There you go recceguy,
I updated my profile.
reasons for post:
1. a demo of a section attack by the Brits (Yorkshire regiment) I saw in aug 2002 in Valcartier.
The drills were different from our own. the same seven section battle drills applied.... but the SOPs and their employment of the drills were fundamentally different from what you would be taught on Canadian courses. For one thing, they essentially favoured section flank attacks. The Assault Group - not the section - was seen as the smallest unbreakable unit.
It was not like the "old School" section flank attack (with both FN C2's and 2iC in support, Sec Comdr and all remaining riflemen in assault - which had come from WW2 Bren Gun tactics.) It was basically: One group in assault, the other in support - with the assault group split into "intimate support" and "trench clearing" fire teams at the assault line.
There were several other differences with our own (usually frontal) Cdn section attack, but I'll spare you the details for now.
You and I know that there is a difference between "textbook" doctrine and current practice within units. Did the demo truly reflect British doctrine?
2. Until recently we had an officer in our unit who had been a Captain in the Royal Marines. Here again, there was difference of perspective on tactics, both at platoon and even section levels.
All that made me curious about other armies' minor tactics and SOPs. What else might be different? and why is there a difference? I figure I might as well see the British pams for myself instead of only relying on hearsay and that one demo.
