Search results

Perhaps unsurprisingly I had a hard time finding that for a reasonable price on Amazon.de!  I got it on Amazon.ca and it'll be waiting for me on HLTA. This makes sense to me as well and how I've envisioned it for most of my time.  Interestingly, it doesn't exactly jive with BG in Ops.  BG in...

I think this also raises the question of depth elements and how they are employed.  As you noted Land Ops states that depth has a c-moves role.  They should be first employed in the block, and reinforcing tasks and perhaps even c-atking depending on the en you face.  I've seen other situations...

I think you'd be very pleased to see I Coy's range card over here.  The process is understood now and I've got buy in on the process of developing the KZ then having range cards produced at the sect level and then filtering up to the Coy and beyond.  Naturally there is still a hockey sock of...

Another good book on this that will concur with your perspective is Attack:  A Study of Blitzkrieg Tactics.  https://www.amazon.com/Attack-Blitzkrieg-Tactics-F-Miksche/dp/1436703174  Despite it's name it's actually a study on how to defeat a combined arms offensive.  There are a couple papers...

The temptation to use the guns is almost unavoidable. I remain by my stance that a heavy APC would be a great way to go for forces that are designed to fight in conjunction with a MBT.  Perhaps most importantly is that the section carrier is equipped with weapons that are more for self defence...

I find it curious that on many places on here we are lamenting the death of the tank due to their vulnerability to a variety of threats and here we have a discussion on how we need a 130mm gun so we can defeat tanks that right now seem very difficult to penetrate.... In terms of balancing the...

I don't think this enters any governments mind.  I wonder what it would be like operating in a theater that isn't buttressed by US firepower and logistics....  Now that might be a learning experience.

I think we certainly should be willing to break up the Coy.  This is what Infanteer was referring to.  The concern about casualties will be reduced if you have sufficient firepower on the objective.  Jim Storr talks a lot about this as does Killcullen.  It's about setting conditions for a...

Isn't this a case of what you mentionned earlier on equivalent cbt power ratios between arms?  Outside of concerns on having sufficient breaching assets either of the cbt tms you've described would have the cbt power to destroy a platoon outpost with IDF in support. This is one of my original...

Good point.  I should have known that. Tango, I agree that our doctrine is flexible and that ultimately this comes down to a CO's decision.  My point, however, is that our intellectual foundation puts a lot of weight on the square cbt tm. All the drills in Cbt Tm in Ops are for square teams. ...

There is also some talk of putting them on LAVs.  The problem is that the systems we've pulled out of storage are dismounted systems.  So, the question is less about how to mount them and more about how to move them around right now. I assume your talking tactical nukes here?

So there is some talk of mounting TOW on TAPV so they could play a role in the Cbt Tm or support it.  They could also perhaps be the HQ veh for the 2IC if for some reason a LAV wasn't available.  None of this is ideal.  We define a cbt tm as a sub unit of tanks or infantry with at least a sub...

Tango, I agree with what you're saying.  I'm sure there is a time and place for the square cbt, however, I believe these will be quite limited, and of course task organisation must be based on an assessment of tasks and the structure of the parent units.  My point is that with our current...

I think we violently agree that the issue with the square cbt tm is the number of tanks we have.  When you have a paucity of resources you centralize them.  The square cbt tm represents the decentralization of resources at the Bde level, where they are organically owned.  This just isn't going...

I think this is a valid point.  It is difficult to come up with better ways when you don't really know what the next war will be like, so why not perfect what you understand to work while working to incrementally innovate, hopefully in the right direction. Whenever I'm reminded of this I think...

Thanks for this.  So I struggled with this as I wrote the original post.  Is a combat tm still relevant in a world where we can find and precisely destroy individual AFVs and fighting positions?  If most of the time we need to defeat an adversary's will to resist vice destroying them...

Like Infanteer said.  The artillery and engineer officers are still attending but in relatively low numbers.  I think there was only 3 arty officers and 2 engineers on my course.  The other issue is that there are about one third as many armour officers to infantry officers but not all these...

The course is still an attend and the course report gives you and your CO an idea where you stood.  However there are no rankings or letter grades.  There's been discussions that it should be graded and my CO has mentioned that he thinks the course reports still don't say enough. There is one...

Yes, if we want three symmetrical CMBG's that can all operate at the high end against the most demanding opposition.  The other option would be to centralise all the tanks in one CMBG, in one Regiment.  We could look at dropping to three tank trps per sqn IOT to ensure there is a fourth sqn in...

So I just finished this years Cbt Tm Comd's Course and I figured I'd take a look at this thread again.  Having re read it a few thoughts come to mind. Thankfully we got back in the tank business.  While our ISTAR capabilities can certainly enable us to take greater risks in certain areas there...