Jump to content


Photo

Modern Infantry Co Toe


  • Please log in to reply
106 replies to this topic

#1 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,841 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 2241 PM

Inspired by thread drift in AFV forum I decided to start this one...

 

So, Serbia.

 

Infantry Company

Co HQ - 5 + 2 men

     = Commander (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, CZ-99 pistol + 2 magazines)

     = 2inC (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, CZ-99 pistol + 2 magazines)

     = medic (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, CZ-99 pistol + 2 magazines)

     = radioman (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, radio, M80 Zolja LAW***)

     = rifleman/assistant/runner (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 150 rounds, M80 Zolja LAW, 2-4 rifle grenades, usually illum/smoke)

     = 2 x sniper (M76 DMR + 5 magazines + additional 100 rounds, CZ99 pistol + 2 magazine). Sometimes one sniper has M93 12.7mm AMR + 3 magazines + additional 25 rounds. I think that in that case he also carries M93 rifle (shortened M70) but has no pistol, however I am not sure.

* 3 x rifle platoon, each with:

  - Platoon HQ, 4 men with 

  = Commander (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, M80 Zolja LAW, smoke and illum rifle grenade)

  = medic (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, CZ-99 pistol + 2 magazines)

  = radioman (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, radio, M80 Zolja LAW***)

  - 3 x rifle section, each with  8 men

     = section leader (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 150 rounds, M80 Zolja LAW,  smoke and illum rifle grenade)

     = radioman (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, radio, M80 Zolja LAW***)

     = LMG gunner (M84 LMG + 200 (2x100) rounds for MG,  CZ-99 pistol + 2 magazines)

     = assistant (M70 rifle + 450 (2x100+250) rounds for MG,  M80 Zolja LAW***)

     = marksman (M76 DMR + 5 magazine + additional 100 rounds, CZ-99 pistol + 2 magazines)

     = SAW gunner (M72 SAW + 7 magazines or 2 magazines and 2 drums + additional 150 rounds, M80 Zolja LAW***)

     = 2 x rifleman (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 150 rounds, M80 Zolja LAW, 2-4 rifle grenades). It is common for riflemen to carry additional MG ammo, usually 100 rounds belt each.

  - Support section  - 9  men with (for AT section)

     = section leader (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + 60 additional rounds, radio, illum and smoke RG)

     = 4 x gunner (M79 Osa AT weapon + 1 round, M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds)

     = 4 x assistant (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, 3 x round for AT weapon)

     or 10 men (for MMG section):

     = section leader (M70 + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, radio, illum and smoke RG)

     = 3 x gunner (M84 MMG + 100 rounds for MG, CZ-99 pistol + 2 magazines),

     = 3 x assistant (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, tripod, 250 rounds for MG)

     = 3 x ammo bearer (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, 500 (2x250) rounds for MG, M80 Zolja LAW)

* Fire support platoon with

  - 2 x 9-men AT section (as above) or 2 x MG section (as above)%%%

  - 2 x 11-men mortar section, each with

    = section leader (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, radio)

    = 2 x gunner (82mm M69 mortar + M70 rifle), 

    = 2 x loader (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds + baseplate and bipod)

    = 6 x ammo bearer (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, mortar ammo - don't know how much)

  - AGL section with

    = section leader (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, radio, illum and smoke RG)

    = 3 x gunner (M93/AGS-17 AGL, M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds)

    = 3 x assistant (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, tripod, 1 x 29 roundс belt),

    = 3 x ammo bearer (M70 rifle + 5 magazines + additional 60 rounds, 2 x 29 roundс ammo belt, M80 Zolja LAW)

 

Will also post Mech inf Co later...

 

*** - if needed

%%%  - if there is AT section in platoons then Co will have MMG sections and vice versa. MG/AT section can be exchanged between rifle platoons and support platoon if needed.


Edited by bojan, 28 January 2016 - 0812 AM.

  • 0

#2 Burncycle360

Burncycle360

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,617 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 0056 AM

Is there a platoon HQ section? I may be missing it.

 

Are the AGL numbers just for when troops are having to fight on foot and is that regularly done, or are they typically mounted on a vehicle with additional ammunition available?


  • 0

#3 Rick

Rick

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,261 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 0511 AM

 I was with the infantry in the early 1980's as a rifle platoon "doc" with the U.S.M.C. Was authorized to carry a M1911. Is it common practice now for medics to be armed with rifles? From memory, some of our Chief Petty Officers spoke of some corpsmen carrying a M16 in Vietnam.

