Quote Originally Posted by TAH View Post

I agree with your points regarding manuever units and FOBs, but the Loggies got to live/operate from someplace. No reason a maneuver unit could/should not operate off-base for days/weeks at a time, depending on re-supply. Lots of infantry/armor/cav units in Viet Nam spent nights off their base in Night Defense Positions. Seems like we have lost that capability....
But in Vietnam, there weren't lots of M1A2s burning 500 gallons every 8+ hours whether moving or not.

We can secure the LOCs, secure the convoys or try to do both. I like the navy's solution of secure the convoy, understanding that a certain amount of that effort will have to go into securing/clearing a ground route immediately in front of the convoy.
Isn't IED route clearance at really slow speeds? If engineers do it multiple hours prior to the convoy, there is time to emplace new IEDs. If it is done immediately forward of the convoy, the entire convoy is reduced to a crawl and is vulnerable to ambush. Does that create a requirement for something to patrol the road behind the engineers and provide them security?

If a tank is involved in securing the convoy, it is generating a high logistical requirement for itself, is tearing up the road and tank without a HET, and may limit the convoy to roads with strong bridges. There are other manned and unmanned aircraft solutions that may be better than a tank escort.

If we can get use to flexible MSRs, and the terrain allows for it, then all we need is the unit organized, equipped, manned and trained to run the route ahead of the convoy and provide close-in defense. We could leave that all to the CSS units, but will create a higher degree of risk. What I am trying to do is create a force for Lines-of-Commuinication (LOC) security....Don't need/want a tank/Bradley Combined Arms Battalion. Would love Stryker Infantry Battalion, if someone is buying more Strykers.
Wonder if after early Stryker air deployment for deterrence, SBCTs will have less of a forward combat mission once sea-deployed HBCTs arrive. They can be task-organized with HBCTs to provide convoy escort, secure the engineer IED clearance teams and roads behind them, and can support AOs along convoy routes to provide full-time patrolling security and stationary surveillance.


A dismounted Infantry Bn does great securing fixed sites and clearing urban areas. Really lousy when they try to keep up with that moving convoy. So, why not create an Infantry Bn (LOC) equipped with MRAPs/JLTVs/M-ATVs?
101st and 82nd already had a LOC security mission during OIF I and secured bypassed cities. So perhaps let the early deployed light guys do it again in their JLTV/M-ATVs and the Strykers/ASVs perform the mobile escort.

Wonder what a 1000 mile operating range for a tank, or APC or IFV would be. At the end, you will still need fuel, only 3 times more then from 300 miles. (bad at math, I know)
About 2,000 gallons per Abrams (roughly one HEMTT tanker per tank) every 1,000 miles. Probably 1,000 gallons per 130K lbs diesel GCV or 600 gallons per 80,000 lb GCV every 1,000 miles. (I'm not too bad in math )

Cole:

Not sure I understand your Recon Sqdn. Is it Company Size or a Battalion? Are your Troops Company or platoon sized?

1 M1A1 is very bad Ju Ju.
I realized that was messed up last night but waited for other input. Left out the word "platoon" with 1 tank, 3 M3A3, and 4 M-ATVs...basically substituting a tank and 4 M-ATV for the current 5 HMMWVs. So the net addition of 4 tanks to the Recon Squadron could occur as a separate platoon, as well, realizing they would probably be task-organized all the time with other troops.

While your solution of foward delivery of supplies by M-ATV might be feasible, the MSRs run all the way back to an APOD or SPOD. Vulnerability starts a soon as any convoy departs that location.
Tractor trailers and commercial vehicles will bring many supplies most of the way. Forward Support Company HEMTT PLS trucks can cover the remaining distance but lack the off-road mobility of a M-ATV and are a bigger target close to dangerous AOs.

Guess you must push BSB HEMTT tankers all the way forward, but with fewer tanks you could get by with fewer HEMTT tankers. A more fuel-efficient infantry platoon with 3 GCVs/3 M-ATVs also reduces fuel requirements. You also could potentially carry 100 gallons (notional 750 lb of fuel + square rubber fuel drum) in the cargo bed of the M-ATV to resupply half of a 80K GCVs 200 gallon fuel tank. If it is a 140K pound GCV, you are probably only carrying 1/4th of a 400 gallon GCV tankful.

Let Strykers, Armored Security Vehicles, and M-ATV escort the HEMTT tankers and PLS racks forward and secure the dropped racks and fuel trucks until the CAB is ready to resupply.