Are snipers and recon still valid in infantry battalions?

[Pete]

In the 50s and early 60s, most Divisions ran a recon school and had a Recon platoon competition annually.

You hardly ever hear of Recondos or Long-Range Reconnaissance Patrols these days. I met a few graduates of division-level Recondo schools when I joined in 1977 and Lurps were spoken of with a kind of awe.

[reed11b]

There is an LRS leaders course at Benning (or there was) plus, LRS guys in Germany get to go to the NATO International LRS School at Weingarten. There are some who get to attend other nation's recon courses and also to USMC courses.

LRS Leaders course is RSLC (Recon and Surveillance Leaders Course) and the NATO LRS school is now called something else and run by SOCOM (very hard for non-SOF to get into). RSLC and Army Reconnaissance Course are just about it. I have failed to find any Marine school soldiers can attend.
LRS mission is unclear at this point, and infantry scouts have always been undertrained and rarley used in the scout role since I joined in the mid 90's.

Perhaps when I get some time in a "RSTA" I will be able to better answer some the questions raised in this thread.
Reed

[Pete]

In 1982 when I was in 7th Infantry Division at Fort Ord, California we were able to send guys to the Marine Corps sniper school at Camp Pendleton. Division headquarters put out guidance to stop sending unmotivated or mediocre soldiers there who lacked basic math skills. The Marines were giving them math tests when they arrived and those who failed were sent back without even touching a rifle.

[Rifleman]

I'd add that Viet Nam totally wrecked Army recon at Battalion level, it still hasn't recovered. The concentration on the NTC and north German Plain in the 70-90 period didn't help. Iraq and Afghanistan will further erode that level unless someone gets smart. In the 50s and early 60s, most Divisions ran a recon school and had a Recon platoon competition annually.

Would the Army have been better off to have had Recon Battalions (in addition to the Cav Squadrons) at division level?

I believe Marine Divisions have both a Recon Battalion and Light Armored Recon Battalion, correct? I'm assuming an infantry battalion gets a platoon from each when combat teams are formed?

[Ken White]

LRS Leaders course is RSLC (Recon and Surveillance Leaders Course)...

Mixing close and deep is really unwise, very different skill sets and even mindsets required. I bet they went ahead and said all the NCOs have to be Rangers, too...

and the NATO LRS school is now called something else and run by SOCOM (very hard for non-SOF to get into).

If that is true -- and I find it hard to believe because the School has instructors from the FRG, Netherlands, Italy and UK as well as the US -- and occasionally from other nations for specifc courses as well. I do not find it hard to believe that SOCOM has taken control of the ATRRS space allocations for the course -- though they should not have.

LRS mission is unclear at this point,

That's due to SOCOM grabbing it but not really wanting to do it unless its exotic -- and then they'll tab it to the two ArNG Groups. It is not really a SOCOM mission under most circumstances; only if it's deep strategic recon should it be theirs.

and infantry scouts have always been undertrained and rarley used in the scout role since I joined in the mid 90's.

Yup, like I said, went to hell in the 70s and never recovered. They were pretty good prior to VN.

Due to risk aversion, it's likely to get worse before it gets better. Lacking a major war and a total shake up of the hierarchy, no big changes will occur.

[Ken White]

Would the Army have been better off to have had Recon Battalions (in addition to the Cav Squadrons) at division level?

and did a good job until they got the M3 Bradleys in the early 80s. That Bradley drug deal between the Chief of Armor and the Chief of Infantry really messed up a lot of things. It turned the Cavalry, who were Scouts prepared to fight for information if absolutely necessary into junior tankers whose idea of recon was to go out looking for a fight. As some French Dude once said, "That's magnificent but it is not war..."

The Cav Sqns also had any LRS assets (as opposed to their being in the MI Bn) until another turf battle screwed that up.

[Fuchs]

Would the Army have been better off to have had Recon Battalions (in addition to the Cav Squadrons) at division level?

There's no real need for a Div level and LRS should be assigned to Corps (I'd say a Bn or Rgt each).

Modern operational theory is very mobile and expects long marches of Bdes with short notice.

LRS infiltrate, observe and exfiltrate. The more movement in their area of operations, the greater the danger of being detected & identified.
They could not exfiltrate, recover, infiltrate and become effective again in time if their Bde (or Div) is moved by 150 km in two days.

