, including emerging locally raised security forces such as the Afghan Local Police (ALP), by UK Forces is therefore one of the
key roles of the BGs in Op HERRICK and FEs need to prepare for the role in pre-deployment training. The MST delivered by the collective training establishments at CT3 and CT4 places heavy emphasis on
the preparation of FEs to advise and mentor the ANSF. This training is vital to ensure that the units are exposed to, and exercised in, the structures, procedures, practicalities, frictions and frustrations of this
role. A credible representation of the partnered force is required throughout the OPTAG and MST training cycles. At the higher end of capability, the role players involved in constant engagement with UK
FEs and complex decision making exercises will by necessity be agile, responsive and intelligent in their approach.

Representation of Security Forces (Generic to COESCEN). Within HFT, and post the cessation of operations in Afghanistan, the indigenous security forces will need to represent the operating principles
within the COESCEN and the likely areas of operation in future conflict.

Representation of Simulated Casualties (CASSIM). The immediate medical treatment administered to an injured soldier at the Point of Wounding (POW) will determine that soldier’s ultimate chance of
survival. Critical in the training regime is the use of the services of previously injured personnel (civilian and former servicemen) and makeup artists to provide the battlefield inoculation training for troops
deploying on operations with particular attention given to reducing the shock effect of dealing with trauma and limb-loss injuries. This high quality realistic casualty simulation allows soldiers to gain the vital
experience of dealing with the stressful and extreme circumstances of immediate injury so that critical time is used to best effect to save life.

Specific Capabilities. In addition to the four main capability categories, will be specific capabilities such as Cultural Advisors who will assist in the training of UK FEs in forming a breadth and depth of
cultural understanding of the operational environment, Language Trainers who will assist in the overall increase of UK FEs linguistic capabilities, and Interpreters who will assist in role playing as the conduit
between UK FEs and the indigenous population during training events. A highly desirable approach of delivery will be characterised by continuity of role players through the training progression, in particular
for those role players who deliver the most complexity and engagement with FEs.
c. Tiers of Capability. This SOR lays out a compendium of ‘Tiers of Capability’. They range from the very basic (Tier 1) to the most demanding (Tier 5). Tier 1 role players will deliver the macro level of detail – to
portray the density of life, whilst Tiers 3 to 5 will be micro in detail delivering the one on one engagement with FEs and the more specific and demanding of capabilities. In particular, as operations in Afghanistan
continue to develop, the representation of Afghan National Security Forces’ headquarters at every level plus decision making and higher command and control mechanisms will be a key deliverable. Each training event
will be described in detail giving the type, capability and number of role players required.
d. Synchronisation. The Synchronisation Matrix within this SOR gives indicative numbers of role players against the planned training progression in time. Due to the dynamic nature of contemporary operations,
there will naturally be periods where adjustments will need to be made. Control, coordination and direction will be delivered through the auspices of the Integrated Management Mechanism and the collaborative work
approach with the Authority.
3 -2 - 2
2.4
Partnering Approach
a. Introduction. To deliver such a contract, there must be a collaborative approach between the Authority (Collective Training Group) and the contractor. Together, they will identify the changes required to the
delivery of COEFOR set against the ever changing nature of the current operational theatre for MST, and the changing nature of conflict for HFT. Equally, the approach will determine how the contract will alter its
balance between the MST and HFT. As such, the contractor must deliver an Integrated Management and COEFOR Development Mechanism within the COEFOR contract. This team will be separate, but linked to the
on site and event management structures. It must be:

Integrated. The contractor must be represented by a training management, development, design and planning team capable of working alongside the Authority and CTE planners to determine the changing
nature of the operational requirement, and the change consequent to COEFOR as a result.

Intelligent. The management, development, design and planning team must have the experience, skill sets and knowledge to allow them to quickly assimilate information, design and plan COEFOR support
and direct subsequent COEFOR activity.

Agile. The management, development, design and planning team must be in a position to meet ever changing requirements in an effective and timely manner.
3 -2 - 3