Tank Platoon Formation

[socom242]

Greetings All

I was fooling around with a start-up adventure where the PC's would become involved with (either going up against OR joining) a Coalition OR Mercenary tank battalion. My question is, how many tanks are in a battalion?

Is one tank equal to one squad of infantry? If so, do 4 tanks make a platoon? Do they ALL have to be tanks? Are the tanks accompanied by infantry? Is it one squad of soldiers per tank? Do support vehicles count? What about missile/artillery vehicles...are they considered into the mix?

Initially, I see 8 tanks and 8 squads of infantry soldiers, with 2 tanks and 2 squads considered one platoon (thereby having 4 platoons OR a company). If such a group was sent out on a mission, how much extra support should I alot them from HQ? I've got other questions regarding the logistics of battle formations and their support, but I'll start with this.

Any help or comments (or links to other posts that have addressed this) are appreciated. Thank you!

[shadrak]

Depends on how you want it...

There are some recommendations in canon material, but it is not necessary that the CS or Mercenaries use modern American formations.

I think it would be easiest to go with a 4 tank platoon, though. It could be 2 tanks and two squads, but it might be easier to just attach an infantry platoon to a tank platoon for support, or vice versa.

It gets to be a command issue...1 LT/platoon, so then you have a platoon commanded by a Tanker, 1 by infantry. I would just fold two platoons together, make one of the Lt's senior, but it is Rifts, so however you feel is best.

There isn't a lot of detail on these types of CS formations in canon text, and none on Mercs. If you make a generic merc unit, no one can call you on it.

[shadrak]

It may be even more likely to have a tank platoon attached to an infantry company.

[shadrak]

Give them as much support as you feel necessary.

[shadrak]

Promise I am not flaming, but another thing occured to me. There is a lot of combined arms theory floating around, from WWI to the present day. If you want, you could google it.

Currently the Army is undergoing a vast and dramatic transformation (Marines have contemplated a transformation as well, but they are already fairly well organized for 4D fighting). This changes entire concepts of organic and inorganic support.

[Nightmaster]

Then Master Shadrak could you give us an example of how a tank battalion is composed today in USA? it will be best for him to understand the composition and then adapt for the Rifts setting.

I dont know either how it is composed so i will be listeing too

[socom242]

Thanks Shadrak! Just to show you where I'm coming from, here's what I have tentatively decided to throw at the PC's.

CS APC Sky Lifter – 20 crew
1) 2, CS Grinning Skull MBT’s w/ 2, SAMAS Each
2) 2, CS Mk IX Missile Launch Vehicles
3) 2, CS CTX-50 “Line Backers”
4) 2, CS CTX-52 “Sky Sweepers”
5) 2, CS Mk VII “Slayer” APC’s w/ 20 CS Infantry & 10 Maulers each
6) 2, CS Death Bringer APC’s w/ 30 Light SAMAS & 20 Super SAMAS each
7) 12, CS Wind Jammer Sky Cycles provide support

I plan on doing another listing, but with merc vehicles (like from Iron Heart or GAW). The deal is to have them go up against these forces (either all at once OR encounter-by-encounter) in a "Save Private Ryan"-kinda approach, in that a squad with a good enuff plan can turn a column of tanks into chaos and win the battle.

Too much? Anything you might add or take away? Comments? Fire away.

Thanks again, to all who respond

[Zakris]

Here's an interesting link for an Engineer Battalion ...

Engineer Combat Battalion

I don't know how detailed you want to get your Merc/CS battalion ...

Personally, I would say you would have an Infantry Company per Tank Platoon ... half in combat support and half in non-combat support. That's just IMHO.

[Zakris]

Thanks Shadrak! Just to show you where I'm coming from, here's what I have tentatively decided to throw at the PC's.

CS APC Sky Lifter – 20 crew
1) 2, CS Grinning Skull MBT’s w/ 2, SAMAS Each
2) 2, CS Mk IX Missile Launch Vehicles
3) 2, CS CTX-50 “Line Backers”
4) 2, CS CTX-52 “Sky Sweepers”
5) 2, CS Mk VII “Slayer” APC’s w/ 20 CS Infantry & 10 Maulers each
6) 2, CS Death Bringer APC’s w/ 30 Light SAMAS & 20 Super SAMAS each
7) 12, CS Wind Jammer Sky Cycles provide support

That's some heavy duty equipment. I feel sorry for the PCs.

