Informing the Army’s Future Structure

[markppcli]

Fair enough.

Edit for a quick question though: How far away can light infantry detect you? And for how long can they track you? And do they need to arrive on your position at all to inflict harm? - Assuming they are given more than grenades and rifles to tackle your AFVs.

You have to consider the optics imbalance at play. If they’re doing an attack then yes, and even if they were to attack by fire with a hypothetical atgm they’d still need to clear that position out. It’s just in ground like that where a mechanized force will have a huge advantage. If we were in the mountains or somewhere much more densely forested that would shift as our ability to detect early on would be greatly lessened.

 

[Kirkhill]

You have to consider the optics imbalance at play. If they’re doing an attack then yes, and even if they were to attack by fire with a hypothetical atgm they’d still need to clear that position out. It’s just in ground like that where a mechanized force will have a huge advantage. If we were in the mountains or somewhere much more densely forested that would shift as our ability to detect early on would be greatly lessened.

I'll agree to that. But I also think that even on the prairies there a lots of bluffs, scrubby valleys and deep, convoluted coulees that would supply cover and concealment. Especially if it is night time and the weather is not co-operating.

On the other hand I would not like to be on the open prairie with a full moon in January.

 

[IKnowNothing]

So a battle group? Am I missing something novel here ?

That's only the Cavalry/Artillery/Mobility and Weapons Coy's, still 9x Light/Motorized Rifle companies to factor in.

Yes but I like tanks so Im keeping them they remind me of my dozers lol

in Canadian terms

tanks	14	Leo2
ARV	2	Leo2
AEV	2	Leo2
LAV6	75	LAV6
SPH	24	Caesar or American winner
SPM	24	LAV6 with nemo or amos or
Anti-Tank	24	LAV6
Anti-Tank	24	TAPV
Anti-Tank	24	unmounted Javelin,NLAW, Gustaf
Shorad	??	LAV6

also loitering munitions?

View attachment 70154

I like it a lot. Went off topic and posted something similar in the Armoured Recce thread. Seems like a realistic way steal a demonstrably viable structure to make use of the fleet we have, add enablers, and still have kit for prepositioned/flyover forces.

Other than LAV conversions the other gap would be enough Bison type vehicles (driven by Reservists?) to motorize the Rifle companies if need be.

 

[GK .Dundas]

I dont see the concept of the brigade holding together in Canada. There is no evidence that we have the desire to equip them and we dont have the people. Sustaining just one medium brigade and one light brigade which is the closest we could approxiamate would require 27000 deployable troops. Thats more than we have right now in the whole army leaving none left over to handle all the day to day boring and necessary stuff. Maybe if we break it down into smaller pieces more similar to a USMC organization or a better fitted out battle group as we used in Afghanistan

Regimental Landing Team (RLT) or Regimental Combat Team (RCT)

• Infantry Regiment (w/ 3 Infantry Battalions), Reinforced
• 48 Amphibious Assault Vehicles, AAV-7A1 and variants (1 Amphibious Assault Vehicle Company (Reinforced))
• 27 Light Armored Vehicles, LAV-25A1 and variants (1 Light Armored Reconnaissance Company (Reinforced))
• 14 Main Battle Tank, M1A1, Abrams (1 Tank Company (Reinforced))
• 2 Armored Recovery Vehicle, M88A2, Hercules (1 Tank Company (Reinforced))
• 2 Assault Breacher Vehicle, M1, Shredder (Combat Engineer Company)
• 24 Howitzer, 155 mm, M777A2 (1 Artillery Battalion w/4 firing batteries of 6 guns each)
• 24 Mortar, 81mm, M252 (4 tubes per section, 2 sections per platoon, of the Mortar Platoon, Weapons Company, Infantry Battalion × 3)
• 27 Lightweight Mortar, 60 mm, M224 LWCMS (3 tubes in the Mortar Section of the Weapons Platoon, Rifle company × 3, Infantry Battalion × 3)
• 24 Anti-Tank Missile Launcher, BGM-71, TOW (8 launchers in the TOW Section of the Anti-Tank (AT) Platoon, Weapons Company, Infantry Battalion × 3)
• 24 Anti-Tank Missile Launcher, FGM-148, Javelin (8 launchers in the AT Section of the Anti-Tank Platoon, Weapons Company, Infantry Battalion × 3)
• 18 Automatic Grenade Launcher, 40 mm, Mk 19 (6 guns per Heavy Machine Gun Platoon, Weapons Company, Infantry Battalion × 3)
• 18 Browning Machine Gun, Cal. .50, M2, HB, Flexible (6 guns per Heavy Machine Gun Platoon, Weapons Company, Infantry Battalion × 3)
• 54 Machine Gun, 7.62mm, M240 (6 guns in the Machine Gun Section, Weapons Platoon, Rifle Company × 3, Infantry Battalion × 3)
• 243 Light Machine Gun/Infantry Automatic Rifle, 5.56mm, M249 (9 guns per Rifle Platoon × 3, Rifle Company × 3, Infantry Battalion × 3)

Is there any sort of discount if I buy six or more?