The area of operations (an area expected to be assigned for weeks) should be the Corps' area, and the LRS operating in this area should be the Corps'.
Much of their tasks go way beyond what Bdes and Divs should bother about.

Div and Bde whose staffs care about far away opfor tend to have (require?) very big staffs - when it's really not necessary as long as Corps staffs can do the job.


The right place of LRS in an Army TO is thus linked to the distribution of tasks between Bde/Div/Corps. Air-Land-Battle and its secondary effects have overburdened the Divs with tasks that should really belong to Corps (or even theatre Cmd).

[Rifleman]

There's no real need for a Div level and LRS should be assigned to Corps....

...The area of operations (an area expected to be assigned for weeks) should be the Corps' area, and the LRS operating in this area should be the Corps'. Much of their tasks go way beyond what Bdes and Divs should bother about.

That would bring LRS more in line with what the USMC's Force Recon Companies were: a Fleet Marine Force asset.

I think the Force Recon Companies have since been absorbed by the Division's Recon Battalions for administration but still operate detached at FMF level? I'm not sure about that.

jcusits, can you clarify?

[jcustis]

Rifleman,

I'm honestly not sure about the operating concept for the Force Companies, beyond the fact that they are supposed to maintain the deep recce capability. I do not know what the doctrinal frontage or depth is supposed to be.

The wikipedia entry makes mention of supporting direct action requirements if MSOB is not around, but I do not know if the companies train to the same standard they had to when DA was the sole domain of Force.

[reed11b]

...said all the NCOs have to be Rangers, too... If that is true -- and I find it hard to believe because the School has instructors from the FRG, Netherlands, Italy and UK as well as the US -- and occasionally from other nations for specifc courses as well. I do not find it hard to believe that SOCOM has taken control of the ATRRS space allocations for the course (

Yes they have, Not in my NG unit yet, but soon. As for The NATO LRS school, I'll look up the new name and a link by tomorrow, but they specifically stated that it is for US SF and NATO SOF on the web page. I know a fair number of LRS guys, and we all want the school, but I know of no one that has gone. I'll ask over at the QP and SOCNET forums and get some clarification.

Reed

[Kurt Vara]

Pete; I am curious why you were sending Army guys to the Marine Sniper School when we had a Sniper School right at Fort Ord.
I only say this because I graduated from Sniper School at Fort Ord,
March 26, 1982 and was stationed there at Fort Ord with
the 7th infantry division A 1/32.
Kurt

[Uboat509]

Pete; I am curious why you were sending Army guys to the Marine Sniper School when we had a Sniper School right at Fort Ord.
I only say this because I graduated from Sniper School at Fort Ord,
March 26, 1982 and was stationed there at Fort Ord with
the 7th infantry division A 1/32.
Kurt

The Marine sniper course is different than the Army course. I'm not going to say better or worse because I don't know but it is different and I have had friends who were qualified Army snipers who still wanted to get that course.

[JMA]

The Marine sniper course is different than the Army course. I'm not going to say better or worse because I don't know but it is different and I have had friends who were qualified Army snipers who still wanted to get that course.

Different in what way?

[Kurt Vara]

I've talked to some of the Marine Snipers and we talked about the Training and they didn't tell me anything that we had not done.
Plus we use to go around and training with all the other Special Forces,
We trained with the Navy Seals we trained with the Rangers and some of our instructors were Green Berets. I do know how ever that they were using differant rifles then we were. But that was the only thing differant that I knew of. We were using a XM - 14 which is like the M21 with a 3x9 power scope.
Kurt

[Kurt Vara]

Wow; I was waiting to talk to Pete see if he knew any of the people I used to know. But probably not those Company's were big and I mostly only knew the guys in my company. I graduated from AIT in 1980 and the entire 3rd Platoon of A company 1/32 graduated with me. The rest of the guys
were spead out thru the 7th Infantry division. I know one of the guys, Jerome was hurt in a bad car accident the other two soldiers with him were killed. They were in a Mach 1 mustang that went off the road and hit a telephone pole and the car split in half. the driver and the back seat passenger were ejected. Jerome was the only one wearing his seat belt. He was busted up badand I never seen him after that.

Kurt

[COMMAR]

Different in what way?

From the Scout/Sniper's in my old unit the major differences are;

1) its a 10wk course as opposed to the Army's 5wk course.

