Amen and Amen, again.Originally Posted by Tom Odom
See a five year old argument regarding the modular BCT:
http://usacac.army.mil/CAC/milreview...g05/melton.pdf
LTC Melton describes a model for modular BCTs that would have resulted in a reduction of 8 BN/BDE HHCs, instead of the increase in 10 BN/BDE HHCs in each division. Our "transformation" increased headquarters, instead of reducing them.
Interestingly, he was my tactics instructor at CSGC last year ... He also has a book, The Clausewitz Delusion. he also had a humorous in-class riff on the US Army's fascination with tents (when indoor space is available) and TOC-mahals.
Is there anything to gain by eliminating the scout platoon in the CAB and replacing one of the companies in the CAB with a Cav Troop of 6x2 M3 and 4x2 M1? The remaining three companies are: two infantry companies with three infantry platoons and one tank platoon each, the fourth company is a tank company. Also, add two more scouts to each M3. The ARS is used for pure recon while the scouts look for trouble.
A couple of questions:
1- Are you going to re-organize the troops in the ARS, too? (or will they remain 3+5)
2- Are you going to retain the scout platoon in the HHC?
Anyway you cut it, your idea is a significant increase in force structures- a platoon of tanks and at 2 platoons of M3s (plus the scouts) in each BCT.
At least part of the reason for the 3+5 platoon is lack of Bradleys- they had to take the BSFVs and convert them back to troop carriers. The conversion of 1/1AD and 3ACR might free up some vehicles, but the personnel strength
I think that your organization is fightable, but not realistic for the US Army at this juncture.
Yes, I would organize the troops in the ARS with a Stryker RSTA (I have a black check).
Yes, I would eliminate the HHC scout.
My idea would increase the number of tanks by two from the current CAB of 28. Big increase in M3 and I did not know that the 3+5 set-up was due to a lack of carriers. Sure, the M3 vehicles would become available with the conversion of the 3rd ACR to a SBCT, but additional Strykers would need to be purchased to equip all HBCTs with a Stryker RSTA. The Stryker seems to be suitable vehicle for this role - reconnaissance and surveillance, snooping in the white area while the CABs are maneuvering with the scout troops/companies out front lookin for trouble and have the firepower to deal with trouble.
I don't know that it was totally due to lack of carriers, but I do know that the BSFVs (M6?) were converted back, and that available numbers were at least part of the consideration.
I've heard that the Stryker RV (M1127) has limited eyeball capability, and limited dismount ability- the second may be to MTOE, not a capacity, issue.
I like the idea of a Stryker RSTA in the HBCT, but I would change the organization (in both BCTs): Each troop would contain 2 Recon Platoons with RVs (4 x M1127, 16 dismounts + 8 crew = 24 pax total), 1 MGS Platoon (4 x M1128, 12 pax total), 1 Rifle PLT (4 x M1126 ICV, 44 pax total). 3 line troops like this, with an HHT. Alternatively, (with a blank check) we could replace the RVs with M3s, the ICVs with M2s and the MGS with M1s in the HBCT- I am in favor of keeping the same organization between the HBCT and SBCT, with the primary difference being the platforms used.
I'm not sure of the need for the Surveillance Troop n the SBCT RSTA. In the HBCT and IBCT, these elements are part of the BSTB. Maybe instead of the Surveillance Troop (or in addition to it) the HBCT RSTA could have a fourth line troop with the Stryker platforms, or they could go into a SQDN Scout PLT in the HHT. I believe that 3-73 AR (the 82nd ABN Sheridan BN) tested a LAV-25 scout platoon, maybe even deploying it to OPN Desert Storm.
Interesting organization. Question: Why infantry in the reconnaissance platoon? The reason I ask this is based my reading on this site and linked publications about scout and recon functions. It seems to most on this site that the opinion is we do not do recon well - we would rather roll in into a fight fast and keep going. Also, a linked publication that discussed the history of reconnaissance in the U.S. Army and others and concluded with the position that general units can perform the task. So my thinking is the a scout company leads the CAB into the fight and the RSTA does reconnaissance and not rolling into or lookin for a fight.
HBCT load out
The current HBCT has:
58 tanks, 29 in each CAB. Gute's suggestion would increase the number of tank platoon per CAB from 6 to 8, total number of tanks from 29 to 37. Crew requirement would be the CAB Scout platoon of 36. Doable with 4 PAX left over.
58 M2 BFVs, 29 in each CAB
30 M3 CFV, 5 in each CAB and 20 in the ARS.
When equipped with LRAS3, the M1127 has excellent opics, just no mounted weapon. Its an either or situation. Mount LRAS or the 50cal/Mk-19.
Like the idea of standarizing the ARS in HBCT & SBCTs, addes a bit of deception from the other side of the hill (I'm I up against an HBCT or SBCT, don't know yet, have not seen any tracks...)
Like the 2X6 + 2X3 RV/MGS mix, very CAV old school. Again, three SBCT platoons of 24 (72 PAX) down to 2 platoons of 6 (6 PAX each) 36 PAX per platoon. Need 18 PAX to man your MGS, 4 from the new CAB and 14 from somewhere. Probably doable, especially if you start with 28 PAX per platton (current MTOE). 28x3 = 84, 84-72 = 12, 12+4 = 16 only 2 PAX required to field the modified SBCT recon Troop. very doable.
Really the BCT UAVs should proably all be under the command of their respective ARSs. That's who will be asking for them the most/first.
Infantry in the ARS solves the issue of robustness/sustainablity. IIRC thye "old" bundeshere recon Bns had a company of infantry mounted on Fuches.
Posting Permissions
"A Sherman can give you a very nice... edge."- Oddball,
Bookmarks