Jump to content
tanknet.org

1960's Combined Arms Tactics


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 79
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

 

the knowledge of people on this site never ceases to amaze me - never heard of the Mobile Defence Corps. Much appreciated

Could of been called worse. Maybe "The Mobile Infantry?" Now that would bug me :D

 

 

That would have cut down dramatically on the cost of training. I think the average age was meant to be in the 35-50 range though which is a bit lower than the cast of the execrable Verhoeven movie :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Some Saxon were donated to Ukraine I think

 

 

With artillery fire control systems IIRC.

 

could be - what I saw were having problems with not so bumps on roads and paths

 

 

found it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CmauH9R_q3o - maybe driver problem??

Edited by WRW
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

I found an excellent analysis of the history of British mechanized infantry, one small issue, it is in Finnish:

 

https://www.doria.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/125132/SM1048.pdf?sequence=2

 

The diagram presented in it (Figure (Kuva) 4 page 39) is from 'Notes On The British Army (1968)' https://www.flickr.com/photos/16498755@N07/11399539176/in/photostream/

 

I also found this advert https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-1960s-uk-army-recruitment-magazine-advert-85315923.html... Somehow I doubt all support platoons had 12 (!) VIGILANT launchers! Especially as the 1968 orbat above shows Vigilant in a separate battalion level platoon with just 6 launchers, transported by land rover.

Edited by FLOZi
Link to post
Share on other sites

I found an excellent analysis of the history of British mechanized infantry, one small issue, it is in Finnish:

 

https://www.doria.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/125132/SM1048.pdf?sequence=2

 

The diagram presented in it (Figure (Kuva) 4 page 39) is from 'Notes On The British Army (1968)' https://www.flickr.com/photos/16498755@N07/11399539176/in/photostream/

 

I also found this advert https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-1960s-uk-army-recruitment-magazine-advert-85315923.html... Somehow I doubt all support platoons had 12 (!) VIGILANT launchers! Especially as the 1968 orbat above shows Vigilant in a separate battalion level platoon with just 6 launchers, transported by land rover.

Thanks for this, most interesting.

 

12 VIGILANT launchers does not sound so extreme when you consider that a late Cold War mechanized or armoured infantry battalion had 24 MILAN firing posts. Would be interesting to know how many WOMBATs a battalion had before MILAN.

 

Best,

 

Greg.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It is a later peruod, but Yugoslav 1984. M-60P APC Mechanized company from a Mechanized bn had 12 x AT-3. Whole Mech bn had 36 or 48 (3 or 4 x Mech Co)

1984. M-60P APC Mech co from the Armored bn had 7 - total for a bn - 7 or 14 (1 or 2 x Mech co).

Edited by bojan
Link to post
Share on other sites

No idea. BMP-1/2 had a launcher each, so number of launchers per co was equal to the number of vehicles in co.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to recall the Soviets beefed up the AT4's (9K111) in BTR motor rifle companies, but I cant remember off the top of my head whether it was 7 or 9 AT4's per company. I guess it was to compensate for the relative lack of firepower compared to BMP's. They seemed to parcel those out, unlike NATO, to the individual Platoon's. They would have had about 27 AT4's per battalion, but they also IIRC had an AT5 launcher, though I cant remember how many of those they had per battalion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Frankly I didn't think Vigilant was so widely adopted to make it reasonable. Poster is tagged as "60's" but perhaps could be later (not by much, mind as Vigilant can't have lasted much longer?). Smacked of "Hey boys, come play with cool toys" and "btw Ivan, we have alllll these missiles, don't try it!" to me. That and it was completely incongruous with the Orbat, though I suppose I shouldn't put too much weight in official 'ideal' organisations?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I confess I'm intrigued. I thought Vigilant was never universally issued and was gone quite a few years before MILAN entered service. I remember a 1976 Jane's giving Mark numbers for formerly Vigilant equipped Ferrets that had had them removed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

IIRC, and I almost certainly dont, light role was 6, mech infantry was 12. I guess most of the reason was the physical difficulty at fitting a Wombat on the outside of an FV432. I would imagine a milan would be 2 FP per vehicle.

Thanks Stuart.

 

For MILAN, there were 5 x posts in each section, (1 x FV 432 with one post in sect HQ, two dets of 1 x FV432 with two posts), and four sections in the anti-tank platoon. There was also a mobile section in the platoon, with four Spartan MCT (an anti-tank version of the Spartan APC with a twin MILAN launcher turret).

 

Best,

 

Greg.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I confess I'm intrigued. I thought Vigilant was never universally issued and was gone quite a few years before MILAN entered service. I remember a 1976 Jane's giving Mark numbers for formerly Vigilant equipped Ferrets that had had them removed.

 

Yeah, there was almost certainly a gap between vigilant being withdrawn, and our getting Milan. I THINK we got Milan in about 1982, but we obviously got rid of Vigilant by the late 70's. Obviously Wombat was never fully displaced. I think we were still using it in some formations in the late 1980's

 

I dont know what the scale of Vigilant issue was. It may have been a case where they trained up a nucleus of operators, and expected to issue them in wartime. Thats pure speculation on my part.

 

 

 

IIRC, and I almost certainly dont, light role was 6, mech infantry was 12. I guess most of the reason was the physical difficulty at fitting a Wombat on the outside of an FV432. I would imagine a milan would be 2 FP per vehicle.

Thanks Stuart.

 

For MILAN, there were 5 x posts in each section, (1 x FV 432 with one post in sect HQ, two dets of 1 x FV432 with two posts), and four sections in the anti-tank platoon. There was also a mobile section in the platoon, with four Spartan MCT (an anti-tank version of the Spartan APC with a twin MILAN launcher turret).

 

Best,

 

Greg.

 

 

Yeah, thats right for a mechanised or Armoured Infantry battalion. They have 24 IIRC. The battalions attached to 24 Airmobile were a lot more of course, 48 IIRC.

Edited by Stuart Galbraith
Link to post
Share on other sites

I seem to recall the Soviets beefed up the AT4's (9K111) in BTR motor rifle companies, but I cant remember off the top of my head whether it was 7 or 9 AT4's per company. I guess it was to compensate for the relative lack of firepower compared to BMP's. They seemed to parcel those out, unlike NATO, to the individual Platoon's. They would have had about 27 AT4's per battalion, but they also IIRC had an AT5 launcher, though I cant remember how many of those they had per battalion.

I think you'll find it was 4 AT4 firing posts per BTR battalion (6 in some battalions in the 1980s). At company level they used the AT-7 Metis (3 firing posts per company).

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I confess I'm intrigued. I thought Vigilant was never universally issued and was gone quite a few years before MILAN entered service. I remember a 1976 Jane's giving Mark numbers for formerly Vigilant equipped Ferrets that had had them removed.

Yeah, there was almost certainly a gap between vigilant being withdrawn, and our getting Milan. I THINK we got Milan in about 1982, but we obviously got rid of Vigilant by the late 70's. Obviously Wombat was never fully displaced. I think we were still using it in some formations in the late 1980's

 

I dont know what the scale of Vigilant issue was. It may have been a case where they trained up a nucleus of operators, and expected to issue them in wartime. Thats pure speculation on my part.

 

 

IIRC, and I almost certainly dont, light role was 6, mech infantry was 12. I guess most of the reason was the physical difficulty at fitting a Wombat on the outside of an FV432. I would imagine a milan would be 2 FP per vehicle.

Thanks Stuart.

 

For MILAN, there were 5 x posts in each section, (1 x FV 432 with one post in sect HQ, two dets of 1 x FV432 with two posts), and four sections in the anti-tank platoon. There was also a mobile section in the platoon, with four Spartan MCT (an anti-tank version of the Spartan APC with a twin MILAN launcher turret).

 

Best,

 

Greg.

Yeah, thats right for a mechanised or Armoured Infantry battalion. They have 24 IIRC. The battalions attached to 24 Airmobile were a lot more of course, 48 IIRC.

Type A (mechanized (wheeled)) battalions had 24 as well, organised as per armoured/mechanized (tracked) battalions, but mounted on Land Rovers. Type B (light role) and para bns had 6, also carried in Land Rovers.

 

Airmobile inf bns had 42 firing posts. 10 in the anti-tank platoon of each rifle company and 12 in the anti-tank mobile platoon in support company. All were mounted on Land Rovers.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...