 

[markppcli]

That's only the Cavalry/Artillery/Mobility and Weapons Coy's, still 9x Light/Motorized Rifle companies to factor in.




I like it a lot. Went off topic and posted something similar in the Armoured Recce thread. Seems like a realistic way steal a demonstrably viable structure to make use of the fleet we have, add enablers, and still have kit for prepositioned/flyover forces.

Other than LAV conversions the other gap would be enough Bison type vehicles (driven by Reservists?) to motorize the Rifle companies if need be.

Why have them driven by reservists ? What’s the benefit there.

 

[markppcli]

That's only the Cavalry/Artillery/Mobility and Weapons Coy's, still 9x Light/Motorized Rifle companies to factor in.




I like it a lot. Went off topic and posted something similar in the Armoured Recce thread. Seems like a realistic way steal a demonstrably viable structure to make use of the fleet we have, add enablers, and still have kit for prepositioned/flyover forces.

Other than LAV conversions the other gap would be enough Bison type vehicles (driven by Reservists?) to motorize the Rifle companies if need be.

Did I miss read a chart? Do we have carrier companies now ?

 

[PuckChaser]

Why have them driven by reservists ? What’s the benefit there.

You'd get 92.8% of the way to the objective, then walk from there. Saves on fuel.

 

[Kirkhill]

Did I miss read a chart? Do we have carrier companies now ?

How about equipping the Transport Platoons of the Rifle Battalions with Bisons?

 

[Brad Sallows]

What's the point? Off they go in summer to the various schools; come back clapped out and VOR'ed until sometime in Nov/Dec. I'm trying to picture mounted warfare in Bisons and failing, which leaves battle taxi - training drivers to drive them, and riders to ride in them.

 

[suffolkowner]

By Bisons do we mean just LAV 6 without a turret?

 

[markppcli]

How about equipping the Transport Platoons of the Rifle Battalions with Bisons?

To do what ?

Did I miss a step here and we’re now talking about reserve units ?

 

[Kirkhill]

By Bisons do we mean just LAV 6 without a turret?

No. The original Bison. An armoured, amphibious truck that fits in a C130 with room and weight to spare.

And I am not thinking mounted warfare Brad. I am thinking an armoured truck that would go anywhere. And if they did come back in Nov/Dec they would be just in time for flood and blizzard season. Get the chains out.

 

[Kirkhill]

To do what ?

To supply transport? To troops that are otherwise footborne? Instead of TAPVs?

 

[markppcli]

Bn transport doesn’t really use TAPVs to do that. Additionally I don’t know that you’d be able to achieve Tn’s mission without massively expanding it just based on pay load of a bison vs a Mac.

 

[Kirkhill]

Mark, I'm not thinking in terms of the Regular or Expeditionary Force.

I'm back on my domestic hobby horse. I'm looking at adding a multifunctional transport capability to what is primarily a light force. I would be thinking of putting the Bison's into the Infantry, Engineers and perhaps some in the Cavalry and Artillery.

Trucks (MSVS and Higher) would go into the Service Battalion Transport Coys.

I take it as read that you and your brothers and sisters are best placed to define the needs of the Expeditionary Force.

I do think that domestic needs are not being addressed. Perrin Beatty still presented my preferred solutions. (Including Nuclear Subs).

 

[suffolkowner]

Mark, I'm not thinking in terms of the Regular or Expeditionary Force.

I'm back on my domestic hobby horse. I'm looking at adding a multifunctional transport capability to what is primarily a light force. I would be thinking of putting the Bison's into the Infantry, Engineers and perhaps some in the Cavalry and Artillery.

Trucks (MSVS and Higher) would go into the Service Battalion Transport Coys.

I take it as read that you and your brothers and sisters are best placed to define the needs of the Expeditionary Force.

I do think that domestic needs are not being addressed. Perrin Beatty still presented my preferred solutions. (Including Nuclear Subs).

Would the LVM-LUVW program maybe not provide a credible solution

I've always liked this ugly duck

Protolab Misu - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Blackadder1916]

. . . not thinking in terms of . . . Expeditionary Force.

I do think that domestic needs are not being addressed.

Domestic movement of pers and light equipment.

 

[Kirkhill]

Domestic movement of pers and light equipment.

View attachment 70160

Brilliant addition to the Service Battalion. How does it do when the highway is washed out?

 

[Kirkhill]

Would the LVM-LUVW program maybe not provide a credible solution

I've always liked this ugly duck

Protolab Misu - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

A contender. Can you get GDLS or Rheinmetal to build it? I'm going to guess that the cost and capabilities would be about the same as a Bison.

 

[suffolkowner]

A contender. Can you get GDLS or Rheinmetal to build it? I'm going to guess that the cost and capabilities would be about the same as a Bison.

Protolab PMPV – Corporal Frisk

Posts about Protolab PMPV written by Corporal Frisk

corporalfrisk.com

I mean it should be cheaper since it's supposed to be cheaper than a Patria 6x6