What If: A World Frozen In The Cold War

[Koesj]

I don't see the Dutch working together with the Belgians on land, even now the AF and Navy ties run way deeper than the army ones. Supposedly 3. PanzerDiv HQ would have provided HQ functions for a combined GE/US/NL covering force in the 1LK area after '85. Why not build from that? The Dutch were already into a full brigade structure with only 'shell' divisional HQs left.

[BansheeOne]

You mean as per this, right?

 

 

I see I made an error in the US makeup, 1st Infantry Division rather than 2nd Armored being partially present under V. Corps, the latter assigned to NORTHAG. So in a scenario where the Dutch have reduced their field forces by about a quarter like the Germans, we transfer it to 1LK, while the remaining Belgian division replaces, say, 12th Panzer to form III. German-Belgian Corps, 12th Panzer in turn pushed over to V. American-German Corps, thus still saving a US division (because I think the Americans would throw a bitching fit if the Europeans reduced their forces while expecting the US to keep up commitments)? Mind, this would be wartime organisation only.

 

As for revised equipment levels under my latest Bundeswehr structure:

 

- Twelve Panzer brigades in five Panzer divisions, 6th Panzergrenadier and 1st Gebirgs division have 984 Leopard 3, 840 Marder 2, 288 PzH 2000 and 144 Panther.

 

- Seven Panzergrenadier brigades in the same divisions have 574 Leopard 2A6 and a further 490 Marder 2, 168 PzH 2000 and 84 Panther.

 

- Nine Panzergrenadier brigades in three semi-active Panzergrenadier divisions have 738 Leopard 2A4, 630 Marder 1A4, 216 M109A3GA2 and 108 Jaguar 1. On reflection, the upgunned Marders will probably not have the 1970s Oerlikon turret, but something like a KUKA E4A2 with a 35 mm cannon.

 

- The above divisions also have 237 Leopard 2A6 and 84 Leopard 2A4 in ten recon and one mountain tank battalion, as well as 392 Fennek, 168 Luchs, 328 MLRS and 204 PzH 2000 including the artillery battalions of Mountain Brigade 23 and the French-German Brigade.

 

- Six 60-series homeguard brigades, including two earmarked to round out 1st Gebirgs and 10th Panzer, have 492 Leopard 2A4, 420 Marder 1A3, 144 M109A3GA1, 72 Jaguar 1 and 48 Luchs.

 

- Six 70- and two 80-series homeguard brigades have 656 Leopard 1A6, 560 Marder 1A3, 192 M109A3GA1, 96 Jaguar 2 and 64 Luchs.

 

- Six 90-series homeguard brigades have 330 Leopard 1A5, 144 FH-70, 72 Jaguar 2 and 48 Luchs.

Edited June 8, 2012 by BansheeOne

[Koesj]

Yeah I was mostly referring to Hans Boersma's excellent work on the Dutch 1985 OOB.

 

You could keep two out of three nominal 1/4/5 Divisie commands as a wartime umbrella over 6 Heavy Brigades, maybe with 8 tank and 10 mech battalions in total? Add in the long coveted airmobile brigade (with two line battalions) and the rear area troops within a national reserve structure and you've got a more than 25% (more like 33%) reduction in manpower (which was probably the biggest constraint going into the 90s per original plans).

 

Another big problem were space constraints w/r/t training and garrisoning inside the Netherlands. Maybe outsource all unit training and initial military service to a two brigade German deployment? With attractive 'Ausland' bonuses to keep conscription both socially acceptable and worthwhile from a mission perspective. Partly paid for by our German friends of course

 

How would the old 4+4 NORTHAG/CENTAG split work out if you combine areas? Unified command? New split?

Edited June 5, 2012 by Koesj

[BansheeOne]

I knew I was overlooking something ... yeah, on the surface you would need a new split, with the amalgamated German-Belgian Corps going either to NORTHAG or CENTAG; I'm thinking it should go North, as corps fronts are narrower there. So in a more complete wartime organisation, also considering reinforcement units:

 

BALTAP

 

LANDZEALAND

- DAN 1st Zealand Brigade

[- DAN 2nd Zealand Brigade]

- DAN 1st Zealand Battlegroup (inactive)

- DAN 2nd Zealand Battlegroup (inactive)

- DAN 3rd Zealand Battlegroup (inactive)

- DAN 4th Zealand Battlegroup (inactive)

 

LANDJUT

- DAN Jutland Division (semi-present)

[- DAN Jutland Battlegroup]

- GER 6th Panzergrenadier Division

- GER Territorial Command Schleswig-Holstein (inactive)

- US 9th Infantry Division (reinforcements)

[- UK 1st Infantry Brigade (reinforcements)]

 

NORTHAG

 

GER I. Corps

- 1st Panzer Division

- 3rd Panzergrenadier Division (semi-present)

- 7th Panzer Division

- 27th Luftlande Brigade

 

UK I. Corps

- 1st Armoured Division

- 2nd Infantry Division (reinforcements)

- 3rd Armoured Division

- 4th Armoured Division (semi-present)

 

NL/US I. Corps

- NL 1st Infantry Division

- NL 4th Infantry Division

- NL 11th Airmobile Brigade (reinforcements)

- US 2nd Armored Division (semi-present)

 

GER/BE III. Corps

- BE 1st Infantry Division

- GER 1st Luftlande Division (only 26th Luftlande Brigade in wartime)

- GER 2nd Panzergrenadier Division (semi-present)

- GER 5th Panzer Division

 

CENTAG

 

US III. Corps (reinforcements)

- 1st Cavalry Division

- 5th Infantry Division

- 24th Infantry Division

- 194th Armored Brigade

 

US/GER V. Corps

- US 3rd Armored Division

- US 4th Infantry Division (reinforcements)

- US 8th Infantry Division (semi-present)

- GER 12th Panzer Division

 

US/CAN VII. Corps

- CAN 1st Infantry Division (semi-present)

- US 1st Infantry Division (reinforcements)

- US 1st Armored Division

- US 3rd Infantry Division

 

GER II. Corps

- 1st Gebirgs Division

- 4th Panzergrenadier Division (semi-present)

- 10th Panzer Division

- 25th Luftlande Brigade

 

In essence, each corps has now about 2 1/2 active divisions and can expect another brigade to division as reinforcements. I also switched III. US Corps' mission from NORTHAG to CENTAG IOT make up for the missing corps there (or we just hope that the French will join in ...). As firepower increases through technological progress, we can rely more on mobilization forces (though I have not considered possible British and Danish reductions until now).

 

ETA: I have marked some additional units that might be cut, redeployed or withdrawn home. In particular, the Danes could go to a single division which would be split and filled with reserve units in wartime to cover both Jutland and Zealand.

Edited June 6, 2012 by BansheeOne

[BansheeOne]

Reading up on the smaller forces, the Wiki entry on the Belgian Army says early 90s plans were for a Belgian-led corps of 2-4 Belgian, one German and maybe one US brigade. I think that's a bit austere and ambitious at the same time, but showing the intent to retain a corps command. If we expand on that, turning BE I. Corps into a tri-national multi-division outfit is more likely, but this means we have to swap another US and German division. I also cut some US and UK units on the brigade level to even out corps strength, thus enabling the former to scratch two and the latter one division for NATO missions:

 

NORTHAG

 

NL/US I. Corps

- NL 1st Infantry Division

- NL 4th Infantry Division (semi-present)

- NL 11th Airmobile Brigade

- 5th Infantry Division (reinforcements)

 

GER I. Corps

- 1st Panzer Division

- 3rd Panzergrenadier Division (semi-present)

- 7th Panzer Division

- 27th Luftlande Brigade

 

UK I. Corps

- 1st Armoured Division

- 3rd Armoured Division

- 4th Armoured Division (semi-present)

- 24th Airmobile Brigade (reinforcements)

 

BE I. Corps

- BE 1st Infantry Division (semi-present)

- BE Para-Commando Regiment (reassigned from AML)

- 1st Cavalry Division (reinforcements)

- GER 5th Panzer Division (under GER III. Corps in peacetime)

 

CENTAG

 

GER/US III. Corps

- GER 1st Luftlande Division (only 26th Luftlande Brigade in wartime)

- GER 2nd Panzergrenadier Division (semi-present)

- GER 12th Panzer Division

- US 1st Infantry Division (reinforcements)

 

US V. Corps

- 2nd Armored Division (semi-present)

- 3rd Armored Division

- 8th Infantry Division

- 197th Infantry Brigade (reinforcements)

 

US/CAN VII. Corps

- CAN 1st Infantry Division (semi-present)

- US 1st Armored Division

- US 3rd Infantry Division

- US 194th Armored Brigade (reinforcements)

 

GER II. Corps

- 1st Gebirgs Division

- 4th Panzergrenadier Division (semi-present)

- 10th Panzer Division

- 25th Luftlande Brigade

 

Other thoughts: What replaces the Dutch and Belgian YPR-765/AIFVs? CV9035, as in reality? For both? Other follow-on equipment?

