Northern Finland becomes more open after certain lattitude.Originally Posted by ganulv
I just skimmed on finnish forum topic about skis vs snowshoes and found out following info:
Utti jaeger regiment once tested tested snow shoes, and while it was found by parajaegers of regiment.
Also it was concluded, both by parajaegers of regiment and reservist forum writers, That few are situtations in Fnland where snowshoes are better that skis.
Thanks for checking up on this! I have been curious about it since moving up north and discovering that not all snow-covered terrain is suitable for cross-country skis. But when they are appropriate the user can make great time.
If you don’t read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed. – Mark Twain (attributed)
And on the other news:
Regional forces will have their old infantry bridage 80 replaced with new regional brigade/contigent/element/*suggest good english name*
Old infatry brigade had:
HQ&HQ-company
4xinfantry battalions
-4xinfantry companies
-HQ&HQ-company
-Mortar company
-anti-tank company
-service company
-forward observer and signals battery
recce company
engineering company
anti-tank company
field artillery regiment
-HQ&HQ and service-battery
-Forward observer battery
-light artillery battalion
-heavy artillery battalion
2xanti-aircraft battery
signals company
service company
New regional *good english term?*
Will have:
3-6 regional battlegoups with:
3-4 infantry companies
1 HQ&HQ-comapny
1 signals company
1 heavy mortar company
1 service company
1 engineering company
1 field artillery battalion.
New system seems atleast more flexibel while possessing more firepower (in indirect fire) than old infantry brigade.
There is no AA-battery, so I assume (hope) that headquarters company has either manpads or ZU-23-2 platoon for air defence, so battegroups wouldn't have to rely only on NSVs and corps level AA assets.
Also question is will NLAW be heaviest AT weapon or will some battelgoups be issued with TOWs or heavy recoilless cannons.
Skis vs snowshoes
It depends on the snow cover, etc. In our country (winter snowfall usually between 200-300 inches per season), both are used. Cross-country skis work best on some sort of trail - i.e., firm base.
Snowshoes come in various designs - traditionally something like these:
Alaskan Style
Much like a large Ojibwa in general shape and function, the Alaskan's upturned toe, large surface area and sleek profile excel at covering open trail distances through any depth of snow.
Fastest, but least maneuverable, snowshoe.
Ojibwa Style
Of all the many shapes we could make, we feature and recommend the Ojibwa, with its pointed tail, highly efficient pointed toe and ''nesting'' shape. This beautiful design comes down to us from thousands of years of challenge and survival. It is strongly preferred by Canadian and US snowshoers and winter guides as the top design for beginners to start on, best for general day trips and for serious expeditions.
More maneuverable than the Alaskan (but not in close quarters - sapling whips, etc. because of the sharp prow).
Huron Style
If your grandfather snowshoed, most probably it would have been on a pair of Babiche-laced (rawhide) snowshoes like these. Country Ways brings this tradition back with these 12" x 46" Huron-style “Drift Busters”. Great looking snowshoes for over the mantle, outside an entrance, or on any wooded trail! Yes, they are as reliable and quiet as ever, especially in the deep snow. Select quarter-sawn white ash is steam bent and the babiche is hand laced by our skilled craftspeople in patterns developed over many hundreds of years.
My dad's choice - which I've adhered to.
Green Mt. Bearpaw
A fine example of the traditional and much-loved New England mountain snowshoe.These Green Mountain (or modified) bearpaws are quite oval, rounded at both ends with a slight lift to the toe. Ideal for outdoor work projects - surveying, orchard pruning, traplines, dense brush and winter campsites where you need to turn in your own length. Often used as expedition spares carried on the back of a pack. Harder walking for long distances than pointed tail snowshoes.
This modification is longer than the traditional bearpaw (which is roughly 2/3 the length, but same width), which is the ultimate cedar swamp snowshoe.
A shorter form of New England bearpaw was probably used by Roger's Rangers in the "Battle of the Snowshoes". That book's cover shows a TdM trooper (French Colonial Marine), a French-Canadian militiaman and an Indian auxilliary - all using Huron-style snowshoes. The First Battle (1757) involved French infantry (TDY'd to Canada) from the Languedoc Regt. (who were not snowshoe-equipped - "The French reported that they were at a disadvantage, since they were without snowshoes and floundering in snow up to their knees."), plus some French-Candadian militia and Indians. The Second Battle (1758) involved mostly Canadian Indians as auxilliaries to approx. a "platoon" (~30 men) of Colonial Marines.
At least two 1757-1758 encounters involved snowshoes - see Wikis, Battle on Snowshoes (1757), and Battle on Snowshoes (1758). Roger's g-g-granddaughter found several original documents reporting on the Second Battle of the Snowshoes, 13 Mar 1758).
Regards
Mike
Last edited by jmm99; 06-23-2011 at 05:15 PM.
When I was in the 7th ID in 1982 and went to Arctic weather training with the 1/32 Inf I thought I was getting the short end of the stick because at the same time my battalion, 1/79 FA, was sending teams to Singapore and Japan for CPXs with their national forces. However, in Alaska I learned all about snowshoes, skis, field-expedient snow caves, and wearing clothing in layers.
The knowledge has come in handy around here, where we sometimes get 24 inches of snow every now and then. I've gotten some people out of the ditch by the side of the road when there is ice and snow all over.
The one thing I wish to say is that my old units, 7th ID, Task Force Faith, 1/32 Inf, were virtually annihiliated during the run-up to the USMC's epic stand at Chosin. We took the main punch the Chinese had to offer and we died with our boots on. Were we yet another incompetent Army unit, or did we die fighting? Probably a combination of the two, if the truth must be known.
When I ran this theory in about 2004 by the late Brig. Gen. Edwin Simmons, the former chief historian of USMC, he wanted to have nothing to do with it. I knew his son during high school in Alexandria, Virginia in '69-'70. Gen. Simmons was a good man and I hope I didn't p*ss him off too much.
PsJÄÄK Korte, you are writing that in Finnish organisation there are Apilas and LAW. Don't you intentend to replace those systems with NLAW? You have bought already approx 2000 pieces. I suspect that this is just beginning. The efficency of NLAW compensates to some limit the quantity of Apilas/LAW in structure. Can you speculate how this weapon will be located in structure? Will it be platoon level weapon?
Nlaw will replace 95 S 58-61 heavy recoilless rifles in addion to APILAS, not LAW. :D
To my knowledge there are no plans for LAW.
Also if NLAW is gradually replaces APILAS and "Blackie" on 1-on-1 rate. It will be located in this way:
Infantry platoon: one NLAW team with leader (NCO or private first class) and two gunners (private or private first class).
HQ-platoon of infantry company: NLAW squad made of two NLAW teams mentioned above. leader of one team is also squad leader.
HQ-company of regional battlegroup and type 90 jaeger battalion: platoon of three NLAW squads.
Also, because finnish terrain is so forested, TOW and SPIKE-MR squads have APILAS/NLAW team for close protection.
I hope my explanation is not confusing.
I would call this unit a brigade in English.
Regarding your earlier post, requesting a suggestion for an English term for "forward observer officer aidman" I would suggest "Fire Support Specialist" as the US Army equivalent if I understand you correctly. English "aidman" usually has medical connotations, but I think that you mean an assistant to the forward observer officer, right?
Yes maybe fire support specialist is better translation. I am talking about person in fire support/forward observer team/squad whose job is to carry laser rangefinders and other similar gear and, to my understanding, help determine exact location on team and/or target for arty and mortars.
Also maybe you are right on calling it brigade.
PsJÄÄK Korte, thanks for quick explanation (juhannuksen aikana). This is best, that I have found so far.
Is this NLAW team on picture? Do they have only 1 NLAW shot per team? Sounds unbelivable. ... or weapon is so good
Saabs are great so long as you can find a mechanic…
The NLAW is disposable, right? So I guess the photo shows one NLAW and three M72s. Is that the normal make-up of a team?Is this NLAW team on picture? Do they have only 1 NLAW shot per team? Sounds unbelivable. ... or weapon is so good
Last edited by ganulv; 06-24-2011 at 12:58 PM. Reason: to improve the question
If you don’t read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed. – Mark Twain (attributed)
A US Army infantry/armor/cavalry company/troop gets a 4-man team for observation/fire support coordination- a LT Fire Support Officer, a SSG (E6) Fire Support NCO, a SPC (E4) Fire Support Specialist and a PFC (E3) RadioTelephone Operator (who is also MOS 13F- Fire Support, not communications).
