Rifle squad composition

[Black Brunswicker]

First of all, hello to all, it's my first post. The reason that I joined this forum is that I found that many people here were discussing some of the same questions and ideas then I. I am thinking since some years about Infantry organization, tactics and weapons.

For the infantry platoon this is where my thinking currently stands:

Rifle Platoon of 32 Men: 1 Officier, 1 Sergeant, 4 Corporals, 26 other ranks (I choose 32 Men because they can ride in 4 common APC)

Basic Organisation:
- Platoon HQ and Support Section: 1 Officier, 1 Sergeant, 1 Radio Op, 1 Medic, 1 Forward Observer, 2 Mortar Operators with 1 x 60mm Mortar, 1 Sniper
- 3 x Rifle Sections with 1 x Section Leader, 1 x Assistent Section Leader, 2 x Machinegunners and 4 x Riflemen; with 2 x LMG, 2 x 40mm Grenade Launchers and antitank weapons

There various variation how the platoon can also be organised, like 4 Rifle Sections of 7 + HQ or 2 x Rifle Sections of 2 Sections of 12 + Support Section + HQ

There are also some variation the sections can be organised
- 2 x Fire Team of 4
- 1 x Assault Team of 5 and 1 x Support Team of 3 with 2 LMG and 1 40mm GL)
- 1 x Assault Team of 4 with 1 x LMG, 1 x 40mm GL and one Support Team with the anittank grenade launcher and 1 x LMG


Basic Equipment:
- 26 x Short Assault Rifles 5.56mm like HK416 or SIG SG551 (about 8 of them with a telescopic sight like ACOG)
- 6 x light machineguns like FN Minimi, Negev or Ultima 100
- 6 x 40mm Grenade Launchers like AG36 (I like the ones which you can convert into a stand-alone weapon) or HK69A1
- 1 x Long Range Rifles (8.6mm) like Sako TRG-42
- 1 x 60mm Mortar
- 3 x Antitank Grenade Launchers like Carlgustav M3
maybe some AT4CS if required
riflegrenades and handgrenades
- 9 x Radios VHF, Portable
- 2 x Radios VHF, Manpack

which weapons exactly is for me not so important. Important is a powerfull mix in the platoon and in the sections. I want some antitank , antipersonel (mortar and 40mm grenade launchers) and suppressiv fire (MG) capabilities.

It is diffcult to chose the right mix of weapons, I considered a lot of different weapons for the platoon like

7,62mm Machineguns like FN MAG or the Mk 48
7,62mm Semi-Automatic Sniper Rifles like the M110 SASS
different 40mm grenade launchers (like the M32) and light mortars
antitankweapons like NLAW, Panzerfaust 3, Carlgustav and AT4

but I couldn't integrate all into one platoon.

There is no right answer for the weapons, I also just looked for a well out-balanced platoon and for flexible weapons. One of the main problems are the antitank (support) weapons, which are heavy and have some other disadvantages.

I first started with a 8-man section with 2 x FN Minimi, 2 x M203 and 1 x Panzerfaust 3. Then I thought about a 8-man section with 1 x Carlgustav, 1 x FN MAG and 1 x HK69A1 40mm grenade launcher, which is already a good mix - I think - but not so flexible. I also thought about a squad with a 5-men AT/assault group with 1 x UGL 40mm and 1 x MBT LAW and a 3-men Support Group with a 7,62mm Mk 48 and a 40mm MGL.

I didn't want to create a very big platoon and I also believe that small sections of 8 or 9 men are easier to command and to lead. I tried to keep the organization and the weapons simple, but sometimes it contradicts with other objectivs.

Any feedbacks?

[William F. Owen]

I didn't want to create a very big platoon and I also believe that small sections of 8 or 9 men are easier to command and to lead. I tried to keep the organization and the weapons simple, but sometimes it contradicts with other objectivs.

Any feedbacks?

Welcome.

I could say great minds think alike or fools seldom differ. Good to see you put the radios in.

Why do you make these assumptions?

Dunno how much of these forums you've read (my guess is most - ) but almost every aspect of your suggested TOE is discussed in depth in about 5-6 threads other than this one.

[RJ]

I want to thank all who have contributed to these 20 pages. Great insight and every possible angle and configeration a rifle squad can be stretched of shrunk too.

When I got the feeling (de ja vu) the second time in the last 8 pages, I recycled myself and went back to the first 4 pages. If anyone joined this discussion in the middle and hasn't read pages 1 - 4 ----I recommend you take the time to do so.

The results of a 12 man Marine DO Squad in combat will be most interesting to this old 13 man Rifle Squad and 9 man Recon Squad leader after about two cycles thru the effort in Afganistan.

Thanks again. I am amazed of the things that have changed and those that have remained.

[jcustis]

When I got the feeling (de ja vu) the second time in the last 8 pages, I recycled myself and went back to the first 4 pages. If anyone joined this discussion in the middle and hasn't read pages 1 - 4 ----I recommend you take the time to do so.

