Returning to a Division Centric Army

[82redleg]

My thought was that making the DIV HQs a "Bde Type" makes all of the units in the division a Bde.

The DIV HQs Bde could/would/might have as base:
1. A HQs Bn of the Division Staff
2. A Signal Co to support the HQs Bn
3. A robust DIV CAV Sqdrn
4. A Security/Field Jager Bn for site security and rear area protection & response force/rear area patrolling
5. Bde HHC

Understand all on the UAVs.

I'm not sure that the operations of a DIV CAV SQDN (which is going to end up TACON to the DIV, as the old DIV CAV generally were) and the Security BN justify a BDE HQ.

The SIG CO is already in the HQs BN.

You end up with (at best) a BDE HQ and BN HQ for a couple of companies, most of whom are doing fixed site security (low overhead) and (when employed as a response force) becoming TACON to someone else (whoever is in contact with whatever they are responding to).

I believe you are better off with a robust BN (put the SECFOR in the HHB), and another robust BN (the DIV CAV) that interfaces directly with the DIV. I think a BN should be able to handle 3 ground troops, a LRSC and an air troop )or two)(preferably with lift, so it can insert the LRS, too).

[TAH]

Understand all on the UAVs.

I'm not sure that the operations of a DIV CAV SQDN (which is going to end up TACON to the DIV, as the old DIV CAV generally were) and the Security BN justify a BDE HQ.

The SIG CO is already in the HQs BN.

You end up with (at best) a BDE HQ and BN HQ for a couple of companies, most of whom are doing fixed site security (low overhead) and (when employed as a response force) becoming TACON to someone else (whoever is in contact with whatever they are responding to).

I believe you are better off with a robust BN (put the SECFOR in the HHB), and another robust BN (the DIV CAV) that interfaces directly with the DIV. I think a BN should be able to handle 3 ground troops, a LRSC and an air troop )or two)(preferably with lift, so it can insert the LRS, too).

Could each of the Bns operate seperate from a Bde, sure. My thought is to standarize thsi new modular brigade type (DIV HQs) to simplify the CSS aspect. Which means I now need to add a DIV HQs CSS Bn capable of supporting: a HQs Bn (with organic Signal Co), a DIV CAV Sqdn, & a SECFOR Bn.

Another way to view this issue is as a transformed/modularized Division Base.

[Infanteer]

Interestingly enough, there is a SAMS monograph on this:

http://cgsc.contentdm.oclc.org/cgi-b...ename=2612.pdf

Only had the oppurtunity to gloss through it, but it seems to point at keeping Divisions and eliminating Bdes?

[82redleg]

Interestingly enough, there is a SAMS monograph on this:

http://cgsc.contentdm.oclc.org/cgi-b...ename=2612.pdf

Only had the oppurtunity to gloss through it, but it seems to point at keeping Divisions and eliminating Bdes?

Sort of.

At 5 BNs (3 x IN-although he calls them regiments- 1 x CSS and 1 x CS) and 4164 pax, his "small" division ("division-lite") is smaller than the "large" BCT I support. I guess its really just a matter of semantics.

I'd argue that it is also a rump organization, with markedly fewer CS enablers than most other US Army divisions, making it optimized for COIN & LIC, but not for MCO. A "division" with only 1 firing battery of 8 howitzers, 1 recon troop, etc, is hardly a division.

The author acknowledges that his organization is adapted for COIN, but his solution for expansion is that the DIV CG returns to 2*s, BCTs are added back into the structure (building a new staff echelon) and battalions return to fall under regiments (although his regiments are battalion sized). I think that this proposal eliminates a headquarters echelon now, but then proposed building 2 new ones for MTW. I'd prefer to retain the organization, and build more with mobilization. Then, we aren't all trying to work in unfamiliar organizations, we are just working at a higher echelon (of the same organization).

[Tukhachevskii]

Could each of the Bns operate seperate from a Bde, sure. My thought is to standarize thsi new modular brigade type (DIV HQs) to simplify the CSS aspect. Which means I now need to add a DIV HQs CSS Bn capable of supporting: a HQs Bn (with organic Signal Co), a DIV CAV Sqdn, & a SECFOR Bn.

Another way to view this issue is as a transformed/modularized Division Base.

How different, if at all, would that look compared to current cav Bn's?

[TAH]

How different, if at all, would that look compared to current cav Bn's?

It would not look anything like any of the existing BCT Recon/CAV Cdqrns.

Probably something like I have outlined over on the BCT thread:
2 hvy Cavalry Troops that have the capabiity of "fighting for information"
1 light recon troop most likely in scout/armored cars for the smaller/light footprint to be able to manuever thru terrain that the hvy toops are too big/heavy for and for missions that require more stealth/surveillance capability.
1 Mounted Infantry Co for staying power and to augment with more dismounted patrolling capability.
Each Co/troop has it own short-range (5-10 km) UAV, Sqdrn has longer range A/C to look deeper and stay longer.
6-8 heavy mortars for organic fire support.

Another option I have kicked around in my head is a 21st century up-date to the 1944 Panzer Aufklarungs Abtielung.
2 Recon companies (one tracked one wheeled)
2 mounted infantry compnaies (one in IFVs and one in APC)
Support/Heavy Company with mortar, AT, engineer/sapper Plts
Add UAVs as above.

