The DFS Regt & other Future Armoured Regiment ideas

[MedCorps]

I have just rec'd a sample ORBAT from CFLCSC on what the first TEWT DFS Regt will look like.

As there has been much chatter here on the DFSV / Doctrine I reckoned I would share. 

Enjoy,

MC

----

DFS Regt (46-120-519)

    Regt Comd Section (3-2-8)
          LAV III CP x 2
          LSVW CP
          LUVW
          GRIZZLY

    RHQ (5-9-39)
          CP Section (3-2-7)
              GRIZZLY CP x 2
              LAV III CP
          Sigs Tp (1-3-11)
              LAV III
              LSVW x 5
              GRIZZLY IS MRT
              MLVW
          RP Section (0-1-1)
              LSVW
          Recce Tp (1-3-20)
              LUVW x 8

    DFS Sqn (x3) (10-29-123)
          SHQ (3-1-6)
              Comd (1-1-2)
                    LAV III CP 
                SHQ Section (2-0-4)
                    LAV III CP x 2
                    Bison CP x 1
          MGS Tp (x3) (1-3-8)
              MGS x 4 
          TUA Tp (1-4-23)
                LAV TUA x 6 
          MMEV Tp (2-7-36)
                MMEV x 6
          Admin Tp (1-8-43)
                Comd Section (1-3-3)
                    LAV III CP
                    LSVW OPS
                    MLVW
                SQMS (0-1-2)
                    LSVW
                    MLVW 
                Tpt Section (0-1-16)
                      MLVW x 4
                      HLVW
                      HLVW POL x 4 
                Food (0-0-2)
                    MLVW w/ Kitchen Trl 
                Maint Section (0-3-17)
                    LAV MRT x 4
                    BISON MRT x 1
                Medical (0-0-3)     
                      BISON AMB 

    HQ Sqn (8-22-76)
          Comd Section (1-1-1)
              LUVW
              LSVW x 2 
          Admin Tp (1-2-5)
              LSVW
              MLVW x 2
              MLVW w/ ktichen trl
          Tpt Tp (1-3-17)
                LUVW
                LSVW
                MLVW
                HLVW x 4
                HLVW POL x 4 
          Log Tp (1-5-7)
                LSVW x 2
                MLVW x 2
                HLVW x 4
          Maint Tp (1-6-33)
                LUVW 
                LSVW x 7
                MLVW x 8
                HLVW x 4
                HUSKY
                MLVW MRT x 2
                LSVW MRT
                HLVW RECOVERY x 2 
          Med Tp (1-1-7)
                LSVW
                MLVW x 2
                LSVW AMB
                BISON AMB
          Pers Svcs Section (1-3-4)
                LSVW x 1
                MLVW x 1 
          CP Section (1-1-2)
                LSVW

 

[Michael OLeary]

Keep in mind this is the initial cut at an ORBAT for the staff training of officers. It's not a hard organization yet, and may change before it becomes one.

 

[George Wallace]

Keep in mind this is the initial cut at an ORBAT for the staff training of officers. It's not a hard organization yet, and may change before it becomes one.

Yes you are sooooo correct.  We have seen many organizations like this put to paper that never ever saw the light of day.  All the part of planning for the future and trying to keep up with any contingency.  If it ever sees implementation, one would not be surprised if it didn't look like this at all.

GW.

 

[MedCorps]

Agreed... ORBATs change as often as I change underwear.  None the less... it is interesting to see the first impressions of what the grand wizzardry at DAD / DLR / Dect, Dect seem to be thinking. 

Cheers,

MC

 

[Lance Wiebe]

It seems to me to be very light on the echelon side.  Ammo for the MGS, ADATS and TOW will have to be kept fairly close, because the "combat" vehicles have very low amounts of ammo on board.

I also think that the Maintenance section is very small, given the amount of FCS types that will be required......

 

[Brad Sallows]

Admin-wise, it occurs to me that just because the F-ech vehicles have wheels doesn't mean the A-ech can be trucks.  There's a mobility difference between LAV and HL/ML/LSVW.

Obviously this thing is intended to fight as a regiment or it wouldn't be one.  In what sort of operations does a regiment of DFSV take part?  (Is this organization intended to be a unit of an infantry or armoured brigade, or a different/higher formation?)

 

[Lance Wiebe]

This unit will never fight, or even deploy, as a unit.

Every time a battle group heads out somewhere, there will be a little bit of this unit attached to it. 

You will notice that it does not have a recce squadron as well.

After this Unit is formed, you will never see a Battle Group completely coming from one single Brigade ever again.  I think that the concept now is that every battle Group will have 2-4 MGS, 1-2 MMEV, and 1-2 TUA-LAV, all coming from the LdSH.

 

[30 for 30]

Can someone clarify does the breakdown above show three sqns each with an MGS, TUA and MMEV troop?

 

[Brad Sallows]

3 squadrons each with 3 MGS tp, 1 TUA troop, 1 MMEV troop.

I believe the decision to group as a regiment and develop appropriate TTPs and so forth is correct as opposed to simply integrating MGS platoons into infantry companies or battalions.  The important distinction is between developing appropriate tactics for LAV variants to fill some of the roles and tasks of tanks, and simply trying to fight them as tanks.

 

[Infanteer]

I believe the decision to group as a regiment and develop appropriate TTPs and so forth is correct as opposed to simply integrating MGS platoons into infantry companies or battalions.  The important distinction is between developing appropriate tactics for LAV variants to fill some of the roles and tasks of tanks, and simply trying to fight them as tanks.

The American's would think otherwise; they've incorporated one MGS Platoon of 3 vehicles along with a Mortar section within every Company of the Stryker Brigade Combat Team.  Any word on how this is going for them in Iraq?

 

[Michael OLeary]

Don't forget that unit organizations and tactical groupings are two different things. It is unlikely that this DFS regiment would normally fight as an independent unit. The proposed organization on the DFS regiment's squadrons allows brigade staffs to consider attaching a mixed group of direct fire assets, who normally train and operate together, to a battle group. A better option than breaking up three single system sub-unit to form mixed system fire support elements. And any perceived lack of support resources will, at this stage of early days training the employment concepts, require officerning staff procedures to solve support issues from brigade assets and may, though simulation exercises by the Director General Land Combat Development (DGLCD), lead to changes in the structure to ensure a robust and capable unit organization.

 

[Brad Sallows]

It seems odd to perpetuate the recce troop in a regiment that wouldn't be expected to form the backbone of a battle group for some tasks

The SBCT infantry battalion also has a mortar platoon, and the SBCT has an anti-tank company and a cavalry squadron (battalion).  I suppose it works well if you opt to have both centralized and decentralized assets rather than choose one.

 

[George Wallace]

Can someone clarify does the breakdown above show three sqns each with an MGS, TUA and MMEV troop?

Yes.   each does....:


  DFS Sqn (x3) (10-29-123)
          SHQ (3-1-6)
               Comd (1-1-2)
                    LAV III CP  
                SHQ Section (2-0-4)
                    LAV III CP x 2
                    Bison CP x 1
          MGS Tp (x3) (1-3-8)
               MGS x 4  
          TUA Tp (1-4-23)
                LAV TUA x 6  
          MMEV Tp (2-7-36)
                MMEV x 6

GW

 

[Infanteer]

I suppose it works well if you opt to have both centralized and decentralized assets rather than choose one.

<sigh> The ease of a bountiful resource pool....

 

[Yard Ape]

Obviously this thing is intended to fight as a regiment or it wouldn't be one.  

It will never fight as a Regiment.  It was probably done to preserve the LdSH heritage, or so that the Army could still say 1 CMBG has 4 deployable BG HQs for ATOF.  The DFS Regt will deploy sub-unit or smaller augmentation to BG deployments.  Here is one model that was being considered as late as March 2004:

 

[30 for 30]

I didn't realize we would have enough MGS to equip three squadrons, ie. a whole regiment. My understanding was that with a CMTC MGS contingent, a Montreal MGS contingent and a Gagetown training MGS contingent, there would only be enough left for one sqn with LdSH.

 

[Michael OLeary]

Keep in mind this is the initial cut at an ORBAT for the staff training of officers. It's not a hard organization yet, and may change before it becomes one.

 

[George Wallace]

Much like the Armour Regiments in Corps '86 and Corps 2000, etc.

GW

 

[Yard Ape]

I didn't realize we would have enough MGS to equip three squadrons, ie. a whole regiment. My understanding was that with a CMTC MGS contingent, a Montreal MGS contingent and a Gagetown training MGS contingent, there would only be enough left for one sqn with LdSH.

The LdSH will likely provide the CMTC MGS crews instead of the soldiers being posted to CMTC.  Will the Armd School have any need of MGS if only one regiment uses them?

 

[c_sqn_tanker]

There is no doubt that the LDSH will be a VERY busy org once CMTC is stood up, there will be crmn posted to CMTC for manning but to what extent I am not aware. 

As far as the MGS in Gagetown it will be there for the AGIC and dog and ponies [to the best of my knowledge, which is limited  ;D].

I cannot not see any "field" crses being run on the MGS platform in Gagetown at this time.