An M3/M1 Hunter-Killer Plt in a Hasty Attack: Learning to Punch with the Fingers Spread (Part 1)

Man schlägt jemanden mit der Faust und nicht mit gespreizten Fingern. (You hit somebody with your fist and not with your fingers spread.) Heinz Guderian
Meaning that you should concentrate your Panzers for one mighty push in one direction and not distribute them over a large area. From WikiQuotes.

The action described below is from a custom-made Steel Beasts ProPE scenario featuring a US Cavalry Plt tasked with filling a gap in a screen line.

This scenario is loosely based in the actions of the 2nd Plt, A Troop, 1-4 US Cavalry near objective Norfolk during the Gulf War. During the early hours of 27 Feb 1991, 1-4 US Cav was conducting a screen mission for 1 ID. The S3 of the unit, Major John Burdan became aware that A and B Troops have been inadvertently moving away from each other while moving to establish the screen line. Thus, a gap in the screen line was generated. The 1st Squadron commander (LTC Robert Wilson) decided to inspect the screen line personally, taking along one M3 and an M113. This command group found a dug-in Iraqi T-72 and quickly dispatched it. Soon it became evident that BMPs and T-72s were behind the 1st Squadron's screen line. Lacking the firepower needed to clear this enemy group, the 2nd Plt of A Troop (2LT Adrian Lowndes) was called in to clear the enemy positions and to re-establish de screen line. More details can be found at "The Road to Safwan", by Bourque and Burdan (pages 151 to 153).

Please keep in mind "loosely based". This scenario is not an historical recreation. Over time, I profusively edited the scenario and kept getting rid of the many difficulties the Troopers of 1-4 US Cav have encountered in real-life. Navigation in an almost featurless desert, with few GPS units, with 1/500,000 maps and at night. How they did it, it escapes my comprehension. To make it up for my scenario's numerous excesses, I situated the action during a moderate sandstorm (low visibility), with no air support and no indirect fires availble for blue. I made the gap in the screen almost 4 km wide. I also reinforced the Iraqis with two plts of T-72s and three plt(-) of BMPs, all deployed in depth with infantry-manned OPs up front. I also gave the Iraqis random start positions and two crude plans of armored counter-attack which are triggered based in the reports by the infantry OPs.

The main purpose of editing and playing this scenario was to learn how to use hunter-killer teams in a hasty attack. M3/M1 hunter-killer teams have been widely used by US Cavalry formations during both Iraq wars. For this scenario, I have an US Cav Plt composed of 6 M3 CFVs and 2 M1 MBTs. I organized this Plt as described in an article that appeared in the Armor magazine, back in 1993.

The Hunter-Killer Cavalry Platoon, as described in Armor magazine. (Click the image for an expanded view)

Without further ado, the mission.

The tactical situation. (Click on the image for an expanded view)

The blue units at the north and south extremes of the map, are part of the squadron's screen line and they are out of my control. The gap between both of them is where enemy presence is suspected. The units is at the eastern extreme of the map are part of my Plt. You will have excuse me in that each of them show Plt symbols and nomenclature. They are all just part of the same US Cav Plt. Units 3-A and 2-A have a tank symbol but they are actually composed of 1 M1 MBT and 2 M3 CFVs. This is the first time I use the new mixed units feature of v2.146! :)

The task is to execute a "clear" tactical mission and re-establish the screen line (dotted arrows located at the western edge). The "clear" tactical mission is ussualy executed after very careful planning and is supported with multiple assets. Clearly not the case for this scenario, but I'm claiming METTTC considerations. :)

To be continued ...

Cheers,

The "Tactics 101" Series at Armchair General

For all of us looking for quality reading material about military tactics, Armchair General has been offering the "Tactics 101" series since 2006.

These articles cover a lot of tactical mileage and are written by two professional soldiers. This articles consolidate a lot of information spread across several US Army and US Marine Corps doctrinal publications.

Armchair General should consider putting all these articles together, print them and sell them as a stand-alone supplement. It would be a pity if this material gets lost in some website transition or archiving.

Cheers,

"Tank Tactics, from Normandy to Lorraine", by Roman Jarymowycz

Just finished reading this book.

"Tank Tactics, from Normandy to Lorraine", by Roman Jarymowycz is a wonderful mix of scholastic treatise on armor doctrine and engaging battlefront stories and anecdotes.

This book is about the evolution of armor doctrine among the US and Canadian forces, from the end of WWI to the trying months after the WWII Normandy landings.

This is a must read for anybody interested in armored warfare. The first chapters are devoted to the post-WWI years, and all the confusion the tank brought into military doctrine. How were tanks to be used grand-tactically, as a breaktrhough ram, as an exploitation weapon or as a pursuit one? The soul-searching of the US Cavalry with their tank vs horse debate follows, with a bit less of detail as in other books by Jarymowycz but nonetheless very informative. The meat and potatoes of the book is the analysis of Operations Goodwood, Cobra, Totalize and Tractable. The author makes great emphasis in the good and bad of the doctrines of British, Canadian, US, German and (altough very briefly) Soviet forces. Every operation is put under the microscope and analyzed from the armored warfare doctrinal point of view. I would dare to say that this is the best operational analysis of the Normandy breakthrough I ever read.

