Are snipers and recon still valid in infantry battalions?

[Rifleman]

Thus you have the shooters at Company level -- I'd go for Platoon level, one team each, Co Cdr to pull for some missions (or give him a team also). With maybe a couple of teams at Bn level; senior NCO to be the shooter trainer, working for the S3.

It seems that snipers have usually been employed most effectively at battalion level. Having said that, company commanders could most likely use a true sniping capability, not just "designated marksmen."

I've mentioned before that I like the idea of a "sharpshooter type" rifle squad led by a senior staff sergeant in a rifle company's weapons platoon. The squad should be big enough to attach a team (or two?) of DMs out to each rifle platoon and have a team left under the company commander's control. Platoon leaders could further attach the DMs directly to a squad if necessary for operations but I don't like the idea of DMs living with a rifle squad full time even if it's been done successfully before.

Use the arms room concept: the teams attached to rifle platoons would likely operate with semi-auto rifles with the team(s) employed by the company commander using bolt rifles or a .50 Barrett, mission dependant.

This squad should also be a natural for things like LP/OP duty or other types of screening.

[Ken White]

Jon:

It's not that the Rifle Cos can't / aren't patrolling and plunking in beaucoup Intel, the reasons for a Bn Scout section are to avoid having to task a Co to provide a patrol that would take people away from their Sector or Zone for those EEI that the S2 identifies that do not fall clearly in the areas assigned to a Co; to provide some Intel trained eyes that can notice things that the Co patrols might miss due to personnel turbulence, casualties/replacements, etc.; Provide people that can give a good full bore report -- a trained observer and reporter is better than a good one. It allows for special training in forensic examination, document review, Rifle Co Recon Patrol debriefs and other good stuff without having to cull from the Cos some who might have had such training -- I can go on for another hour.

However, I do acknowledge that they would have / have had limited use in most Bn AOs in Iraq. They probably would have little employment in Afghanistan in current reality but that job is tailor made for such a section -- provided the Theater Commander had the testicular fortitude required to let 'em be sent out.

In a mid intensity or high intensity situation, they'll earn their money many times over. Partly due to Rifle Co casualties and personnel turnover.

Not a frontage issue in all cases but it can be -- it is a depth issue in the sense that the Rifle Co Recon (Combat patrols are a separate animal and they belong to the Cos and not to the Scout sect) Patrols should normally go out no more than 10-15 km, max, generally less -- and METT-TC dependent -- so they run about 4 hours out and 4 back, max (with 4-6 total being better and with no overnight stays) the Scout Sec, OTOH should be prepared for three to five day patrols in bad guy territory or up to about 30 km out. Not everyone grooves on that-- or can do it. Div Recon should be used for the stuff from 30-100km out while Force Recon can do the strategic stuff beyond 100km.

What usually happens in peacetime is the Sections get cut, the Rifle Cos get tabbed to do things they should not and Div gets called in to do what should be the Bn's job while force is busy with other things (That from a former Div [war] and Force [peace] guy ).

Rifleman:

You said:

:It seems that snipers have usually been employed most effectively at battalion level..."

Is that because that's where they've been placed most of the time due to fear of unsupervised NCOs shooting the wrong people or because that's really the most effective location?

"Having said that, company commanders could most likely use a true sniping capability, not just "designated marksmen."

I'd think so -- not least because in Korea there were snipers in most rifle companies in the 1st Mar Div -- some had 'em down to Platoon level. Some units in Viet Nam did the same thing, most didn't bother but the decision was generally based on the terrain and vegetation the unit operated in -- not much call for 5-800m shots in triple canopy...

What's your objection to the DM being / staying part of the squad?

Why would you go with a .50 at Co level? For that matter, why go with a bolt gun in the Co?

[Rifleman]

What's your objection to the DM being / staying part of the squad?

For some of the same reasons that crew served weapons are usually kept seperate for training and garrison and attached out as needed. It seems to me that snipers and DMs would better trained under the supervision of a senior staff sergeant with sniper experience instead of a rifle squad leader who might not have any.

Why would you go with a .50 at Co level?

It wouldn't have to be a .50 but wouldn't it be benificial for the company commander have some kind of heavy rifle available?

For that matter, why go with a bolt gun in the Co?

