I agree, so why not allocate 2 x 8.6mm or 7.62mm Long Range/Sniper Rifles to the platoon?Originally Posted by 120mm
I agree, so why not allocate 2 x 8.6mm or 7.62mm Long Range/Sniper Rifles to the platoon?
Very interesting points Mr.Owen.
Your recommendations for the Platoon's Weapons layout then, are: Assault Rifles effective out to 200 m or so as well as Underslung Grenade Launchers, and magazine-fed LMGs of the same calibre in the Section, and a pair of Sniper Rifles in the Platoon HQ along with a Light Mortar and a Carl G. How would you organize GPMGs in the Platoon - or would you pool them at a higher level? I remember in The RCR, each Rifle Company HQ and each Rifle Platoon HQ had a Weapons Det with a GPMG, a 60 mm Mortar, and a Carl Gustav, to keep the PLatoon's objective under comprehensive direct-fire, indirect-fire, and AT/bunker-busting fire. I know that the Brit Army briefly used the US Army solution of a pair of GPMGs plus the 51 mm Mortar at Platoon HQ before transitioning to the present composition.
And, in short, with specific reference to the Platoon's Weapons (of course), what would you set as guidelines regarding the weight of such weapons and their attendant ammo and associated kit, etc. At what point does lightening the weight adversely affect the ability of the Platoon to perform its tasks?
And thank-you once again for responding to us.
Wow, this is exercising the old grey matter…
1. Please call me Wilf, not “Mr. Owen” – smacks of unnecessary and unearned deference!
2. I see there as being two things that the platoon needs to do as concerns weapons. First you need Teams (3-5 men?) to conduct reconnaissance so that weapons teams – again 3-5 men – can get weapons into places where they can do the most damage to the enemy. This is as old as the hills and has been around for years. Wigram detailed this in his 1941 “Battlecraft” pamphlet, and then added to it in his post Sicily battle notes.
3. The “Recce” Teams should be lightly loaded so as they can best do their task. The weapons teams would then be optimised to support the weapons they are equipped with.
4. As a straw man and in the absence of any other ideas, I’d have 3-5 “Recce” teams under the platoon commander, and 2-4 weapons teams under the Platoon Sergeant.
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
That sounds good to me.
I agree with you on the importance of machineguns, and the relative unimportance of the IW for recon.
However, 5.56 just stinks against even light barrier material. And I challenge you to maneuver either the GPMG OR the Sniper Rifle in CQB in order to deliver projectiles on a target behind a light to medium barrier. Or to stop an automobile racing toward you with intentions unknown.
Just trying to "stir the pot" a bit. I certainly do like someone who challenges Conventional Wisdom.
1. The performance of 5.56mm is always up for grabs. I judge SS109 derived rounds to be pretty good, for suppression and engaging targets in the open. If I want to punch up some cover then 7.62mm or HE is a better choice. All very obvious.
2. I wouldn't even try to maneuver a GPMG or Sniper rifle in CQB, except as part of a 3-5 man team and supported by another team doing the recce. EG - Recce team clears the building and then calls up the weapons teams so as they can use their weapons against the enemy in the next building.
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
I'd think the obvious problem with what you suggest would be the non-linear nature of urban combat. Sooner or later, the "whackamole" pops up where you don't expect him.
To be sure, I'm playing "devil's advocate" here, but I've heard from some folks who've used the admittedly problematic M14 to good effect in towns to punch through barriers using reflexive fire in CQB.
But the "whackamole" is inherent to warfare. No technique will defeat him, except being generally better at what you do than he is. The "Recce finds places for weapons" is one of the few tactical concepts I see that seems to keep working time and again. It is often misrepresented as fire and manoeuvre.
As concerns the M14, I guess this begs the question, how many 7.62mm 20-inch barrelled semi-automatic rifles do you need in a platoon?
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
Okay, I finally broke down and read the article. I'm with you, until you advocate the 5.7 x 28mm and other PCOW rounds.
Frankly, those things are worse than worthless. Want your infantry to be effective? Give your enemies plenty of 5.7 x 28mm ammo and the required weapons. I have a police officer friend whose department adopted the FN5.7 pistol, and they have had ZERO luck with actually stopping a bad guy with that particular "tickle gun". Here's a quote: "Stop shooting me with that g-d-mned gun or I'm gonna get pissed off!"
EVERYTHING I've read, seen or discussed with OIF vets indicate the need for more lethal short-ranged ammo. Not more whiz-bang NATO fast-small b.s..
Again, this is more of the same "statistical firefight" stuff. So, by your reckoning, 20% of the time you're SOL???
Where to begin?
1. OK, you read the article. Thank you.
2. I advocate making better use of the carried load. Nowhere do I say, "give everyone 5.7 or 4.6 weapons". When I was a young radio operator and Number 1 on the Carl Gustav, I had a Sterling SMG, with 3 x 30 round magazines. 4.6mm and even 5.7mm weapons are generally more effective in terms of measurable criteria (CRISAT performance and PERMANENT wound channel) than 9mm SMGs. Is it better to carry more 7.62mm link for the M-240 and 40mm HE, for the MGL, or carry a Thermal weapons sight than lug 30 round magazines for a 5.56mm weapon, that 90% of soldiers cannot use effectively under pressure.
3. Never heard of a statistical fire fight, but I am pretty up on light weapons operational analysis. If you can't measure it, it can't be improved. (Which is where scaling 6.5mm across the platoon 'seems' to fall down) What is "effective range" etc. What we know from trials is that soldiers under stress perform some 75% less accurately, than when not. No amount of training seems to correct this.
Now I am not coming down on any one side here, but we need to stop saying things like "all PDWs are crap" and start doing real trials and measurements. Some folks have done the work and their conclusions are instructive. The P-90 and MP-7 have both been used in combat. I have talked to folks who are equipped with both weapons and neither seems to have a problem with it, in the role they use it.
...other wise just give everyone M4s chambered with 6.5mm and suck up the extra weight, based on the opinions rather than data.
Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"
- The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
- If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition
One should think that with current ops going on in Iraq & -stan it shouldn't be too difficult to equip a few units with non-standard calibers and simply find out!
And isn't it, that a soldier's confidence in his weapon influences the way he uses it?
Funny that "the other side" never seems to have gripes about what caliber to use, even as the composition and fire power of our side changes.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks