Infantry Unit Tactics, Tasks, Weapons, and Organization

[Fuchs]

There's a tendency to distribute man-portable weapons into the small manoeuvre units and to keep the crew-served weapons pooled at a higher level (with tripod machine guns being the water shed that moved into platoons after WW1).

A battalion fire support unit would thus use mortars or crew-served anti-tank weapons rather than a 7 kg MGL.

An exception are snipers which should be in a Bn Sniper Plt, but their employment is very distinct from the normal infantry employment (thus sharpshooters within the infantry).

[PsJÄÄK Korte]

A battalion fire support unit would thus use mortars or crew-served anti-tank weapons rather than a 7 kg MGL.
.

I forgot to add that it would be (possibly) in addition to mortars, crew-served anti-tank weapons and what have you at battalion level.
I am not also sure who in infantry squad would be equipped with it... ...unless I change assistant automatic rifleman to grenadier.
(Squad I came up was sort of horrible chimera of US army infantry squad, finnish infantry squad and german jaeger squad(?) and my additions. At the moment it is squad leader, designated marksman and two fireteams with team leader, automatic rifleman, assistant automatic rifleman and two anti-tank gunners with either M72 or AT-4CS)

[Firn]

I forgot to add that it would be (possibly) in addition to mortars, crew-served anti-tank weapons and what have you at battalion level.
I am not also sure who in infantry squad would be equipped with it... ...unless I change assistant automatic rifleman to grenadier.
(Squad I came up was sort of horrible chimera of US army infantry squad, finnish infantry squad and german jaeger squad(?) and my additions. At the moment it is squad leader, designated marksman and two fireteams with team leader, automatic rifleman, assistant automatic rifleman and two anti-tank gunners with either M72 or AT-4CS)

As Fuchs said, having a grenadier platoon at the battalion would a bit of an oddity. The key question is the overall utility compared for example to (additional) pioneers or personal/assets for the heavy weapon company/platoon, especially for the mortars.

METT-TC is of course once again key, for example in a high-intensity conflict against an enemy using combined arms additional light/heavy AT capability could be far more important. In very difficult terrain, the number of hands per heavy MG or mortar will have to be increased to support them and heavy casualities in the rifle platoons could make it necessary to fill them up again.

To fully exploit an MGL you might need an assistant gunner which carries additional rounds, as the gunner will have already to carry at least the heavy MGL, possibly in addition to a carabine.

While I have no idea how a weapon like the M25 is performing in combat, but it might be, METT-TC permitting, worthwile to incorporate it into the heavy weapon squad of the platoon. Having supposedly good range and a neat thermal sight it might offer good target detection, fire support and target designation, marking accurately targets for the MGs, mortars and heavier assets. This third role doesn't even require complicate time-fuzing.

[JMA]

METT-TC is of course once again key, for example...

Yes this is true. I wonder though if there have been any significant changes in what is carried at section/squad, platoon and company levels (and how they are employed) due to METT-TC in either Iraq or Afghanistan.