I spent four years in the 11th Armored Cavalry Regiment in the 1980's, back when the US Army had three ACRs. These outfits were assigned to the armored corps. There were two in Europe and one stateside. While I was with the Regiment, we were in the H-series organization and the reorganized to the J-series. The armored cavalry regiment, of which only one still exists in the Army, were a powerful combined arms force that were permanently task-organized in garrison and combat.
The armored cavalry squadron had three line troops, a tank company, an artillery battery, an ADA platoon, an AVLB section and the full range of support assets. The regiment had three line squadrons, an air cavalry squadron, engineer and MI companies, and other assets that I can't remember anymore. We often were plussed-up with slice elements for Reforger, etc. But the basic organization stayed the same and we had a solid system that worked everyday, regardless of whether we were on the border, at gunnery in Graf or on maneuvers.
In the armored cavalry troop under the J-series we had two tanks platoons, two scout platoons, a mortar section, HQ and maintenance platoons. In 88 and 89 we did a test where they mixed up the tanks and Bradleys in our troop to make combined platoons. Operationally, it was a throwback to the old H-series TOE where the PL rode on a 113 and the PSG was on a tank. The theory with the test was that the troop could cover the same amount of ground and so did the platoons, but having all the platoons permanently task-organized would make them more flexible and responsive. We never did find out whether it worked or not, but were always saying that if the Army couldn't figure out the deal with the H-series after all those years, our stab at mixing it up wouldn't prove much. It was fun though, since all the scouts got licensed to drive the tanks and vice versa.
Thursdays in the US Army have always been designated as "sergeant's day" where NCO's are supposed to have uninterrupted time for training their Soldiers in individual and collective tasks. Anyway, in the cav squadron, we had lots of Soldiers in low density MOS's spread out all over the place and they would link up for their training across troop lines.
After I left the Blackhorse I was assigned to the Big Red One at Fort Riley, KS. I served in an armored battalion scout platoon and the battalion was pure in garrison and task organized for operations. It was always a goat screw when we were getting ready for an NTC rotation or field maneuvers on reorg day. Two tank companies would leave the hardstand and two companies of mech infantry would show up and so did all the slice elements. PLL was f***ed for awhile until they got all the right parts on-hand. The Soldiers still lived in the barracks from their home elements, but did PT with us. In theory, we got the same people everytime, but it never worked that way in practice. In my platoon we were supposed to get an ADA section, and an engineer platoon. We wasted so much time just figuring out who was who. In a word, it was stupid.
To me it boils down to ownership and flexibility. Permanent task organizations send the message that we are in this for warfighting and will focus our energy on building and sustaining EFFECTIVE task forces that train as they fight. Pure battalions look pretty in the hardstand, but that's not how they fight. Yes, it is tough to sustain critical skills in low density MOS's but Soldiers are smart and they can do it.
Let's face it, the days are over when infantrymen with bayonets were alone at the sharp end of the spear. If you could take a slice of the battlefield and analyze what MOS's were down there, they would all be mixed up. It only makes sense to officially organize them that way in garrison so much as possible.