  • 0

#4 FALightFighter

FALightFighter

    Red-Legged Ilk

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1,417 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 0638 AM

Rick, the TOE standard for the line medics (those that accompany infantry platoons) in the Army is a pistol. The battalion aid station medics often have rifles/carbines. Of course, units can modify this with MTOEs, or just re-arrange the issue of pistols without any formal documentation.


  • 0

#5 EchoFiveMike

EchoFiveMike

    I offer safe passage through the wasteland

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,815 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 0752 AM

We gave our organic corpsman a M249SAW.  He was a hard dude.  I had my attachment corpsman with a shotgun.  USMC has largely moved away from pistols to M4's for officers, SNCO's and other positions formerly issued M9's.  S/F....Ken M    


  • 0

#6 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,841 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 0808 AM

Is there a platoon HQ section? I may be missing it.

 

Yeah, forgot about it, it is 3-men (Plt cmd, radioman, medic), will fix. This is usually attached to 1st rifle section (1st section leader is also Plt 2inC).

 

 

Are the AGL numbers just for when troops are having to fight on foot and is that regularly done, or are they typically mounted on a vehicle with additional ammunition available?

 

Infantry Bn has motor pool that includes motorization (trucks) for all Cos. IIRC there will be also at least one qualified driver per each section. Those ammo loadouts are for fighting on foot, additional ammo is carries in Bn logistic section.

IIRC two sections load per TAM 150 6x6 truck, except mortar section where each section has own truck with additional ammo.

Co HQ has Pinzgauer/Puch(G-Wagen) or similar vehicle or 4x4 truck. There is also additional command/radio vehicle, but I have no idea how it is incorporated.

Pure light infantry was disbanded in '90s, they had only 2 x 3 60mm mortars in mortar sections and one AT section (Plt support sections were always MG, and most often LMGs w/o tripod).


Edited by bojan, 28 January 2016 - 0830 AM.

  • 0

#7 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,841 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 0815 AM

...Is it common practice now for medics to be armed with rifles? From memory, some of our Chief Petty Officers spoke of some corpsmen carrying a M16 in Vietnam.

 

Medics had just pistols until shit started in 1991, then soon it became obvious they should be better armed.


  • 0

#8 chino

chino

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 3,181 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 0830 AM

As the Platoon Runner (radioman), I was armed the same as my partner the Platoon Medic, which is the same as any standard infantryman in the platoon: Rifle (M16S1) with 8x30rd mags, and 2 hand grenades.

 

So our concept of medic is very different. But his load was hell to carry. Besides the medic bag, he has to carry a foldable stretcher is unwieldy and a pain to carry when moving with the foot platoon.


  • 0

#9 rohala

rohala

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 506 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 0856 AM

In the unit I served ( a "raider" (=light infantry) battalion)  platoons had no medic in their composition. There was a medic platoon in the HQ company. Medics were issued rifles like everyone else.


  • 0

#10 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,684 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 0921 AM


...Is it common practice now for medics to be armed with rifles? From memory, some of our Chief Petty Officers spoke of some corpsmen carrying a M16 in Vietnam.
 

Medics had just pistols until shit started in 1991, then soon it became obvious they should be better armed.

Pistols often marked officers or specialists like medics. Both valuable targets for a sniper as a soldier without a rifle is easy to spot.
  • 0

#11 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,684 posts

Posted 28 January 2016 - 0924 AM

doublette

Edited by Panzermann, 28 January 2016 - 0925 AM.

  • 0

#12 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,917 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 0031 AM

The Serbian TOE as described here looks antiquated, and a bit confused.

- many unnecessary pistols

- too many cartridges (and magazines) and one-shot bazookas carried by leaders, medics and signallers (I don't mind the pyrotechnical ammo of course). Carbine + 3 magazines + 60 rounds in clips should be enough for them. Participation in the firefight isn't their job, nor are they porters for those who have it as their job.

- old school Warsaw Pact-style PKM + RPK + SVD (equiv.) concept

- snipers seemingly permanently attached to Coy instead of pooled at Bn Sniper Plt for better training regime and resource allocation on campaign (and assigned to companies only temporarily)

- 3 to 1 ratio between manoeuvre and fire support sections in platoon, which is the exact opposite of the ideal configuration during an assault

 

- It's often difficult to tell which section will be in good position for overwatch/security and which for assault, and the follow-on assault will change which position is good for which task. sections capable of assault as well as overwatch/security thus make more sense (and the platoon quicker in the advance, easier to lead, more nimble in reaction to surprise, less predictable).

