tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post3917132119709330719..comments2024-03-16T11:54:44.590+01:00Comments on Defence and Freedom: TO&E debatesUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-64636193662510454472013-01-19T20:50:06.178+01:002013-01-19T20:50:06.178+01:00Participants of the 1946 Armor Conference conclude...Participants of the 1946 Armor Conference concluded that the future armor to infantry ratio should be 2 to 3. <br /><br />gute Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-11676357845144712542012-12-21T10:55:34.521+01:002012-12-21T10:55:34.521+01:00I think they're accurate right now.
Besides, ...I think they're accurate right now.<br /><br />Besides, this "very large percentage" is most likely a clear minority if we take reserve Bns into account.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-8020889572730491742012-12-21T07:09:10.380+01:002012-12-21T07:09:10.380+01:00I didn't miss it but I am quite sure US combat...I didn't miss it but I am quite sure US combat arms BNs make up a very large percentage of all the combat battalions in the western world at least. So if you want to qualify your statements as "other than the United States" than they would be accurate. Kristian375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-74958082188582488292012-12-19T23:20:42.885+01:002012-12-19T23:20:42.885+01:00Hehe, it shows that I'm not much into TO&E...Hehe, it shows that I'm not much into TO&E discussions.<br />I remember the initial Stryker Bde design was criticised for being weak on infantry at least. FM 3-21 is dated 2003, the discussions about this brigade type commenced up to three years earlier (don't remember exactly; may have been 2001).<br /><br />Regarding the scout/sniper thing you seem to have ignored the "world-wide"; I'm not US-centric and the U.S. Army is but one of a hundred armies or so.<br />Same about mixed battalions; you ignored "widely preferred" and "usually".S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-1317140197315257912012-12-19T23:10:26.353+01:002012-12-19T23:10:26.353+01:00Your information is not up to date. US Army Infant...Your information is not up to date. US Army Infantry BN have an organic Scout/Sniper Platoon with 3 x scout squads and 3 x sniper teams. This MTOE has been around for at least 15 years. The US Army also does not field any strictly armor or mech infantry BN any longer. They are all organized in to Combined Arms Battalions which also include an engineer elmement. This MTOE has been the norm for at least 5 years. Finally, USMC MEUs units may be ad hoc, but organizationally they have a MTOE and they are mixed, combined arms units that include infantry, armor, artillery and aviation up to fixed wing combat aircraft. The US Army is toying with the idea of pushing helicopter aviation down to the BDE level and also adding another maneveur BN to it's BCTs. And also, where does this idea that Stryker BNs did not have enough infantry come from? At inception, the Stryker BCTs had and still have 3 infantry BN which is one more than other infantry BN.Kristian375noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-21606721484357681892012-12-18T05:26:41.777+01:002012-12-18T05:26:41.777+01:00The first question is a bit tough; German practice...The first question is a bit tough; German practice was to call a brigade with 2 infantry Bn (Panzergrenadier, kinda infantry) + 1 armour Bn a Panzergrenadier (mechanised) Bde while 1+1 used to be a tank brigade.<br />Broken down to Bn level this would be about companies instead of brigades; 2+1 Coy = mechanised, 1+1 = tank.<br />"Motorised" was usually added to Warsaw pact Rifle divisions, and described those divisions which had much more wheeled APCs than BMP-style vehicles + MBTs and consequently an emphasis on slower dismounted combat unlike than their tank divisions. A Stryker Bde and all the other fashionable 8x8 AFV-based TO&Es could be called "motorised". Likewise, the old German Jägerbrigade would come close.<br />"light" depicted forces without organic armour to speak of.<br /><br />None of these conventions have ever really required a personnel percentage of infantrymen AFAIK; their meaning was more about the means of mobility and the tactical styles.<br /><br />Which infantrymen percentage is adequate depends on the missions and terrain - a simple answer would be inadequate.<br />________<br /><br />The sniper/scout topic on the operational level really turns into the LRS/LRRP/LRSU/Fernspäher thing and yes, I considered it. <br />This is a nice text about it:<br />http://www-cgsc.army.mil/carl/download/csipubs/gebhardt_lrrp.pdf<br />Aside from that, I also considered a short-range dismount scout element for armoured recce, which is an underestimated factor probably because training areas aren't cluttered enough to give it prominence.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-85888581219939597872012-12-18T04:03:58.204+01:002012-12-18T04:03:58.204+01:00What would you consider an adequate complement of ...What would you consider an adequate complement of infantry for a battalion-sized force with infantry in its name: mechanized, motorized, "light", etc?<br /><br />Have you considered the operational (but not administrative) integration of scout/sniper platoons with reconnaissance units, given your desire to set recce up according to area, rather than command? NWnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-49901823968252911242012-12-15T23:38:36.707+01:002012-12-15T23:38:36.707+01:00You may think so, but "fantasy" has no b...You may think so, but "fantasy" has no bad meaning in this context. Every counter-factual thought such as a thought about potential improvements is necessarily "fantasy" (or "creativity" as it would be called by more benevolent people).<br /><br />I cannot conclusively prove my point since I have no battalion battlegroup in my backyard - nor can it be conclusively falsified by anyone without such a luxury.<br />Those readers who see value and inspiration in picking up thoughts here are most likely satisfied and the others kind of misunderstood this blog or may be here for a brawl out of sheer aggressiveness (such as trolls), which I refuse to offer.<br />So no, I just go on to the next topics.<br /><br />Feel free to elaborate on the deception thing, though. I've rarely if ever seen means for deception built into organisational charts. It's sometimes in an order of battle (such as deception ops involved in Operation Overlord or Operation MI), but I've yet to see one in a TO&E.<br />I'm not aware of any debates going on or having happened about the need for organic means of deception.S Ohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03359796414832859686noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-20385289166842756112012-12-15T19:12:36.653+01:002012-12-15T19:12:36.653+01:00Nice try, but I suggested you prove your point abo...Nice try, but I suggested you prove your point about the potential of merging light trucks and utility vehicles. The exact opposite of indulging yourself in a world of pure fantasy.<br /><br />In regard to this post, I guess you forgot to mention the need for organic means of deception.Michaelnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-386077914312449748.post-69772555046987163722012-12-14T23:01:15.294+01:002012-12-14T23:01:15.294+01:00I guess people like TO&Es so much because they...I guess people like TO&Es so much because they look like very specific representations of data. If you add equipment you can make your "dream force" with all the shiny new toys. That's like little boys playing with lego and arranging the pieces. Describing general ideas or plans just in words is much more abstract and possibly harder to grasp for several people. Nevertheless the latter seems to be the basis for TO&E and thus is more important from my point of view.Mandulisnoreply@blogger.com