You are absolutely right. Those first four pages are gems, and reminded me that I needed to print off some of the text and linked material and offer to a motivated Aussie cavalry exchange officer.

[RJ]

Is it too soon for the Marine Corps to comment on the effectiveness of the 12 man squads in those two battalions deployed to Afganistan within the last 18 months?

Or the basic squad set up in fireteam members and weapons.

This might be premature, but it is on my mind and thought I'd ask.

[RJ]

I came across an article on the CH-53E Super Stallion
and in checking the personnel load line found out that it can haul and deliver 37 personnel in it normal seating config., and 51 Marines with the addition of center asile seats.

The CH-53E will be upgraded to a K version that will have bigger engines and a heavier lift capability by 2015.

The"E" versions are are being refurbished with three bigger engines that will increase their capability to function better in hot conditions and fly higher for mountian work.

The rear ramps are receiving FB M3M 50. cal supression sistem that provides 180 degree rear protection for the aircraft.

A fleet of these can and have delived 3 squads at a time. Could this aircraft (or the future variants for it) solve the personell fit limitations for intact squad delivery to the battlefield for many nations and the U.S. ARMY?

The following is an excerpt on the CH-53E's recent roles in the Marine Corps picked off Goggle.

Since their arrival in Djibouti in early April 2003, HMH 461 was instrumental in accomplishing the Combined Joint Task Force Horn-of-Africa's mission of detecting, disrupting and defending against trans-national terrorists by supplying organic operational reach and providing flexibility to a wide variety of counter-terrorism activities across the region.

The Ramp Mounted Weapon System (RMWS) has been added to Marine Heavy Helicopter Squadron's CH-53 Super Stallion helicopters, giving them 180 degrees of defensive fire from the rear of the aircraft. The RMWS was being evaluated as a possible defensive weapon system for several assault support aircraft in the Marine Corps, but HMH 461 is the first Fleet Marine Force squadron to actually implement the system in real-word operations.

The RMWS is a Fabrique Nationale (FN) M3M .50-caliber machine gun modified into a weapon system specific for Marine Corps applications.

The CH-53 has tremendous capabilities and there have been several instances where this capability could have directly benefited Marines.

The missions the CH-53 has been called upon to do have been long-range, over the horizon, sometimes without escort missions. Durning the O'Grady rescue in September 1995, they were able to take Cobras with them, but it was a relatively long-range, over the horizon mission. The inability to have a rear-mounted suppressive fire capability could have cost them significantly. Fortunately, the missiles that were shot at them didn't impact the aircraft.

During missions in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan, Marines were cargo strapping personnel on the ramp of the aircraft with M16's (Marine standard issue assault rifle) and M60's (medium machine gun) to provide a rear suppressive-fire capability.

In mid-2005 three H-53 Sea Stallion helicopters were brought out of retirement and transported between Aug. 9-11 to Naval Air (NAVAIR) Depot (NADEP) Cherry Point, NC, where they were upgraded before being put back into active service.

This marked this first time H-53s have been recalled from the nation's war reserve, also known as the aircraft "bone yard," at Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, AZ. The Aerospace Maintenance and Regeneration Center located there maintains more than 5,000 excess DoD and Coast Guard aircraft for the nation's war needs.

The H-53 is critical to the fleet and is the only heavy-lift helicopter in the Marine Corps. These helicopters can carry internal and external cargo and transport up to 55 troops. Essential for bringing necessary supplies to Marines on the front lines, the aircraft are also used for long-range insertion and search and rescue missions, and they are capable of in-flight refueling.

It's very much the workhorse of the Marine Corps and is the most heavily utilized aircraft in the fleet. Unfortunately, there are just not enough of them. The Marine Corps has lost many H-53s in the last few years because of the war in Iraq and Afghanistan, and needs to increase the amount available.

The Marines activated these war reserve CH-53E helicopters to sustain high, hot and long duration heavy lift for US and coalition forces engaged in the global war on terrorism. The Marines hadn't lost any aircraft to enemy action, but the harsh and unforgiving natural environment where these aircraft are relied upon for day-to-day logistics and assault support has taken its toll. In order to meet present mission requirements, deployed Marines have to transfer aircraft between squadrons.

[Ken White]

The Army will not want to buy the 53K because they didn't invent it. American parochialism is alive and well, budget problems or not...

They'll point out that the Chinook can do almost the same on troop lift (I've seen more the 60 people on a C Model in hot and high...). Most Chinooks carry three MG, two side and a ramp, calibers vary...

I've always contended that the Armed Forces should compete and buy the best design for a requirement; then compete the design and get at least two competing production sources. Everybody laughs at that idea on two counts. Congress won't support it because the manufacturers would not like that approach and the parochialism...

[William F. Owen]

The CH-53E will be upgraded to a K version that will have bigger engines and a heavier lift capability by 2015.

I'd check that. I have a briefing .ppt on CH-53K and it states that it is a new build AC. As CH-53K has a new wider fuselage (to take JLTV) I can't see how you'd upgrade an E to a K, but I might be wrong.