- AGS-17 at company level despite it being very heavy and quite long-ranged (better suitable for a fire support Plt at Bn level)

- same problem with mortars, which have a too heavy calibre for a Coy (even if the weapon was very light, the mortar bombs aren't!)

- antiquated and weak AT munitions/weapons, incapable of reliable penetration of many modern MBT side armours

- single Coy signaller ("radioman") isn't enough for 24/7 radio listening, of course. You'd need at least 2, one of which can carry additional stuff (I suspect the "runners" do this, but it's still strange - and no runners are supporting the Plt level signallers!).

- not enough ammunition bearers to support the reloadable bazookas or the machinegunners

- no Coy-level senior NCO ("Spieß"?)

- a span of command of four (four platoons, three of which have four sections) is quite burdensome for junior officers, particularly during mobile ops. This may be acceptable for an active army, but at least reserve units should be limited to a triangular pattern to reduce the command load.

 

- seemingly lacking intra-squad radios?

 

- no mention of thermal sights / laser rangefinder binoculars



Overall this looks as if someone was expecting during the early 1980's a static defence against 1950's tank and infantry forces, and there was never a modernisation since.


  • 0

#13 rohala

rohala

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 506 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 0454 AM

- 3 to 1 ratio between manoeuvre and fire support sections in platoon, which is the exact opposite of the ideal configuration during an assault

I don't understand what you are saying.

- same problem with mortars, which have a too heavy calibre for a Coy (even if the weapon was very light, the mortar bombs aren't!)

!
81/82mm mortars are and have been very common coy weapons, and as far as I know, certain NATO armies (I think the Dutch, but haven't checked) had 120mm mortars at the company level.

- antiquated and weak AT munitions/weapons, incapable of reliable penetration of many modern MBT side armours

True. The fate of armies that cannot afford to replace old weaponry. Greece has the same problem.

- single Coy signaller ("radioman") isn't enough for 24/7 radio listening, of course. You'd need at least 2, one of which can carry additional stuff (I suspect the "runners" do this, but it's still strange - and no runners are supporting the Plt level signallers!).

Fair point. In my unit the company HQ section had the coy commander, the coy assistant commander, the coy master-sergeant and 3X radiomen.
  • 0

#14 Simon Tan

Simon Tan

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 13,152 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 0702 AM

It's not really very bad at all. The equipment is all legacy but that has mostly to do with the Serbian government having no money.

 

PKM/SVD/RPK at section level is pretty good....it allows the section to split into a base of fire element and an assault element.

 

The squad marksman is not a scout/sniper. He provides the squad with accurate point fire at extended ranges beyond what they can achieve with their M70s. He will usually work with the PKM as the base of fire supporting the maneuver fire team. The 8mm Mauser chambering if the M76 is not such a disadvantage since the PKM uses belted ball that tends not to be particularly accurate. Yes, in a pinch it would be nice to be able to feed off the PKM but it is outweighed by lots of legacy guns and ammo.

 

As far as the M80s....they are going to be used much more as explosive projectors rather than necessarily AT weapons. They are better than nothing. This is one major difference with most AK users, they don't use RPGs as section explosive projectors.

 

The reality of today is that the heavy weapons and such will quickly be mounted onto pickups and these TOEs will quickly become meaningless.


  • 0

#15 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,917 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 1045 AM

@rohala:

 

Platoon assault tactics should include much more overwatch and security than assault personnel.

More assaulters and less supporters proved inadequate and much more risky in both tests and actual combat situations.

The TOE has the opposite of the ideal ratio built in. The platoon leader may still assault with the correct ratio, but the doctrine doesn't seem to push him that way, judging by the TOE (=an expression of doctrine).

 

Such mortars are barely crew-portable and not properly crew-portable with a decent quantity of munitions. The company should either use a lighter mortar or rely on Bn fire support. This is one of the points that make the TOE look as if meant for static defence (or alternatively an utter dependency on proximity to motor vehicles more appropriate for mechanised infantry).

As a rule of thumb everything at infantry Coy level should be man-portable unless you accept them to be tethered to motor vehicle support.

 

There's by the way a problem with the PKM/RPK concept (belt-fed machinegun with quick change barrel +  magazine-fed light machinegun):

While this combo allows for suppressive machinegun fire of the PKM-style weapon supplemented by the RPK-style weapon during PKM reload, movement and barrel change, it has but one effective machinegun most of the time.

