Thanks Thanks:  27
Likes Likes:  35
Dislikes Dislikes:  0
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 51 to 75 of 77
  1. #51
    C/S CTU's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    London
    Posts
    1,300
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    It was a public source (possibly An Cosantoir), PM if necessary
    Connect June 2014 poster.

    http://digital.jmpublishing.ie/i/320307-a2-poster/0?
    Well, government doesn't stop just because the country's been destroyed!
    I mean, annihilation's bad enough without anarchy to make things even worse!

  2. Thanks Tempest, FMP, DeV, Truck Driver thanked for this post
    Likes DeV liked this post
  3. #52
    C/S FMP's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    UK and Tanzania
    Posts
    361
    Post Thanks / Like
    Only 4 x Dismounts in the CRV (+MRV)!! I'm not so crazy after all .

    na grohmití, sorry I have not got back to you on your offer. No I'm not a spy and yes please I would like a look at the ORBAT .
    We travel not for trafficking alone,
    By hotter winds our fiery hearts are fanned,
    For lust of knowing what should not be known,
    We make the Golden Journey to Samarkand.

  4. #53
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,273
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by CTU View Post
    Many thanks

    Could have sworn the CRV had more

  5. #54
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,273
    Post Thanks / Like
    IMHO, recce troops with a 50/50 mix within them of CRVs and MRVs is preferred with a Supp Tp of MRVs and a few LTAV ISRs in HQ troop

  6. #55
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,082
    Post Thanks / Like
    http://breakingdefense.com/2015/04/t...1efe-408236157

    For those that are interested: there is a lot of info on Stryker BCTs out there on the internet. I would recommend the cavalry RSTA (ISTAR) cavalry squadron sections of the literature.

    Incidentally, the US Stryker BCTs look more an more like someone in Europe read the doctrine an recoined it EUBG. Except

  7. #56
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,273
    Post Thanks / Like
    The U.S. Stryker RSTA Cav Sqn is equivalent to an Irish Cav Regt, so an Irish Cav Sqn is roughly equivalent to a U.S. Recce Tp.

    Having looked at the TO&E, we should organise:

    HQ Tp probably with LTAVs (liaison, sniper & UAV deployment, CBRN recce, etc).
    Supp Tp with MRV (with FOO/MFC, Javelin capabilities)
    Recce Tp with CRV (and mix with MRV if funds allow) (with min 84 (if not Javelin) and possibly 60 mortar carried)

  8. #57
    C/S
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    3,171
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by TangoSierra View Post
    http://breakingdefense.com/2015/04/t...1efe-408236157

    For those that are interested: there is a lot of info on Stryker BCTs out there on the internet. I would recommend the cavalry RSTA (ISTAR) cavalry squadron sections of the literature.

    Incidentally, the US Stryker BCTs look more an more like someone in Europe read the doctrine an recoined it EUBG. Except
    Except European countires like france had wheeled APC long before the americans, so its actually the other way around. And the Americans were also influenced a bit by soviet doctrine. The Stryker BCT concept comes largely from operations in the balkans from 1991-1999, and in particular the rush for Pristina airport. In fact the british are also looking a bit at soviet doctrine, their army 2020 light infantry company will have two regular infantry platoons, a reserve infantry platoon and a regular machine gun platoon with 6 GMPG, a bit like the 1989 soviet motor rifle company

    As i said before Its all about overseas, you design your units and buy equipment in accordance with what you want to do. The state doesn't need to have a reconnaissance squadron so that it can locate invaders from the north, or lead a brigade across the border.

    What it does need is an ISTAR company that can operate overseas in conjunction with other European armies, which it can keep on very high readiness alert for six months once a year. That it does have, and it knows how to organise it as well as i said look at An Cosantoir for September 2012.
    Last edited by paul g; 28th April 2015 at 10:42.

  9. #58
    2/Lt
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Posts
    1,082
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DeV View Post
    The U.S. Stryker RSTA Cav Sqn is equivalent to an Irish Cav Regt, so an Irish Cav Sqn is roughly equivalent to a U.S. Recce Tp.
    And hence maybe that's a point worth focusing on. Does the current split organisation of the DF cavalry (maybe applies to the rest of the DF) fall below critical mass to offer any effective capability. Would amalgamation of both cav units and ACS into one unit offer better efficiencies and opportunities to develop capabilities?

  10. Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  11. #59
    Non Temetis Messor The real Jack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2004
    Posts
    3,211
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by TangoSierra View Post
    Would amalgamation of both cav units and ACS into one unit offer better efficiencies and opportunities to develop capabilities?
    There is a rumour doing the rounds that 1 Mech might be ditching berets in favour of Party Hats...
    Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

  12. Likes Truck Driver, FMP liked this post
  13. #60
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,273
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by paul g View Post
    Except European countires like france had wheeled APC long before the americans, so its actually the other way around. And the Americans were also influenced a bit by soviet doctrine. The Stryker BCT concept comes largely from operations in the balkans from 1991-1999, and in particular the rush for Pristina airport. In fact the british are also looking a bit at soviet doctrine, their army 2020 light infantry company will have two regular infantry platoons, a reserve infantry platoon and a regular machine gun platoon with 6 GMPG, a bit like the 1989 soviet motor rifle company

    As i said before Its all about overseas, you design your units and buy equipment in accordance with what you want to do. The state doesn't need to have a reconnaissance squadron so that it can locate invaders from the north, or lead a brigade across the border.

    What it does need is an ISTAR company that can operate overseas in conjunction with other European armies, which it can keep on very high readiness alert for six months once a year. That it does have, and it knows how to organise it as well as i said look at An Cosantoir for September 2012.
    The ISTAR Battlegroup contribution is task org'ed with assets from other corps. AFAIK it doesn't follow the lead unit principle.

    I would agree to a point, a Cav Sqn should be the lead unit for an ISTAR EUBG contribution with other corps task org'ed in as required.

    We have and need a DF organised for its primary mission, ie defence of the State, but also available for other roles. And in a light infantry all arms conventional format.

    So say for example:
    FHQ / BG HQ- provided by all Corps
    ISTAR TF HQ - provided by all Corps
    ISTAR Recce Coy - provided by lead Cav unit (Inf, Arty, Engr assets task org'ed in)
    ISTAR Logs Coy - provided by all Corps
    HUMINT Team - provided by all Corps
    MP element - task org'ed in
    Movecon element - provided by all Corps

    http://www.forsvarsmakten.se/siteass...-master-es.pdf


    Quote Originally Posted by TangoSierra View Post
    And hence maybe that's a point worth focusing on. Does the current split organisation of the DF cavalry (maybe applies to the rest of the DF) fall below critical mass to offer any effective capability. Would amalgamation of both cav units and ACS into one unit offer better efficiencies and opportunities to develop capabilities?
    TBH I'd say get the 2 x Cav Sqns properly manned and equipped and then figure out if we can afford 1ACS - bearing in mind it is supposed to be a Combat asset.

    The CRVs and MRVs would need to be taken out of 1ACS to supplement a new order being placed.

    Do you then keep 1ACS?
    What do you equip them with?

  14. #61
    Captain Truck Driver's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Here And There...
    Posts
    10,545
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by The real Jack View Post
    There is a rumour doing the rounds that 1 Mech might be ditching berets in favour of Party Hats...
    Ha... Would doubt that one - I'd say it's someone floating a kite...
    "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)!"

  15. #62
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,273
    Post Thanks / Like
    Found a bit on the LTAV:
    http://www.dfmagazine.ie/site-assets...-_Jun_2010.pdf (Page 18)

    http://www.defence.ie/WebSite.nsf/Re...C?OpenDocument

    http://www.defence.ie/website.nsf/fba727373c93a4f080256c53004d976e/2d3f7aaec4efca2d802574440031a060/$FILE/RFT.doc

    http://www.defence.ie/WebSite.nsf/0/9AFA5F99BAE5152380257571005C2DA1/$file/RFT+STA+Suite.doc

    http://www.defence.ie/website.nsf/fba727373c93a4f080256c53004d976e/9afa5f99bae5152380257571005c2da1/$FILE/QUESTIONS%20AND%20ANSWERS%20RELATING%20%20TO%20THE %20TENDER%20COMPETITION%20FOR%20STA%20SUITE.doc

    http://www.defence.ie/website.nsf/fba727373c93a4f080256c53004d976e/2d3f7aaec4efca2d802574440031a060/$FILE/Q&A.doc
    Last edited by DeV; 1st May 2015 at 22:55.

  16. Thanks FMP thanked for this post
  17. #63
    C/S
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    6,989
    Post Thanks / Like
    Suggestion: bring a bigger gun.

  18. #64
    Private 2*
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Posts
    11
    Post Thanks / Like
    IF it is to be a somewhat "real" armoured cavalry squadron----a battalion sized unit----- (as opposed to a cav troop) and the "teeth of the army" (as the military.ie site claims), then:


    4 tank platoons of 4 CV-90-105's each. Attach an infantry platoon with 4 Mowag III Piranha's, some Javelin mounted LATV's, etc.. A legitimate tank troop/coy.

    A headquarters coy/troop with 2 CV-90 command vehicles, 2 recovery vehicles, 4 LATV's, an ambulance Mowag and some repair vehicles.

    A recce platoon with 4 CRV's, 4 LATV's and 16 dismounts.

    An infantry coy with 120 troops and 16 Mowag Paranha III's. (attach the existing 1st Mechanised Infantry Coy).

    A mobile artillery battery of 2 towed 105's and 2-4 vehicles mounting 81 mm and/or 120 mm mortars.

    Even that will be a "armoured cavalry squadron lite" compared to an American Armored Cavalry Squadron TOE.

    But it would be a legitimate armoured reserve force to back up the infantry battalions and the cavalry squadrons.

    Of course, that would take a government investment into the purchase of CV-90's and some additional Mowags, so it probably won't happen.

    It would be a nice formation, though. A real strategic reserve for Army command.
    Last edited by TerryD1957; 9th May 2015 at 16:14.

  19. #65
    Moderator DeV's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    23,273
    Post Thanks / Like

  20. Thanks Anzac thanked for this post
  21. #66
    Recruit
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Baltinglass
    Posts
    606
    Post Thanks / Like
    What equipment is there for ISTAR other then Mk1 human eyeball? I see no mention of any acquisition of SIGINT/COMINT/optronics/radar/extendable masts/ESM/C-ESM etc?

  22. #67
    Sergeant madmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    put out to pasture
    Posts
    628
    Post Thanks / Like
    My suggestion for a cavalry squadron make up

    A and B troop equipped with 4 Fennek 4x4 reconnaissance armoured vehicle 4 per troop and 1 UAV per troop.

    C troop equipped with 4 CRV and CTR detachments

    D troop equipped with 4 MRV and anti Armour det

    support troop 6 CRV with 2x amstar det, 2 x mobility det, 4 x sniper teams

    HQ and admin troop i wont go into

    A bit of a dream but that how i would like to see a troop, i believe the cavalry should not use the RG32 and the fennek is a better fit. Yes i would like to see a 105mm or 120mm in D troop but unless we go down the road of tracked i believe we should wait for a more suited wheeled vehicle
    Last edited by madmark; 17th January 2020 at 20:44.
    Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.

  23. Likes hptmurphy liked this post
  24. #68
    BQMS spider pig's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    561
    Post Thanks / Like
    Talk in the corps is to get rid of all CRVs, drop close recce and focus solely on medium recce/ formation recce. Using a MRV type platform for A/B/C and Spt with something more devastating
    Sir I cant find my peltors........Private they are on your face

  25. Thanks DeV thanked for this post
  26. #69
    Sergeant madmark's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    put out to pasture
    Posts
    628
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by spider pig View Post
    Talk in the corps is to get rid of all CRVs, drop close recce and focus solely on medium recce/ formation recce. Using a MRV type platform for A/B/C and Spt with something more devastating
    If that's the case at least one troop should have a vehicle with a low silhouette. Are all infantry mowags converting to crv would be a good move for them
    Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory. Tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat.

  27. #70
    Commandant EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,870
    Post Thanks / Like
    RG32_MRSS.jpg
    Quote Originally Posted by Graylion View Post
    What equipment is there for ISTAR other then Mk1 human eyeball? I see no mention of any acquisition of SIGINT/COMINT/optronics/radar/extendable masts/ESM/C-ESM etc?
    Like a RG32 LTV fitted with an Elbit MRSS?

    https://www.flickr.com/photos/dfmaga...7693660480364/
    Last edited by EUFighter; 18th January 2020 at 19:37.

  28. Likes Tempest, DeV liked this post
  29. #71
    Commander in Chief apod's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Ass in the grass.
    Posts
    5,496
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by spider pig View Post
    Talk in the corps is to get rid of all CRVs, drop close recce and focus solely on medium recce/ formation recce. Using a MRV type platform for A/B/C and Spt with something more devastating
    You mean like they were supposed to do in the first place? Close RECCE was and is an Infantry tasking. Medium is Cav and Long range is SOF.

    D Cav blurred the waters back in the early 2000's when the Rapid Reaction force /PSO Bn force structure was first decided and muscled in on an Infantry role just to still have a place at the table. Hence years of wasted time and money developing capabilities and purchasing equipment for a role they were never intended to do.

    What could the Cav have bought for the money they wasted on the CRV's and ISR LTAV's that would have been more suited to a medium RECCE role??
    "105,000 dead. 40,000,000 unemployed. Police murdering African-Americans. You’ve completed you’re mission. You’ve made America great. Now get the f**k out."

    - Rob Reiner.

    "Yes he's an idiot with zero common sense,and no social skills,but he IS my son.I just hope he never goes into politics.He'd be a disaster.

    - Mary Anne Trump

    #unfollowtrump

  30. Likes na grohmiti liked this post
  31. #72
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,703
    Post Thanks / Like
    It was the beancounters way of giving cav a job without need to provide any new armour.
    No regard for international best practice. Dismounts are just that, people who leave the vehicle when it becomes impossible to achieve the objective by staying in it. Having a whole section of dismounts is already done by mechanised infantry.
    The pIIIh is unsuitable for recce. It's too big. I have no experience of the LTAV but unless it offers something extra in term of optics, ground radar or firepower, there isn't any point.
    We have managed to come up with an ORBAT that suits our equipment, rather than having equipment to suit the ORBAT.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  32. Thanks hptmurphy thanked for this post
    Likes EUFighter, madmark liked this post
  33. #73
    Commander in Chief
    Join Date
    May 2014
    Posts
    6,703
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by EUFighter View Post
    I think they were intended for Artillery FOs.
    German 1: Private Schnutz, I have bad news for you.
    German 2: Private? I am a general!
    German 1: That is the bad news.

  34. Likes madmark, DeV liked this post
  35. #74
    Commander in Chief hptmurphy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Posts
    13,869
    Post Thanks / Like
    It was the beancounters way of giving cav a job without need to provide any new armour.
    Mixed bag really, with one of the major problems being the DF had just purchased the initial Mowags and had jumped two generations of AFV and hadn't quite worked out what the possible successor to the AML fleet was in fear of loosing the capital budget bought more Mowags in the hope in would be a one vehicle fits all roles. By the time they woke up to the reality that the Mowags weren't what was needed in the Cav role the money was gone.

    The figure of €25 million was out there in about 2002 for an AML replacement but they couldn't make their minds up.

    One of the major problems the Cavalry Corps has always suffered from is the amount of units has exceed the armour available and thus Squadrons on the ground tended to be oversized troops or putting more than two squadrons on the ground took every available piece of armour in the country.

    Reality has begun to sink in and the amount of squadrons has been reduced , but then again so has the amount of armour available, two full squadrons with a complete fit out of suitable vehicles is enough. Get rid of the dismountable elements and ditch the CTR role and get back to being an armoured recce force and stop trying to take a bite from all the cherries.

    Once the actual realistic role has been identified but the specific vehicles required, yes get something with an element of commonality but get away from the concept of a multitask vehicle that no one gets to use.
    Covid 19 is not over ....it's still very real..Hand Hygiene, Social Distancing and Masks.. keep safe

  36. Thanks EUFighter thanked for this post
    Likes madmark liked this post
  37. #75
    Commandant EUFighter's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2016
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    1,870
    Post Thanks / Like
    Within the EUBG's we have tried to claim the ISTAR role which mean we need to focus then on equipping the Cavalry properly, but it also means that we need to have enough APC's for the Infantry at the same time.

    As for the PIIIH being too big I am not that sure, the new French EBRC Jaguar is the same size of the MRV and is actually heavier. The new Australian Boxer CRV (Combat Recon Vehicle) makes the PIIIH look like a Mini in comparison. The Canadian and Australian armies had used LAVII for recon, (Coyote & ASLAV) both of which are around the same size. And the Patria AMV is used in the same role by the Polish and South African. Even the new Canadian TAPV is not too much different is size. And lastly the Italians have now two recon versions of the Freccia entering service.

    But looking at the Italian model is interesting, their Cavalry Battalion has a mix of equipment. The combat element consists of 3 Squadrons, 2 Recon and 1 Heavy. The Recon have 7 Freccia and 12 Lince vehicles:
    - Command 1 Freccia Recon
    - Troop A-C: 2 Freccia Recon + 4 VTLM Lince

    The Heavy Squadron has 3 Troops of 4x Centauro 2 plus 2 Centaur in the Command.

    This gives them per Cav Battalion (same as our Corp): 14x Centauro, 14x Freccia Recon and 24 VTLM Lince.

  38. Thanks DeV thanked for 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
  •