• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Soldier Operational Clothing and Equipment Modernization

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,363
Points
1,160
Yea no wearing your collar up like that isn't listed as allowable on the kitlist. Please stick to cam paint in the front left tacvest pocket and field dressing in the right.

Season 5 Reaction GIF by Outlander
 

IRepoCans

Member
Reaction score
31
Points
430
Which should be for all soldiers engaged in close combat, mechanized or light. Rifles and radio work the same. But I digress.
I don't disagree, there are some arguments that the dedicated dismounted forces may have some slightly different requirements than than those who aren't; but I'm not airborne enough to understand that line of reasoning.
 

markppcli

Sr. Member
Reaction score
546
Points
860
I have my doubts frankly, its not like mechanized units aren’t given the same tasks, and aren’t expected to perform them. Sooner we end the fetishism of light infantry the better.
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,006
Points
1,040
I have my doubts frankly, its not like mechanized units aren’t given the same tasks, and aren’t expected to perform them. Sooner we end the fetishism of light infantry the better.
US Army Armored units were deployed in Afghanistan in a dismounted infantry role. You lose some flexibility when you cling too tightly to defined "specialist" roles.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,187
Points
1,140
US Army Armored units were deployed in Afghanistan in a dismounted infantry role. You lose some flexibility when you cling too tightly to defined "specialist" roles.
Infantry elements of Armored units where deployed like that - but most Armored and Artillery where used for Convoy work -- I am unaware of any Armored troops used as Dismounted Infantry - outside of Scouts - and even then they retained UpArmored Hummers
 

GR66

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,006
Points
1,040
Infantry elements of Armored units where deployed like that - but most Armored and Artillery where used for Convoy work -- I am unaware of any Armored troops used as Dismounted Infantry - outside of Scouts - and even then they retained UpArmored Hummers
I was referencing an episode of The Spear podcast from the Modern Warfare Institute at Westpoint that follows the deployment of an Tank Platoon in a dismounted role at a COB in Afghanistan in 2009. A very interesting episode of the podcast and an interesting podcast series for those that haven't heard it before.

In re-listening to the start of the podcast to refresh my memory as it was a while ago that I heard the podcast it appears that the unit was a tank platoon of 1-66 Armored of the 3rd ABCT of the 4th Infantry Division at Fort Carson, CO.
 

markppcli

Sr. Member
Reaction score
546
Points
860
US Army Armored units were deployed in Afghanistan in a dismounted infantry role. You lose some flexibility when you cling too tightly to defined "specialist" roles.
Right, look at 1 VP in 2009, all dismounted work, including 4 man recce patrols.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,363
Points
1,160
US Army Armored units were deployed in Afghanistan in a dismounted infantry role. You lose some flexibility when you cling too tightly to defined "specialist" roles.

Tangentially...

Artillery and armoured units were regularly deployed as Infantry in Northern Ireland, over decades, and generally did an excellent job in a variety of operational roles previously thought of as 'Infantry only' tasks.

I've even had some Navy bods on patrols who did a great job... under supervision of course ;)
 

markppcli

Sr. Member
Reaction score
546
Points
860
Tangentially...

Artillery and armoured units were regularly deployed as Infantry in Northern Ireland, over decades, and generally did an excellent job in a variety of operational roles previously thought of as 'Infantry only' tasks.

I've even had some Navy bods on patrols who did a great job... under supervision of course ;)
I believe Artillery were used by the Brits in Afghanistan as cimic / psy ops types. “Non kinetic strikes” was the term
 

Halifax Tar

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
2,264
Points
1,260
Tangentially...

Artillery and armoured units were regularly deployed as Infantry in Northern Ireland, over decades, and generally did an excellent job in a variety of operational roles previously thought of as 'Infantry only' tasks.

I've even had some Navy bods on patrols who did a great job... under supervision of course ;)

Walking and carrying rifle aren't that hard ;)
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,187
Points
1,140
Right, look at 1 VP in 2009, all dismounted work, including 4 man recce patrols.
Big difference between Canadian Infantry who also drive in a LAV, than tankers...

Tangentially...

Artillery and armoured units were regularly deployed as Infantry in Northern Ireland, over decades, and generally did an excellent job in a variety of operational roles previously thought of as 'Infantry only' tasks.

I've even had some Navy bods on patrols who did a great job... under supervision of course ;)
Not to bash the issues of the Troubles - but Urban/Rural Patrolling in NI is significantly different that the same task in most areas of Iraq or Afghanistan.
When I was in Iraq the US Army had Armored and Artillery units on FOB/COB security missions. They didn't really leave the wire in those roles, just permitter patrols and OP (Tower) duty - they had for the most part rolled Infantry and MP's into convoy duties after the Artillery and Armored had colossally screwed those up.

There is a major difference in the attitude and experience/training when units come under contact especially dismounted or in light vehicles - Infantry generally revert to close with and destroy - while other units tend to not do that.
 

markppcli

Sr. Member
Reaction score
546
Points
860
Big difference between Canadian Infantry who also drive in a LAV, than tankers...
I was more commenting on the value of DICE being strictly for the light infantry try and pointing out that mech sized infantry can and is tasked with those tasks.
 

quadrapiper

Sr. Member
Reaction score
80
Points
330
There is a major difference in the attitude and experience/training when units come under contact especially dismounted or in light vehicles - Infantry generally revert to close with and destroy - while other units tend to not do that.
How much of a difference is there between US armour/artillery and their Canadian or British peers as far as breadth of training, noting the US habit of thin-slicing job specs?
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,363
Points
1,160
Big difference between Canadian Infantry who also drive in a LAV, than tankers...


