Quote Originally Posted by Rifleman View Post
Immediate action drills for reacting to contact and breaking contact are another matter, at least according to Vietnam era recon vets.....

Many recon vets of B-52 Project Delta and SOG credit well rehearsed immediate action drills with their survival.
Drill just means common aims and means, so as you say, AI drills are very useful. Battle drill is just an extrapolation of that. Some drills get called SOPs.

Quote Originally Posted by Norfolk View Post

@ I figure that competent and well-trained infantry and infantry leaders don't need Battle Drill, or if they do, only for very limited purposes. And on the other hand, Battle Drill can serve to disguise the poor tactical judgement of weak infantry and especially their leaders.

@ For those reasons, I think that Battle Drill should be ditched and the German system adopted. It's easier to find out who's got the goods, and who doesn't, in peacetime if they don't have the cover of Battle Drill to hide behind.
@ I think you are right. I am not a fan of Battle Drill, in terms of the name. IA drills are essential however, as is an objectively based form of infantry training. The real problem is Battle Drill is it is usually taught very badly, because people are confused by the language, so resort to simplistic iterations of what they think is right. That is why you have Section Attacks, and not Section IN the Attack.

@ What is the German System? - and how do you measure tactical skill in peacetime. When I went up to ITC Brecon, back in the UK and suggested that TES kit be used on all tactical courses, everyone fell over in horror! To quote one SI "You can't learn anything once you become a casualty" - and yes he really said that.

...now, forgoing the idea of something called "a German system" I think you are right, and there are some pretty obvious ways to do it.