[BansheeOne]

Attempt at a Dutch OOB:

 

KONINKLIJKE LANDMACHT

 

1st Netherland Corps

 

- 1st Infantry Division

-- 11th Mech Infantry Brigade (inactive)

-- 12th Mech Infantry Brigade

-- 13th Armored Brigade

 

- 4th Infantry Division

-- 41st Armored Brigade

-- 42nd Mech Infantry Brigade

-- 43rd Mech Infantry Brigade (inactive)

 

- 101st Airmobile Brigade

- 101st Artillery Group

- 101st Engineer Group

- Light Aviation Group

 

- 101st Military Police Battalion

- 105th Reconnaissance Battalion

- 305th Commando Battalion (inactive)

 

Territorial Army

 

- 302nd Infantry Brigade

- 304th Infantry Brigade

- 460th Engineer Group

 

- 15th Anti-Aircraft Brigade

- 25th Anti-Aircraft Brigade

 

Four armor battalions in two armored brigades have a total of 208 Leopard 3, four more in the mech infantry brigades another 208 Leopard 2A6 plus 54 more in two divisional and one corps recon battalions; the latter also have 144 Fenneks. Eight mech infantry battalions have a total of 288 CV9035 and 96 Fenneks in the AT variant. Six brigade artillery battalions have 120 M109A4; the corps-level artillery group has three battalions with a total of 60 PzH 2000, one with a total of 36 ATACMS-capable MLRS and two inactive ones with 40 M109A2. Two divisional AA battalions have 54 PRTL (Dutch Gepard).

 

I renumbered the airmobile brigade as I found No. 11 was part of 1st Division. Deleted 102nd and 104th Artillery Group to consolidate corps artillery into 101st, as well as 101st Anti-Aircraft Group with its Bofors 40 mm L/70 guns (probably going to the TA AA brigades) because I couldn't make up my mind about a follow-on system (maybe Roland?) and the inactive 201st Engineer Group. The aviation group has two active and one training squadron with a total of 54 BO-105.

 

In the Territorial Army, deleted independent battalions (local security companies will probably still exist, but I didn't list down to that level). The eight battalions of the two TA brigades will use the YPR-765A1s replaced by the CV9035 and AT-Fennek in the regular units, along with a total of 48 old M114/39 howitzers.

Edited June 10, 2012 by BansheeOne

[BansheeOne]

KONINKLIJKE LUCHTMACHT

 

Helicopter Command

 

- 298 Helicopter Squadron (18 x CH-47D/F)

- 300 Helicopter Squadron (18 x NH 90)

- 301 Helicopter Squadron (18 x AH-64D)

- 302 Helicopter Squadron (18 x AH-64D)

- 303 Helicopter Squadron (3 x AB 412SP)

 

Tactical Air Command

 

- 311 Fighter Bomber Squadron (18 x F-16AM/BM)

- 312 Fighter Bomber Squadron (18 x F-16AM/BM)

- 313 Fighter Bomber Squadron (18 x F-16AM/BM)

- 315 Fighter Bomber Squadron (18 x F-16AM/BM)

- 322 Fighter Bomber Squadron (18 x F-16AM/BM)

- 323 Fighter Bomber Squadron (18 x F-16AM/BM)

 

- 3rd Missile Group

-- 324 Missile Squadron (12 x Patriot)

-- 326 Missile Squadron (12 x Patriot)

-- 327 Missile Squadron (12 x Patriot)

-- 328 Missile Squadron (12 x Patriot)

 

Air Transport Command

 

- 334 Transport Squadron (3 x KDC-10, 2 x Fokker 50, 1 x Gulfstream IV)

- 336 Transport Squadron (6 x C-130H)

 

I deleted two fighter squadrons still equipped with the NF-5A in 1989 and 306 Reconnaissance Squadron, assuming all other squadrons are multi-role and can use recon pods. Also amalgamated the original two missile groups into one, fully equipped with Patriot. There were half a dozen more air defense squadrons for each air force base, equipped with Hawk and Bofors, but again I can't make my mind up about follow-on systems.

 

KONINKLIJKE MARINE

 

Naval Squadron

 

- 4 x De Zeven Provinciën class FFG

- 8 x Karel Doorman class FFG

- 2 x Rotterdam class LPD

- 2 x Zuiderkruis/Amsterdam AOR

 

Submarine Service

 

- 6 x Walrus class SSK

 

Mine Detection and Clearing Service

 

- 15 x Alkmaar class MCM

 

Maritime Patrol Aircraft Group

 

- 320 Squadron (6 x P-7)

- 321 Squadron (6 x P-7)

 

- 860 Squadron (20 x MH 90)

 

Korps Mariniers

 

- 1st Marine Battalion (assigned to UK/NL Landing Force)

- 2nd Marine Battalion (assigned to AMF-L)

- 3rd Marine Battalion (Dutch West Indies, semi-present)

- Amphibious Combat Support Battalion (2 x SOF company , 2 x boat company, support company with 120 mm mortars and Stinger)

- Amphibious Logistics Battalion

 

The Navy is pretty straightforward: keep the Karel Doormans instead of going to the typical post-Cold War colonial OPVs, retain the minehunters. Replace the old Zwaardvis-class submarines with two additional Walrus, though there's some leeway for cost-saving measures there. As in the German Navy, the P-7s and MH 90s are condition to those being available. The Marines have 200 Bv 206S/BvS 10, six LCU and 24 LCVP.

Edited June 11, 2012 by BansheeOne

[BansheeOne]

Provisional Belgian OOB:

 

Royal Army (I'm not getting into a language dispute here)

 

1st Belgian Corps

 

- 1st Infantry Division

-- 1st Mech Infantry Brigade

-- 7th Mech Infantry Brigade (inactive)

-- 17th Armored Brigade

 

- Para-Commando Brigade

 

- 13th Artillery Group

 

- 2nd Jaagers te Paard armor battalion

- 3rd Line mech infantry battalion

- 3rd Carabineers Cyclists light infantry battalion (inactive)

- 4th Carabineers Cyclists light infantry battalion (inactive)

- 4th Chasseurs a Cheval cavalry squadron

- 14th Anti-Aircraft Battalion

 

- 1st Genie field engineering battalion

- 3rd Genie bridging battalion

- 6th Genie fiel engineering battalion

- 10th Genie field engineering battalion

 

- 16th Aviation Squadron

- 17th Aviation Squadron

 

- 1st Long Range Reconnaissance Company

 

Territorial Army

 

- 1st through 9th Provincial Regiment

 

- 4th Light Engineer battalion

- 11th Light Engineer Battalion

- 27th Heavy Engineer Battalion

- 31st Heavy Engineer Battalion

 

A total of five armor battalions have 200 Leopard 2A6. Mechanized infantry battalions have CV9035, following the Dutch example (I considered the Ulan as an alternative, standing in for the Pandur, but in our scenario 35 mm seems to be the new NATO standard for IFVs). The brigade tank destroyer companies have a total of 72 Jaguar 1 snapped up cheap from Germany. The corps cavalry squadron and the armor battalion of the Para-Commando Brigade have a total of 96 Stormer 30, the AA battalion has 27 PRTL.

 

Six brigade artillery battalions have 108 M109A4, corps artillery has three battalions with a total of 54 PzH 2000 and one with 36 MLRS (ATACMS-capable). The Para-Commando Brigade has a battery of six 105 mm L118 Light Guns, and its own light AA battery (Stinger), engineer, medical and logistics company each. The two aviation squadrons have a total of 26 Agusta 109 helicopters.

Edited June 11, 2012 by BansheeOne

[BansheeOne]

Royal Air Force (note there is nothing here of this modern unified force nonsense)

 

- 1st Tactical Wing (48 x F-16AM/BM)

- 2nd Tactical Wing (48 x F-16AM/BM)

- 9th Tactical Wing (32 x Alpha Jet)

- 10th Tactical Wing (48 x F-16AM/BM)

 

- 12th Missile Wing (24 x Patriot)

- 13th Missile Wing (24 x Patriot)

 

- 15th Transport Wing (8 x A400M, 4 x ERJ 135/145, 3 x Dassault Falcon, 1 x A330)

 

Deleted 3rd Wing with the Mirage 5 and the former Hawk battalions. The Army used to have another two of the latter, but once more I was devoid of a follow-up. I really think both the Dutch and Belgians will need to get some Rolands, Crotale NG, ADATS, NASAMS or HUMRAAM, because as of now there is a rather painful missile gap for air defense of ground forces. Another option would be BAMSE, since they already bought Swedish IFVs.

 

Royal Navy

 

- 3 x Leopold I. class FFG

- 10 x Tripartite class MCM

- 10 x MH 90 helicopter

 

The Leopold I. class frigates are not former Dutch Karel Doormans here, since all those stayed in service at home. After pondering some other used-ship options which all turned out to be too much ship for the Belgian needs, I went with Schelde's SIGMA design in the 10513 variant, likely to be built in Belgian yards like the preceding Wielingen class:

 

Displacement: 2,335 ts

Length: 105 m

Beam: 13 m

Draught: 3.75 m

Propulsion: 2 x SEMT Pielstick 20PA6B STC rated at 8910 kW each on two shafts

Speed: 28 kts

Complement: 80

Armament: 1 x 76 mm Otobreda gun, 2 x 20 mm GIAT F2 gun, 2 x 4 Harpoon, 16 x Sea Sparrow, 4 x 324 mm torpedo tubes, 1 x NH 90

[Koesj]

I don't see the Belgians having 144 F16s and the Dutch 108, should probably be the other way around.

[BansheeOne]

I knew something was feeling wrong ... I was working off Pat Callahan's 1989 NATO OOB, and at second look there is a discrepancy between squadron strengths and total F-16 numbers, probably because deliveries were ongoing. The Dutch got a total of 213 (177 A, 36 , but even all nine squadrons active then and listed with 18 aircraft each plus ten for training in the US would only come out to 172. However, the squadron numbers might include only the single-seaters, since they are listed expressively as F-16As. Another three B each would make more sense.

 

I thus propose to have eight multi-purpose squadrons of 21 each for a total of 168 (plus more trainers at schools etc.), deleting only the dedicated recon squadron. I was cutting way more aircraft from Belgium, a total of 58 Mirage 5; seems the Belgian Air Force was in fact stronger relative to overall force size.

 

And I see now that Belgian light air defense is not using Stinger, but Mistral; and the Dutch actually ordered NASAMS back in 2006. Conveniently having the Belgians latch on to the latter, we thus get:

 

- the 101st Anti-Aircraft Group with 54 x NASAMS in NL 1st Corps;

 

- six air defense squadrons with 6 x NASAMS each in the RNLAF;

 

- two anti-aircraft battalions with 24 x NASAMS each in BE 1st Corps;

 

- and six air defense squadrons with 6 x NASAMS each in the RBAF.

Edited June 12, 2012 by BansheeOne

[HBoersma]

Well, here's some thoughts on the Dutch. Assuming that NATO's perception of the WP/USSR would remain similar to that of the 1980s, it seems highly unlikely that 5 Divisie would have been disbanded; a Dutch government tried this in 1974 but they were met with severe criticism (both internal and exteral) and had to abandon the idea.

 

On the other hand, 11 Airmobile Brigade, a typical post Cold War developement, would not have happened; but armed helicopters would have (as they had been on the menu since 1974). Other expeditionary elements such as C130s and possibly LPDs would not have been procured either; perhaps one LPD for the marines' role in UK/NL LF, though if possible the Dutch would likely have continued to rely on British ships.

 

Cost reductions would probably have been achieved as they usually were: (further) increasing the mobilisable part of the Royal Army, and thinly slicing equipment numbers. In comparison to today cost reductions would be limited though, as the aim would still be to spend 3% of BNP on defence.

[BansheeOne]

I thought a little about that beforehand. 11th Airmobile is essentially just a light brigade that is light enough to be, well, airmobile, its means of transportation coming from the Luchtmacht. I agree it wouldn't have turned out in its modern expeditionary guise, but the concept of having an airmobile corps reserve was employed by various NATO partners, notably the Germans with the three brigades of 1. Luftlandedivision parceled out to the corps in wartime, and the British with 24th Airmobile Brigade (as part of 2nd Infantry Division, rounded out by two TA brigades). I tried to develop that into somewhat of a general trend, with Belgium assigning the Para-Commando Brigade the same role. Of course, most of the Dutch helicopter force is a function of 11th Airmobile and would have little use otherwise, except for the Apaches.

 

I checked about the origins of the various Dutch expeditionary systems, but at best I was able to ascertain, plans for them were going back to the 80s, though not in the current numbers. I think there were only two C-130s (but can't find any pre-1990 ideas for them now) and indeed plans for just one LPD, the latter obviously based upon Dutch participation in the UK/NL Landing Force. I still went with higher numbers partly due to the greater emphasis on reinforcements vs. present forces in Germany. I may well be mistaken about the KDC-10s though, as I now find they were rebuilt from civilian jetliners post-CW; previously I thought they were from the original KC-10 production run that ended in 1987, possibly bought to support commitments to the Dutch West Indies.

 

The issue of 5th Division is interesting; ISTR that late in the CW, the Dutch were considered as having a fairly cavalier attitude about defense by some NATO partners - which would account for the external pressure against disbanding the unit, but be contradicted by the domestic pressure. Now some of the overall parameters we're operating under in this scenario are the rising financial burdens of modern weapon systems and the societal/economic cost of running large conscript armies in the face of declining enthusiasm, thus encouraging force reductions. I guess though if having a full corps is seen as a value in itself, we could rather delete 101st Brigade (airmobile or not) and go to 2 x 2/3, 1 x 1/3 active divisions?

Edited June 12, 2012 by BansheeOne

[RETAC21]

Thing is, all of this would be dependent on the WP stance. If Gorby is not around to go for a defensive doctrine, large scale cuts on NATO would be unthinkable or I missed something?

[HBoersma]

Thing is, all of this would be dependent on the WP stance. If Gorby is not around to go for a defensive doctrine, large scale cuts on NATO would be unthinkable or I missed something?

 

This is my angle as well. Disbanding an entire division would have been unacceptable to NATO (and the Dutch military), never mind it being traded for 11 Airmobile Brigade (officially Air Assault these days I believe), which was not the sort of outfit that was requested by NATO anyway. The primary Dutch mission in NATO was the defence of its corps sector in Germany, and 1 (NL) Corps was already considered the minimum of what was required.

 

Of course there are many unknown parametres in this concept, and you could go in many directions. But I suppose that "a world frozen in the cold war" would indeed be frozen in many ways (and at the time it did seem as if nothing was ever going to change). Anyway, I would rid a Netherlands 2012 Cold War army of any expeditionary elements that were added after 1990.

 

Cheers,

[BansheeOne]

Well, a point that was brought up here was that disproportional technological advances would give NATO firepower superiority, which would enable troop reductions as much as force them due to financial reasons, irrespective of the Pact's posture. But I grant you that a 30 percent cut (nearly 50 for the Belgians) looks excessive, particularly since my latest model comes out to just 20 for Germany; facts intruded there, too!

 

So let's try another approach to the strength/technology/cost triangle dilemma. After all people saw this in the 80s, too, and there was the idea of technological advanced, but lighter and cheaper systems with the same overall effectiveness per pound as a possible alternative. We see this in the Humvee-borne US 9th Infantry Division and the German trials of wheeled tank destroyers previously mentioned in this thread. Therefore:

 

KONINKLIJKE LANDMACHT

 

1st Netherland Corps

 

- 1st Infantry Division

-- 11th Infantry Brigade

-- 12th Infantry Brigade

-- 13th Armored Brigade

-- 102nd Reconnaissance Battalion

-- 25th Air Defense Battalion

 

- 4th Infantry Division

-- 41st Armored Brigade

-- 42nd Infantry Brigade

-- 43rd Infantry Brigade

-- 103rd Reconnaissance Battalion

-- 26th Air Defense Battalion

 

- 5th Infantry Division (inactive)

-- 51st Armored Brigade

-- 52nd Infantry Brigade

-- 53rd Infantry Brigade

-- 104th Reconnaissance Battalion

-- 27th Air Defense Battalion

 

- 101st Artillery Group

- 101st Anti-Aircraft Group

- 101st Engineer Group

- Light Aviation Group

 

- 101st Military Police Battalion

- 105th Reconnaissance Battalion

- 305th Commando Battalion (inactive)

 

Territorial Army

 

- 302nd Infantry Brigade

- 304th Infantry Brigade

- 460th Engineer Group

 

- 15th Anti-Aircraft Brigade

- 25th Anti-Aircraft Brigade

 

Corps assets (with 101st Brigade deleted) are equipped as before except the two M109 artillery battalions also get PzH 2000 for a total of 100. However, the active brigades have new TO&Es:

 

3 x Armored Brigade

- 2 x Armored battalion (52 Leopard 3, 12 YPR-765A1 each)

- Mech infantry battalion (40 CV9035, 12 YPR-765A1 PRAT, 9 YPR-765A1 PRMR, 9 YPR-765A1)

- Artillery battalion (20 M109A4)

 