One word of caution: the title "Tank Tactics" is a bit off. The book makes emphasis in the grand-tactical and operational use of armor in WWII. There are a few tactical vignettes here and there. But don't expect to see too much small units tactics here.

On a side note: This book has been available from Lynne-Rienner Publishers for a long time. Now Stackpole Books prints and sells it at a lower price. Kudos Stackpole for getting us this wonderful scholarly treatise at such a knockout price.

This book has given me an itch for some WWII Normandy war-gaming ...




Do you recognize this war game?


HPS's Normandy 44








What about this classic?


Combat Mission: Beyond Overlord




I'm off to play these great war games.

Cheers,

America's Army 3, Pre-Loaded at Steam

America's Army 3 is near release. If you have a Steam account, you can download it now and play right away on June 17th. Please follow this link.

The Army creates and distributes America's Army so that young Americans can virtually explore Soldiering in the U.S. Army like Soldiers experience it - as individuals and as members of teams. Through the Game's virtual experiences, young Americans can explore the Army from basic training at Fort Benning, Georgia, and medic training at Fort Sam Houston, Texas to operations in defense of freedom. Along the way, they can join elite Army units and experience the strength of Army teamwork, values and technology within an engaging environment. The game has become an online phenomenon, consistently ranking among the most popular PC action games played online. The games are rated T for Teen and can be downloaded free from various partners listed on the www.americasarmy.com site. They are also distributed at local Army Recruiting stations, ROTC Detachments and Army events.

In the America's Army game, players are bound by Rules of Engagement (ROE) and grow in experience as they navigate challenges in team-based, multiplayer, force on force operations. In the game, as in the Army, accomplishing missions requires teamwork and adherence to the Army's core values. Through its emphasis on team play, the game demonstrates these values of loyalty, duty, respect, selfless service, honor, integrity and personal courage and makes them integral to success in America's Army.

The Army launched America's Army in July of 2002, and has released major updates to the game every few months. These releases feature new technologies, missions, Army units and occupations. In keeping with the dynamic nature of Soldiering, the America's Army game will continue to expand and will allow players to explore the Army of today, tomorrow and the future. An entirely new version of the game, America's Army 3, will be released in 2009.

From America's Army website

I never played AA, out of concerns about the maturity of the other players. But this time I'm going to give it a whirl.

Does any of you have any experiences to share about AA?

Cheers,

The M2 Bradley Fighting Vehicle at the 2009 Joint Services Open House

Boy, so many pictures to share from that event!
Today, the M2 Bradley fighting vehicle.





Cheers,

DCS Black Shark: The Ka-50 model in the Simulation is not Equipped for Conventional Wars

Very shortly after its release, several threads appeared in the official forums asking why the Ka-50 didn't have thermal imaging, radar or even radar detector. The most people were prone to compare the Ka-50 to the AH-64D Apache, with its lavish target acquisition systems.

Because important points at the official DCS forums most of the times get lost in the squelch, the reason of this entry is to state very clearly that the Ka-50 we fly in DCS Black Shark is not intended for deployment in conventional wars.

A beta-tester made it clear at the official forums:

The Ka-50 is intended for low-intensity operations. It is not intended for and will NOT be deployed in an actual war. That is the Mi-28's job.

From a post by GGTharos

Another, beta-tester (this one an actual AH-64 pilot), commented about the lack of RWR and the missions in which the Ka-50 might be deployed.

The mission for which the Ka-50 is intended implies that the adversary will not be advanced enough or have the resources necessary in order to deploy radar-guided air defenses. Because of that, the aircraft is not equipped with any kind of defense against radar-guided threats.
From a post by AlphaOneSix

Black Shark, on who shall we unleash your firepower today?

The mission for which the Ka-50 is intended implies that the adversary willnot be advanced enough or have the resources necessary in order to deploy radar-guided air defenses. Because of that, the aircraft is not equipped with any kind of defense against radar-guided threats.

Based on our virtual flight hours with the DCS Black Shark, we may feel like the Ka-50 model simulated may do more than OK in a conventional war. I'm sure you have busted many enemy tanks in this simulation. We should recognize though that the less than stellar AI ground units are just too happy to walk into our engagement areas and be blown up into oblivion. If the virtual tanks in DCS Black Shark would react a bit more competently, they would just hide in heavy forested or urban areas at the first sign of trouble.

The baptism of fire of the Ka-50 was during the second Chechen War. Please refer to this article.