A squad with two machineguns (even smaller ones) has a greater repertoire, particularly the ability to execute a full parapet defence. PKM+RPK lends itself to a frontal defence, firing frontally at advancing targets (in the simplest case). A parapet defence uses cover along the axis of target advance and orients firepower for flanking fires This is much better in regard to effect and survivability. Squads with 2 LMG each are much more capable of such a tactic than the ones described by the TOE here.

 

http://www.2ndbn5thm...ightinghole.pdf

http://www.dtic.mil/.../u2/a393163.pdf

http://defense-and-f...le-bastion.html

http://usacac.army.m...illiamDepuy.pdf

 

The 4th mentions parapets, but also the quote

"Use of two fire support squads and one maneuver squad was more effective in penetrating all types of prepared positions than the use of one fire support and two  maneuver squads."

Other sources indicate 3:1 is even better.

 

 

Some things are thus visible in this TOE that cannot be explained by tight budgets at all, but rather provide hints that their infantry doctrine is obsolescent.


  • 0

#16 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,841 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 1045 AM

The Serbian TOE as described here looks antiquated, and a bit confused.

- many unnecessary pistols

- too many cartridges (and magazines) and one-shot bazookas carried by leaders, medics and signallers (I don't mind the pyrotechnical ammo of course). Carbine + 3 magazines + 60 rounds in clips should be enough for them. Participation in the firefight isn't their job, nor are they porters for those who have it as their job.

- old school Warsaw Pact-style PKM + RPK + SVD (equiv.) concept

- snipers seemingly permanently attached to Coy instead of pooled at Bn Sniper Plt for better training regime and resource allocation on campaign (and assigned to companies only temporarily)

- 3 to 1 ratio between manoeuvre and fire support sections in platoon, which is the exact opposite of the ideal configuration during an assault

 

- It's often difficult to tell which section will be in good position for overwatch/security and which for assault, and the follow-on assault will change which position is good for which task. sections capable of assault as well as overwatch/security thus make more sense (and the platoon quicker in the advance, easier to lead, more nimble in reaction to surprise, less predictable).

- AGS-17 at company level despite it being very heavy and quite long-ranged (better suitable for a fire support Plt at Bn level)

- same problem with mortars, which have a too heavy calibre for a Coy (even if the weapon was very light, the mortar bombs aren't!)

- antiquated and weak AT munitions/weapons, incapable of reliable penetration of many modern MBT side armours

- single Coy signaller ("radioman") isn't enough for 24/7 radio listening, of course. You'd need at least 2, one of which can carry additional stuff (I suspect the "runners" do this, but it's still strange - and no runners are supporting the Plt level signallers!).

- not enough ammunition bearers to support the reloadable bazookas or the machinegunners

- no Coy-level senior NCO ("Spieß"?)

- a span of command of four (four platoons, three of which have four sections) is quite burdensome for junior officers, particularly during mobile ops. This may be acceptable for an active army, but at least reserve units should be limited to a triangular pattern to reduce the command load.

 

- seemingly lacking intra-squad radios?

 

- no mention of thermal sights / laser rangefinder binoculars

Overall this looks as if someone was expecting during the early 1980's a static defence against 1950's tank and infantry forces, and there was never a modernisation since.

 

1. Pistols were introduced in '90s (before that only Co Cmd, MG-gunners and medics had them, but medics did not have rifles). It is debated topic, ranging from wasted weight to proven to be good things.

2. Lesson of a decade of wars is that everyone should shlep as much ammo as possible. Their ammo is mostly to be used by others.

3. LMG+SAW+DMR is actually very good, you can make very strong base of fire, and can also send SAW with assault element as he wil have to problem to keep with them. Before wars it was 2 x SAW + DMR, but war experience demanded full power LMGs in sections.

4. Section snipers are just marksman, IOW good shooter with scoped full-power semi-auto rifle that has reach. Didn't whole NATO start introducing them as a consequence of Afghan/Iraq? There are additional snipers at Bn level in Recce plts, but I am not sure about Bn TOE ATM.

5. US Army has same ratio IIRC inside Plt as does USMC and few other armies... I am not sure why it is bad?

6. AGS replaced old RCL section (two 82mm RCLs). They are much more mobile, and do same job of covering 400-1000m. They are also trade off that it is better to have some firepower now than a lot of firepower later.

7. As noted, a lot of armies use 81/82mm mortars in Co. Also goes under "better have some firepower now than a lot of firepower later". They are also provided with trucks that have additional manpower to shlep that ammo from trucks to the fire position.

8.M79 Osa is quite capable, and tandem HEAT and FAE actually entered service. M80 is a cheap HE thrower.

9. As noted Co also has additional radios and radiomen (two IIRC) in light radio vehicle (based on Puch/G-Wagen), but I am not sure about it's actual place in TOE.