Not to bash the issues of the Troubles - but Urban/Rural Patrolling in NI is significantly different that the same task in most areas of Iraq or Afghanistan.
When I was in Iraq the US Army had Armored and Artillery units on FOB/COB security missions. They didn't really leave the wire in those roles, just permitter patrols and OP (Tower) duty - they had for the most part rolled Infantry and MP's into convoy duties after the Artillery and Armored had colossally screwed those up.

There is a major difference in the attitude and experience/training when units come under contact especially dismounted or in light vehicles - Infantry generally revert to close with and destroy - while other units tend to not do that.

IMHO, there's alot that the (generally Testosterone afflicted) Infantry can learn from that approach ;)
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,517
Points
1,060
Big difference between Canadian Infantry who also drive in a LAV, than tankers...


Not to bash the issues of the Troubles - but Urban/Rural Patrolling in NI is significantly different that the same task in most areas of Iraq or Afghanistan.
When I was in Iraq the US Army had Armored and Artillery units on FOB/COB security missions. They didn't really leave the wire in those roles, just permitter patrols and OP (Tower) duty - they had for the most part rolled Infantry and MP's into convoy duties after the Artillery and Armored had colossally screwed those up.

There is a major difference in the attitude and experience/training when units come under contact especially dismounted or in light vehicles - Infantry generally revert to close with and destroy - while other units tend to not do that.

I think what I'm seeing from this discussion is that no matter what the task is, it takes time to become proficient.

And the second point is that often your previous experience is a hindrance to adapting to your current situation.

I always figure it takes two years for a new body to learn, understand and adapt when moved into a different environment. Experienced hands can take longer.

Pack a lunch and bring the wife and kids.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,187
Points
1,140
I think what I'm seeing from this discussion is that no matter what the task is, it takes time to become proficient.

And the second point is that often your previous experience is a hindrance to adapting to your current situation.
I think it is more than one can either incorrectly attempt to apply previous experience that either isn't relevant or is OBE.
Some folks can adapt better on the fly and relate training and experiences better than others - regardless of trade


How much of a difference is there between US armour/artillery and their Canadian or British peers as far as breadth of training, noting the US habit of thin-slicing job specs?
Armor ;)
Honestly I have next to no recent experience with CAF Armor or Arty personnel -- I can tell you E Bty (Para) back in the day was a fairly proficient in the basic Infantry skills - local defense task/skills in W Bty (with the M109) where significantly higher than US Arty in the 2000-2014 time frame -- Squad/Team/Individual level fire and movement was pretty much a unknown thing to most - and the NCO and O levels had virtually no understanding of anything to do with dismounted fighting, or as a former member here (BigRed) can attest that the NCO corps was also completely incompetent in doing what one would expect of a NCO corps - like having ammunition for troops to move back through a red zone after a range...
These major unit (even trade) level deficiencies where one of the goals the now disbanded Asymetrical Warfare Group was working on fixing - both with Mobile Training Teams when deployed - at units home stations - or at the AWG sites (Ft Meade and AP Hill)


I always figure it takes two years for a new body to learn, understand and adapt when moved into a different environment. Experienced hands can take longer.

Pack a lunch and bring the wife and kids.
The Aussie SASR have a board outside one of their ranges reminding people that 1) Perfect Practice makes Perfect 2) 10,000 reps are required to commit something to unconscious memory.
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,517
Points
1,060
The Aussie SASR have a board outside one of their ranges reminding people that 1) Perfect Practice makes Perfect 2) 10,000 reps are required to commit something to unconscious memory.
Which rather goes to my point.

If someone has done something 10000 times they are no longer thinking.

I don't want that person on my team. I'd sooner somebody that observes and works from first principles.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,187
Points
1,140
Which rather goes to my point.

If someone has done something 10000 times they are no longer thinking.

I don't want that person on my team. I'd sooner somebody that observes and works from first principles.
That is the wrong take away -- that is discussing things like mag changes - target scans etc.
You have removed a lot of processing power to allow the Assaulter to use their mind to see the picture of the fight - and react accordingly -- rather than being slowed down by thinking and looking for the right mag pouch to get a reload - the need to look at the mag well etc.

The goal of IA's is to make them immediate - putting those task into the "unconscious memory" frees up the active memory to be able to react quicker and more accurately to what is seen and presented.
 

daftandbarmy

Army.ca Relic
Reaction score
11,363
Points
1,160
That is the wrong take away -- that is discussing things like mag changes - target scans etc.
You have removed a lot of processing power to allow the Assaulter to use their mind to see the picture of the fight - and react accordingly -- rather than being slowed down by thinking and looking for the right mag pouch to get a reload - the need to look at the mag well etc.

The goal of IA's is to make them immediate - putting those task into the "unconscious memory" frees up the active memory to be able to react quicker and more accurately to what is seen and presented.

(Grim memories of switching between traditional webbing and chest rigs and desperately searching for a mag that wasn't there in each case .... until I got my sh&t together)
 

Kirkhill

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
3,517
Points
1,060
That is the wrong take away -- that is discussing things like mag changes - target scans etc.
You have removed a lot of processing power to allow the Assaulter to use their mind to see the picture of the fight - and react accordingly -- rather than being slowed down by thinking and looking for the right mag pouch to get a reload - the need to look at the mag well etc.

The goal of IA's is to make them immediate - putting those task into the "unconscious memory" frees up the active memory to be able to react quicker and more accurately to what is seen and presented.

Your point is understood but my counter is that "muscle memory" doesn't just extend to swapping mags. Anyone that has gone through a door too many times and found exactly the same scenario before them, and has been conditioned to react the same way, will twitch exactly the same way the next time they go through a door.

They will twitch to solution A, and then consider alternatives B and C that they have encountered before. Meanwhile Plan Zulu might be called for. But they have already committed to A, B or C.
 
Top