Canadian LAVIII Coys

[Gibsonm]

Well RecceDG's posts #12 and #15 maybe a guide.

He talks about a Coy being 4 x 4 LAVs + OC + 2IC (LAV Capt)

Then he says in post #15 that the scenario was played with 3 x PL comanders.

So either the Coy consists of 4 PLs and one was missing for the scenario.

Or

The Coy has 3 PLs and a 4 veh spt elm and all the PL comds were there.

So if it has 4 x PL then you can spare the 4th for the flank job after all.

BUT: The pam provided by JohnO has pictures and taskings on pp 76 and 77 where only 3 x PLs are drawn (14 LAV in the Coy) and tasks are given to the 1st, 2nd and 3rd PL commanders.

So I think you may need to wait for a Canuk for a definitive answer.

[Kingtiger]

Your right. bugger me and my 3 plt coys im used to...

But firing up CMSF you get 3plt of 4 veh each in a mech Coy. I'm officially confused

Or they have moved from 3plt coy (CMSF 2008) to a 4plt Coy (2011). Guess we have to wait for 12A ore RecceDG to clear this up

[Gibsonm]

Or they have moved from 3plt coy (CMSF 2008) to a 4plt Coy (2011). Guess we have to wait for 12A ore RecceDG to clear this up

That would be my guess (lessons learned and all that).

The pam is dated 2003 so its even more "ancient".

[Kingtiger]

The pam is dated 2003 so its even more "ancient".

now there is a reality check that I'm getting old, I was a conscript in 2003 :debile2:

Ancient, blah

[Gibsonm]

Its all relative.

I enlisted in 1981, have seen 2 x service rifles, 3 x field uniforms and looks like I'll see a 3rd truck type come into service (looks like MAN won our Land 121 project).

Get some time up!

[Kingtiger]

that worked, now I feel allot younger! :biggrin:

[12Alfa]

Your right. bugger me and my 3 plt coys im used to...

But firing up CMSF you get 3plt of 4 veh each in a mech Coy. I'm officially confused

Or they have moved from 3plt coy (CMSF 2008) to a 4plt Coy (2011). Guess we have to wait for 12A ore RecceDG to clear this up

4ptl Coy, when deployed as on my tour, and yes they have anti-amour (Carl G and eryx)

[Kingtiger]

Cheers, thanx for clearing that up.

eryx: how many system to a company? handed out to platoons or kept in a AT-platoon?

[RecceDG]

OK this is getting a bit off topic, but does this look as a sound "canadian" LAVIII plan?

Heh, you're attacking Petersville. That's a VERY sound idea; I know lots of guys who would like to see it erased from the face of the earth.

(Petersville is the staging area for all Armour School courses. It's where the students live while on course. Everybody in the Corps has bad memories of Petersville. I know that ground very well)

You've got the firebase in a weird spot - it will take longer for them to get into position than the main assault force, and you want the firebase shooting up the objective while the assault forces is moving to the LD - partially to attrit the target, and partially to fix the en attention on the firebase so the assault comes as a surprise.

The blocking force for the counterattack is in a good spot, but those tanks go in on the assault and then move to that position after they have fought through the objective. If you put them there on their own, they are ass-end to a known threat and you lack their firepower on the assault.

So either the Coy consists of 4 PLs and one was missing for the scenario.

Or

The Coy has 3 PLs and a 4 veh spt elm and all the PL comds were there.

Or I'm just suffering from rectal-cranial inversion.

It's 3 Pl in the Coy, normally. But doctrine is a guideline, right? So it may be more if the situation dictates.

The ATOC "by the book" Coy is 3 Pl. G Coy 2 RCR on my tour was 3 Pl. But that doesn't preclude a larger Coy.

DG

[TankHunter]

On a related note, what tank ammo does the Leopard 1s and 2s use in Canadian service?

[Kingtiger]

Heh, you're attacking Petersville. That's a VERY sound idea; I know lots of guys who would like to see it erased from the face of the earth.

Haha looks like a good target then! but Petersville have expanded a bit, I'm uping the settlement with a few more houses and stuff, think its to small right now.

You've got the firebase in a weird spot - it will take longer for them to get into position than the main assault force, and you want the firebase shooting up the objective while the assault forces is moving to the LD - partially to attrit the target, and partially to fix the en attention on the firebase so the assault comes as a surprise.

I first planned to have the firebase where I have the OP now but deemed it out as to far away and seeing to little into the target area. What is your opinion about where I should put it then?

The blocking force for the counterattack is in a good spot, but those tanks go in on the assault and then move to that position after they have fought through the objective. If you put them there on their own, they are ass-end to a known threat and you lack their firepower on the assault.

Well, 12 tanks and 12 LAVIII running into small Petersville? I rarely say this, "but that sounds like overkill". :cul:

I consider my original plan of 1tk platoon and 2 LAVIII platoon to be on the limit of what you can fit into Petersville. The player will have command of one of the LAVIII platoons, he should get SOME combat atleast

Or I'm just suffering from rectal-cranial inversion.

No comment :biggrin:

It's 3 Pl in the Coy, normally. But doctrine is a guideline, right? So it may be more if the situation dictates.

The ATOC "by the book" Coy is 3 Pl. G Coy 2 RCR on my tour was 3 Pl. But that doesn't preclude a larger Coy.

DG

3 platoons it is then its 3plt on the Tank Sqn to right?

Your help is much appreciated (and gibbo and 12As ofcourse to!)

/KT

[12Alfa]

On a related note, what tank ammo does the Leopard 1s and 2s use in Canadian service?

Leo 1's loadout is Sabot ad Hesh ad may have smk on board due to tasking

Leo 2 is same but no Hesh, so Heat is carried

[Kingtiger]

Is the entire Tank Sqn Leo2A6 or are there still Leo C2 in use? In CMSF you get 3 Leo2A6 and 1 leo C2 but thats a 2008 orbat.

[RecceDG]

I first planned to have the firebase where I have the OP now but deemed it out as to far away and seeing to little into the target area. What is your opinion about where I should put it then?

My sort of initial read was that the firebase should probably go where your OP is.

Keep in mind that the combat team quick attack is just that - QUICK. The firebase usually goes at or near wherever the point of first contact is made. Sometimes it gets moved if that point is obviously bad (you blundered into a kill zone) or if a better spot is nearby but if the lead tanks have been taking good positions of observation and fire, that point of initial contact should be good enough.

With the firebase fixing the enemies' attention, the assault force is free to flank

Well, 12 tanks and 12 LAVIII running into small Petersville? I rarely say this, "but that sounds like overkill".

Hells no; it is barely adequate. Platoons attack sections. Combat teams attack platoons.

We aren't in this to make a fair fight.

The player will have command of one of the LAVIII platoons, he should get SOME combat atleast

If a combat team attack is done properly, there should be very little for the pongoes to do save clear a few trenches and the buildings. Between the the firebase direct fire, the firebase-observed indirect fire, and the assault tanks all the enemy AFVs should be knocked out before anybody dismounts. The idea is that the infantry fight is between fresh troops (ours) and the shellshocked remnants (theirs)

If you want to give the player something to do, give him the assault tank troop and task him with the countermoves (blocking) force with a counterattack.

Is the entire Tank Sqn Leo2A6 or are there still Leo C2 in use? In CMSF you get 3 Leo2A6 and 1 leo C2 but thats a 2008 orbat.

When the Leo2 first showed up there wasn't enough to go around, and I don't think the Leo2 had mine plows. So the Tp was 3 x Leo 2 and a Leo1 plow tank.

The intent now is to go all Leo2

Note that we had Leo2A6 in Afghanistan, but the new tanks being bought are Leo2A4 based with newer FCS and some other bits - sort of a "super A4" or an A6 without the wedge.

DG

[Kingtiger]

some good input there.

1. I have opted to go with 4platoon Coys/sqn.

2. I have changed so the firebase is where the OP was before.

3. Im using Leo 2E as Leopard 2A6. Good or should I go with another Leo2?

4. the Recce, they find the enemy. then they go into observation mode untill the Tk plt have moved up into firepositions they they pull out. right? (focus on keeping eyes on target?)

5. what is a BC?

6. You list 1 FOO for the whole Battlegroup, what C/S do he recieve? The tank Sqns C/S? (9G for FOO right? )

With regards to the overkill:

well, for Petersville 12 tanks and 12 LAVIII might be "hardly enough" in real life, but I want the player to have some fun, not just follow the tanks and watch them shoot stuff up. And the scenario focus on LAVIII so I don't really want to give the player a tank platoon, because that would remove the point of my scenario

This must be the most messy scenario background I have ever done, but its fun to learn about other countrys tactics and C/S routines

[Gibsonm]

5. what is a BC?

