Gute:
Bad idea trying to train tank and Bradley crewmen to rotate between ABCTs and IBCTs. Tasks are too differnent between an M1/M2 and a armored HMMWV.
IMHO, 2X2 Infantry Bn also not a good idea, not enough infantry.
Regarding RC cadre units for CS and CSS. A hat trick. When you need these units, you need them and don't want to wait while they get filled and trained up.
With another 100K of personnel cuts possible out of the Army, we have only seen the tip of this iceberg.
I will have to take your word for it since I don't have experience in that area, but I do wonder why a four man tank crew would have difficulty operating as a four man crew in a HMMWV. The driver drives, the TC becomes the VC, the gunner mans the .50 or MK19, or TOW and the loader assists the gunner, etc. But, again, that is why I asked to hear from those of you with the experience. Yes, definetely light on dismounts, especially for protracted combat. I don't think turning tank crew men into infantry is a smart idea.Originally Posted by TAH
So in your opinion should the Bradley platoon crews remain separate from the rifle platoon or could the weapons squad in the rifle platoon serve as the M2crew members?
The cadre units would be for the NG BCTs maneuver battalions and not the CS and sustainment units.
Easy for a tank crew to take over as a HMMWV crew. Much harder for them to go back to being a tank crew. Lots of "muscle memory" involved in getting a tank crew up to speed. Pretty sure its the same for a Bradley crew.
The idea of transfering between IBCT & SBCT is a better fit regarding vehicle crewman. Manning a Bradley on this assignment foloowed by being an MG or Javelin gunner on the next, not so much.
An issue with cadre units is that they end up being mostly chiefs and very few (if any indians). As nearly all of the combat arms units in the US Army are in the National Guard, you end up with where do the chiefs come from if there weren't any indians in the first place.
Ahhh, kemosahbee.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks