Results 1 to 20 of 232

Thread: Are snipers and recon still valid in infantry battalions?

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Council Member reed11b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Olympia WA
    Posts
    531

    Default Must be chilly in...

    Holy Cow! I agree with Fuchs on something.
    Reed
    Wilf, I would add one cavet to your patrol/reconn based infantry. The "close" fight, ie, restricted terrain and urban settings, is a core skill for infantry as well.
    Quote Originally Posted by sapperfitz82 View Post
    This truly is the bike helmet generation.

  2. #2
    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 reed11b View Post
    Wilf, I would add one cavet to your patrol/reconn based infantry. The "close" fight, ie, restricted terrain and urban settings, is a core skill for infantry as well.
    Sure. We could call it.. let me think.... errr... fighting patrols?

    Fighting dismounted is fighting dismounted and yes context is critical. If anyone can point out to me how an infantry Platoon is hindered by equipping, training and organising for fighting and reconnaissance patrol activity, I'll gladly listen.
    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

  3. #3
    Council Member reed11b's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Olympia WA
    Posts
    531

    Default Fighting patrols

    The reason I stated "close" fighting was due to the tendency of infantry theorists to focus on firepower over mobility and tend to organize to assualt static positions to the best that I can figure out. Dismounted 120mm and even 81mm mortars make little sense, as does heavy long range AT weapons, yet they keep appearing in organizational schemes low on the echelon scale. The other reason was that reconn "purists" state that reconn should not have ANY heavy wepons or HE projection capability since reconn is looking and not fighting. This is also flawed. As usual, the truth is somewhere in the middle.
    Reed
    Quote Originally Posted by sapperfitz82 View Post
    This truly is the bike helmet generation.

  4. #4
    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 reed11b View Post
    The reason I stated "close" fighting was due to the tendency of infantry theorists to focus on firepower over mobility and tend to organize to assualt static positions to the best that I can figure out. Dismounted 120mm and even 81mm mortars make little sense, as does heavy long range AT weapons, yet they keep appearing in organizational schemes low on the echelon scale. The other reason was that reconn "purists" state that reconn should not have ANY heavy wepons or HE projection capability since reconn is looking and not fighting. This is also flawed. As usual, the truth is somewhere in the middle.
    Eyhh... yes and no. Yes, you are right in the purist approach, and yes, no dismounted 81 or 120mm.

    However, if we take rifle Platoons to be the basis for the capability we are talking about, then they do need support. You need mortars from somewhere. How and who needs to be examined. I am working on this at the moment, looking at Infantry Battalion of less than 500 men.

    AT weapons, such as Javelin or Spike are required, but they are an optional capability. Any platoon should be able to employ them. - so could you have a Mortar Platoon, worked the same way?
    Could they be manned by the artillery?
    Point is, if we all agree on where we are going, we can then discuss how we get there!
    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

  5. #5
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,007

    Talking

    Fuchs, I'll add to your post 1 good comment

    Modern basic individual camouflage

    http://defense-and-freedom.blogspot....amouflage.html

    Off-topic request.

    Wilf said:

    However, if we take rifle Platoons to be the basis for the capability we are talking about, then they do need support. You need mortars from somewhere. How and who needs to be examined. I am working on this at the moment, looking at Infantry Battalion of less than 500 men.

    AT weapons, such as Javelin or Spike are required, but they are an optional capability. Any platoon should be able to employ them. - so could you have a Mortar Platoon, worked the same way?
    Could they be manned by the artillery?
    Point is, if we all agree on where we are going, we can then discuss how we get there!
    I'm trying to find information about IDF unit Maglan's structure, where in small unit are connected long range AT weapons and scouts.

    The unit is made of two elements - the missile launching teams, which will deploy and launch the ATGM, and the Long Range Reconnaissance Patrol (LRRP) teams that will detect the target as well as guide the ATGM to it by laser designating it.
    http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums...d.php?t=120866

    Any additional information (with additional sources) is very welcome and I'm waiting your PM's

  6. #6
    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 kaur View Post

    I'm trying to find information about IDF unit Maglan's structure, where in small unit are connected long range AT weapons and scouts.
    Almost everything about Maglan is classified. As far as I can work out though, they are basically the Parachute Brigades, Recon and Anti-tank unit. How those two roles come to be together, I guess comes from the M151 Jeeps with TOW launchers they were equipped with back in the 1970s.

