.com.unity Forums
  The Official e-Store of Shrapnel Games

This Month's Specials

Raging Tiger- Save $9.00
winSPMBT: Main Battle Tank- Save $6.00

   







Go Back   .com.unity Forums > The Camo Workshop > WinSPMBT > TO&Es
Notices


Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 2nd, 2008, 05:22 PM
Imp's Avatar

Imp Imp is offline
General
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Uk
Posts: 3,308
Thanks: 98
Thanked 602 Times in 476 Posts
Imp is on a distinguished road
Default ATGM availability

Hi want to pick brains of people who have served or done some research as having trouble finding details.

Want a rough rule of thumb for ATGM availability, generalising here as obviously varies due to formations not sticking to on paper layout but I am thinking West has a higher ratio than the likes of China Eastern Block

1) West roughly 1 per Platoon & handled fine by game as in Company formations.

2)Eastern Block tends to be in Support Company (Heavy Weapons whatever) so if present assume normal use 1 Support Comp to 3 Inf Comp
So 1 ATGM per Inf Comp or am I being thick?

3) We are talking alloted usage here fully realise if think a tank threat likely in area one would hope they assign more there by stripping other units.
To that end is there a HQ formation that can be assigned for such a purpose.

4) Also do infantry & armour formations have same allotment of or does one recieve more. Realise they can switch companies to form combat groups not talking about that.

5) Also vehicular ATGMs again can find very little info how are they alloted
From what can tell without going into specifics for certain dates.
Eastern Block assigns to Inf formations at 1 Comp per Regiment plus has a few dedicated tank killer regiments composed purely of. Does not give to tank Regiments though obviosly whole or part of tank killer could be assigned to

6) USMC Tend to have more TOW HMMWV than tanks 3:2 ratio?
7) What about the rest & Eastern theatre, likes of dessert storm did ATGM vehicles work with tanks or seperatly.

Hope this makes some sort of sense & don't take what I have said as correct, tis why this is out there to get a feel for the presence of ATGMs as had a big effect on the battlefield.
Any handy links welcome
thanks John
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old October 4th, 2008, 04:52 AM
PlasmaKrab's Avatar

PlasmaKrab PlasmaKrab is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: 40km from the old frontline
Posts: 859
Thanks: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 7 Posts
PlasmaKrab is on a distinguished road
Default Re: ATGM availability

1) and 2) depends largely on which class of ATGM you are dealing with: short-range (Dragon, Eryx, AT-7), medium-range (Milan, AT-4) or long-range (TOW, AT-5). US gets 1-3 short-range ATGM per platoon starting in the 70s (Dragon), but no one wuld get TOWs at this level.
Regarding light-vehicle ones, they are generally foot ATGMS mounted in the field.
More on this later or if someone else kicks in.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old October 4th, 2008, 10:54 AM
PlasmaKrab's Avatar

PlasmaKrab PlasmaKrab is offline
Captain
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: 40km from the old frontline
Posts: 859
Thanks: 0
Thanked 15 Times in 7 Posts
PlasmaKrab is on a distinguished road
Default Re: ATGM availability

In more detail:

1) & 2) are really country-dependent. As said above, it depends on the class of ATGM you are talking about, US being the exception with overwhelming quantities of short-range weapons. As far as I have seen in the different countries I have researched, medium-range ATGMs are generally battalion-level assets, even though the actual units are often cross-attached to lower levels (say one 6-ATGM platoon at btn level give one 2-ATGM section to each of its 3 infantry cos).
That's what you describe as your Eastern model, but it should work for most European countries and those working on the same model. Let's say:
-1 to 3 medium-range ATGMs per infantry company. When not available (e.g. US pre-Javelin), substitute with long-range ATGM.
-1 to 3 short-range ATGMs per infantry platoon when available. In most cases these will replace unguided AT rocket launchers (RPG-7, Carl-Gustav, Panzerfaust). Depending on the country, these heavy AT weapons were assigned one per platoon or one per section.

3)As you said, most Western TOEs had huge battalion-level anti-armor allotments (at least until the 90s). In many cases, these would not necessarily be manned to full strength, so I'd suggest that it would be more about AT assets being stripped of or converted against low-armor enemies. Typically, a US airborne battalion would have about 12 TOW-armed Hummers in its tables, but the TOW launchers could be replaced by heavy MGs or AGLs if not needed, so you would convert from a mobile ATGM-jeep squadron to a mobile infantry support/recon force.
In Eastern countries, you may have more AT reinforcement, as the basic TOE included less low-level ATGMs, but the standard Soviet division had an integral anti-tank regiment (MTLBs with AT-6 SP). Also bear in mind that most Eastern countries have gone on using non-ATGM anti tank weapons (AT guns, recoilless rifles) much longer, so this may shift the balance and suggest there were unduly low level of AT weapons if you count only ATGMs. For instance, the standard AT-3 platoon had 3 launchers, supported by 2 SPG-9 RCLs and 3 RPGs for short ranges.

4)Basically, tank units don't get many ATGMs since they are their own tank killers. That's particularly true about modern MBTs, which are much more antitank-oriented than previous models, and much more accurate. Playing 60s-70s forces, you can add one SPATGM platoon per tank battalion if you have high-end forces.
Also mechanized infantry gets less organic ATGMs. Particularly Soviet-style BMP units get zero infantry ATGMs while BTR infantry gets one short-range platoon per company (when available) and at least one medium-long-range platoon per battalion. The basis being that the BMPs carried their own AT weapons (see mixed AT platoon above).
Of course, mechanized or armored infantry has more chances of getting SP ATGMs.

5)In most cases, vehicular were used to replace foot ATGM one on one in mechanized units. SPATGMs are generally higher-level assets when medium-range foot ATGMs are available, because most armored ATGM carriers use long-range missiles. Jeep-mounted ATGMs are either substitute for armored carriers in light units or field mounts of foot-borne weapons, as said before.

6)No idea about the actual mix, but keep in mind that the USMC is not exactly an armor-heavy force. I guess this is reflect in the game picklists, so if you run a battle with a large IA-purchased USMC force, chances are that the computer will purchase not a lot of tanks and a fixed amount of ATGMs based on the force size. If you want to have a less balanced, more armored force, better pick the units yourself.

7)See above, most Middle East countries have a mix of British and Soviet structures. Without much actual info, I repeat the baseline that ATGMs are more about supporting infantry than supporting tanks. After all, tanks once used to be more about supporting infantry.

Some actual orbat links:
orbat.com public library
Some wargame-based TOEs
and some more
and then some

Also make sure to check out the US battalion TOEs and the Field Manuals posted not long ago here.

Hope this helps.
Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to PlasmaKrab For This Useful Post:
  #4  
Old October 4th, 2008, 02:27 PM
Imp's Avatar

Imp Imp is offline
General
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Uk
Posts: 3,308
Thanks: 98
Thanked 602 Times in 476 Posts
Imp is on a distinguished road
Default Re: ATGM availability

Cheers Plasma Crab that pretty much got it & your answers were nice & concise so easy to pick the bones out of.
I prefer to at least field a possible force rather than cherry picking to win hence the question. They can deal with most threats anyway & regard more as a sim than a game.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old October 14th, 2008, 01:00 PM
Suhiir's Avatar

Suhiir Suhiir is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 2,829
Thanks: 542
Thanked 797 Times in 602 Posts
Suhiir is on a distinguished road
Default Re: ATGM availability

I can give a little help with #6, been working (when I have time/energy) on the USMC OOB for a "while" now.

In 1972 the USMC adopted the TOW missile.
At the time these were jeep mounted and placed in an anti-tank company (48 launchers) that was part of the division tank battalion. This unit was intended to be split for operational attachment to the infantry units.
In apx. 1985 each infantry regiment got a TOW platoon added to it as well (12 launchers).
In 1993 the regimental TOW platoon was reduced to 8 launchers in a TOW section.
In apx. 2004 the TOW company in the tank battalion was deactivated (except one platoon with the Anti-tank and Scout Platoon), as was the regimental TOW platoon. In it's place each infantry battalion was given a TOW platoon (12 launchers).