[Tukhachevskii]

It would not look anything like any of the existing BCT Recon/CAV Cdqrns.

Probably something like I have outlined over on the BCT thread:
2 hvy Cavalry Troops that have the capabiity of "fighting for information"
1 light recon troop most likely in scout/armored cars for the smaller/light footprint to be able to manuever thru terrain that the hvy toops are too big/heavy for and for missions that require more stealth/surveillance capability.
1 Mounted Infantry Co for staying power and to augment with more dismounted patrolling capability.
Each Co/troop has it own short-range (5-10 km) UAV, Sqdrn has longer range A/C to look deeper and stay longer.
6-8 heavy mortars for organic fire support.

Another option I have kicked around in my head is a 21st century up-date to the 1944 Panzer Aufklarungs Abtielung.
2 Recon companies (one tracked one wheeled)
2 mounted infantry compnaies (one in IFVs and one in APC)
Support/Heavy Company with mortar, AT, engineer/sapper Plts
Add UAVs as above.

So how many dismounts is that? IIRC ther were LRRP detachments assigned to Div HQ in the 1980s

[82redleg]

So how many dismounts is that? IIRC ther were LRRP detachments assigned to Div HQ in the 1980s

Divisions had a LRS detachment from sometime early 80s until modularity (04-06), when they all went to Pathfinder COs in AVN BDEs or to the BFSBs.

A mech CO dismounts 3 x 27 (in rifle squads) + a few more HQ types (CO, 3 x PL, 5 x RTO), so ~90 for the mech CO.

A current mixed (M3/HMMWV) scout section with 10 pax can dismount 4 (3 from the M3, 1 from the HMMWV) while keeping the vehicles fully manned. From this, I deduce that an M3 can carry at least 3 dismounts.

A HMMWV can carry 2, but really should only carry one (keeping the other seat free for a terp/medic/casevac/etc). The old 2 LCR MTOE had no dismounts, simply the 3 vehicle crew per each HMMWV, the same as the current IBCT and BFSB mounted troop platoons.

A current Stryker recon platoon has 6 or 7 pax per Stryker RV, from which I deduce that the RV can carry at least 5 dismounts (leaving the 2 man crew in the Stryker).

Assuming that we go with 3 PLTs of 6 M3 in the Heavy Recon Troops, they should be putting out a 6 man recon team per section, for 18 dismounts per platoon, or 56 per troop. Unless we add additional pax, there is no leadership planned to dismount, at least the CO should have a jump gunner and a couple of RTOs to enable him to dismount, so ~59 per heavy troop.

Assuming (again), 3 PLTs of 6 Stryker RVs in the Light Recon Troops, they can be organized identically, or even put down a full 9-man squad per section. So, minimum of ~59 per troop, maximum of 30 per platoon (3 x 9 + PL/RTO/Medic) + COs crew ~94 per troop.

If we are operating unconstrained, I seem to recall (but can't reference right now) that the initial proposal for the ACR included a mech CO in addition to the tank CO, howitzer battery and 3 x Recon troops. That is a pretty big BN, but maybe doable. It would have 18 operational platoons, but a CAB had 16 (before the EN CO was removed) and the old DIV CAV had 16 (counting the air troops) and was split between ground and air. Since this SQDN will operate independently, organizing it to do so without task organization/augmentation would probably be beneficial.

[TAH]

So how many dismounts is that? IIRC ther were LRRP detachments assigned to Div HQ in the 1980s

For the mounted scout/recon/cav, the larger the number of dismounts, the greater number of dismounted patrols & LP/OPs each unit can support.

A 36-man scout plt (could be CFV or Stryker) can dismount 18 (CFV) or 24 (Stryker) Soldiers. six or eight 3-man teams or three or four 4-man teams per platoon. These folks are recon/scouts with training, manning, and equipping focused on the recon aspects of the mission. Could a Scout platoon defend or clear a building, sure but I don't see that as their primary job.

The infantry company is there to address the recurring issue from recon/cav units that they insufficent dismounts for sustained combat operations. These are infantry Soldiers trained, manned and equipped for their set of combat operations. Could these guys man LP/OPs or conduct dismounted patrols, again sure, but need them focused on missions that will normally require more then 3-8 folks at a time.

The DIV CAV must be capable of BOTH recon (route, area, zone) AND security (screen & guard) operations. Mine will also be a viable canidate for economy-of-force missions, delays etc. None of the existing Recon Sqdron currently have ALL of these capabities without outside augmentation.

[gute]

I found additional information on this topic and seems clear that modularity just costs too much. General Chiarelli has questioned why the Army needs so many vehicles, especially humvee trucks (158,000 by 2012) and puts the blame on the shift to the modular force.

http://www.fortgordonsignal.com/news...ll_Be_Ter.html

Would eliminating the Brigade Troops Battalion in the BCT and shifting its responsabilities to the Brigade support Battalion help with efficiency?

Would decreasing the number of Forward Support Companies in the BCT do like wise?

Is a FSC necessary for every maneuver battalion or is a 2 to 1 ration sufficient?