I'd suggest throwing it against them piecemeal or in small chunks... but other than that, have fun!

[shadrak]

I'm more of an infantry man myself, so I can only say, yes-4 tanks to a platoon. I hesitate to go more in detail because I have mostly been involved in ad-hoc formations.

The one to ask is Juicer-Mac, in fact, I think he had a thread about it 3 weeks ago, but it might be hard to find.

Currently, (I'm not mech, so this could be off) mech infantry and armor might mingle at a company or battalion level and certainly at a brigade level. At a platoon level, I would think it would be a case by case basis, temporary with multiple chains of command.

It might be easier to envision it like an engineering or military police company assigned to an infantry battalion...1 platoon per company, the CO of the company determining what to do with the attachment, but the BC could consolidate them in certain circumstances. In this case, the engineers/MPs have their own command structure, but they are somewhat isolated from them.

Again, the Army is undergoing a dramatic transformation that changes a lot of this.

[Jefffar]

To my knowledge it's usually 4 tanks to a platoon in most modern militaries. When using lighter AFVs (ie armoured cars) it's often 6 to a platoon. Heavy combat robots would likely use the 4 to a platoon while lighter combat robots likely 6. I'd see a power armour or cyborg platoon of probably 8 to 16.

As for support ratios, it depends on what the task at hand is. In a low threat environment You might see a tank platoon supporting an infnatry company - assuming it was decided they need infantry support at all.

In a high threat environment the platoon of each mix would definitel be appropriate.

[Dead Boy]

I personally go 4 heavy armor units to the platoon mainly because that's how the US Army does it . The the CS is greatly based off the old American Empire, so it makes sense that they would too.

[shadrak]

ROFL!!!!

That's another one...

Just wanna be a post fu master...like the hot chica

[Aramanthus]

I know you are right about it's location. There was also one in source book 1. (For Robots and Power armor along with troopies.)

[shadrak]

If you read literature written by Marine Generals from the mid to late nineties, you will see the Marines were contemplating a change in combined arms doctrine...whether or not these theories changed Marine doctrine significantly, I do not know. I doubt that there would have been serious changes, since the changes weren't that necessary (Marines have always been highly mobile, highly deployable-fairly well suited to the changing combat environment).

The Army, it has been argued by several Army Generals and Civilian staff (Rummy and others) needs to transform, to become more adaptable and mobile. This started (some say) with Gen. Shinseki 99-00. Quite a few General officers and military theorists disagreed with his approach.

Because of many factors, 9-11 just one (a major one), the Army has begun a new transformation. Part of this has been due to continued BRAC closures (which started in the 1980's). Part has been due to a new organizational strategy/theory that makes the Brigade the primary combat unit, rather than the Division, Corps or Army (this is a recognition that we are no longer facing a Soviet-style enemy with a large conventional army, where action occurs in a large theatre).

These brigades (heavy, striker and light infantry brigades), are characterized by mobility, organic support (Artillery and Aviation assets assigned to the Brigade itself). Brigade and battalion commanders are expected to take more initiative and these units are expected to be able to completely control their battle space.

I can't say I am an expert in the theory, but I have had quite a few classes on it (BORING!!!), and it all boils down to smaller units and a flatter organizational heirarchy.

[shadrak]

PS- Ft Irwin is the test bed for a lot of these theories. While NTC, JRTC and the other training posts have been condemned for not adapting to the new threats (many of the missions are the same as the missions from the 70's and 80's), I think that we have learned quite a few things about the adaptability of the new organizational system.

[shadrak]

Hey, Ysbaddin!!! We came online the same day and we have about the same amount of posts...

You, Sir, are a BLACK POT!!!!

[Ice Dragon]

A modern armor/tank platoon consists of 4 tanks.

So 1 tank is equal to a squad of infantry (in organisational terms speaking).

Support is atttached at company levels (maint., medics, etc.).

[socom242]

First i have to inform you that this information is in coalition war campaign.

RIGHT! I'll check it out. Thank you all for you input and insight. Incidently, what kind of "support" should I give a Tank formation of this kind AND would they neccesarily follow them into a combat zone OR hang back? Just in case the PC's try and flank them or something.

[Jefffar]

Well oyu should describe hte situation they are facing better before we sggest wat the tank commander might do.

