Results 1 to 20 of 307

Thread: Infantry Unit Tactics, Tasks, Weapons, and Organization

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    AUT+RUS
    Posts
    87

    Default

    I think the allocation of heavier weapons is determined by logistics requirements, system costs and C2/massing.

    Since it lacks oversight the squad should have only direct fire weapons (especially when using the German system) - GPMG, automatic rifle, IWs. I'm not sure about the use of UGLs here. Probably not in regular units.

    The platoon can handle the light support weapons that are not always needed - RPG, MGL. Here weapons are still handled by just one man.

    Company level adds 80mm mortar and man portable guided missile crews, esp light ATGMs.

    Such a setup, btw, probably favours light IW (like MP7) as standard equipment, since the weapons crews can carry those in addition to their main weapons, can support the rifles once their heavy stuff is gone, and are already equipped for missions that do not require their special weapons. Up to company level every man should be able to handle every weapon.


    On the issue of APC/IMV/MRAP and IFV weaponry, I'd say for APCs and pure IFVs anti-infantry weapons (30cal, 40mm grenade launcher, &c) only.

    But then if you go towards cavalry fighting vehicles/light-to-medium-tanks - all based on IFVs - some 25/30mm autocannon/heavier ATGM combo-turrets, 120mm mortar turrets, 40/57mm autocannon turrets (I think a tank-installed Mk110 could be interesting), SHORAD turrets.

    I'm not sure how far into MBT territory a cavalry fighting vehicle should go, but mounting a 120mm gun like on the CV90120 I think is over the top and might lead to wrong tactical utilization.

  2. #2
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    My thoughts are as follows,

    Company Weapons.

    I can see some merit having a company mortar detachment of 2 tubes. To ease company log issues and to enable dismounted ops, I’d stick with 60mm.

    The company can probably also operate a Tactical UAV. It has the staff and C2 function that may well make that very useful.

    The best fire support weapon for Platoons is, IMO, guided weapons like Javelin, Spike, or even an update of the old M47 Dragon.

    APCs.

    An essential piece of equipment which no infantry unit should be without, if required.
    Need to carry 8 men, so as to get a useful Platoon load out of 4 vehicles.
    Remote Weapons Stations are extremely useful, and if they can also fire the same guided weapon that the Platoon uses then that is also extremely useful.
    I don’t care if its wheeled or tracked as long as the mobility capability matches the mission requirement and the most commonly encountered threat, so the same goes for the levels of protection.

    I think MICVs are better suited to reconnaissance, so that's a different role.
    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

  3. #3
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    AUT+RUS
    Posts
    87

    Default

    Good point about the UAVs.
    Didn't think about that while writing, though I'm usually an UAV guy ...
    But I would not neccessarily integrate an UAV into a company, only give it a data receiver station. Assuming that we talk foot soldiers here only micro/mini-UAVs come into question - they are nice and developing fast, but their capabilities are quite limited so far. And I wouldn't integrate too many non-shooters in too low echelons, also because of ECM/ECCM issues and advanced homing-on-emitter ammo. Of course in the future we're not only talking UAVs, but also UGVs. UAV/UGVs I'd put higher up (battalion level plus), together with ISR assets, like SIGINT. And once they reach autonomy they will filter down through all the echelons, but I'd start with them at battalion level.


    Guided missiles on platoon level is not realistic, too expensive. Esp since they are needed only for certain missions. And if organized in fire crews on a higher level they can be distributed downwards if needed, anyways.
    Precision-attack capability for squad/platoon level could be realized by targeting capability for PGMMs.


    Why only 60mm mortars? The Wehrmacht had quite good experience with the 3-men crew served sGrW34. A lot more punch than 60mm, I think it justifies the higher weight/less rounds ammo. Esp when combined with a MGL at platoon level. To save weapons weight use a short barrel. No need to reach out to 5000M+ in my opinion. How do you ID targets so far out?
    (Even though I have to admit that the follow-on to sGrW34, Granatwerfer 37, was designed to reach out to 4500m+; but the reason for that might be non-tactical).


    That brings up another question: So squads are seldom fighting beyond 200m. Meaning platoons neither. What should then be the reach of an infantry company? I think 2500 to 3000m is realistic. Opinion?

  4. #4
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Distiller View Post
    Good point about the UAVs.

