Thanks Thanks:  174
Likes Likes:  416
Dislikes Dislikes:  17
Page 34 of 34 FirstFirst ... 24323334
Results 826 to 836 of 836
  1. #826
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,188
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by TangoSierra View Post
    Doesn''t offer anywhere that tanks are the solution to urban warfare, just offers across the board that current tactics , techniques and equipment are not suitable for modern urban warfare especially given the size of cities and the large concentrations of civilians.

    Interestingly the use of flamethrowers has been banned in proximity to large concentrations......while someone toys with the nuclear option!
    Just visiting

  2. #827
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    732
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by hptmurphy View Post
    Doesn''t offer anywhere that tanks are the solution to urban warfare, just offers across the board that current tactics , techniques and equipment are not suitable for modern urban warfare especially given the size of cities and the large concentrations of civilians.

    Interestingly the use of flamethrowers has been banned in proximity to large concentrations......while someone toys with the nuclear option!
    More reading/ideas on the subject

    https://mwi.usma.edu/army-megacities-unit-look-like/

  3. Thanks hptmurphy thanked for this post
  4. #828
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,188
    Post Thanks / Like
    1 Armor Battalion

    A tank battalion trained for the specifics of urban warfare is crucial. Yes, they’re too big and too unwieldy for large sections of dense cities—but not entire cities. And where they can be brought to bear, they can offer the necessary decisive advantage on the urban battlefield. Historical urban warfare case studies repeatedly show the demand for mobile, protected firepower.

    The ability to combine armor and infantry into decentralized fighting teams, with armor supporting infantry, infantry supporting armor, has been shown to be key to success in urban fighting. An army that can execute combined arms maneuver with precision indirect fire and air support overwhelms enemies even in urban terrain.


    Urban operations demand decentralized, small-unit operations at the tactical level, with junior leaders capable of operating independently. Much of the fighting in Iraq was by company- and platoon-level teams of infantry, armor, aviation, sniper, and intelligence, all combined at the lowest level under the command of captains and lieutenants.

    The three infantry battalions and one armor battalion should be trained much like the combined-arms Armor Brigade Combat Teams (ABCTs) deployed to Iraq. These would be companies of Strykers, Bradley, and tanks platoons with organic intelligence teams and enablers to conduct independent operations within the cities.
    While this is the theory, I wonder on deployment what the casualties would be like among the tanks. But you are now relegating hugely expensive vehicles to what in essence is house to house fighting and street clearance, hugely wasteful .
    Just visiting

  5. #829
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    732
    Post Thanks / Like
    Urban warfare is never effecient. The Russian model of combined arms battalions (combat engineers, armour, infantry, small UAVs, EW, Snipers and MLRS) is worthy of study. Some good YouTube videos out there of DB9s and Tanks working in pairs supported by infantry and small UAV teams in Syria

  6. Thanks hptmurphy thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  7. #830
    Captain Truck Driver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Here And There...
    Posts
    10,192
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by TangoSierra View Post
    Urban warfare is never effecient. The Russian model of combined arms battalions (combat engineers, armour, infantry, small UAVs, EW, Snipers and MLRS) is worthy of study. Some good YouTube videos out there of DB9s and Tanks working in pairs supported by infantry and small UAV teams in Syria
    Tanks supported by Infantry. Where have I heard that one before? Ah yes, the German Wehrmacht did it with Panzer Grenadiers in WWII
    "Well, stone me! We've had cocaine, bribery and Arsenal scoring two goals at home. But just when you thought there were truly no surprises left in football, Vinnie Jones turns out to be an international player!" (Jimmy Greaves)!"

  8. #831
    Commandant
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    1,760
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Truck Driver View Post
    Tanks supported by Infantry. Where have I heard that one before? Ah yes, the German Wehrmacht did it with Panzer Grenadiers in WWII
    i think everyone accepts that urban warfare is a mess, and that armour is vunerable in urban ops - but what do you suggest, armour not supported by Infantry, or infantry not supported by armour? i look forward to reading the career prospects of the Officer at Staff College who suggests that in urban operations the Armour should just sit outside the gates catching up on their suntans and reading while the Infantry get sent in without the big guns and protection of our donkey-whalloping colleagues...

    personally i think that urban operations should be left to a couple of Regiments of belt-fed 155's, but i'm given to understand that its a non-correct solution on the HCSC...

  9. #832
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    East
    Posts
    19,949
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by ropebag View Post
    i think everyone accepts that urban warfare is a mess, and that armour is vunerable in urban ops - but what do you suggest, armour not supported by Infantry, or infantry not supported by armour? i look forward to reading the career prospects of the Officer at Staff College who suggests that in urban operations the Armour should just sit outside the gates catching up on their suntans and reading while the Infantry get sent in without the big guns and protection of our donkey-whalloping colleagues...

    personally i think that urban operations should be left to a couple of Regiments of belt-fed 155's, but i'm given to understand that its a non-correct solution on the HCSC...
    Not going to be a viable defence in The Hague either

  10. #833
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,410
    Post Thanks / Like
    There have even been calls to bring back flamethrowers, as the US found in Fallujah that enemies in bunkers built inside houses and other buildings were very difficult to deal with and they resorted to point-blank fire from M1s/ widespread use of ATGMs/ precision air-launched missiles and bombs and even their own improvised bombs to blow down buildings with enemies inside, rather than go to hand-to-hand fighting with grenades and automatics up close and personal, as that drove the casualty rate off the clock.

  11. #834
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Johannesburg
    Posts
    518
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    Not going to be a viable defence in The Hague either
    Irrelevent if you are not western or don't lose.

  12. Dislikes DeV disliked this post
  13. #835
    BQMS
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    732
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by GoneToTheCanner View Post
    There have even been calls to bring back flamethrowers, as the US found in Fallujah that enemies in bunkers built inside houses and other buildings were very difficult to deal with and they resorted to point-blank fire from M1s/ widespread use of ATGMs/ precision air-launched missiles and bombs and even their own improvised bombs to blow down buildings with enemies inside, rather than go to hand-to-hand fighting with grenades and automatics up close and personal, as that drove the casualty rate off the clock.
    Lots of talk in the milblog sphere of "Why US destroyed Iraqi cities to save them".

    Haven't had the time to read, just offering the link

  14. #836
    C/S
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    3,042
    Post Thanks / Like
    the really important conflict at the moment, which will shape the procurementof armoured vehicles for PDF units overseas is the Ukraine especially the tactics employed by the Russian Battalion tactical groups deployed there, which is giving everybody in western defence circles food for thought, in particular
    • The use of UAVs in conjunction with long range massed artillery fire to cause massive casualties.
    • The way local militias/irregular forces are so well integrated with the Battalion tactical groups.
    • The use of EW to disrupt comms and the use of information war
    • That the current generation of Russian tanks fitted with Reactive armour and active protection systems are pretty much invulnerable to the anti-tank weapons the Ukrainians have (hence why they requested javelins from the Americans. Reason Americans agreed to send them, they’re petrified that javelin might not be able to defeat modernised Russian T-72/T-90)
    • Same tanks are massacring Ukrainian mechanised infantry.
    Last edited by paul g; Today at 04:07.

  15. Likes DeV liked this post

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

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