A tank platoon is just the 4 tanks. At the company level they get some organic maintence and medical and organizational support (and an extra tank for the company commander)

Might take a bit of reading but

Table of Organization and Equipment for US Army Tank Company

Table of Organization and Equipment for US Army Mechanized Infantry Company

[socom242]

Well, without getting into the nuts & bolts of the storyline, the PC's are hired/ordered to take out OR defend a town fortified by the CS or Mercs. I'm trying to be organic with the opposition, since the story hinges on how the PC's approach the set up. They could be the aggressors OR the defenders, depending on their motivation and morals.

If the PC's go the "Mercs with the Heart of Gold" approach (ala "A-Team" or "Tears of the Sun"), then the opposition will be the CS, who have landed the following forces at a town deemed strategically important to their expansion/fortification campaign:

CS APC Sky Lifter – 20 crew
1) 2, CS Grinning Skull MBT’s w/ 2, SAMAS Each
2) 2, CS Mk IX Missile Launch Vehicles
3) 2, CS CTX-50 “Line Backers”
4) 2, CS CTX-52 “Sky Sweepers”
5) 2, CS Mk VII “Slayer” APC’s w/ 20 CS Infantry & 10 Maulers each
6) 2, CS Death Bringer APC’s w/ 30 Light SAMAS & 20 Super SAMAS each
7) 12, CS Wind Jammer Sky Cycles provide support

If the PC's decide to be "heartless and truly mercenary" (treasure seekers, war profiteers, etc), then they go up against a merc force (of "higher moral standings") protecting a town from bandits. Kinda like "Seven Samurai" except the PC's are the bandits.

The "merc force" would be similarly equipped with vehicles and weapons from Iron Heart or GAW, but I haven't drawn up a list yet. Basically, I'd like a semi-realistic approach regarding what the op-force should be without going overboard. So besides the raw firepower, what other support equipment and personelle should I commit to the NPC's.

REMEMBER: If they go up against the CS, the PC's may have the advantage as the townsfolk are likely to help out in the assault. Not the same case if the PC's become the aggressive force against benevolent minded NPC's.

Again, thanks for all the input gang!

[socom242]

WOW Jeffar Those links came in handy! I'll try to make sense out of them, but thank you!

[shadrak]

I don't see how a modern TO&E applies in the Rift's setting w/Power Armor & irregular crews for vehicles.

Can you imagine being a logistician for a CS task force!?! Good god!!! They have at least 4 different kind of tanks, numerous APC's (some that carry reinforced squads, others so large they carry half a battalion). Skycycles and rocket bikes, different power armors, robots...heck, its a good thing we assume all ammo is interchangable (between the different models of Rail Cannon and such). You're supply train would be unmanagable!!!

Couple that with the fact that the CS (according to canon) has no specific organizational system, except 10-20 different patrol and squad types. You have a multitude of vehicles and MOS's, from Grunts, to juicers and 'borgs. Infantry troopers can be carrying a number of weapons, but this is probably the easiest part of a CS unit to manage logistically.

Since I normally play as a CS force, I tend to mirror conventional organizational systems and either drop the robots and Power Armor entirely, or include Power Armor in place of a crew served weapon.

I might sub out hovercycles in place of conventional helicopters, but that normally requires such a huge force that I tend to ignore them as well.


What the CS needs is either generalized vehicles or a modular system.

[Jefffar]

CS APC Sky Lifter – 20 crew
1) 2, CS Grinning Skull MBT’s w/ 2, SAMAS Each
2) 2, CS Mk IX Missile Launch Vehicles
3) 2, CS CTX-50 “Line Backers”
4) 2, CS CTX-52 “Sky Sweepers”
5) 2, CS Mk VII “Slayer” APC’s w/ 20 CS Infantry & 10 Maulers each
6) 2, CS Death Bringer APC’s w/ 30 Light SAMAS & 20 Super SAMAS each
7) 12, CS Wind Jammer Sky Cycles provide support

That's a pretty sizable force, what do the PCs have at their disposalanyway?


Let's just genralize this a bit.

We have:

4 Tanks
2 SP AAAG/SAM systems
2 MRL Artillery/SAM systems
2 Infantry Fighting Vehicles
2 Transport/Gunship Aircraft
12 Combat Aircraft suitable for Air Superiority and Close Air Support
40 Infantry
20 Medium Infantry PA
60 Light flying PA
40 Heavy flying PA

From a plausibility stand point, I might play with those ratios somewhat. Usually the cheapest unit type is the most plentiful. I'd say swap out abunch of those SAMAS for infantry, maybe making the SAMAS self deploying (ie flying there on their own.) So yeah, I'd go with this intead

4 Tanks
2 SP AAAG/SAM systems
2 MRL Artillery/SAM systems
2 Infantry Fighting Vehicles
2 Transport/Gunship Aircraft
12 Combat Aircraft suitable for Air Superiority and Close Air Support
120 Infantry (20 each IFV, 40 each Transprt) 10 a squad, 40 a platoon
60 Medium Infantry PA (10 each IFV, 20 each Transport) 5 a squad, 20 a platoon
20 Light flying PA - Self Depoying - 5 a squad
10 Heavy flying PA - Self Deploying - 5 a squad

That force makesa bit more sense to me.

So, now how would I use it?

If I was attacking I'd set up the MRLs and one of the anti-aircraftsystems at some distance outside of the town to provide relatively secure fire support. I'd also assign a squad or two of infantry to protect them.

The Transport/Gunships, escorted by the flying PA would be used to land a platon of infantry and a platoon of infantry PA on the far side of town to act as a blocking force against any retreating forces. The Gunships and 2 squads of flying PA would stay with them to provide fire support. Idealy this would be acomplished in such a way as the towns defenders don't know they are cut off.

The tanks, the IFVs, the remainaing infantry and the other anti-aircraft system would be the primary assault force.

The Sky cycles and flying PA not assigned to the blocking force would become my air force.

Now the sneaky and underhanded bit. A few days before the whole op, I would take a squad or half squad of my most trusted and skilled infantry anddress them as civies or as mercs (ass appropriate) and slip them into town. They would walk aroun town for a day or two, finding strong points, barracks and other items essential to the defence.


On Zero Hour, My RMLs would light up the town using the target list compiled by the squad I inserted earlier. Target 1 is any parked aircraft, target 2 is any heavy weapons emplacements - especially anti-aircraft or anti-tank capable, target 3 is defensive strong points or toop concnetrations.

My Air force would immediately go into action to deal with any hostile aircraft that got off the gorund, then follow the targeting priorities for my fire support.

About this time the assault force would be kicking in the front door and (depending on the types of defences I was faced with) I'd airlift about half my blocking force directly onto the main defensive command and control centre to take it. The remaining blocking force will either help prevent any escapees or become my reserve of forces to support the rest.

All forces would co-ordinate with fire suppor to deal with emergencies as they arise.


On the defense:

1) Concealment. Everythign is hdden as best I can. Dummy buildings, camoflagued posiions, whatever it takes, my forces will not be found esily.

2) Mobile reserve. The tanks and the infantry PA would be kept as a heav and mobile reserve. These guys will hit hard and fast when and where the attackers are making progress.

3) Air Defence - This will be the primary duty of the Anti-Aircraft Taks and the MRLs. The MRLS will have a secondary duty of fire support for the defensive forces with them allready re-ranged for key positions.

4) Infantry - these guys will be doing hte bukl of the hard work. They will dig in concealed fighting positions near every major intorsection, choke point or strategeic facility. They would also have prepared obsticles, lanes of fire and all that fun stuff that maks the attacker drive into kill zones and not get back out.

5) Air power: The Transport/Gunships will be used to provide fire support or to distribute my infantry as required. The flying PA will play a bit of a role in the air superiority battle, but for the most part will be a part of my mobile reserve. The Skycycles will be tasked wiht air superority and fire support. Also, if I can find out where they are expect my fling PA and Skycycles to make a daring raid on the hostile command cente and fire support

Thoughts?

[socom242]

You're tactics are sound, Jeffar. And if you feel a "but" coming on, don't. No "buts". Really good tactics. Unfortunately, by the time the PC's encounter the forces, they will have already occupied OR dug into the town. I guess the "defensive" tactics would be used, and I guess it all depends on the PC's intelligence gathering skills and covert tactics. I also like the second set of numbers (with more soldiers, and less air-power). But remember, and I know I have to crunch the numbers, I have to create an alternative op-force consisting of "merc-type" (read: non-CS) vehicles and weapons.

If the player's are smart, they'll go super-covert and learn as much from the enemy (sneaking in, taking notes of patrol strengths, contaminating water supplies, etc.) The more I think about it, the more it sounds like this could be a slaughter, but by whom. The player's better be on their toes, cuz I'm not gonna make these guys act like "Keystone Cops" when the crap hits the fan. It'll be tuff, but I'll be fair and let the dice roll where they may.