6 x Infantry Brigade

 

- Armored Battalion (52 Leopard 2A6, 12 YPR-765A1)

- 2 x Motorized Infantry Battalion

-- HSS Company

-- 3 x Motorized Infantry Company (13 x Boxer APC, 7 x Fennek AD w/ .50 M2/40 mm AGL, 6 x Fennek PRAT each)

-- CSS Company (9 x Boxer w/ 120 mm mortar)

- Artillery Battalion (20 M109A4)

 

KONINKLIJKE LUCHTMACHT

 

- 301 Helicopter Squadron (15 x AH-64D)

- 302 Helicopter Squadron (15 x AH-64D)

- 303 Helicopter Squadron (3 x AB 412SP)

 

- 311 Fighter Bomber Squadron (21 x F-16AM/BM)

- 312 Fighter Bomber Squadron (21 x F-16AM/BM)

- 313 Fighter Bomber Squadron (21 x F-16AM/BM)

- 314 Fighter Bomber Squadron (21 x F-16AM/BM)

- 315 Fighter Bomber Squadron (21 x F-16AM/BM)

- 316 Fighter Bomber Squadron (21 x F-16AM/BM)

- 322 Fighter Bomber Squadron (21 x F-16AM/BM)

- 323 Fighter Bomber Squadron (21 x F-16AM/BM)

 

- 3rd Missile Group

-- 324 Missile Squadron (12 x Patriot)

-- 326 Missile Squadron (12 x Patriot)

-- 327 Missile Squadron (12 x Patriot)

-- 328 Missile Squadron (12 x Patriot)

 

KONINKLIJKE MARINE

 

Naval Squadron

 

- 4 x De Zeven Provinciën class FFG

- 8 x Karel Doorman class FFG

- 2 x Zuiderkruis/Amsterdam AOR

- Rotterdam LPD

 

Submarine Service

 

- 4 x Walrus class SSK

 

Mine Detection and Clearing Service

 

- 15 x Alkmaar class MCM

 

Maritime Patrol Aircraft Group

 

- 320 Squadron (6 x P-7)

- 321 Squadron (6 x P-7)

 

- 860 Squadron (20 x MH 90)

 

Korps Mariniers

 

- 1st Marine Battalion (assigned to UK/NL Landing Force)

- 2nd Marine Battalion (assigned to AMF-L)

- 3rd Marine Battalion (Dutch West Indies, semi-present)

- Amphibious Combat Support Battalion (2 x SOF company, 2 x boat company, support company with 120 mm mortars and Stinger)

- Amphibious Logistics Battalion

[swerve]

The extent of disproportional technological advances is an interesting topic in itself. The Soviet Union would not have had as much access to Western civilian technology (e.g. in computers) as post-Cold War Russia has, but would have continued to spend large amounts (much more than its successor states) on R&D & military technology. What would it have come up with?

[Chris Werb]

The extent of disproportional technological advances is an interesting topic in itself. The Soviet Union would not have had as much access to Western civilian technology (e.g. in computers) as post-Cold War Russia has, but would have continued to spend large amounts (much more than its successor states) on R&D & military technology. What would it have come up with?

 

One possible future would have seen the introduction of GPS/INS and GLONASS/INS guided weapons resulting in huge numbers of relatively cheap all-weather guided munitions targeted on each other's fixed installations hundreds of kilometres deep. The incentive to shoot first would presumably have been great. The problem would have been dispersing large numbers of launchers in peacetime to provide a viable retaliatory capability.

Edited June 13, 2012 by Chris Werb

[RETAC21]

The extent of disproportional technological advances is an interesting topic in itself. The Soviet Union would not have had as much access to Western civilian technology (e.g. in computers) as post-Cold War Russia has, but would have continued to spend large amounts (much more than its successor states) on R&D & military technology. What would it have come up with?

 

The USSR had an extensive program of technical intelligence, so a good deal of R&D was in fact performed in the West on their behalf, they had an issue replicating and putting into production stolen designs, though. There would still be a big incentive to sell them forbidden technology in exchange for good old cold cash.

[RETAC21]

 

One possible future would have seen the introduction of GPS/INS and GLONASS/INS guided weapons resulting in huge numbers of relatively cheap all-weather guided munitions targeted on each other's fixed installations hundreds of kilometres deep. The incentive to shoot first would presumably have been great. The problem would have been dispersing large numbers of launchers in peacetime to provide a viable retaliatory capability.

