Page 36 of 49 FirstFirst ... 26343536373846 ... LastLast
Results 701 to 720 of 978

Thread: The Roles and Weapons with the Squad

  1. #701
    Council Member Kiwigrunt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Auckland New Zealand
    Posts
    467

    Default

    Here is the latest (that I know of) on the IAR. Link retrieved from The Firearm Blog.
    Nothing that results in human progress is achieved with unanimous consent. (Christopher Columbus)

    All great truth passes through three stages: first it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
    (Arthur Schopenhauer)

    ONWARD

  2. #702
    Council Member Kiwigrunt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Auckland New Zealand
    Posts
    467

    Default

    It could happen.
    Nothing that results in human progress is achieved with unanimous consent. (Christopher Columbus)

    All great truth passes through three stages: first it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
    (Arthur Schopenhauer)

    ONWARD

  3. #703
    Council Member jcustis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    SOCAL
    Posts
    2,152

    Default German squad in combat

    I have spent a while searching the threads, but I cannot find a link to the 1943 War Department publication detailing how the German squad fought. I have the .pdf, but need a link to an online archive.

  4. #704
    Council Member Kiwigrunt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Auckland New Zealand
    Posts
    467

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jcustis View Post
    I have spent a while searching the threads, but I cannot find a link to the 1943 War Department publication detailing how the German squad fought. I have the .pdf, but need a link to an online archive.
    Here, from here.

    (Pretty sure there are no copy right issues here. I rightfully received a polite yet firm telling off a few days ago for such a breach.)
    Nothing that results in human progress is achieved with unanimous consent. (Christopher Columbus)

    All great truth passes through three stages: first it is ridiculed, second it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident.
    (Arthur Schopenhauer)

    ONWARD

  5. #705
    Council Member jcustis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    SOCAL
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Many thanks.

  6. #706
    Council Member William F. Owen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The State of Partachia, at the eastern end of the Mediterranean
    Posts
    3,947

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kiwigrunt View Post
    Here, from here.
    B*stard!! Oh thanks mate..... Now I'll never get any work done. How I didn't know about this, I cannot fathom!

    ...load up the printer.... it's going to be a long night!
    Infinity Journal "I don't care if this works in practice. I want to see it work in theory!"

    - The job of the British Army out here is to kill or capture Communist Terrorists in Malaya.
    - If we can double the ratio of kills per contact, we will soon put an end to the shooting in Malaya.
    Sir Gerald Templer, foreword to the "Conduct of Anti-Terrorist Operations in Malaya," 1958 Edition

  7. #707
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Thee and me...

    Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
    How I didn't know about this, I cannot fathom!
    I'm sorry I didn't know about it -- there's a LOT of well stated wisdom in that booklet. Many things I had to learn the hard way -- and yet, it was out six years before I followed the Recruiter home...

    Base on what I see and hear today from both theaters, Benning should make this required reading...

  8. #708
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    CenTex
    Posts
    222

    Default

    I'm about to print the part about leadership and hang it up at work...

  9. #709
    Council Member jcustis's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    SOCAL
    Posts
    2,152

    Default

    Wow, you're slipping Wilf...you never saw that publication before, or the link to the archive?

  10. #710
    Council Member Fuchs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,189

    Default

    I read it long ago and don't remember unusual stuff in it. What's so special about it?

  11. #711
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default It's pretty good

    Quote Originally Posted by Fuchs View Post
    I read it long ago and don't remember unusual stuff in it. What's so special about it?
    and more combat and reality focused than most of it's western contemporaneous documents -- and vastly superior to most of today's.

    While I don't particularly agree with the then Squad organization, the combat actions and degree of detail are impressive -- no wonder the WW II German force was such a tough opponent.

    As an aside, your earlier comment on the German troops 'talking it up' in combat also applies to others. Good units know when to talk it up and when to be silent -- and what to say when talking where. Dare I say METT-TC yet again...

  12. #712
    Council Member Fuchs's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    3,189

    Default

    It's also inaccurate.

    Let's look at Fig.8. It makes no sense whatsoever.
    MG1 in prepared position, riflemen in the open? Nonsense.
    MG1 without MG2? Nonsense.
    Riflemen separated like that from MG? I have never, ever seen, read or heard anything like that. It makes no sense anyway, other than extending the hand grenade range.

    Figure 10:
    Again nonsense; the defensive positions are depicted on the front slope!
    Different barrage areas for different types of support weapons are also highly questionable (and I've never seen anything that confirms the assertion).
    the practice of pre-planned barrage positions has afaik never been weapons-type specific. The infantry mortars were preferably used against point targets because of the limited supply of ammunition.
    A main line of resistance without forward observation and listening posts was totally contrary to doctrine. Very few tactics that weren't and didn't become doctrine were universally applied.

    Figure 13.: Again forward slope defence...

    ...


    Wartime publications about opfor tactics were often outrageously inaccurate. I've seen this in many, many publications. Authors were either mislead or described what individual units had done in the assumption that it was representative.

  13. #713
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default It's inaccurate due to three factors.