Another question, and we'll use the second troop strength. Let's say they take the town (a forgone conclusion) and now they have to hold it. How far away from town would you have soldiers patrolling, and how many squads or teams? Considering they're on foot, I was thinking no more that 200 or 300 yards from the outskirts of town. OR they could have hover jeeps or combat cars assigned (maybe not). Basically, what would be the PC's most likely FIRST encounter as they approach enemy territory? After that, it really doesn't matter.

[shadrak]

Depending on the size of the patrol and how many you have (as well as how much ground to cover) a 10 man foot patrol could patrol an area of at least 1 square mile an hour. So, 1 mile out.

I will choose to go off of current U.S. Army doctrine out of 7-8 and state that a single squad should cover at minimum an area 50 yards deep and 10 yards wide. Moving at a shuffle, a group this size gould cover a couple hundred yards every few minutes.

I would have the patrols sweep in a clover pattern, 1/2 to 3/4 of a mile from the edge of a small town (a few buildings) or 1-2 miles from a larger town.

Otherwise, what is the point of the patrol? It certainly won't function as an early warning system.

So they could encounter a squad, and it may be possible to infiltrate (in a very small number 5-10 tops).

[socom242]

I would have the patrols sweep in a clover pattern, 1/2 to 3/4 of a mile from the edge of a small town (a few buildings) or 1-2 miles from a larger town.

Otherwise, what is the point of the patrol? It certainly won't function as an early warning system.

So they could encounter a squad, and it may be possible to infiltrate (in a very small number 5-10 tops).

Sounds good, I can live with that. Of course, if it is CS troops they go up against, at least they won't have any Perception bonuses to spot the PC's

BTW - and this borders on leaving the thread topic - but I've been thinking about Perception rolls. You think it's too much to maybe give a penalty/bonus to perception rolls based on certain skill percentages? Like using Detect Ambush OR Camouflage OR Prowl, and giving the roll a +/- 1 per 10% chance in the skill or something like that? Just my mind spilling out, is all

[Dead Boy]

Table of Organization and Equipment for US Army Tank Company

Table of Organization and Equipment for US Army Mechanized Infantry Company

Well that was cool. I can use this to fine-tune my CS rank system/duties chart

[Jefffar]

Thanks about the tactics. I pride myself on having about a 90% predction rate on what was going to happen during the invasion of Afghanistan and a 80% during the invasion of Iraq (damn "Rollng Start").

For the Non CS stuff, I suggest you keep the numbers of tanks, power armour, light aircraft (sky cycle type) and artillery units the same (though coming up with a general equivalent to the sky-sweeper might be tricky).

For the Transport/Gunship Aircraft and the IFVs Just use the number necissary to move the force you come up with. If the Aircraft are not all that well armed add a group of dedicated attack aircraft (I suggest the Iron Eagle attack helicopter). If hte IFV's arne't so well armed add a second platoon of tanks (light or mediums, not MBTs)

Patrols is an interesting question. With the flying PA an the Skycycles the group has, they should be able to keep a pretty decent perimiter to locate touble and attack it pre-emptively. Which would be my prefence rather than having to fight it out in the town. If I was forced to fight in the town I'd use what's above.

As for player's patols, depends on what they have at their disposal. I suggest foot patrolls will have very limited radius - unless extended over night. A patrol, keeping alert and watching for trouble, can onl cover about a mile an hour. They will also need frequent rest stops. So, if this town is of any signifigant size, foot patrols out beyond the perimiter will eat up an awful lot of manpower at any given momment - which is why I recomended the fliers take that duty. Hover jeeps nd hver cycles also make good add ons.

So what do the players have to start with?


Dead Boy, you're welcome.

[Mack]

Mack's simplified organization structure for Rifts' units:
(Note - This does not reflect any military, it's just a easy to use method.)

1 Squad = 12 Infantry or 4 Power Armor or 1 Large Armor (Bot or Tank)
1 Platoon = 40 Infantry or 12 Power Armor or 4 Large Armor (Bot or Tank)

A unit consists of 3 units of the next smaller size, plus a leadership/support element that's two units smaller. Such as a Company consists of 3 Platoons, plus a Leadership/Support Squad. A Brigade would consist of 3 Battalions plus a Leadership/Support Company.

The Leadership portion is the Commander, 1st Sergeant, etc... and the Support portion covers supply, communications, armorers, organic repair, etc...