 

The Soviets were in love with missiles, so they would have deployed accurate missiles fired from all kind of platforms, from GLCMs to balistic missiles. Warheads could have included some frightening payloads, like bio weapons (they had an extensive biological warfare program) or binary chemical weapons.

[BansheeOne]

So let's try another approach to the strength/technology/cost triangle dilemma. After all people saw this in the 80s, too, and there was the idea of technological advanced, but lighter and cheaper systems with the same overall effectiveness per pound as a possible alternative. We see this in the Humvee-borne US 9th Infantry Division and the German trials of wheeled tank destroyers previously mentioned in this thread.

 

I read up a little on the 9th ID experiment. Of course strategic mobility rather than cost was the driving motivator there, eerily foreshadowing the post-CW C-130 deployability craze that eventually gave us the Stryker and FCS project. Nothing is ever really new! Of course 9th ID ironically wasn't deployed to the Gulf in 1991, probably because in its Humvee-borne interim form it was wisely not considered resilient enough for what was effectively a live fire evaluation of conventional forces doctrine developed over decades of the Cold War.

 

At least part of what did it in seems to have been one of the various failures to produce a successor to the M551 which was envisioned to fill an assault gun role in the Combined Arms Battalions. We thus come back to the question of the M8's fate in this alternate reality, along with other systems which would have made the high-tech high-mobility approach viable.

[LouieD]

Banshee,

FWIW I believe by the late 80's the 9ID was planned to convert into a Mech Div., one of it's bdes had already been disbanded and replaced by the ARNG's 81 IB (Mech) and the Armor Bn at Ft. Lewis assigned to the Div (previously the bn was independent and I read CAPSTONED to 177 Armd Bde/OPFOR at Ft. Irwin)NATO role was to reinforce LANDJUT or Southern Norway. I believe it had POMCUS stock in Burtonwood, Cheshire and a couple of other places in the UK.

Speaking of the UK, there were plans to expand the TA further in the 90's . Five further Inf. Bns were identified for MHD (Military Home Defence) and there were suggestions to form HQ's for HSF and Reserve Cos that were guarding KPs. In addition several Combat Service and Support units were recommended.

[thekirk]

So let's try another approach to the strength/technology/cost triangle dilemma. After all people saw this in the 80s, too, and there was the idea of technological advanced, but lighter and cheaper systems with the same overall effectiveness per pound as a possible alternative. We see this in the Humvee-borne US 9th Infantry Division and the German trials of wheeled tank destroyers previously mentioned in this thread.

 

I read up a little on the 9th ID experiment. Of course strategic mobility rather than cost was the driving motivator there, eerily foreshadowing the post-CW C-130 deployability craze that eventually gave us the Stryker and FCS project. Nothing is ever really new! Of course 9th ID ironically wasn't deployed to the Gulf in 1991, probably because in its Humvee-borne interim form it was wisely not considered resilient enough for what was effectively a live fire evaluation of conventional forces doctrine developed over decades of the Cold War.

 

At least part of what did it in seems to have been one of the various failures to produce a successor to the M551 which was envisioned to fill an assault gun role in the Combined Arms Battalions. We thus come back to the question of the M8's fate in this alternate reality, along with other systems which would have made the high-tech high-mobility approach viable.

 

As lore would have it, 9ID would have gone to the Gulf as a motorized division, were it not for an overly-zealous battalion commander who achieved deactivation of his support battalion earlier than projected... Had he held to the date projected by Department of the Army, the division would have had to essentially undo the deactivation it was facing, and then deploy. Orders had already arrived at Fort Lewis making this happen, and the CG had to tell DA "Sorry... No can do--The deactivation has reached the tipping point...".

 

Nonetheless, a huge number of 9ID Soldiers went to the Gulf, as round-outs and replacements to other units.

 

Whether or not 9ID would have worked as constituted in the late 1980s is a good question. I have my doubts, but I also know that they were on to something. The enabling technology wasn't quite there yet, but perhaps we can posit its implementation coming somewhat earlier in a prolonged Cold War.

 

The interesting thing is the way the 9ID was shut down almost as soon as its "true believers" retired, and the generation after them brought it back. The key person behind the Stryker concept was Shinseki--Who'd been a mid-level commander in 9ID. As soon as he was in charge, he started agitating for it to "come back", but with the proper equipment, this time.

[WRW]

I remember in lenigrad 1982 - wondering how NATO intel could think that the USSR could conquer the west

[Mr King]

Good ol' days