Is Bundeswehrplan 2007 available in English?

[BansheeOne]

I seem to remember that the Cold War Bundeswehr armored units used tank platoons with three tanks each. Have I sniffed too much glue, or when did they change the organization to tank platoons with four tanks each? Did the Cold War organization have two command tanks per tank company?

 

You probably have the heavy scout teams of the divisional armor recon battalions in mind, which operated in trios of Leopard 1. A tank platoon has had four Leopards for decades. You are however right that there used to be only one command tank in the company.

 

How will the indirect fire support be organized in the future armored units? Will it only be provided by PzH 2000 and MARS, and in that case, will the PzH 2000 be organized as an organic asset at brigade level as lowest, or will be also be an organic asset at battalion level?

 

Division Intervention Forces (1st PzDiv) will have a PzH 2000 battalion with three batteries of eight in both of its brigades, and another two batteries in the artillery recon battalion of the divisional artillery regiment, the other battalion of the regiment having four batteries of eight MARS each. Franco-German brigade will have a mixed artillery battalion with two PzH 2000 and one MARS battery.

 

The two mechanized stabilization forces divisions will have no organic artillery, but draw from the pool of the artillery regiment in the Heerestruppenbrigade (three PzH 2000 batteries plus recon assets) on an as-needed basis. So no, armored units will have no indirect fire support at the battalion level (light infantry will still have the mortar platoon in the heavy company, though it looks like the mortar Wiesel is currently also lost in space).

[Ssnake]

Short summary: 20 Leopard 2A6M and two ARVs to be lent to Canada for two years at no cost. Crews trained at Munster for two million Euro plus one million for interpreters (huh?)

Well, maybe it's yet another confusion of what an interpreter does, vs. a translator's job. I would imagine that lots and lots of technical manuals need to get translated (Canada would be the first English-speaking Leo 2 user state, right?).

[A2Keltainen]

You probably have the heavy scout teams of the divisional armor recon battalions in mind, which operated in trios of Leopard 1. A tank platoon has had four Leopards for decades.

 

What was the reason for this difference in platoon organization?

 

and another two batteries in the artillery recon battalion of the divisional artillery regiment, the other battalion of the regiment having four batteries of eight MARS each.

Why is the artillery recon battalion of the divisional artillery regiment equipped with PzH 2000 instead of MARS?

 

The two mechanized stabilization forces divisions will have no organic artillery, but draw from the pool of the artillery regiment in the Heerestruppenbrigade (three PzH 2000 batteries plus recon assets) on an as-needed basis. So no, armored units will have no indirect fire support at the battalion level (light infantry will still have the mortar platoon in the heavy company, though it looks like the mortar Wiesel is currently also lost in space).

 

Sounds like it could become an "interesting" situation if both those divisions would be needed at once in real combat, since it would leave each of the divisional brigades with six PzH 2000 for all their indirect fire support if my calculations are correct.

[BansheeOne]

Well, maybe it's yet another confusion of what an interpreter does, vs. a translator's job. I would imagine that lots and lots of technical manuals need to get translated (Canada would be the first English-speaking Leo 2 user state, right?).

 

That was the explanation I came up with, too - after all, interpreter and translator is the same word in German.

 

What was the reason for this difference in platoon organization?

 

A scout team is not a platoon, but either two Luchs (light team for stealthy reconnaissance up to 150 km behind enemy lines) or three Leopard 1 (heavy team for reconnaissance by combat). Platoons were either six Leopards or eight Luchs. In wartime, most of the recon battalion's Luchs platoons would have been attached to the division's brigades, leading me to believe the battalion would have been doing mostly recon-by-fire and screening operations for the division. I'm not really familiar with armor recon doctrine, though.

 

Here are the various incarnations of Panzeraufklärungsbataillon 12 throughout subsequent army structures:

 

http://www.pzaufklbtl12.de/Geschichte/heeres.htm

 

Why is the artillery recon battalion of the divisional artillery regiment equipped with PzH 2000 instead of MARS?

 

I think that's merely the divisional tube artillery assets they stuck together with the artillery recon assets (one battery with COBRA, sound detection system and meteorological systems, one UAV battery with Kleinfluggerät Zielortung).

 

Sounds like it could become an "interesting" situation if both those divisions would be needed at once in real combat, since it would leave each of the divisional brigades with six PzH 2000 for all their indirect fire support if my calculations are correct.

 

Oh, but the stabilization forces won't do real combat, we have the all-new-and-shiny-named Division Intervention Forces for that. They'll just do a little peacekeeping, and there will always be sufficient intelligence, time and means of transport to attach a PzH battery which will threaten any would-be rabblerousers that become uppity against the kind and gentle German forces into submission.

Edited June 2, 2007 by BansheeOne

[Ssnake]

That was the explanation I came up with, too - after all, interpreter and translator is the same word in German.

No, it's not:

Übersetzer == Translator

Dolmetscher == Interpreter

 

And the Focus article explicitly mentions "Dolmetscher". Then again, it wouldn't be the first time of careless use of vocabulary in a newspaper.

[BansheeOne]

D'uh. I re-translated in my head without looking up the article again. Now I remember what I caught myself on.