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

Who Does More Infantry Work? Artillery or Armoured

ComplexR3TRO

Guest
Inactive
Reaction score
0
Points
60
I know.  ;D I've used the search button, Didn't find anything. If someone does. I'll gladly read it  :nod:

I do understand Artillery is Artillery and Armored is Armored but i would really appreciate what between the two have more work that is you can say what Infantry does. Specifically, dealing with personal weapons, tactics, survival training, all those Infantry things.

Thanks in advance!  :salute:
 
ComplexR3TRO said:
I know.  ;D I've used the search button, Didn't find anything. If someone does. I'll gladly read it  :nod:

I do understand Artillery is Artillery and Armored is Armored but i would really appreciate what between the two have more work that is you can say what Infantry does. Specifically, dealing with personal weapons, tactics, survival training, all those Infantry things.

Thanks in advance!  :salute:
:facepalm: Go to forces.ca, I highly doubt you used the search function.
 
ComplexR3TRO said:
I know.  ;D I've used the search button, Didn't find anything. If someone does. I'll gladly read it  :nod:

I do understand Artillery is Artillery and Armored is Armored but i would really appreciate what between the two have more work that is you can say what Infantry does. Specifically, dealing with personal weapons, tactics, survival training, all those Infantry things.

Thanks in advance!  :salute:

So you understand that Artillery is Artillery and Armoured is Armoured. What does that mean exactly? Do you really know what those branches do?

What is your question? Are you asking which one has the most in common with Infantry?

Cheers

T2B
 
Romanmaz said:
:facepalm: Go to forces.ca, I highly doubt you used the search function.

You shouldn't assume things. I checked Forces.ca, plenty of YouTube videos, many posts on Army.ca in which i can link you to, I fount bits of information but I'd like more. I highly doubt you ever give people the benefit of the doubt. :facepalm:

Tango2Bravo said:
What is your question? Are you asking which one has the most in common with Infantry?

Yes.  ;D Which of the two are most in common with the Infantry.
 
ComplexR3TRO said:
You shouldn't assume things. I checked Forces.ca, plenty of YouTube videos, many posts on Army.ca in which i can link you to, I fount bits of information but I'd like more. I highly doubt you ever give people the benefit of the doubt. :facepalm:

Yes.  ;D Which of the two are most in common with the Infantry.

If I was you I'd bite my tongue right now. You're in for an a$$ chewing.
 
ComplexR3TRO said:
Yes.  ;D Which of the two are most in common with the Infantry.

Let me caveat this by saying that while I have been an infanteer and am currently a gunner, my knowledge of armoured capabilities only comes from working alongside the RCD's.

In an honest attempt to answer your question, the answer is both and neither. It really depends how you are employed, what you are doing and what the threat is. Armoured Recce has a strong dismounted function that looks very much like what I guess you would think of infantry doing in some cases. Think sitting in a hole and watching stuff while living out of your ruck. 

Artillery has a infantry type task in defence of the gun battery. Gunners are trained on a range of small arms and support weapons although their offensive dismounted skills are limited at best.

Neither armour or artillery are capable of holding ground in the way that infantry does. Neither is going to be as proficient in the infantry type tasks as the infantry is going to be and both will use their "infantry" skills as an enabler to accomplish their primary tasks. It would be a rare occasion that you would see artillery or armoured troops "closing with and destroying" the enemy in an offensive operation. In fact, I can't think of a single example in history where this has occured although there no doubt is one or two exceptions that prove the rule.

Bottom line, if you want infantry, go infantry. If you want to be a gunner or a trooper, do so for reasons of what those jobs entail. Also, make sure you understand what the job actually entails. Don't choose infantry because you are really good at Call of Duty or because you've seen Generation Kill (good show) a million times. 

