# Combat support unit defence questions



## Colin Parkinson (23 Apr 2004)

I know from discussions on other sites that the Combat support units both regular and reserves have been having difficulty getting training and support to practice their combat skills. From my time at base support and working for 1 Svc Bat in Germany that the amount of fire power for defence in these units is minimal. Also I understand that it is difficult in the reserves to get the time and ammunition to keep fighting skills up. 

Here are some questions for the Combat support types here both reserves and regular:

Are the lessons being learned in Iraq regarding the protection and defence of support units being learned , disseminated and put into practice?

Are units receiving any extra equipment?

Any changes in training?

Has NDHQ even figured out that this is a problem?

I am thinking of questions I can ask the various candidates during the next election. thanks


----------



## Eowyn (23 Apr 2004)

Purely from a Reserves point of view.  I haven‘t seem any lessons learned from Iraq yet.  No we haven‘t received any extra equipment, no changes to training.  There is a question on whether we might be able to get any linked ammo.


----------



## MedCorps (25 Apr 2004)

Lessons learnt (Medical Corps and Logistics) from Iraq yes.  Deseminated yes.  Put into practice.  No.  

Extra equipment.  No 

Changes in training.  Well... we were going to, but it never unfolded due to "operational tempo".  Hummm... and I thought there was never a better time to train then before an operation... foolish me.  I did get to go do the Army Tactical Operations Course - Combat Service Support.  We looked at Defence of CSS units quite a bit.  Good insight from the Log Major and the US Army guy who just got back from Iraq.   There seems to be an interest in defence of CSS units, just no solid doctrine or training plans.  

NDHQ figued out the problem.... I suspect so.  I hope so.  Once they have figured out the problem do they know the next step to take.  No.  Have they taken it,  No.   Win some loose some eh?  A good place to start would be with DAT putting out a B-GL-XXX on CSS Defence in Battle. 

MC.


----------



## vr (28 Apr 2004)

In the Reserve Med world nothing from the iraq experience has filtered down to us.  We still have nothing heavier than C-7‘s to defend ourselves with and still don‘t have any ammunition (live/blank) to train with.  We are only authorized currently to train to level 1 of the PWT which is 25 rds from the 100m point.  Don‘t fire ‘til ya see the whites of their eyes boys!!!

We‘ve always been taught to rely on the support of other local units for our defence, though in today‘s non-linear battlefield that‘s not always an option.  The Svc Bn was always supposed to be responsible for rear area security with assets diverted from other tasks or in reserve.

Our defence on the move has always been "drive through the **** and re-org the survivors on the other side.  Medical units have never been high on the priority for escorts.  Iwas however once taught by an Eastern unit to stop the vehicles in the ambush, unload any casualties from the ambs, and then return fire.  Peals of derisive laughter, Bruce.


----------



## ghazise (29 Apr 2004)

From my unit‘s experience in IRAQ, CSSB-18 Maint. Co, Ord Weap Maint Plt.  For defensive operations with had the minimum of 2 man Fighting Holes, in a layered perimeter, with a dedicated guard, the QRF was everybody else with M-16‘s(M249, M240G, M2, AT4‘s) , and in one case the tank mechs towed a disabled abrams, that‘s about it.
Now CSSB-22 while in Nasiriyah, had 9ft sand berms for perimeters with sand-bagged fighting positions, and were able to repel light infantry attacks.
I would say we should have focused more attention on training for convoy security actions/reactions and recovery missions tactics.  Rather than platoon infantry tactics and Urban ops.


----------



## Supply (31 Aug 2004)

At my unit we have started to disseminate this info we have put into place an SOP on convoy operations.   By adopting this doctrine the CF will have to revamp our current doctrine to take into account the new non-linear battlefield.


----------



## Brad Sallows (31 Aug 2004)

It's not exactly new.  If you could find them, there are probably SOPs dating from the North African campaign 1940-1943 on how to run escorted and unescorted convoys through unsecured territory.


----------



## Supply (31 Aug 2004)

That is correct the SOP's are not new they are the SOP that the Americains are know using since the 507 Maint unit got ambushed in Iraq.  And know the CF are adopting these SOP's.  The Non-linear battlefield is  more often seen now then what was seen in the 2nd World war.  During the 2nd World war the front line were  defined.


----------



## Tpr.Orange (1 Sep 2004)

For people from the 32 brigade I can say Yes its being put into practice...

Convoy drills and practice have been important to keep up on especially for the CSS guys/girls. 

At EX SG 04 the maintainers did more stand to's and defensives then most of the rest of the units that attended. 

As for equiptment. 

For this Ex, which was the biggest on hand in a while something like 2600 soldiers on the ground, maintainers and admin guys had 2 mags and thats it.


----------



## a23trucker (6 Sep 2004)

Be careful. 
Just because things are done on EX doesn't mean that they're correct...
The tactical level doctrine has not changed (yet).
This is mainly because, when conducted properly, the doctrine is robust enough to handle the situation.
Some adaptions may be made but I don't think it's going to change greatly.
Operational level doctrine is evolving to cope with the non-linear, non-contiguous battlefield.
LFCA is already knee-deep in these changes so stay tuned.

Cheers
AM


----------



## Kirkhill (11 Sep 2004)

Came across this article.  Thought it might be appropriate to this discussion.

http://www.dod.mil/news/Sep2004/n09102004_2004091008.html



> 'Rat Patrol' Secures Afghan Mission
> By Sgt. Frank Magni, USA
> Special to American Forces Press Service
> 
> ...


----------



## Kiwi Loggie (4 Dec 2004)

Hi all, 

this is a issue that I have a great interest in, I am the S4 for the New Zealands Army 2nd Logistic Battalion. I have spent most of this year working with the New Zealands army's 1st Battalion in developing its 1st line CSS organisation to support our newly acquired LAV3's. The whole issue on defending CSS assets has until recently being paid lip service by the New Zealand army and it is only recently with the lessons learnt from Iraq and Afghanistan that CASS security has started to be taken seriously, after all it is no good having a fleet of top of the line LAV 3's as your teeth, if the tail is naked.

The good news is that very soon (within 12months) I will be receiving 4 armoured Pinzgauers, to provide a QRF and convoy escort capability for the Logistic battalion. The problem at the moment is that there any manpower to man these assets will have to be from within the battalions current strength, and there is no Doctrine to guide their employment.

I am slowly developing TTPs for the use of this new capability, and are confidant that within 6 months I will have some solid SOP's developed. If any one can provide any feed back, lessons learnt, personal experiences, SOP's and TTP's I would be extremely grateful.

My main areas of concern at present are, convoy protection and RF drills.

Thanks on advance

Rob Mickie


----------



## Hylander_ca (11 Dec 2004)

Any changes in training? Yes

1 Svc Bn has and is currently perfecting actions on drills. We are in the midst of changing the doctrine on how we Trucker's do business. We have implemented the "Gun Truck" a HLVW with a min of 1 x C-6 (mounted on a base in the center of the box) 4 x C-9's and 3 x C-7's....With the "Gun Truck" commander up in the cab's hatch opting for a C-7 or a C-9. We have even gone as far as beefing up an Iltis as a scout veh with a couple of C-9's. When I went to Borden on my 5's it was interesting to take a step back in my trg and do the old actions on drills...especially when it will be changing country wide in the near future.


----------



## MSE_OP18 (22 Dec 2004)

*2 Svc Bn * has actually taken a bigger step forward in the "actions on drills". As we learned from Roto 0 Op Athena. We are now using Armoured Vehicles as our Convoy Escorts. The Bisons offer more protection then the Soft skin vehicles. Our Concepts have proven to be a lot more effective in the busy streets of Kabul. We also have tested in actual Live Fire scenarios different ways in Dismounting if need be, in order to counterattack an Ambush. Many of the drills we are using still come from the "old way" however keeping the threat of mines always on our minds when dismounting of course. Like any drills we have utilized there are always Pro's and Con's. If anyone is interested in knowing more on how "Truckers are doing business" Let me know, would love to discuss this as it is actually becoming my bread and butter.

Peace


----------



## Hylander_ca (22 Dec 2004)

MSE_OP18,
The trg that 1 SVC BN is implementing, is basically just the ground work for "action on drills". We both know that for 1: each theatre is different, and 2: you can't always use the same tactics in every theatre. Do you remember the "actions on drills" in Borden? (BEEP BEEP) 1 SVC BN is just trying to provide better and more up to date doctrine to the school. The Bn is just changing the basics. The basics prior to work up training. And part of those basics do include AFV's (Armoured Fighting Vehicles) and Bisons in our packets/convoys. Including the roll in and roll out of AFV's into the packet on the move, to simulate moving into more hostile areas where armoured protection is paramount. Hey by the way...Merry Christmas & Happy New Year, and you guys be safe on the next Roto! 

Nil Sine Labore.

Cheers  :mg:


----------



## MSE_OP18 (23 Dec 2004)

I think this is long overdue. I was fortunate to play quite an important role in these drills that we have rehearsed over the last several months. The AFV's included with us play a huge role. I disagree with you on each theatre is different they are all similiar, its the "situation" that is always different. Now knowing and actually using the AFV's within our convoys is has made our job as "Truckers" even more important. As now we are not just concentrating on moving pers or equipment from one point to another but we are also "Escorting" these convoys with AFV's and G-wagon's and now this takes more manner power. Overall I like this way far better then the old as you said (Beep-Beep). I think its about time that "Truckers" get some good recognition. Merry Xmas and Happy New Year to you as well.


----------



## George Wallace (11 Jan 2005)

Here is a US Army Gun Truck solution:

http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/10427810.htm

GW


----------



## Carey (14 Jan 2005)

Personally I think very little consideration is put on how to quickly react under fire while moving. My favorate example of this lack of oversight is where the rifle rack for the middle passenger in the LSVW is ???


----------



## AmmoTech90 (14 Jan 2005)

Unless the rifle rack interferes with using your weapon while it is in your hands it shouldn't matter where it is.  If there is a slight chance you may need your weapon pax shouldn't be racking them at all.


----------



## MSE_OP18 (14 Jan 2005)

In a hostile area your weapons are never put in a storage rack. You must always have them near the ready when possible. Always stay Vigilant. That is how the Wpn rack issue is resolved.


----------



## Hylander_ca (14 Jan 2005)

Well said MSE_OP18!!

Carey,
    The situation will dictate how readily available your weapon is. For instance you would use the weapons' racks while moving on civilian roads here in Canada during an administrative road move.(my understanding is that it is very intimidating to Cdn Citizens, if we have our wpns at the ready. This in turn would cause even more unnecessary and detrimental media coverage towards the CF.) In an explosively hostile environment like Iraq, chances are the co-driver (and other passengers) would have one in the spout, safety on and at the ready. Due diligence at all times, know your working environment.

Cheers  :mg:


----------



## MSE_OP18 (15 Jan 2005)

Don't confuse people too much. Hostile theatres and our Wpns State is dictated by higher when leaving camp. Once a "Hostile Act" or a "Hostile Intent" has been recognized then actions towards that threat will be taken.....ROE's.


----------



## Hylander_ca (15 Jan 2005)

MSE_OP18,

Thanks for the correction....but I was just trying to explain that there is a reason for the weapon racks in the vehs.

Cheers  :mg:


----------



## MSE_OP18 (15 Jan 2005)

But of course! 8)


----------



## Radop (11 Feb 2005)

Carey said:
			
		

> Personally I think very little consideration is put on how to quickly react under fire while moving. My favorate example of this lack of oversight is where the rifle rack for the middle passenger in the LSVW is ???


How could you provide effective fire while on the move with most of our non-AFV?  Iltis with top down, OK but if the rifle is in the rack try and get it out and use it with or without the superstructure.  Do the same with the LSVW, MLVW and HLVW?  If the tactical situation is such that an attack can be expected, you should not stow your wpns and your windows should be open.  The best defense is your gas pedal and your contact drills.


----------



## PresterJohn (6 May 2005)

Colin P said:
			
		

> Are the lessons being learned in Iraq regarding the protection and defence of support units being learned , disseminated and put into practice?
> 
> Are units receiving any extra equipment?
> 
> ...




No.
No.
Yes, based upon political epediency, without listening to the needsof the Cf or the "Hat in Hand" requests from NDHQ.
Yes.


----------



## PresterJohn (6 May 2005)

Hylander_ca said:
			
		

> Any changes in training? Yes
> 
> 1 Svc Bn has and is currently perfecting actions on drills. We are in the midst of changing the doctrine on how we Trucker's do business. We have implemented the "Gun Truck" a HLVW with a min of 1 x C-6 (mounted on a base in the center of the box) 4 x C-9's and 3 x C-7's....With the "Gun Truck" commander up in the cab's hatch opting for a C-7 or a C-9. We have even gone as far as beefing up an Iltis as a scout veh with a couple of C-9's. When I went to Borden on my 5's it was interesting to take a step back in my trg and do the old actions on drills...especially when it will be changing country wide in the near future.




Hope so. The worst thing, right now, for all of us, is if we stifle new ideas, and the second worst, to ignore the lessons learned from almost a hundred years of the trade.


----------



## PresterJohn (6 May 2005)

George Wallace said:
			
		

> Here is a US Army Gun Truck solution:
> 
> http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/news/10427810.htm
> 
> GW



COOL. COOOL!!!

Steve McQueen COOL!

How soon can you go into mass production?


----------