    Quote Originally Posted by Fuchs View Post
    It's also inaccurate...
    Wartime publications about opfor tactics were often outrageously inaccurate. I've seen this in many, many publications. Authors were either mislead or described what individual units had done in the assumption that it was representative.
    Those are the factor you cite -- seeing a limited sample and assuming it's universal ( a lot of that still going on... ); translation flaws; and the inability of generally civilian artists to properly capture the military nuances. Those and the inability or unwillingness of supposed military (but often very inexperienced) reviewers to get all three types of flaws (and more) corrected.

    Such publications should be reviewed by a board of competent and experienced, not 'specially selected and long serving' -- very different things, those -- NCOs but that would mean that a lone Captain or Major, even the odd LTC or COL, was not 'competent.'

    Even if he or she had no combat experience...

    The errors you mention and others not withstanding IMO it is still a more useful publication than most.

  14. #714
    Council Member Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North Mountain, West Virginia
    Posts
    990

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ken White View Post
    ... and more combat and reality focused than most of it's western contemporaneous documents ...
    Halt, this is the Apostrophe Police! Be advised you've been issued a warning for conduct subversive of good astrophical order and discipline! Now go forth and sin no more.

  15. #715
    Council Member Ken White's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    8,060

    Default Ya got me, Pete...

    Ain't no possessive or possessed 'it'...

  16. #716
    Council Member Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North Mountain, West Virginia
    Posts
    990

    Default

    I suspect that a lot of First World War experience influenced the content of that Wehrmacht infantry squad manual, particularly the emphasis upon riflemen in the squad supporting the machine gun, instead of the other way around.

    During that war change happened so fast that the lengthy review and approval process for official publications couldn't keep pace with new innovations on the battlefield. Because of that the British army artillery began publishing unofficial bulletins on changes in artillery practices, and the "Field Artillery Notes" put out by Fort Sill is the continuation of a practice begun by us in emulation of the British during that war.

    The old Sturmtruppen appelation adopted by Hitler and the Nazis in the 1930s was a reference to the specialized assault battalions formed by the German army during WW I. Back then they were considered to be cutting-edge and their influence on German line infantry units then was similar to how some practices of Airborne units in the U.S. Army migrated over to straight-leg outfits post-1945.

  17. #717
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    499

    Default

    The gist of it seems to be that the German squad leader led from the front and usually concentrated on getting his LMG into action. That type of leadership and employment is more like something we expect to see at fire team level today instead of squad level. That's close to Paul Melody's recommendations for squads too.

    Changing the subject a little: I thought there was a light infantry article that had some operational history on the Chindits and Galahad somewhere on the cgsc.edu link but I can't find it. The search function didn't work for me. Anyone have a link to the article I'm talking about?
    "Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen." - Jeff Cooper

  18. #718
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    499
    "Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen." - Jeff Cooper

  19. #719
    Council Member Pete's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    North Mountain, West Virginia
    Posts
    990

    Default

    I don't want to belabor the point, but part of the reason for stalemate on Western Front during the First World War wasn't because tactics were outdated and stayed mired in the past, but because of dramatic advances in the siting and employment of machine guns and artillery fire planning and techniques during a relatively short period of time.

  20. #720
    Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Durban, South Africa
    Posts
    3,902

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fuchs View Post
    It's also inaccurate.

    Let's look at Fig.8. It makes no sense whatsoever.
    MG1 in prepared position, riflemen in the open? Nonsense.
    MG1 without MG2? Nonsense.
    Riflemen separated like that from MG? I have never, ever seen, read or heard anything like that. It makes no sense anyway, other than extending the hand grenade range.
    Fuchs, you need to review the illustration after reading the following text:

    When a light machine gun fires through a gap in the line, it should be located behind the center of the gap, and the distance from the gun to the gap should be less than the width of the gap (fig. 8). Overhead fire with the rifle and light machine gun is undertaken only when the weapons are located on high ground immediately above the troops over which the firing is directed.
    As to the positions of the riflemen... everywhere (except in Afghanistan apparently) soldiers do not walk/sit/lie in the open. So see that merely as an illustration relating to distances as marked on the diagram.

    Figure 10:
    Again nonsense; the defensive positions are depicted on the front slope!
    Different barrage areas for different types of support weapons are also highly questionable (and I've never seen anything that confirms the assertion).
    the practice of pre-planned barrage positions has afaik never been weapons-type specific. The infantry mortars were preferably used against point targets because of the limited supply of ammunition.
    A main line of resistance without forward observation and listening posts was totally contrary to doctrine. Very few tactics that weren't and didn't become doctrine were universally applied.

    Figure 13.: Again forward slope defence...

    Wartime publications about opfor tactics were often outrageously inaccurate. I've seen this in many, many publications. Authors were either mislead or described what individual units had done in the assumption that it was representative.
    Again... when in doubt read the text... and never say never about forward slope defensive positions.

    The context is defensive fire plans and interlocking arcs of fire machine guns (and anti-tank weapons) which have been sited in depth.

    Don't knit-pick the illustrations or you will get a reputation like some others around here

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •