Author Topic: Mech infantry or all light infantry with some Armd APC units?  (Read 66917 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline tomahawk6

  • Army.ca Fixture
  • *****
  • 53,885
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 7,029
Re: Mech infantry or all light infantry with some Armd APC units?
« Reply #150 on: April 29, 2007, 16:33:57 »
Mechanized/motorized units and light infantry units are two seperate beasts. I dont feel that they can be mixed. This is one reason that the US Army has seperate formations for heavy forces, medium forces and light. In a small Army with 9 infantry battalions I think it would be possible to dedicate 3 battalions to mechanized warfare and mount them in Bradley/Warrior IFV. Three battalions could be in LAV's and 3 battalions in the light infantry role with only trucks for transport. Ideally the light infantry battalions would be ferried around the battlefield in helicopters. It works great for us. But the CF has one key factor that dictates the nature of its forces and that is money. If I was a Canadian planner I would probably forget the pure LI role in favor of 6 LAV battalions and 3 Warrior/Bradley battalions. I would have LI battalions in the Pres because they would be unlikely to deploy outside of Canada and would be used in emergencies inside Canada and as filler for the regular battalions. A LI soldier is well grounded in his role as a rifleman and can exit a LAV or IFV as well as an infantryman who does it all the time. For the most part whether you are transported to the battle in a LAV or an IFV in most cases you exit the vehicle to fight and the vehicle supports you in that role.

Offline TCBF

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 9,565
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 3,783
Re: Mech infantry or all light infantry with some Armd APC units?
« Reply #151 on: April 30, 2007, 01:13:55 »
Once "The White Paper Turned Brown" and we saw the writing on the wall and began packing our 'Redball' and 'Greenballs' to leave Germany, the big debate was on re-forming the Army after losing the forward deployed Brigade (4CMBG).  Logistic logic suggested a - wait for it - light, medium and heavy brigade army.  Trouble was: everyone (but us) was screwing their collective heads further and further into their butts looking for a way to cash in on our already spent "Peace Dividend."  Hence, even Corporals doing the most rudimentary threat matrix in their heads on a 10 km run realized that a heavy (Leo/M113) brigade would be a target rich environment for those wanting to cut the army and dispose of our Cold War doctrinal baggage at the same time.

Thus, the second best solution (logistically, even though our top-rung RCEME types told Gen Gervais - the CDS - that is was 'supportable') was politically the best solution, as spreading the tanks among the brigades ensured equal access for professional all-arms development among them and made it harder to disband our tracked capability in one fell swoop. Especially since three balanced brigades would cost the same, whearas a heavy one with all of the ADATS, Leopards, etc. would stand out fiscally like a turd in a punch bowl.

Although those political conditions do not exist AT THE MOMENT, things can change quickly at that level.

Also:  tour rotation requires re-rolling non-standard units.  Remember the Cdn AB Regt almost going to Morocco?  When that was canned, they were promised the next mission.  What came up next?  Somalia - a wheeled AFV/heavy SUV/light track task if ever there was one.   Credit where credit is due:  they did a far better job there than this country will ever give them credit for, but the point is that well balanced general purpose forces across the board are our best bet for roto main force units, other wise you get a real training crunch transitioning to your new "TO & E"

Do we need light and SF?  Desperately so, but not as part of a brigade where they will stay constantly under equiped and mal-trained for the conventionaly mounted tours they will deploy on.  Strap them on to conventional Battle Groups by all means, don't build a BG around them.



"Disarming the Canadian public is part of the new humanitarian social agenda."   - Foreign Affairs Minister Lloyd Axeworthy at a Gun Control conference in Oslo, Norway in 1998.


"I didn’t feel that it was an act of violence; you know, I felt that it was an act of liberation, that’s how I felt you know." - Ann Hansen, Canadian 'Urban Guerrilla'(one of the "Squamish Five")

Offline HatMan

  • Guest
  • *
  • 586
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 2
Re: Mech infantry or all light infantry with some Armd APC units?
« Reply #152 on: January 16, 2012, 00:15:22 »
I was wondering if anyone had opportunity to see what british Rm are doing with their structure.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Commando_21

ommando 21 organised each RM Commando unit into six sub-units, styled companies. Each company was subdivided into troops; note that a “troop” is the RM nomenclature for a platoon rather than for an individual soldier. The new structure was presented as giving the RM more firepower, more mobility, more information, more flexibility and more fighting power. According to open-sources each Stand Off Combat Company was to have a field strength of five officers and 78 other ranks, and each Close Combat Company was to have five officers and 98 other ranks. Under the Commando 21 re-organisation the overall strength of each of the three units was originally stated to be 692 all ranks.[2]
The companies are:
Command Company
Main HQ
Tactical HQ
Reconnaissance Troop (includes a sniper section)
Mortar Troop (9 Barrels of 81 mm) (Includes 4 MFC pairs)
Anti-Tank (AT) Troop (Milan—to be replaced by Javelin ATGW)
Medium Machine Gun Troop
One Logistic Company
A Echelon 1 (A Ech1)
A Echelon 2 (A Ech2)
FRT
RAP
B Echelon (B Ech)
Two Close Combat Companies
Company Headquarters (Coy HQ)
Three Close Combat Troops (Troop HQ, 3 Rifle Sections, Manoeuvre Support Section)
Two Stand Off Companies
Company Headquarters (Coy HQ)
Heavy Machine Gun (HMG) Troop (0.5" heavy machine guns)
AT Troop
Close Combat Troop
[edit]Command Company
The Command Company is responsible for command, control, communications, computation, intelligence, surveillance, reconnaissance (C4ISR). It also was organised to include a machine gun troop, the unit’s mortar and anti-tank troops, together with the reconnaissance troop.
[edit]Logistics Support Company
The Logistic Support Company manages administrative and logistic activity.
[edit]Close Combat Companies
Each of the two Close Combat Company is similar to the previous RM rifle company, having 3 platoon sized troops, but each troop, in addition to three rifle sections, has a manoeuvre support section of five men equipped with General Purpose Machine Gun, Long Range Rifle and 51 mm Mortar.
[edit]Stand-Off Combat Companies
Each of the two Stand Off Combat Company has a Close Combat Troop identical to those in the Close Combat Companies. It also was organised to have an Anti-Tank Troop with 6 MILAN anti-tank weapons and a Heavy Machine Gun troop with 6 0.5in Heavy Machine Guns.

Let me know of what you thinks and if it possible for CF to try replicate or modify to your own needs. Thanks

Offline ArmyRick

  • Army.ca Veteran
  • *****
  • 22,860
  • Rate Post
  • Posts: 1,868
  • What the????
Re: Mech infantry or all light infantry with some Armd APC units?
« Reply #153 on: January 16, 2012, 17:10:31 »
Your several years out of date on this one. There is a post dealing with RM CDO 21 and ideas/concepts. Give me some time and I will see if I can find it and put a link here.
Please do not bother to comment on my post unless you actually read it and understood what I am getting at. Its kind of like receiving orders and noth bothering to do a mission analysis. Make sure you get the point.