Why, because you're just not a real sniper without a bolt rifle. Think about it. With a semi-auto you actually have to wait for gas to cycle the action before firing again, while a good man with a bolt rifle can.....

Seriously though, I was just thinking that a semi-auto isn't as necessary once you're removed some distance from the firefight and perhaps operating in something closer to a true sniper role instead of a DM role, plus the M24 is still in the system and will be for some time, won't it?

But I'd be less concerned about what rifle is used and more concerned about grouping all snipers/DMs into a single squad for training and admin. MGs do it that way, mortars do it that way, anti-armor does it that way, etc. Sometimes those weapons mass and sometimes they're attached out. Seems to me that concept sould also work well with snipers/DMs at rifle company level, that's all.

As always, Sergeant Major, I look forward to your rebuttal!

[Ken White]

For some of the same reasons that crew served weapons are usually kept seperate for training and garrison and attached out as needed. It seems to me that snipers and DMs would better trained under the supervision of a senior staff sergeant with sniper experience instead of a rifle squad leader who might not have any.

Totally agree with your logic but not the solution. First, a key distinction is just that 'crew served' -- keep the 'crew' together in both garrison and combat. Recall also that all the crew served weapons we have are best employed in multiples (yes, even the Javelin) so keeping the crew together for cohesion makes sense, training them altogether makes sense. Employing then together makes sense.

The designated marksman, to be most effective in combat should part of a crew involved in the fire and maneuver business. That crew is the squad so that's where he or she should be. The training issue in garrison is easily solved by scheduling the DM sustainment training so that they all get together under the senior Co (or Bn) DM / Sniper. In my view, you'd have two Sniper * tms at Co, a DM in every squad and the senior Sniper becomes the Co DM trainer. if there's also a Bn Sniper Tm or section, the leader becomes the Bn Master Shooter and oversees training.

Let me caveat all that by saying that's a here and now answer to your point. In a dream world, all the Squad Leaders (and thus the PSG) would have been DMs and would thus know how important the job was and would not neglect the training which they could conduct themselves. I'll add that 'dream' isn't at all hard to achieve -- all it would take is will power and an acknowledgment by the Army (and Congress) that not everyone who sticks around long enough and keeps his nose clean needs to be a Squad Leader...

It wouldn't have to be a .50 but wouldn't it be benificial for the company commander have some kind of heavy rifle available?

Yeah but I'd go with a .338 or similar on weight aspects.

Why, because you're just not a real sniper without a bolt rifle. Think about it. With a semi-auto you actually have to wait for gas to cycle the action before firing again, while a good man with a bolt rifle can.....

Yeah, yeah -- lot of tha going around...

Seriously though, I was just thinking that a semi-auto isn't as necessary once you're removed some distance from the firefight and perhaps operating in something closer to a true sniper role instead of a DM role, plus the M24 is still in the system and will be for some time, won't it?

Valid on all counts. My though is that to preclude identification by the other guys shooters and on logistic grounds, all the weapons in the Co that can possibly be similar should be, the more they all look and operate alike, the easier your training and the better to conphooze the evil enema. not a big thing, though...

But I'd be less concerned about what rifle is used and more concerned about grouping all snipers/DMs into a single squad for training and admin...Seems to me that concept sould also work well with snipers/DMs at rifle company level, that's all...As always, Sergeant Major, I look forward to your rebuttal!

here's my re -- the buttal was up above...

I hear you but I think that's a peace and not a warfighting approach -- it also neglects the fact that 'attachments' in combat do not work well, a guy cannot work for two masters and that the DM is an individual with an individual weapon as opposed to a crew with a crew served weapon. Combat cohesion is critical...

A lot of our poor structuring is a result of trying to make life easy in garrison and in peace time; unfortunately, while it works well there it often is a minor problem -- sometimes a major one -- in combat where there are so many bigger problems that the minor ones are overlooked. Not a good way to do it, IMO.

[shlomz]

It seems that snipers have usually been employed most effectively at battalion level.

That's what my experience thought me. Both recon & sniping are capabilities which, in a perfect army, any infantry company should have. However, I have found it very difficult to maintain these capabilities within the company level, due to the small number of men concerned and the "force of momentum", which tends to constrain the company CO to his more immediate and generalized tasks.

Moreover, the battalion CO should not, IMO "sub-let" this crucial element to his company commanders.

Therefore - a battalion recon platoon and sniper section.