In 1975 the USMC adopted the Dragon missile.
These were first allocated to an anti-tank platoon in each infantry battalion (12 launchers). This was operationally split so each infantry company had 2-4 launchers.
In 1999 the 12 Dragons were replaced by 8 Javelin's (each company normally gets 2).

Yes, the USMC uses a LOT more ATGM's then tanks.

In addition the USMC relies heavily on helo mounted TOW and Hellfire missiles and the Maverick (usually on the AV-8 Harrier jump jet) for it's anti-tank capability.

Hope this helps.
__________________
Suhiir - Wargame Junkie

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein

Last edited by Suhiir; October 14th, 2008 at 01:06 PM..
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to Suhiir For This Useful Post:
  #6  
Old October 14th, 2008, 08:19 PM

Koh Koh is offline
Corporal
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 112
Thanks: 1
Thanked 10 Times in 7 Posts
Koh is on a distinguished road
Default Re: ATGM availability

12 launchers in a platoon? That sounds pretty high. Are you sure you didn't mean to say company? I mean, I can understand the need to be ATGM heavy if you are low on tanks, but wouldn't 12 launchers in a platoon form at least some leadership problems?
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old October 16th, 2008, 05:57 AM

Griefbringer Griefbringer is offline
Sergeant
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 385
Thanks: 1
Thanked 76 Times in 67 Posts
Griefbringer is on a distinguished road
Default Re: ATGM availability

Quote:
Originally Posted by Koh View Post
12 launchers in a platoon? That sounds pretty high. Are you sure you didn't mean to say company? I mean, I can understand the need to be ATGM heavy if you are low on tanks, but wouldn't 12 launchers in a platoon form at least some leadership problems?
As said previously, you simply structure them into suitably sized sub-units (say, section/squad of three launchers). Then assign a capable NCO to lead every such sub-unit, and detach the sub-units to support other formations like individual infantry companies.

If a USMC sergeant can direct a squad consisting of three fireteams of four men each, then directing a missile section of three missile teams should not be too much harder.

And for those interested in seeing how much stuff you can bang into a platoon, I would recommend checking out the TOEs for such things as USMC infantry company weapons platoon in the 60's, or US army cavalry units from WWII or Vietnam.

Griefbringer
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old October 15th, 2008, 07:54 AM

Marek_Tucan Marek_Tucan is offline
Major
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Kladno, Czech Republic
Posts: 1,176
Thanks: 12
Thanked 49 Times in 44 Posts
Marek_Tucan is on a distinguished road
Default Re: ATGM availability

It would be similar to most common practice. The platoon breaks down to sections, every section several launchers (same for MANPADs or machineguns - USSR MANPADS platoon cxonsisted of 3 MANPADS sections, 3 MANPADS teams each).
__________________
This post, as well as being an ambassador of death for the enemies of humanity, has a main message of peace and friendship.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old October 15th, 2008, 10:51 AM
Suhiir's Avatar

Suhiir Suhiir is offline
Lieutenant General
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
Posts: 2,829
Thanks: 542
Thanked 797 Times in 602 Posts
Suhiir is on a distinguished road
Default Re: ATGM availability

One of the main things I've been doing with my USMC OOB revision is attaching such things as ATGM's, MANPADS, etc. to the infantry companies and platoons.
The current OOB does a great job with the administrative organization of the USMC. But unlike many military forces their combat organization is very dependent on attachments from higher headquarters.
Problem is, the current OOB really only allows you to buy these attachments in platoon size units, makes it very difficult to create anything less then a battalion size infantry component for battles.
__________________
Suhiir - Wargame Junkie

People should not be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of their people.

"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old October 15th, 2008, 11:07 AM
Imp's Avatar

Imp Imp is offline
General
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Uk
Posts: 3,308
Thanks: 98
Thanked 602 Times in 476 Posts
Imp is on a distinguished road
Default Re: ATGM availability

Cheers Suhiir again nice & clear. I agree with your later comments that in a lot of cases to reasonably represent a force you often have to go big. I presume what you are saying is you are making date specific pre tailored combat formations if so great looking forward to.
If possible the odd note on expected use or a doc outlining would also be great if have the time.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 03:13 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©1999 - 2024, Shrapnel Games, Inc. - All Rights Reserved.