[jedi078]

Just to set some of the record straight the USMC has:

4 tanks to a platoon (like everyone else)
12 AAV to a Platoon (I should know I was an AAV crewman)
12 LAV’s to a Platoon (the LAV and AAV companies in Okinawa share the same “Ramp.”)

Now in my games I go with 12 as the base number for armor/Destroid platoons.

I also did a TOE last summer for an RDF Marines Expeditionary Force for use in my Robotech games, and posted on the Robotech forums.

[Jefffar]

I think you should clarify, those AAVs/LAVs to a platoon would be a transport platoon. Infantry sold seperately. Am I right?

For some reason, the standard RDF Mecha units are based on 3s. 3 Veritechs or Destroids form a Fireteam. 3 such Fireteams form a Platoon of 9 units with the senior Fireteam leader also being the Platoon leader. Meanwhile, the Sothern Cross tends to build in blocks of 4 like the US military.

But that's Robotech, we're looking at Rifts.

[Dead Boy]

I had a thought on all this yesterday while going through my CS Rank & File thing (mainly incorporating Warrant Officers to a greater degree). In the days of the mid 20st century to date an armored platoon was comprised of four tanks, representing that each was roughly equivalent in capability to a squad of infantrymen. However, as of the later part in the Golden Age of Man, power armor made the common soldier more capable enabling a Squad of them to easily destroy any single armored vehicle, unsettling this balance. So to escalate things in kind I can see the development of a Mechanized Squad to replace the Mechanized Platoon and bumping that designation up to the capability of a Mechanized Company, and so on right up the chain.

• A single crew operated combat vehicle is typically manned by those of the enlisted ranks and is commanded by a high ranking NCO (E-6), though exceptions have been known to happen.
• A Mechanized Squad has 3 to 4 crew-driven units and is commanded by a lowly Second Class Lieutenant (O-1), a Warrant Officer 1 (W-1), or a highly accomplished NCO (E-6).
• A Mechanized Platoon has 3 to 4 Squads with 12 to 16 crew-driven units and is commanded by a First or Second Class Lieutenant, or a W-1 or W-2 Warrant Officer.
• A Mechanized Company is made up of 3 to 4 Mechanized Platoons with 48 to 64 crew-driven units and is commanded by a Captain or a Major, or alternately a W-2 or W-3 Warrant Officer.

This would give the armored Platoon enough oomph to survive an encounter with a Platoon of 30-40 power armor clad soldiers and put them on a more level playing field.

Thoughts, opinions, rotten tomatos?

[RockJock]

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ ... 9/appa.htm



Try the above link for the breakdown of a SBCT Stryker company. It gives you a more flexible organization, as a actual mixed company of infantry and medium armor. Just no actual tanks.

[shadrak]

I don't get it...?

[jedi078]

I assume you just had a brainfart, but LAV's and AAV's have only four(4) vehicles in a platoon, unless doctrine has changed dramatically in the 3 years since I got out.

Ocassionally, a pair of TOW variants will be attached to an LAV platoon, for a total of six.

NO BRAINFART, Mr. Pook while I may be wrong about the LAV’s, AAV platoon's have twelve vehicles, like I said before I was an AAV crewman, who else would know better?

Look’s like both of us were wrong in one form or another.

To answer Jeffar’s question, yes in LAV companies the infantry are organic to the company, in fact an LAV crewman is an infantryman and holds the infantry MOS of 0313.

In an AAV company the infantry IS sold separately, a platoon of 12 AAV’s can transport an entire company of infantry, with an AAV company transporting an entire Infantry BN (minus the Weapons Company). I'll also point out that MEU's ushally have 12-15 AAV's, 7-16 LAV's and (sometimes) 4 M1A1's.

Furthermore a line Company’s H.Q. element has been known to travel in a standard AAVP7 (troop variant) or AAVC7 (C3 Variant), instead of their hummer’s.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/library/policy/army/fm/3-21-9/appa.htm

Try the above link for the breakdown of a SBCT Stryker company. It gives you a more flexible organization, as a actual mixed company of infantry and medium armor. Just no actual tanks.

To be honest the 105mm guns on some of those Strykers would be more then enough to take out a number of the older Soviet Bloc tanks. Remember the M1A1 started life out with a 105mm gun.

So while no actual tanks the Stryker Company is capable of defending itself against tanks, more so then an USMC AAV platoon.

[shadrak]

The Striker's 105 gun is far different from the 105 mounted on the M1. The Strikers is a low pressure weapon, more comperable to a recoiless rifle. In fact, many of the more recently developed RPG rounds have better capability than the Striker's gun (one of the main arguments against the Striker).

Not that it really matters to the composition of a tank company, I just didn't want people thinking that the Striker's 105 was a tank gun.

[jedi078]

The Striker's 105 gun is far different from the 105 mounted on the M1. The Strikers is a low pressure weapon, more comperable to a recoiless rifle. In fact, many of the more recently developed RPG rounds have better capability than the Striker's gun (one of the main arguments against the Striker).

Not that it really matters to the composition of a tank company, I just didn't want people thinking that the Striker's 105 was a tank gun.

Didn't know that.....thanks...

[Jefffar]

Yes, the 105 on the stryker isn't the 105 on the old Abrams (or Patton for that matter).

Yes a lot of new rocket launchers can penetrate more armour than the 105 on the stryker.

But how many of those rockets launchers can engage a moving vehicle reliably at a range of upto 1000 meters compensating while travelling at over 40 miles per hour?

But how many of those rocket launchers have a rate of fire of up to 8 rounds per minute?

How many of those rocket launchers mount a .50 calibre machine gun and provide the operator with armour protection against 14.5 mm machinegun and artillery splinters?

The stryker isn't a battle tank, but it has distinct advantages and I woulddefinitely want it at my disposal (if I was unable to get battle tanks).

[shadrak]

Yes, the 105 on the stryker isn't the 105 on the old Abrams (or Patton for that matter).

Yes a lot of new rocket launchers can penetrate more armour than the 105 on the stryker.

But how many of those rockets launchers can engage a moving vehicle reliably at a range of upto 1000 meters compensating while travelling at over 40 miles per hour?

But how many of those rocket launchers have a rate of fire of up to 8 rounds per minute?

How many of those rocket launchers mount a .50 calibre machine gun and provide the operator with armour protection against 14.5 mm machinegun and artillery splinters?

The stryker isn't a battle tank, but it has distinct advantages and I woulddefinitely want it at my disposal (if I was unable to get battle tanks).

Yes, the stryker does have some nice features...but I will tell you this...it is a vehicle that is far too over rated...from armor that can't protect the crew, a vehicle that can't manuver for crap (last summer, two of the Strykers carrying members of my platoon flipped when cornering), and the interior is way to small to support a full squad. I remember old guys complaining that we didn't reactivate old M113's. I used to think they were crazy, but I am begining to see their point.

But how many of those rockets launchers can engage a moving vehicle reliably at a range of upto 1000 meters compensating while travelling at over 40 miles per hour?

How many targets are American soldiers facing in Iraq that require firing on a moving vehicle at 1000 m while the aggressor vehicle is moving itself? And, regardless of these features, the RPG costs a couple thousand dollars and a Stryker costs a few hundred thousand. The only thing the Stryker does is provide psychological comfort for those who don't know how poorly it protects them. How many pictures have you seen of Strykers on patrol with metal screens the increase the width of the vehicle over two meters? Why are they there? Because the armor of the Stryker can't protect much better than an uparmored Humvee.

[Jefffar]

Something I've found interesting is that in Iraq, American Strykers and LAV-IIIs need extra armour to survive encounters with RPGs and IEDs.

Meanwhile in Afghanistan, Canadian Strykers and LAV-IIIs without these extra screens have proven to be so resistent to IED and RPG attack that the insurgents have given up shooting at them and go after the jeeps.

Am I missing something here or is the US Military somehow not getting the most out of the Stryker and LAV-III?

Anyway, I dgress.

The Stryker has some solid advantages in economy of operation and strategic mobility over the M-113. The Strker force also needs a mobile, diret firesupport weapon that keeps pace with that strategic mobility without creaitng a complicated ne layer in the logisitcs chain, so the Stryker Mobile Gun System.

I agree the M8 Burford AGS would have been better for the light tank role, but it doesn't have the strategic mobility to keep up with the Stryker on the march. The M1 definitely provides much better armour and fire support than the Stryker MGS, but it lacks th strategic mobility and hte economy of opeation. So again, the Stryker MGS is the only direct fire suppor vehicle that matches the needs of the Stryker Brigade.

But, the Stryker Brigade is basically the unit you have there when you can't get anything more powerful in the area. If you can't get the Stryker force on scene, you're stuck with light infantry and HMMWVs.

If I have the choice between no armoured support or a Stryker based force, I'd take the Stryker 9 out of 10.

Of ocurse, if you let me have a heavy brigade with Bradleys and Abrams, I'll change my pick.

[shadrak]

True enough...

Just wish they would have picked a different weapon system...there are several foreign systems that are far more capable, and I am sure we could have had a better home grown system...I've been in several training exercises with Marines, and, it seems, that the LAV is more capable and is a good deal cheaper.

The Striker was intended to be highly mobile and air deployable...

It is mobile (too a degree) but I would not call it highly mobile. As far as air deployable...yeah...if you already have a prepped LZ...I have yet to see or hear of one dropped out of a plane yet.

[Jefffar]

The Stryker is basically an enhanced LAV. Interesting that it didn't get better.

I think the 120 mm Mortar Carrier and the MGS systems could be combined with a turreted Mortar/Gun capable of indirect and direct fire support. The HE content of the shells would be greater, recoil forces would be less. When you want to hit that mobile armoured fghting vehicle you just load a laser guided HEAT charge and drop it on top where the armour is nice and thin. You could do that farther thna oyu could hit the target with the 105 or a TOW.

[shadrak]

Unfortunately, it looks like indirect fire weapons are being eclipsed by new technologies (they are hard to use in built up areas with civilians), which is tragic because indirect fire weapons are very capable for their weight and they have multiple applications.

[Jefffar]

The US is still investing heavily in the 120mm mortar - looking to make it's rate of fire higher, it's bombs more accurate and automate the system.

Though they aren't looking into dirct fire capability, which I think is a big mistake.

[shadrak]

Yes...but you are seeing more and more company and battalion commanders ignoring their organic 60's and 81's in favor of air support.

[Jefffar]

Which is a shame, but once PG Mortar Bombs come into wide spread service, that will change.

[Drakenred®™©]

I don't see how a modern TO&E applies in the Rift's setting w/Power Armor & irregular crews for vehicles.

Can you imagine being a logistician for a CS task force!?! Good god!!! They have at least 4 different kind of tanks, numerous APC's (some that carry reinforced squads, others so large they carry half a battalion). Skycycles and rocket bikes, different power armors, robots...heck, its a good thing we assume all ammo is interchangable (between the different models of Rail Cannon and such). You're supply train would be unmanagable!!!

Couple that with the fact that the CS (according to canon) has no specific organizational system, except 10-20 different patrol and squad types. You have a multitude of vehicles and MOS's, from Grunts, to juicers and 'borgs. Infantry troopers can be carrying a number of weapons, but this is probably the easiest part of a CS unit to manage logistically.

Since I normally play as a CS force, I tend to mirror conventional organizational systems and either drop the robots and Power Armor entirely, or include Power Armor in place of a crew served weapon.

I might sub out hovercycles in place of conventional helicopters, but that normally requires such a huge force that I tend to ignore them as well.


What the CS needs is either generalized vehicles or a modular system.

Just use the German TOEs From WWII.



(for thoes of you who dont know what I am refering to, I have seen Division level Equipment lists from 1944 that included 14 diferent tanks chasies(with almost as many diferent types of main guns), 39 diferent makes of trucks, 9 diferent Anti tank guns (not counting the ones used by the Luftwaffe!) 4 diferent motorcycles and at least 13 Diferent makes of artiliery guns (yes 13, they had German French and Check 75mm French 100mm, British 24 pounder howitsers German Check and French 105mm some 120 mm and 130mm guns a(yes a, as in one total!) 150mm and some 155mm guns, How the hell they ever managed to have usable fire suport is beyond me.

Oh and theirs also the fact that almost anyone who was anyone in Nazi Germany had their own army. Goring for example had 2 Panzer Divisions.

[Jefffar]

Unfortunately for the germans while the underlings were as thorough and systematic in their planing as any teutonic individual could be, the leadership seemed to be making it up as they went along.

I strongly beleive that one of the things that cost germany the war was letting Htler have a say in the weapon, tank and aircraft design processes.

That and his habit of helping allies who didn't really ever do anything to help him.

[Mack]

Which is a shame, but once PG Mortar Bombs come into wide spread service, that will change.

I saw the result of a GPS guided artellery shell. After a ~20 mile flight, it hit 6 feet away from the center of the target circle. While this was a prototype test, the main problem the company saw was expense--even with full production it would cost several grand per shell.