• http://usmilitary.about.com/cs/marin...rinesniper.htm

2) There's also a 4wk Pre-Sniper or PIG (Professionally Instructed Gunman's) course, thats a prerequisite which is basically a Basic Snipers course followed by months of OJT before getting a slot in SSBC. An article on the Pre-Sniper Course:

• http://www.leatherneck.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=80919

3) A large portion of the course is dedicated to the employment of Combined Arms coordination & planning.

4) Most of the course is dedicated to Scout/Sniper Mission Planning & Sniper Employment b/c most of the sniping basics is covered in the PIG course & in OJT.

5) Actually becoming a "Scout"/Sniper which involves learning to operate in up to 6-man teams to conduct reconnaissance missions independently at extended ranges.

[TAH]

Would the Army have been better off to have had Recon Battalions (in addition to the Cav Squadrons) at division level?

I believe Marine Divisions have both a Recon Battalion and Light Armored Recon Battalion, correct? I'm assuming an infantry battalion gets a platoon from each when combat teams are formed?

As long as you are staying past tense, yur first statement about Div CAV is correct. With Transformation, the CAV Sqdron (Part of the Old DIV Base) is now gone. And not really replaced.

The current thought is that if a DIV CDR needs someone to do that mission, they will task a BCT.

BTW, same applies a Corps level. Soon, if not already the last Armored CAV Regiment (3rd ACR) will convert to a standard HBCT.

The proposed solution is the Battlefield Surviellance Brigade (BFSB).

A couple of issuues.

1. There will never be enough BFSB to give one per division (11 total BFSBs to cover 18 divisions and 4 Corps).

2. The standard manning of a BFSB is around 1200/1300. Of that, only 375 are in the Recon Sqdron and of that 139 are in the Long-Range Surveillance Company.

As a side now, force structure of the Army is driven/limited by manning. Adding a unit of 100 to one organization means a 100 slot reduction(the term is billpayer) soemwhere else.

TAH

[82redleg]

BTW, same applies a Corps level. Soon, if not already the last Armored CAV Regiment (3rd ACR) will convert to a standard HBCT.

It will convert to an SBCT sometime next year (or maybe FY 12)

1. There will never be enough BFSB to give one per division (11 total BFSBs to cover 18 divisions and 4 Corps).

Right.

2. The standard manning of a BFSB is around 1200/1300. Of that, only 375 are in the Recon Sqdron and of that 139 are in the Long-Range Surveillance Company.

The Recon SQDN in the the BFSB is an emasculated organization- besides the LRS, it only has 4 x 6 truck scout platoons, in two troops. The LRS is bigger than the 2 recon troops combined. What a crock.

The recon in the BCT is too big- better a large (4 platoon) troop in the BSTB, with a couple more troops (a big mounted troop, and a LRS) in the DIV HHB.

I guess I come down on the side of DIV CAV AND a Recon BN, like the USMC, is a good idea.

[COMMAR]

Rifleman, I'm honestly not sure about the operating concept for the Force Companies, beyond the fact that they are supposed to maintain the deep recce capability. I do not know what the doctrinal frontage or depth is supposed to be.

Presently due to size, currently 3 Plt as opposed to the standard 6, & lack of current ability to independently support them at the MEF they are currently still administratively under the Div but Operationally under the MEF.

W/their return to the MEU they have returned to the FR-DAP mission again picking up the Precision Raids, Hostile VBSS, GOPLAT, & other Black-side missions; although the MSPF has a different structure & a new name.

• http://www.marines.mil/unit/31stmeu/...ombattown.aspx

The wikipedia entry makes mention of supporting direct action requirements if MSOB is not around, but I do not know if the companies train to the same standard they had to when DA was the sole domain of Force.

As of 2009 the MSOCs were still conducting the CQB Course followed by the 5wk Direct Action Course, but I haven't heard or read anything this year.



Its still listed as a course taught by by the MEF SOTG though listed under the Dynamic Assault Course:

• http://www.marines.mil/unit/iimef/so...s/default.aspx

W/the lessened MSPF now MSF, not sure if the MEU's are still doing TRUEX:

• http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita...216-usmc01.htm

[Ranger94]

M I bet they went ahead and said all the NCOs have to be Rangers, too... (

Why is it a bad thing that a LRS team leader has been to additional schooling for leadership/planning?

(Note my Bias: I believe EVERY leader would benefit from at least attempting Ranger/Light Leaders training.)