    .... and doctrinally it's not a stretch or even silly to have AT and Recon as the same people, for a who range of reasons I will not bore everyone with right now.
    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. #7
    Council Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by William F. Owen View Post
    .... and doctrinally it's not a stretch or even silly to have AT and Recon as the same people, for a who range of reasons I will not bore everyone with right now.

    Its not a stretch at all. Its exactly what the Force Recon Hunter/Killer Teams did in the opening days of Afghanistan.

    Force Recon Teams teamed up w/the BLT's (Battalion Landing Team) CAAT Teams (Combined Anti-Armor Team) to form up H/T Teams that operated as a separate Maneuver Element in Deep Battle Space.

    These combined small teams conducted DA & Interdiction missions out in a 400+mi radius fr/ FOB Camp Rhino alone or sometimes escorted or by Cobras or LAVs.

    The 1 famous Interdiction, only known b/c it was caught on camera, was the Shoot Out on Highway 1 which is just outside of Kandahar.

    Excerpt fr/an LA Times article, "What The Marine Saw" referring to the Combat Cameraman attached on that particular Interdiction:

    Once Camp Rhino was established, Marines from the elite Force Reconnaissance moved northward to intercept Taliban and Al Qaeda forces fleeing a major battle north of Kandahar to regroup and possibly mount a counteroffensive.

    In Humvees and light-armored vehicles, Marines moved slowly through villages in search of fleeing enemy troops. They disarmed anyone suspected of being Taliban or Al Qaeda fighters and, if they were not hostile, let them go. Villagers, mostly old men and children, greeted the Marines.

    He was also there a few days later when the heavily armed Marine "hunter-killer" teams moved cautiously toward the Taliban stronghold of Kandahar--unsure whether Afghan villagers would treat them as liberators or enemies.

    ...To prevent enemy vehicles from fleeing Kandahar, the Marines were ordered on the night of Dec. 7 to set up a roadblock. Thirty feet of razor-sharp concertina wire was strung across a narrow asphalt road and anchored by tent pegs.

    Glowing "chemlights" were attached to the wire so the roadblock could be seen by oncoming drivers. Marines positioned their vehicles at the bottom of a berm beside the road and snipers crouched several hundred yards away. Chenelly took up his video camera.

    Shortly after 4 a.m., headlights were spotted rushing toward the roadblock. A truck hit the concertina wire and skidded to a stop. On the video, Marines can be heard calling to each other excitedly, "He blew it. He blew it." Chenelly remembers the sound of the wire scraping the side of the truck. A Marine who speaks the local Afghan dialect shouted for the men in the truck to drop their weapons.

    Instead, men in the cab and the truck bed--who appeared to be sleeping--raised their AK-47s at the Marines, some of whom were just 10 feet away. In an instant, both sides began firing--captured on video as green glowing tracer rounds. "Force Recon didn't hesitate for a second," Chenelly said. "They didn't flinch. If they had, I don't think we'd have all made it out alive."

    The heat of the rounds ignited an ammunition cache in the back of the truck. Rounds, including rocket-propelled grenades, shot off in all directions, like some deadly Fourth of July celebration.

    "It's very surreal when it's happening," said Chenelly. "For a second, you can't believe it. It's like an Arnold Schwarzenegger movie. It goes so fast and everything blows up."

    Seconds later, Marines can be heard on the video calling out, "Go, go, go, quick, quick, get back." An authoritative voice--that of a master sergeant, the ranking Marine on the scene--barks out, "Let me know when everybody is in."

    The Marines withdrew down the road, leaving eight Taliban and Al Qaeda members dead, their truck a flaming ruin. The Marines left the bodies on the road as a warning to others who might decide to fight rather than surrender. None of the Marines were injured.
    Last edited by davidbfpo; 08-29-2009 at 11:34 AM. Reason: Place in quotes and erase use of bold.

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
  •