Leading infantry tactics theoreticians/experts today

[Norfolk]

Fuchs, Kilcullen's main piece in this regard was "Rethinking the Basis of Infantry Close Combat" (Australian Army Journal). It more or less mirrored at Company-Level what General DePuy wrote about at Platoon-Level in "One Up and Two Back?"(scroll down to Pages 295-302 of "Selected Papers of General Wiliam E. DePuy", and yes, I'm plugging for my boy here). Both approaches are focused upon the primacy of suppression in the Attack, of course, and our own Tom Odom as you know (along with his two co-authors) based some of his publicly accessible work upon Gen. DePuy's: see "Transformation: Victory Rests with Small Units", in Military Review from a few years back. McBreen especially emphasized suppression in his articles for Marine Corps Gazette. Obviously it takes some digging to get a hold of his best two, but they don't say too much different than others who base their work upon DePuy's. Besides them, there's Wilf of course, and Wigram, whom some of Wilf's work derived from. And a number of us who admire the RLI's Fire Force (not to mention Drake Shooting); See jcustis' "Interview With an RLI Vet", too, here and here. The RLI's Platoon and Brick organization and tactics, along with Wilf's work, provide some insight into what Infantry tactics of the future may look like.

Edited to Add:

Get a hold of the original 1981 edition of On Infantry by John English (the 1984 edition with Bruce Gudmundsson as co-author is also good), and Virgil Ney's work is generally considered as good or better than even English's (but it's harder to get a hold of).