6. You list 1 FOO for the whole Battlegroup, what C/S do he recieve? The tank Sqns C/S? (9G for FOO right? )

Well I didn't catch where it was written and therefore out of context but ...

BC is usually the Battery Commander, an Artilleryman.

"Usually" a BG is allocated a Bty of Arty under some sort of spt arrangement.

The BC of that Bty travels with the BG CO in the Bn HQ Tac and advises the CO on Arty stuff, writes the fire plan, etc. on the BG Comd net he'd usually be 9G.

The BC though is not alone. He would bring with him 3 or 4 "FOO"s (to use your terminology). Ideally a FOO is allocated per CT.

So the FOO with A Coy suprisingly becomes "19G". If he'd been attached to B Coy then he'd be "29G".

Often in trg you form relationships with the Arty units in your Bde and set up habitual relationships where X FOO party always trains with Y sub unit, etc.

However they can also arrive with their own callsigns and just plug in with those.

For "us" the sequence is sub unit then Tp/PL then veh / Sect.

If you are in BHQ or RHQ or BGHQ there is no leading digit, your csn starts with 9, so 9, 9A, ...

If you are in a Coy / Sqn / Bty you have the sub unit prefix so for A Coy, 19, 19A, ....

If you are within A Coy then you have 1 then the Tp, so 11 for 1 Tp A Sqn.

If you are a vehicle in a Tp (and not the Tp Ldr) you get a letter with the lower letter being the junior csn so 11A or 11C say.

11A tells 11C what to do.

11 can tell 11A or 11C what to do.

19 can tell everyone else in csn "1" what to do (11, 11A, 11C, ...)

9 tells everyone what to do.

11C getting a radio call from 11 is fine.

11C getting a radio call from 19 is usually "bad".

11C getting a radio call from 9 is go and hide under a rock somewhere stuff.

With regards to the overkill:

Yes 3:1 for the assaulting unit is the "norm". Then add the cbt power of the tks and the arty and the fire spt position.

Its not designed to be a fair fight.

If the Inf arrive get out, poke around and find nothing to do that's a good plan.

I'd much rather consume ammunition that people.

[Kingtiger]

Yes 3:1 for the assualting unit is the "norm". Then add the cbt power of the tks and the arty and the fire spt position.

Its not designed to be a fair fight.

If the Inf arrive get out, poke around and find nothing to do that's a good plan.

I'd much rather consume ammunition that people.

thx for the info regarding BG/FOO!

well, as this scenario unfolds the game time will be around 60mins, and about 5mins of them is combat, if there is anything left to shoot at that is.

This gonna end up as the most famous scenario ever. "The most realistic,but also the most boring scenario ever created"

But f*ck that, I like realismen

[Gibsonm]

Well I didn't catch where it was written and therefore out of context but ...

Just had another thought (again depends on context).

"BC" can also be the Battle Captain.

He's the guy who runs the battle for the Coy Comd from the CP while the Coy Comd is out and about.

Depending on the structure of the sub unit, he can be the second or third in charge after the Coy Comd.

[Kingtiger]

well the BC I got from the C/S thread:

A Sqn (Tank) (note - all applies to B, C change prefix from "1" to 2, 3 as applicable)

OC: 19

2IC: 19A

BC: 19B

SSM: 19C

SQMS: 19D

LO: 19E

1 Tp (Tank) Ldr: 11 (all applies to 2 Tp, 3 Tp, 4 Tp; just change suffix)

1 Tp WO: 11A

1 Tp Sgt: 11B

1 Tp Mine Plow: 11C

Dozer Tank (OC's Wingman): 16

[Gibsonm]

Yes well that's the Sqn Battle Captain position (i.e. BC definition 2).

Of course you'll remember from your previous lession that the "Artillery BC" is at BG level and because what you have quoted is a Sqn structure of course he wouldn't be there, would he.

[Gibsonm]

Oh and before you ask:

SQMS = Sqn Quarter Master Sgt

The CSS doer at Sqn level.

Edited December 19, 2011 by Gibsonm

[12Alfa]

well the BC I got from the C/S thread:

That would be a battle Captain:)

Also there is 8 AFV's in a recce Tp never seen a assult TP in my 40 years, lots of talk and plans, how ever no assaulter's to be seen, or in fact a course.:frown:

The rest seems to be current if we were to field such a monster:frown:

Edited December 20, 2011 by 12Alfa

[Kingtiger]

Of course you'll remember

remember? by god no! Confused as confused can be. This is so far away from Swedish C/S structure as it can be

I'm already down to draw and write stuff on paper so I can get the logic clear to me regarding Plt/Coy/BG structure and then get the C/S structure into that. Ain't easy task for a non-CW person (just see apocalypse31s reaction )

But, I'm slowly learning

[Gibsonm]

Guys slightly OT (And I know most are posting there anyway):

I've asked the Canadians to try the ANZAC template (it is the same for the manoeuvre units and the key appointments you construct individually anyway).

But no responses as yet.

Similarly if a UK user confirms its basically the same for UK units (again it shouldn't be too far off the mark) we can rename "ANZAC" to "Commonwealth" and then upload it or equally incorporate it into the future 2.6x patch.

But until some one from these two countries actually TRIES IT and is happy I can't vouch for it.

Will now cross post to the LAVIII and CR2 threads and see if I get a response from there.

Can one of you Canuks have a look at this an confirm it corresponds to current Canadian call sign structure and let me know?

Further discussion and attached file to test in this thread:

http://www.steelbeasts.com/sbforums/showthread.php?t=15954

[RecceDG]

Note that a recce BC runs the CP, but a tank BC has a tank and is a fighting element of the Sqn. (The 2IC is always with the B Ech so that you can't wipe out the Sqn leadership in one go)

Never done a trace with 8 cars? Where have you been? I've done dozens of exercises with 8 car troops in them.

Mind you, the number of cars in a troop can change. I've done 7 car (no G) and 5 car (no G or E Ptl). Recce Sqn on my tour did 6 car Tps with 3 car Ptls to accommodate the theatre directive of 3 A vehicles minimum in any convoy so I did a MAPLE DEFENDER at CTC using a 6 car, 2 patrol format to duplicate that.

Flexibility is a principle of recce after all.

Assault Tp (44) has fallen by the wayside for a number of years, but it is (supposedly) coming back. Some assault troopers courses were recently run....

1. I have opted to go with 4platoon Coys/sqn.

2. I have changed so the firebase is where the OP was before.

3. Im using Leo 2E as Leopard 2A6. Good or should I go with another Leo2?

4. the Recce, they find the enemy. then they go into observation mode untill the Tk plt have moved up into firepositions they they pull out. right? (focus on keeping eyes on target?)

5. what is a BC?

6. You list 1 FOO for the whole Battlegroup, what C/S do he recieve? The tank Sqns C/S? (9G for FOO right? )

OK:

1. OK... but I think 3 Pl of infantry is more doctrinally correct

2. OK - so long as the firebase can actually see the target

3. I'm not up to speed on all the differences between the various Leo2 models. I generally use Leo2A5 to or 2A4 to sub in for a Canadian Leo2

4. Effectively, yes. There will be a target handover between the recce and the tanks, and then the recce will move on. Recce should be two vehs max - the rest of the recce top will have continued up the trace ("piquet and bypass") looking for more bad guys

5. "Battle Captain" - see above

6. The FOO is not an integral part of the sqn nor the coy - he (or she) is an attachment. Depending on which battery the FOO comes from, C/S will be (1-3)(1-3) so 11, 23, 32 are all legit. Because they are attached, the "Golf" arm indicator is used, so G12

While we're on the topic of arm indicators, the combat team net controlling station is probably the Coy CP, so all the Sqn callsigns will be prefixed with the "Tango" arm indicator - unless the Tank Sqn comes from a different Sqn letter than the Coy. If the callsigns don't step on each other, sometimes they'll get lazy and drop the arm indicator.

So if the tank sqn is "A" and the inf coy is the first in the battalion (would normally be "A" but the coys are lettered sequentially in the regiment - don't ask) then both would be C/S "1" and life gets confusing fast. The arm indicator deconflicts. If the tank sqn is "B" and the inf coy is the first in the battalion, then the tanks are "2" and the coy is "1" and you can get away without using the arm indicator.

DG