    1. Didn't think about that while writing, though I'm usually an UAV guy ., but I'd start with them at battalion level.

    2. Guided missiles on platoon level is not realistic, too expensive.

    3. Why only 60mm mortars?

    4. So squads are seldom fighting beyond 200m.
    1. I'm happy with Coy. Gives the Coy Comd a view of each platoon objective and if the company is working away from the Battle Group, it still has a UAV capability. Also the UAV product gets fed to platoons very quickly. If the UAV is at BG level there is a whole new level of command for stuff to jam up in.

    2. Most US Squads have Javelin and did have Dragon. Platoon seems ideal. Spike MR is so capable that it requires a whole new view of Platoon weapons.

    3. Having carried 2 x 81mm mortar bombs across Germany, Canada, and Cyprus, I am not a fan unless they are vehicle mounted. Also 60mm mortar ammo can be used in light hand held mortars.

    4. I don't think squads seldom fight beyond 200m, to the extent we should limit the capability to that other than to recognise the limit of IWs as concerns marksmanship. I'd want a platoon to hit out 1000m min and 2000m better. Javelin goes to 3,200m IIRC and
    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

  5. #5
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    AUT+RUS
    Posts
    87

    Default

    @ #1: Hm. I see your point. But: Look here, an advanced system.
    http://www.rafael.co.il/marketing/SI...ILES/7/617.pdf
    The control station is big as a full-size fridge. No way you can haul that on your back.

    @ #2: Since I'm not U.S. I didn't know. You have to be rich to place it on squad level.
    The reason I would want to place a Spike-MR on company level, is that I don't want to grow the platoon into a mini-company.
    And I mean, how many tanks will you encounter out there that made it through smart stand-off subammo >> fighterbombers >> fast-mover CAS >> a/t-helicopters >> smart artillery rounds, to finally wind up in front of your platoon? And for anti-structure jobs a RPG-style weapon or PGMM seems more cost effective to me.

    @ #3: Didn't say it's fun . That's why using a MGL at platoon level.

    @ #4: Ok, understood - in your platoon 60mm mortars and ATGMs would be capable of doing that.

  6. #6
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Distiller View Post
    @ #1: Hm. I see your point. But: Look here, an advanced system.
    http://www.rafael.co.il/marketing/SI...ILES/7/617.pdf
    The control station is big as a full-size fridge. No way you can haul that on your back.

    @ #2: Since I'm not U.S. I didn't know. You have to be rich to place it on squad level.
    The reason I would want to place a Spike-MR on company level, is that I don't want to grow the platoon into a mini-company.
    And I mean, how many tanks will you encounter out there that made it through smart stand-off subammo >> fighterbombers >> fast-mover CAS >> a/t-helicopters >> smart artillery rounds, to finally wind up in front of your platoon? And for anti-structure jobs a RPG-style weapon or PGMM seems more cost effective to me.

    @ #3: Didn't say it's fun . That's why using a MGL at platoon level.

    @ #4: Ok, understood - in your platoon 60mm mortars and ATGMs would be capable of doing that.
    1. I know Skylite well. You can carry the control station but not easy. It's best integrated into the Coy CP vehicle. There are lots of these type of UAVs to choose from.

    2. How is equipping 1 Fireteam in the Platoon with a Spike MR post and 3 missiles making it into a mini-Coy? Platoon Level Guided weapons are an very valid fire support options. Like I said, my cost preference would be for an updated M47 Dragon and even 9К115-2 Metis-M. -AT-7/13

    3. Well if you have an M-32 with Medium Velocity 40mm, then OK, but if I have UGLs in the Fireteams, also with Medium velocity, that's duplication.
    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

  7. #7
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    AUT+RUS
    Posts
    87

    Default

    @ 2: What is the notion behind giving your squad/platoon an ATGM, but leaving the 60mm mortar with the company?
    If you group different effectors at a certain level, they should be akin in range and impact (RPG - MGL; mortar - ATGM).
    And what do you do with those low echelon (platoon) 3-men special weapons shooter team if you don't need their special capability? A fourth mini-squad? Add one man to each existing squad (Then you might run into group-dynamic and transportation problems)? Or leave them at home? Group them one level higher and you have another full squad.
    Plus I wouldn't be comfortable with having just one ATGM team out there.

    @ 3: The M-32 is what I have in mind. I have no idea how useful/popular UGLs are. I just think that a single dedicated weapon with one characteristic is enough, not two tactics/ballistics/effects for one man. Plus the MGL shooter is probabaly better with his weapon than a stand-in grenadier.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •