Operations in Built-Up Areas (OBUA)

[Danjanou]

marshmanguy:

What's it like?

OBUA in the CF reminds me of shopping at walmart.

All the buildings are basically laid out the same.
The minute you get inside the building you loose whoever you came in with.
The staff members seem to have different answers to your questions.
Your always bumping into people
Everyone seems to go in every direction at once.
You always find yourself in an area you just don't want to be (womens clothes/in the middle of the enemy)
You always end up having to carry around something big and heavy. (84mm/huge stupid table set)
You always run into someone you don't like and don't want to talk to

Ghost you owe me one large double double from Tims and you can now clean the keyboard that I spewed said beverage all over after reading your post and laughing.  8)

Thanks for making my day

 

[jmackenzie_15]

Of all of the tasks that an infantry soldier is faced with that I have experienced so far, or learned about from others, CQB, FIBUA/OBUA, is by far the most lethal by any stretch of the imagination.

My unit has been mostly training on this stuff steady for the last few months, culminating to an exercise down in the states with the army national guard (southbound trooper 5).Our unit had been tasked with putting together a platoon sized force to send down, and I was selected amongst the others.This past saturday were training in and old run down jail, while using paint rounds.Anyone else who has trained on this stuff recently knows what I am talking about.

Just an example, there was about a platoon of us (40 ish) with members of the pipe and drums band, and some recruits/SQ recruits comprising an enemy force of about 8-12 troops.We took 8 casualties in the first minute of the attack.It took about 20 minutes to clear the entire 2 story plus basement jailhouse, taking probobly close to almost 25 casualties in the process.

I am interested to hear what other infantry soldiers have to say on the subject, as I personally find that if you are near the brunt of the firefight, or engaged directly in it, your life expectancy is only seconds long if you're lucky.This doesnt include when you storm into a room and the first two guys are on the floor before the entire 4 man team is even in the room.

 

[Yeoman]

our only thing we all agreed on is just push as fast and as hard as you can. just keep going do not stop what so ever. while on course my section alone cleared the largest building in meaford from top to bottom from a ladder to the top window, with only two casualty (being me, hit at the same time as hitting the enemy force guy, man I dropped like a hawk my ear killed, and my 2IC while he was on the ladder) in under 10 minutes. just keep pushing, once the room is clear splash parts of a broken green glow stick (or red if there's booby traps) and just keep on moving. that's the way to get it done pretty much.
Greg

 

[KevinB]

I won't go into details on an open forum but IMHO you unit leadership and your skills are sadly lacking.

Using Sims shoudl also go hand in hand with DD's - this is perhaps the biggest failure of our command to leanr that we must train as we fight.  Doing precision house clearing should not be done the manner the majority of CF seems inclined to teach it.

The only way to learn is to have your chain dial the Hill and ask for help.

 

[jmackenzie_15]

I would be interested to see how each units drills differ from the nexts, and which ones are more successful.It seems like the 'correct' way to do something is changed quite often.

The first 5 or 6 guys we lost because of a tricky OPFOR guy on the floor above us, there was a hole in the floor just big enough to stick part of the barrell down and maneuver a bit... that plus automatic onto a bunch of guys' heads.

What I meant originally about the perils of CQB was, death can come from anywhere at any time.FIBUA/OBUA whatever its called now, has to be the most hazardous form of infantry combat  :-\

 

[48Highlander]

DD's?  Designated Drivers?

I don't think the "go go go" attitude accomplishes much in FIBUA except getting soldiers killed.  I saw a good example of that this summer.  The plan was crap from the start, and in the spirit of "max speed and agressions", 2 platoons got annhiliated in in the same small building within the first 15-20 minutes.  Watching it was like watching a group of lemmings jumping off a cliff, with the RSM standing at the edge and pushing the reluctant ones over.  You need a good plan, good communication, and enough flexibility to react fluidly to new intel.  When you're pushing the attack forward at top speed, there's no time for the front line units to send info back up the chain, have that info analyzed, and then fix the problems.  So what happens is exactly what occured in that attack.  The first unit goes in, gets slaughtered, and before they're even finished dying, the next unit's bashing in right into the same situation, without having any idea what happened to the unit in front of them.  And if they decide to pause for a minute, asses the situation, and try and send info back, they get the NEXT unit being shoved into the same building right on top of them.  Speed and agression is important, but without leaving enough time for thought and communication it's pointless.  It's like driving through a heavy fog at 160mph.  Sooner or later you're going to hit a wall.

 

[KevinB]

DD's - Distraction Devices - FlashBangs.

48th I agree there are times to go - and times to sit back and observe.
 
Multiple Entry points are key and so are comms.

 

[48Highlander]

DD's - Distraction Devices - FlashBangs.

48th I agree there are times to go - and times to sit back and observe.
 
Multiple Entry points are key and so are comms.

Absolutely.  Unfortiunatly current CF doctrine (or it was last time I checked) is to only use ONE entry point, and the same point as the only exit.  Which is just bloody ridiculous.

