Description: The issue of organization of interaction is one of the most complex in military theory and practice. Experience in the use of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in the counter-terrorism operation in the east of Ukraine (the Joint Forces operation) shows that the increasing importance of the engagement of heterogeneous forces in the execution of combat missions requires a deeper study of the nature and content of the engagement. However, an analysis of the works on this topic showed that not all issues of interaction (especially in its applied part - regarding planning and organization) are solved and sufficiently reasoned. When developing variants of the air command combat use method, it should be borne in mind that to date no operation can be conducted independently by any one type of troops, or even by the Armed Forces (AF). Interaction, as a form of uniting the efforts of different types of the Armed Forces and armies, and other force structures, is a feature of modern martial art. The current stage in the development of the theory and practice of the interaction of troops is characterized by its organization with new elements of the operational construction of troops, the challenges of hybrid conflicts, which differ significantly from the tasks to be solved, the depth of influence, the scope of application. The article describes the problematic situation in the synthesis of methods of combat use of air command in a defensive operation of an operational group, provided that it is necessary to simultaneously execute a state air defense plan and an air operation plan. It is proved that together with indicators of purposefulness, flexibility, saving of resources, accessibility; timely need to enter another indicator, called consistency (interoperability). The value of this indicator ranges from zero to one and indicates the degree of agreement of plans. The method of calculating this indicator is a five-step procedure (construction of a hierarchical set of objectives of warfare, ranking goals using the method of hierarchy analysis, determining the forces and means that will be allocated to achieve each goal, drawing up an integral table of comparison plans, and selecting a curve comparison plans compatibility indicator calculation). The use of this indicator allows to evaluate the conformity of the developed variants of plans of military use of air command of the air defense plan of the state and the plan of air defense of the operation of troops (forces).
Keywords: combat use, interaction, operational force grouping, operation, planning, air command, air defense, coherence.
1.Mikryukov, V.Yu. (2002), “Teoriya vzaimodeystviya voysk” [Theory of interaction of troops], University book, Moscow,240 p.
2.Tkachenko, V.I., Drobakha, G.A., Smirnov, E.B. and Tristan, A.V. (2008), “Teoriya pryynyattya rishenʹ orhanamyviysʹkovoho upravlinnya: monohrafiya” [The theory of decision-making by military management bodies: a monograph], KhAF, Kharkіv, 545 p.
3.Gorodnov, V.P., Drobakhа, G.A., Ermoshin, M.O., Smirnov, E.B. and Tkachenko, V.I. (2004), “Modelyuvannyaboyovykh diy viysʹk (syl) protypovitryanoyi oborony ta informatsiyne zabezpechennya protsesiv upravlinnya nymy (teoriya, prak-tyka, istoriya rozvytku): monohrafiya” [Modeling of combat operations of troops (forces) of air defense and information support of processes of their management (theory, practice, history of development): monograph], KhMU, Kharkiv, 409 p
4.Kirichenko, I. O., Allerov, Yu. V., Trobyuk, V.I. and Ursakiі, Yu.F. (2006), “Aksiomatychni osnovy teoriyi vzayemodiyisluzhbovo-boyovykh system” [Axiomatic foundations of the interaction of service-combat systems theory], Honor and Law, No. 1, pp. 9-17.
5.Korobko, V.I. (2010), “Teoriya upravleniya” [Management Theory], Unity-Dana, Moscow, 384 p.
6.Saati, T. (1993), “Prinyatiye resheniy. Metod analiza iyerarkhiy” [Decision Making. Hierarchy analysis method], Radioand communications, Moscow, 278 p.
7.Sakovsky, G.A., Piskunov, S.M. and Prosov, A.V. (2009), “Analiz mozhlyvykh variantiv struktury systemy upravlinnyasylamy i zasobamy protypovitryanoyi oborony uhrupovannya Sukhoputnykh viysk” [Analysis of possible variants of the control system of forces and means of air defense grouping of the Ground troops structure], Science and Defense, No. 4, pp. 12-17.
8.Stepanov, G.S., Kaminsky, V.V. and Pavlenko, M.A. (2018), “Pohlyady shchodo problemnykh pytanʹ zastosuvannyaPovitryanykh Syl v protypovitryaniy oboroni” [Views on Problematic Issues in the Use of Air Forces in Air Defense], Science and Technology of the Air Force of Ukraine, No. 1 (30), pp. 18-23. https://doi.org/10.30748/nitps.2018.30.03.
9.Avramenko, V.P., Petrova, R.V. and Kalachova, V.V. (2005), “Optimizatsiya operativnogo upravleniya biznes-protsessami metodom analiza iyerarkhiy” [Optimization of operational management of business processes by the method of hierarchy analysis], Economics: problems and theory of practice, No. 202, Vol. I, pp. 105-112.
10.Kalachova, V.V., Tretyak, V.F. and Sumtsov, D.V. (2004), “Mnogokriterial'nyy vybor proyekta logisticheskoyinformatsionnoy sistemy” [Multi-criteria selection of a project of a logistics information system], Information Processing Systems, No. 1(29), pp. 97-100
11.Kalachova, V.V., Tretyak, V.F. and Tretyak, O.V. (2003), “Otsenivaniye soglasovannosti ekspertnykh mneniy vzadachakh prinyatiya proyektnykh resheniy” [Assessing the consistency of expert opinions in the tasks of making design decisions], Information and Control Systems on Railway Transport, No. 6, pp. 11-13.
12.Avramenko, V.P., Kolesnikov, O.A. and Kalachova, V.V. (2003), “Mnogokriterial'nyy sintez organizatsionnoystruktury billingovoy informatsionnoy sis-temy metodom analiza iyerarkhiy” [Multicriteria synthesis of the organizational structure of a billing information system by the hierarchy analysis method], ACS and automation devices, No. 125, pp. 45-52.
13.Kalachova, V.V., Sumtsov, D.V. and Tretyak, V.F. (2003), “Mnogokriterial'nyy sintez logisticheskikh sistem metodomanaliza iyerarkhii” [Multicriteria synthesis of logistic systems by hierarchy analysis], Information and Control Systems on Railway Transport, No. 2, pp. 37-41.
14.Avramenko, V.P., Kolesnikov, O.A., Yur’yeva, N.N. and Kalachova, V.V. (2002), “Tekhnologiyamnogoal'ternativnogo vybora informatsionnykh sistem na osnove metoda analiza iyerarkhiy” [The technology of multi-alternative choice of information systems based on the method of analysis of hierarchies], New technologies, No. 1, pp. 32-38.