In addition, rifle platoons (and the cavalry platoons in the Infantry BCT) get a forward observer party consisting of a SGT (E5) Forward Observer and a PFC (E3) RadioTelephone Operator (who is also MOS 13F- Fire Support, not communications).
Other platoons (tank platoons, cavalry platoons except where noted, and anti-armor/weapons platoons).
The US Army used to, and the USMC still does, refer to the artillery officer (LT) in the company as the forward observer. AFAIK, that changed in the mid-70s with the introduction of the Fire Support Team (FiST) concept, and the LT became known first as the FiST Chief and then the Fire Support Officer (FSO). I don't know exactly when the FiST Chief changed to FSO, but it was before I became FA in 1997, although my early BN CDRs were FiST Chiefs in the early-mid 80s.
When in doubt, doctrine is always a good place to start. FM 1-02 defines brigade as "(DOD) A unit usually smaller than a division to which are attached groups and/or battalions and smaller units tailored to meet anticipated requirements. (Army) A unit consisting of two or more battalions and a headquarters." Dictionary.com has "a military unit having its own headquarters and consisting of two or more regiments, squadrons, groups, or battalions."Also maybe you are right on calling it brigade.
Based on these, and your unit descriptions, I would use the BDE symbol if I were drawing this unit on an overlay, but that's just an opinion, and you can take it for what you paid for it.
The latter definition does not draw a line between brigade and regiment, though. Brigades tend to be combined arms, whereas regiments tend to be one-branch formations.
Infantry should be highly agile, a 2 km cross-country run with equipment should be possible at almost any time (I certainly would need two months of exercise till I reached that fitness level).
Not the least for this requirement, I dislike the idea that infantry teams always need to have heavy AT munitions.
I'd rather prefer to have multiple TO&E per team; and a Plt base / cache / carrier vehicle with the temporarily unnecessary equipment.
Traditional US Army usage (I don't have the definitions handy) was that a Regiment was a fixed organization of (predominantly) a single arm/branch, while a Brigade was an unfixed organization combining multiple arms/branches, but that wasn't always true, since a square division in WW1 had 2 brigades of 2 regiments. It is also not true in the current organizations, since each of the three BCTs have a fixed organization. The Multifunctional and functional support brigades have an unfixed organization, but at least the functional support brigades are predominantly of one arm.
It also depends on the size of your regiment, since some nations' regiments are only battalion sized.
As you can see from picture, it is from exercise with advanced MILES. They propably have one NLAW simulator because number simulators, which can simulate other forms of damage than rifles, Finland has is low. There are barely enough for one exercise between two peace time brigades. So every advanced MILES gear is rotated between peace time brigades, althought every infatry battalion has their older MILES gear of their own, used to practice squad and platoon combat, while advanced MILES is reserved for company, battalion and battlegroup/brigade exercises. For example, in our exercises APILAS-team I was part of usually had one APILAS simulator. And in our "Final War" we had to use older MILES, so only way to simulate APILAS fire was to have referee with "referee gun" follow us everywhere.
In war that team would be given anywhere between 2-9 NLAW, depending on wether it is in more "peaceful" location or wether it is part of force sent to blunt attack of tank brigade.
Infantry and armoured infatry companies have fire support officer (senior lieutenant or captain) and, depending wether they are armoured infatry company, type 05 jaeger comapany, type 90 jaeger company or type 80 infantry company, either company level fire support platoon with 3-4 fire support squads or each platoon has organic fire support team. Difference between fire support squad and team is that squad has two RTOs and team has one. Reason why squad has two RTOs is that one of RTOs have radio for communicating with firing positions while second carries telephone cable for company network
Btw. Reason why I was uncertain for translation for that new formation because in finnish word prikaati means brigade, but that new unit's name in finnish paikallinen taisteluosasto which component words mean, if translated directly
paikallinen=regional, territorial
taistelu=combat, battle
ryhmä=group, team, squad, section, plus many more translations which have nothing to do with military.
Maybe it is similar to the ‘territorial battalion’ of the CF?
If you don’t read the newspaper, you are uninformed; if you do read the newspaper, you are misinformed. – Mark Twain (attributed)
I dare to say that right now there is no NATO infantry unit able to do it as a team in equipment they are required to carry on when outside the wire. It´s beating the same dead horse as we do for some years already.
Last edited by BushrangerCZ; 06-26-2011 at 08:35 AM.
Well, I'm not talking about a patrol, but about tactical (area) defence.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks