Ken?
How “tactically” mobile were the HMMWV and FMTV trucks the infantry relied on before? Sure they “some” off-road capacity, but believe me, I have gotten many a HMMWV stuck. Any of the IMV’s that Wilf or I advocate have the same “tactical” mobility range as these vehicles and are simple enough to be left behind if specialty tracks (like the Australians and Brits have done in East Timor and Afghanistan) or helicopters or plan old forced marches are better suited. Also,
as you point out, a signifigent amount of the force gets tied up in vehicles regardless. If an IMV holds as many troops or more then the PC HMMWVs, doesn't that increase the troops available?In the old Airborne Battle Group and Battalion Recon Platoons with the M 151, a third of the strength was driving. My Sons Rifle Platoon in OIF II had a slew of unarmored HMMWVs with no turrets and ad hoc weapons mounts; they carried more people so he only lost a fifth of his strength to the vehicles. Later, in OEF IV (or V, can't recall) he had an Antitank Platoon, armored HMMWVs with turrets -- back to a third or fourth of the strength left with the vehicles.
Helicopters do provide potentially better mobility, however, unless you are advocating for decentralized helicopter distribution (which does not work very well either), they have problems as well. They are very expensive to operate, take a great deal of advance planning the way they are currently set up, and have vulnerabilities to MANPADS and planned ambushes. Like you say, METT-TC dictates. The core concept to the IMV is that it is NOT a “system of systems” and simply an affordable force multiplier if METT-TC dictates. Historically, since they have been shown to be the most likely to be utilized, the easiest and most affordable to operate, since they do not require a unique skill set as helicopters and IFVs do, why not make them organic? This means the operators will in-fact have infantry skills. Don’t need them, don’t use them. Need them, and if they are not available, that’s were situations like Somalia and the 2-5 CAV QRF rescue attempt in Sadr City occur.
One more question.. you state
But then you stateTrack drivers were poorly trained, tactically speaking (Yes, they need to be trained -- and plain old riflemen training is a good base from which to start), the track commanders were similarly poorly trained and the crew just wanted to transport and not get involved in the fight. Doesn't work that way. So, yes, the training of the crew is very important -- and they should at least have a basic understanding of Infantry tactics. They will still suffer the fact that they have no loyalty to the unit being transported -- and that does make a difference; a big difference.
IFVs are aggressive fighting vehicles, so why is the first quote be relevant to them? They are designed to get in and mix it up with the enemy. If you do not want to lose the cohesion and training for infantry platoons, then you have to separate the IFVs (and the unique skill sets required to operate them well) and the Infantry squads. Even if they stay in the platoon, the manning can’t come out of the individual squads, or else you are never capable of dismounting an effective infantry squad/platoon, period. So the question is, what is your suggestion to reduce the infantry manpower and skill drain in the Mech units? Having the troops rotate between light and heavy outfits is a good start but it only addresses part of the issue. What else is there? You have been around for a variety of concepts, what works best in your eyes?A Mech platoon at company level or a mech company at Bn level is, IMO, an invitation to trouble because, as many point out, Mech and Inf are two entirely different doctrines. Added complication at Bn and below is best avoided...
ALL infantry is walking infantry since they require essentially the same skill set and there job starts once they "dismount". All Infantry needs to be able to utilize IFVs, IMVs and aircraft if the TA-DA! METT-TC determines them to be valuable. The ability to dismount and fight effectivly are determined more by..TA-DA again! training, training and training.Walking infantry is equally necessary and valuable
Reed
P.S. Do I get my toaster yet?
Bookmarks