10. Again, more ammo is in trucks, with people to carry it to fire-position. This is only immediately available ammo load and w/o logistic part.

11. 2inC is/was that (zastavnik/warrant officier, highest "old" NCO position). New org is introducing "NATO compatible" ranks, so this will probably change but I have no idea how.

12. This was for active, I have no idea how reserves are ATM (I am not sure anyone counts on reserves ATM). Anyway, this was a real problem and some things were done to lessen a problem including FS section leaders being junior officers and such. IDK how it will be solved in new org.

13. There are hand-held radios inside squad (marksman should have one for sure), but I am not sure how much and who carries them. During my conscription my rifle section had 3 (leader, DMR, LMG assistant) but training org often differs a lot from real and a lot of things changed since then.

14. every section leader and up has binos. Co snipers have them also. all MG gunners,  AT-gunners, marksmen and snipers are supposed to have night sights. Also one riflemen per section. IDK about LRFs, they were none in rifle section during my conscription. This is a really dark area as a lot of those were introduced when conscription was abolished in 2008.

 

It is based on 1989 org, but there are a lot of differences as an experience of wars.


  • 0

#17 bojan

bojan

    Crew

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 11,841 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 1050 AM

... Squads with 2 LMG each are much more capable of such a tactic than the ones described by the TOE here....

 

How the fuck you carry enough ammo for two real* LMGs? Also LMG (even 5.56) can not effectively follow assault team, limiting it to only rifles. Don't think of M72 as RPK, think of it as longer barreled AK with better sustained firepower. That is how it is used.

 

*No 5.56mm need apply.

 

 

 

The 4th mentions parapets, but also the quote

"Use of two fire support squads and one maneuver squad was more effective in penetrating all types of prepared positions than the use of one fire support and two  maneuver squads."

Other sources indicate 3:1 is even better.

 

 

Some things are thus visible in this TOE that cannot be explained by tight budgets at all, but rather provide hints that their infantry doctrine is obsolescent.

 

With 3:1 you are critically short on rifleman. Most modern squads already are.

2:2 is easily achieved by attaching Co Spt Plt sections (or even teams) to plts. Then you have two rifle sections for attack, two support sections and can keep one rifle section in reserve to use as fit. This was often done during '90s.


Edited by bojan, 29 January 2016 - 1057 AM.

  • 0

#18 Panzermann

Panzermann

    REFORGER '79

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,684 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 1136 AM

4. Section snipers are just marksman, IOW good shooter with scoped full-power semi-auto rifle
that has reach. Didn't whole NATO start introducing them as a consequence of Afghan/Iraq?
There are additional snipers at Bn level in Recce plts, but I am not sure about Bn TOE ATM.


Ironically the soviets had that puzzle solved in the fifties. Took NATO just half a century to get there eventually...
  • 0

#19 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,917 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 1215 PM

"With 3:1 you are critically short on rifleman."

This isn't about riflemen, but about the ratio of forces. A small share shall manoeuvre, the vast majority shall overwatch (suppressive fires) and provide flank+ rear security.

 

"How the fuck you carry enough ammo for two real* LMGs? Also LMG (even 5.56) can not effectively follow assault team,"

 

Not at all, this was done in wartime even with 12 kg machineguns and full power cartridges. 5.56/5.45 LMG goes down in weight to Ultimax 100 that weighs less than a 5.56 carbine with 40 mm UBGL and other accessories, BTW. 7.62x54 mm Pecheneg weighs less than a kg more than a Minimi.

 

The ammunition carried is proportional to needs, not to the quantity of machineguns. If a squad with 2 LMG cannot carry enough ammo then a squad with one 7.62x54 universal machinegun and a RPK-style weapon is likely not going to be able to carry enough either.


  • 0

#20 lastdingo

lastdingo

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 4,917 posts

Posted 29 January 2016 - 1508 PM

 

4. Section snipers are just marksman, IOW good shooter with scoped full-power semi-auto rifle
that has reach. Didn't whole NATO start introducing them as a consequence of Afghan/Iraq?
There are additional snipers at Bn level in Recce plts, but I am not sure about Bn TOE ATM.


Ironically the soviets had that puzzle solved in the fifties. Took NATO just half a century to get there eventually...

 

 

 

I think this designated marksman thing is obsolete by now since 3.5x scopes are now affordable and commonplace on ordinary riflemen weapons (and help with target detection and identification in addition to increasing the effective range of the rifle). Riflemen and designated marksmen will be one and the same.


  • 0