 

[jmackenzie_15]

I played enemy force on the first run through with another guy against a 10 man section on our floor, it was incredibly easy to set up numerous ambushes at choke points (long hallways, dark stairways etc) pop off 10 or so rounds at the first couple of guys, and then withdraw to another pre-determined point.We managed to get 6 of the 10 guys before eventually getting screwed, we ran into a door that we thought would open and ended up didnt.

This was all made up on the fly pretty much too, i would hate to see what some enemy forces could do with some more numbers, traps, and plans.  :-\

 

[Fusaki]

Absolutely.  Unfortunately current CF doctrine (or it was last time I checked) is to only use ONE entry point, and the same point as the only exit.  Which is just bloody ridiculous.

It was my understanding that the reason we only use one breach point is to give cut off teams a  better chance at mowing down a fleeing enemy. The idea is that you suppress a target house with machine gun fire, use a Carl G (or something similar) to blow a breach point in a second story wall, and then find a way to send troops through that hole to start clearing the building from the top down. I think the benefits of breaching through the upper levels of a building are worth mentioning here, despite the fact that I think most would consider them obvious. Its always been easier to fight downhill, the reason being that grenades go better with gravity and the geometry of the situation gives reduced exposure to the guy shooting down through a hole as opposed to up. The other reason is to give the enemy a way out of the building. If your opposition is cornered in the attic he'll fight to the death, but if he sees a chance to escape he might just try and withdraw through a ground level exit. This is where the single friendly breach point helps to maximize the effect of cut off teams.

This is, of course, the World War 3 scenario, and the most common one that my own unit trains for. Its also the least likely scenario we'd find ourselves in. I've heard mid level officers try and tell me its better to train for WW3 and tone it down for peacekeeping, as opposed to the other way around. That would be fine if we backed it up with enough "precision" training, but when the pressure is on, you don't rise to the occasion - you revert back to basics. If something doesn't change soon there's going to be some young private standing up in front of a court marshall who violated his ROE in the split second it took for his training to override his rational thinking.

Here's an idea I'd like to throw out here for comments: The most common way to get troops up to higher stories is using ladders, but that looks a little too suicidal IMHO. I've heard of using LAVs to drive up beside buildings, that way you can have a few guys riding on top of the vehicle to have a sturdy position from which to throw a frag in the breach point, and move through the hole in decent fighting fashion. You could then send reinforcements in through the ramp and up the bird gunner's hatch. This sounds viable (and safer then a ladder), but has anyone actually seen it done?

Multiple Entry points are key and so are comms.

Regarding the multiple entry points, I totally agree - IF we had the training to go along with it. OBUA is complicated enough as it is, but to try and get fancy without a major shift in training policy is asking for disaster.

 

[Britney Spears]

I urge you all to read up on the Israeli solution to this, which has proven to be very, very effective:

Don't use doors, or hallways, and don't move along the obvious routes that your enemy would expect you to use.

Instead, every soldier is trained in the use of breaching charges. Instead of entering a building through a doorway and into certain death, blow a hole in the side. Instead of moving down fire swept streets, move <i>through</i> the buildings, when you come to a wall, just "make a hole". 

The IDF have, on numerous occasions, made large scale sweeps (i.e. day long fire fights) through densely built up areas (Nabulus, Jenin) with minimal casualties, using regular infantry well trained with these ( and judicious use of their D9 dozers)  simple techniques. Defending a building becomes a whole lot more difficult when the attack comes from every direction EXCEPT the doors and hallways. Unlike the FISH scenarios that we practice, with this approach the assualt team ALWAYS had the initiative. 

Of course, extensive use of breaching charges and such pyro is impossible given our training resources, so this would be a case where one hopes that we DON'T fight as we train.

 

[Infanteer]

I love it when you talk dirty, Britney....

I'll post the link again, because I think this is a very good resource to look at when considering approaches to OBUA:

http://www.socnetcentral.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=917&highlight=Urban+Combat

 

[Glorified Ape]

Of all of the tasks that an infantry soldier is faced with that I have experienced so far, or learned about from others, CQB, FIBUA/OBUA, is by far the most lethal by any stretch of the imagination.

My unit has been mostly training on this stuff steady for the last few months, culminating to an exercise down in the states with the army national guard (southbound trooper 5).Our unit had been tasked with putting together a platoon sized force to send down, and I was selected amongst the others.This past saturday were training in and old run down jail, while using paint rounds.Anyone else who has trained on this stuff recently knows what I am talking about.

Just an example, there was about a platoon of us (40 ish) with members of the pipe and drums band, and some recruits/SQ recruits comprising an enemy force of about 8-12 troops.We took 8 casualties in the first minute of the attack.It took about 20 minutes to clear the entire 2 story plus basement jailhouse, taking probobly close to almost 25 casualties in the process.

I am interested to hear what other infantry soldiers have to say on the subject, as I personally find that if you are near the brunt of the firefight, or engaged directly in it, your life expectancy is only seconds long if you're lucky.This doesnt include when you storm into a room and the first two guys are on the floor before the entire 4 man team is even in the room.

My last platoon commander said the proper ratio for CQB/FIBUA was 10:1... I would imagine that would be difficult to muster though.

I urge you all to read up on the Israeli solution to this

I thought the whole "mouseholing" technique was used by alot of countries, from what I've read anyway. It just seems like common sense not to take the most obvious route.

 

[Britney Spears]

I thought the whole "mouseholing" technique was used by alot of countries, from what I've read anyway. It just seems like common sense not to take the most obvious route.

The prevailence of modern "SWAT" techniques has, IMO, pushed some of these older lessons to the side. This is bad, since police methods were developed for very specific applications. That is, the cordoning off and assault of a single building. Concepts such as "stacking" outside a doorway or opening, while useful for SWAT teams, are not so useful for large, fluid Stalingrad or Falluija style battles. a police SWAT team outside a building generally doesn't have to worry about someone with an RPG popping up 100m down the street in another building and taking out the whole stack. 

 

[Ty]

The prevailence of modern "SWAT" techniques has, IMO, pushed some of these older lessons to the side. This is bad, since police methods were developed for very specific applications. That is, the cordoning off and assault of a single building. Concepts such as "stacking" outside a doorway or opening, while useful for SWAT teams, are not so useful for large, fluid Stalingrad or Falluija style battles. a police SWAT team outside a building generally doesn't have to worry about someone with an RPG popping up 100m down the street in another building and taking out the whole stack.  

To that I add that a SWAT unit also has to worry about non-combatants much more in their situation than an infantry unit operating in unfriendly BUA.  Has the old doctirine of using armour to breach buildings gone by the wayside?  Similar to a dozer, but can be used for gaurd duties in the streets shortly afterwards (to paraphrase a post form the armour section here, putting a tank in the streets is like putting a bouncer at the door)

 

[JBP]

Great idea, but having tanks or LAV's in a tight urban area can prove just as deadly without infantry support for the crew.

Example:

a police SWAT team outside a building generally doesn't have to worry about someone with an RPG popping up 100m down the street in another building and taking out the whole stack. 

But say this guy has 1-2 more buddies with him. A few well placed rounds into any MBT will do some damage. Especially if the bad guys know where to hit them... I think the most important thing in the "urban" scenarios is what some folks have touched on already, Situational Awareness, keeping your damn eyes open!!!

IMHO anyway, which is about .2 cents if that as a Pte(R)!!!

 

[Ty]

Great idea, but having tanks or LAV's in a tight urban area can prove just as deadly without infantry support for the crew.

To be clear, I wasn't advocating the use of an armour-only approach ;D

 

[Fraz]

  Indeed, Kevin B you've hit the nail on the head with that one... In our unit we have in limited terms used the techniques taught to us from the boys at the Hill, and yes to be effective the attacking force must be capable of utilizing combined arms (armour and infantry as well as engineers and mortars, not to mention air support if we had it)
  As per the mention about the Israeli's tactics, those are nothing new, One needs only to remember Ortona in the Italian campaign back in 1943 where we... yes Canadian troops invented mouseholing, this is not a brand new idea, although it is a shame that we have forgotten the book that we ourselves wrote way back when... (note: recent OBUA ex's now have drywall and engineers to blow the windows to simulate mouseholing albeit in limited numbers but it has proven effective as those in OPFOR can attest to)
  For reservists in Ontario, I hope that you're units and leaders took some of the lessons learned at SG 04 in Pet (yes i was one of those bastards wearing the red duct tape) and can apply them so that the troops can fight effectively not as just mindless drones to end up being number 1 in the room aka bullet catcher...
  I agree with all of you that more training is definitely needed but isn't that always the case???? In lieu of guarding lockers you bet that I'd love to be out there honing warfighting skills... Let us hope the recent appointment of LGen Hillier won't just be another attempt at window dressing and we will see real doctrinal refinement as well as procurement and committment

 

[Glorified Ape]

Does anyone know what proportion of combat training FIBUA composes? I would think (just going on vague impressions) that, given the increasing size and importance of urban areas, FIBUA's becoming more and more important... maybe even to the point where it should compose the majority of combat training (as opposed to more rural environments)? Is this so, or am I completely wrong? If so, is the increasing importance reflected in an increased focus on FIBUA training?

 

[Fusaki]

Concepts such as "stacking" outside a doorway or opening, while useful for SWAT teams, are not so useful for large, fluid Stalingrad or Falluija style battles.

So whats the alternative?

In the initial breach, I can see using a Carl G to blow a hole from a distance then having troops sprint from cover into the hole. But, you'd NEED to make sure that EVERYONE inside that room is dead or else the enemy is going to start busting caps in the good guys as they trickle in one at a time. Depending on the distance that we'd need to sprint from cover to the breach, I can see an entire section getting killed before someone realizes that the enemy is still holding ground.

I can see your point about getting wasted by an RPG, but this is looking like a "Damned if you do, damned if you don't type situation".