"Black Sharks" in Chechnya, by Andrey Zinchuk. Military Technology 09/2005

The article is a brief history of the Ka-50/Ka-29 Combat Attack group in Chechnya. The take home lessons from this article are:

• Ka50s used in conjunction with Ka-29s that provide target data

• Ka50 used in conjunction with Ka-29s in a low intensity conflict (enemy didn't have radar guided SAMs or other conventional anti-aircraft weaponry)

• Ka-50 excelled at maneuverability in highly mountainous regions

• Enemy targets included parking sites, rebel camps, ammo depots, field fortifications, shelters, trenches, etc.

• The Ka-50 is extremely reliable mechanically.

Cheers,

HPS Simulations, 3 New Wargames Out!

Good news from HPS Simulations, 3 new titles are out!
Please follow the links below for more details.
Screens are directly from HPS's website and used without authorization but without monetary gain. If this is a problem please comment below.

• Alexandrian Wars

• War in the Southern Front

• Dien Bien Phu

Cheers,

USMC to Open Military Academies Across the US

This morning, the Army Times published an article about the US Marine Corps leading a movement to open military academies across the country and how they are talking to civilian education district leaders to combine efforts to do so.

The Marine Corps is wooing public school districts across the country, expanding a network of military academies that has grown steadily despite criticism that it’s a recruiting ploy.

The US Marine Corps leading some innovation. Nothing new here, move on. Sometimes it appears that the USMC are they guys with the bigger fire in their feet when it comes to attitudes of change. I'm not surprised, but kudos anyway.

And then, off course, the backlash.

In DeKalb County, which includes part of Atlanta, protests by parents and threats of lawsuits began almost as soon as the school board announced last year that it planned to open a Marine Corps high school. The district wanted to open it this fall, but the approval process in Washington has delayed that. The district hopes to open the school in fall 2010.

Critics like Mike Hearington, a 56-year-old Vietnam War veteran whose son attends Shamrock Middle School in DeKalb County, say the schools are breeding grounds for the military.

“To pursue children like they are is criminal in my mind,” Hearington said.

Some degree of controversy is always good. Good debate about something new has to be a given.
But what worries me is that the the detractors are using language that reflects something beyond the mere fear of some day seeing our sons go into harms way.

"Breeding grounds for the military"? This sounds like something sinister will come out from the proposed academies. Like potential recruits. The horror!

“To pursue children like they are is criminal in my mind ...”. We indoctrinate our children in lots of things way before they can make rational decisions by their own. None of these indoctrinations are considered "criminal". Thus, if indoctrination per se is not criminal, is the word "criminal" used here implying that eventually becoming recruits and later waging the wars of our country is somehow "criminal"?

In his book "The Culture of War", van Creveld wrote:

... in today's self-styled "advanced" countries, for the culture of war to be held in such high esteem is rare. Soldiers, war gamers, collectors of militaria, and even military historians know the score. At best, their culture is seen as a quaint leftover from a previous, presumably less rational, less utilitarian, and less humane past. At worst, it is denied, put aside, ignored, ridiculed, or denounced as childish "warmongering".

The dangers of embracing opposition to anything military are only to be known when our enemies are too close to the gates of our cities.

Cheers,

Point of Attack 2 (HPS Simulations): The Ultimate War Simulation

Point of Attack 2 (PoA2) is a simulation of modern warfare by Scott Hamilton that was made for the US Air Force Office of Scientific Research. It is a turn-based, tactical level simulation featuring regular armies (US, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Syria) and irregular forces.

The level of detail of PoA2 is very deep. The screen-shot above shows a Combat Phase Report window (you will have to click the screenshot to be able to read), where every move and fire is recorded. Taking into account that this simulation is used by the US Air Force, the algorithms used to solve fire and movement must be really top-notch.

One could spend a lot of time trying to summarize all the gadgets and goodies this simulation has. Yet today I want to show you something that I have never seen in other off-the shelf simulation.
Take a look at the screenshot below (again, you will have to click the screenshot to be able to read).


The window on top shows tabs for all type of staff officers. The "Commo" (communications tab), has a detailed summary of the communication status of every unit. Yes, the simulation keeps track of communications sent back and forward, and if the comms network is saturated, the messages start to fall within the cracks. The highlighted unit in the screenshot (1st AP Section) could not send its SITREP (situation report) and as a result of that, the 1st AP Section position shown in the map will not be accurate. This is called "friendly fog of war", something in the lines of "you don't know where your forces are unless they have an effective communications means with you".

Before I end this entry, a very important clarification: PoA2 is not for everybody. This is not a "beers and pretzel" game. Indeed, I don't even think this is a game in the entertainment sense of the word. I would label PoA2 as an analytical tool to simulate warfare at a very realistic level.

Cheers,

2009 Joint Services Open House: Assorted Images (Part 2)

Some more images from the event.

The cockpit of an F/A18

This close-up of the cockpit didn't work out very well ...

Awesome bird ...

The F/A 18 from where you can admire it at all its splendor

The HUD of a USMC's Super-Cobra attack helicopter

Next year I promise I will get a better camera! :)

Cheers,