"Advanced Elements - Recon or Security for Soviets?" Topic

I've read up a bit on the various advance units for the Cold War Soviet Motor Rifle Battalions/Regiments, since there are some great examples provided for that, in the US Field Manuals, FM 100-2.

However, I'm curious to know if the Tank Battalions, Regiments, and Divisions used the same orgs. for their Combat Recon Patrols, Advance Party, and Advance Guard units, e.g. a mix of tank and motor rifle units (usually a tank platoon and a motor rifle company, plus a few other add-ons, for the Motor Rifle Regiments), and/or if they might use a more tank-heavy force, given their organization (perhaps a tank company and a motor rifle platoon instead, since they had more tanks and fewer IFVs in the Tank Divisions)?

Also, I'm curious to know when the above units would be fielded, instead of the various recon units available to the battalions, regiments, and divisions, which, if I've understood the TO&Es right, consist of a recon platoon, company, and battalion, respectively, for the aforementioned larger units?

From what I've read, if I've understood it correctly, the dedicated Divisional/Regimental Recce Units would typically be operating further afield from their parent units, in order to identify the path(s) of least resistance for the follow-on forces.

The Combat Recon Patrols, Advance Force, and Advanced Guard are operating closer to the main unit(s), in order to provide some intelligence, but mainly operational security for the larger unit(s), so they don't get surprised, and ambushed.

Do I have that correct?

Any good examples of Recon TO&Es and Combat Recon Patrols/Advance Force/Advance Guard units for the Tank Battalions/Regiments/Divisions, if they are different from those of the Motor Rifle Units listed in FM 100-2?

I'm interested in TO&Es for the 1960s – 1970s primarily, but perhaps for the early to mid-1980s as well.

Assuming an attack on West Germany, by a lead Tank, or Motor Rifle Division, I'm not sure how much space they'd have to conduct recon patrols far in advance of the rest of their main units. I would think they'd want to have the armor pretty bunched up (assuming they didn't suspect a nuclear counter-strike), in order to punch through the first line of defense near the border, as quickly as possible.

Mako 11:

According to David Isby's "Weapons and Tactics of the Soviet Union" the approach was the same but the constituent units were different. Also while I rely heavily on Isby, some have called into question his accuracy due to the fine level of detail he provides in this seminal work on the Soviet forces. Originally printed in 1981 and reprinted up to 1985 in revised versions by Janes this is a handy but now very expensive book to have for the Cold War gamer. I was luck to pick it up at a wargames convention in 1982 for a more reasonable price.

The Combat Reconnaissance Patrol (CRP) would be made up from a platoon of three MBT's with an attached squad (1 BMP) of supporting infantry. To this would be attached engineering assets (usually a squad) in a tracked vehicle, and a chemical defense detachment of i-2 BRDM-2 Rkh's and perhaps other kit tailored to the expected mission of the CRP. For example the CRP could be supported by some ATGW's or some heavier engineering kit (then the CRP would be called a Road Opening Detachment).

The Advance guard will also be similarly constituted with the balance of the tank company (7 MBT's), The remains of the Infantry platoon (2 BMP's and their squads), the rest of an engineering platoon (2 tracked vehicles and their squads), 1-2 BRDM-2 Rkh, 1/2 to a full battery of 120mm Mortars, AA detachments of SPAA's and/or SAM's and perhaps an attached battery of 2S1 SAU-122 SP How's.
This will be followed by the balance of the first tank battalion minus CRP sized detachments for flank security patrols (2 x Tank Ptns(-) of 1-3 MBT's each plus no attached infantry.

Remember that preceding the arrival of the CRP will be elements of the divisional Recce battalion and LRRP's of the corps or army.

Distance between elements will be dependent on the terrain and expected level of opposition but as a rule of thumb they are as follows. Recce Btn forces to CRP 10-25 Km (longer for any LRRP's), CRP to Advanced Guard 5-10 Km, Advance Guard to lead Btn (-) 5-10 Km.

There could also be another force between the CRP and the AG called the Company Advanced Guard (CAG) which is another platoon-sized force of tanks reinforced with the NBC BRDM's and the engineering assets which are stripped off the CRP and attached to this force instead. Also artilley observation teams could be attached to this intermediate formation rathar than the AG as a whole or more rarely to the CRP. According to Isby, there is no attached infantry in the CAG. These units are drawn from the AG company forces weakening the AG considerably.

I hope that this helps you.
Cheers and good gaming.
Rod Robertson.

Hi Rod,

Thank you for the info, and good to see I wasn't too far off the mark – thought I recalled it was the reverse of the MRR force ratios.

I appreciate all the details.

I also ran across these free PDFs from the old Defense Intelligence Agency docs on the Soviet Tank Battalion and Company Tactics. They're from the late 1970s, and worth downloading, if people are unfamiliar with them.

Time for me to do a bit of memory refreshing.

They're located here:

link

It's also interesting to see all the pics of the T-64s (smaller bogies) labeled as T-72s in these docs as well.

Now I see why the Team Yankee writer, and others got it wrong, plus, they do look very similar in overall shape to the T-72s as well.

I you can get hold of one the old 7 Int Company Threat fold out is useful for clear diagrammatic examples,

Tally Ho!

The Soviet Studies group and others always indicate a range of possibilities that could be put together depending on time, the enemy and the terrain.

The are mentions of multiple CRPs being put out in a number of articles as well as variants of the MSD.

Isby is an old book and its primary sources are the 1977 CIA studies. By the late 1980s we have seen a large shift in both terminology (for example my first posting in 1983 we were discussing "Vanguards" which then changed to Advanced Guard as well as seeing increases in size and complexity of the GSFG units trying out ideas.

GSP ferry units for example were seen a lot further forward in the North than in say 1 GTA. So you can get away with trying out lots of things and have a reasonable chance of it being correct.

A forward detachment for example has a specific mission. Once that is over then it would be expected for a new Advanced Guard or Forward detachment to be passed through in a follow on echelons. Everything was about creating momentum. Cross the River, then the canal then the next river etc means that they had planned to sequence the bridging assets rather than have to wait for them to be brought up.

Despite popular press there is nothing in FM-100 or the DTIC papers to indicate that the Soviets werent flexible, possibly more so at the operational level than NATO.