The people you are asking advice from are professionals for the most part and while this may blow your mind, you are not the first person to ask questions such as this. The whole "what does each trade do thing" has been covered here before. Here's a post that links to a whole host of topics on being a gunner for example. http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/22569.0.html and here's a thread on what crewman do. http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/84498.0.html. That maybe took me 1 minute to come up with. Oh, and even better would be look up in this area to the post aptly titled "Comparing the Combat Arms (Inf vs. Engr vs. Armd vs. Arty)". That thread probably answers 95% of your questions. To echo what Jim said, check the attitude.

Best of luck moving forward.
 
jeffb said:
........ It would be a rare occasion that you would see artillery or armoured troops "closing with and destroying" the enemy in an offensive operation. In fact, I can't think of a single example in history where this has occured although there no doubt is one or two exceptions that prove the rule.

Guess you have never advanced with/behind Tanks onto an Objective.  >:D
 
Complex just what is it your looking for.  What of the other two arms have the most similar qualities that you feel the infantry does?

"dealing with personal weapons, tactics, survival training, all those Infantry things."

All three branches deal with what you just mentioned.  Do you like those things specifically and are not planning to go infantry there for you want to know if Arty and Armoured are the closest?  Are those two trades open and Infantry closed?  If you want half decent advice you need to ask half decent questions starting with yourself and how you search for it. 

On the assumption that you like dealing with the glowing words.  I am going to say focus less on the "that stuff is cool so I want to do allot of that" Focus on finding out what each trade does.  I will tell you Arty and Armoured to both do your main points but each brings another skill set to the table.
 
jeffb said:
It would be a rare occasion that you would see artillery or armoured troops "closing with and destroying" the enemy in an offensive operation. In fact, I can't think of a single example in history where this has occured although there no doubt is one or two exceptions that prove the rule.

You obviously haven't studied much history then....
 
jeffb said:
only comes from working alongside the RCD's.

And while we're picking on you ;D

It is The RCD. No apostrophe 's'. That would be like saying Royal Canadian Dragoons's.  ;)
 
recceguy said:
It is The RCD. No apostrophe 's'. That would be like saying Royal Canadian Dragoons's.  ;)

Like pantses......you have to be from Manitoba to understand it.
 
George Wallace said:
Guess you have never advanced with/behind Tanks onto an Objective.  >:D

George, of course you are absoluetly correct. What I forgot to include was the key phrase "in a dismounted role". That made sense in my head but alas, you are not all mind readers. :)
 
Example from my dad.  The ship carrying the RCD' vehicles were slightly slow getting to Italy.  The RCD were put into the line as infantry until more vehicles were rustled up.  Caption from the photo:
The Gang just before going in for our first crack at Jerry as Infantry near Lanciano.  February, 1944.

So there you go.


 
AmmoTech90 said:
Example from my dad.  The ship carrying the RCD' vehicles were slightly slow getting to Italy.  The RCD were put into the line as infantry until more vehicles were rustled up.  Caption from the photo:
So there you go.

Nice touch with the past.
 
ComplexR3TRO said:
Yes.  ;D Which of the two are most in common with the Infantry.

It would be great if the Canadian Forces had a "sorting hat" that would tell you what branch you should join.

Until then, do you play hockey?
 
AmmoTech90 said:
Example from my dad.  The ship carrying the RCD' vehicles were slightly slow getting to Italy.  The RCD were put into the line as infantry until more vehicles were rustled up.  Caption from the photo:
So there you go.

As they did in WW I.  For the majority of WW I, the RCD fought in the trenches as infantry, only near the end of the war did they fight as part of the Canadian Cavalry Brigade.

In Armour, if your vehicle gets shot out from under you, and you survive, you will continue to fight as a "ground pounder".  In Armour Recce, you may be so far behind enemy lines that the safest way to patrol without detection is on foot. 

Trying to say that Infantry have a monopoly on being "two cylinder jobs/ground pounders" is as good as saying Armour has a monopoly on riding in vehicles.  Infantry ride around in LAV III as well. 

Every Combat Arms soldier will at one likely be in close combat with an enemy.  Warfare blurs all distinctions.
 
Back
Top