"US Armored Cav Troop M106 Doctrine?" Topic

There are a variety of different versions of TO&Es for this unit, but all involve the addition of a single M106 to provide direct fire support.

My guess is this one vehicle can't really provide much in the way of indirect fire, even allowing for a rather short burst of high-intensity fire, for a minute, or two, vs. enemy forces, using HE rounds.

Therefore, I suspect its primary role is that of laying smoke with WP rounds, and these would also provide for some anti-personnel value.

Does that sound about right, or can the single mortar really provide that much indirect fire in a short amount of time?

Few, if any modern rules I've run across permit that as a doctrine.

Many other mechanized infantry units have 3 – 6 x M125s or M106s in direct support.

Also, I'm curious about how close or far other troops in the squadron would be from one another in Western Europe, when deployed to patrol the East German Border?

I suspect they'd be stretched pretty thin to patrol such a long border, so might not be available immediately to support their compatriots, but am not sure about that either.

The single M106 per cavalry troop existed before the widespread use of thermal imagers, so illumination rounds would be very useful in a screen or guard mission at night.

pjm

We had 3 per troop in the late 70's, basically allowing one per platoon for coverage.

A troop zone would be 3-5km wide (METT) and 5-10km deep.

As to how far from the border that really depends. IF we got to our GDP we would have been within 2-3km (and in some places MUCH less)

archive.org/details/FM17-36

To get the doctrinal answer, I would look at the above link and search on 'mortar.' Has some good info. In some cases, the mortars did operate individually.

Mark

Thanks for the replies.

A good point on the illumination rounds, and I know they had battlefield radar sets from the early-mid 1960s (can't recall the exact date they got those – perhaps earlier?), so they'd have reason to fire those rounds as the enemy closed in.

I've never seen a Cav TO&E with 3 x M-106s per troop, but have seen that for the Mech. Infantry (and/or M125s), IIRC. Interesting.

Ah, Saber6, apologies for my error above. I keep having issues with the Armored Cav. (British) organization terminology, and wrapping my head around a unit of ten to twelve vehicles being a "platoon". So, yes, of course a Troop would have 3 x mortar tracks.

I was thinking about the platoons, and calling them "troops" in error.

I see that the Troop commander does have the option of consolidating all of the mortars together, when on the defensive, when/where that is possible.

My question above should have been worded, how does the single M106 employ its mortar, when in support of the armored cav. platoon?

Good to know on the troop zones, so it appears that another troop might not be that far away, if it was needed for reinforcement.

Then again, perhaps heavier units would be called in to respond, since I recall the term "speedbumps" being used with respect to the armored cav. units.

I know the doctrine was for them to slow the attackers, gather intel on their movements and composition, and if possible, retreat to the rear through other, heavier units, like 3rd Armored Div., assuming they survived.

Many seem to think they (armored cav units), and/or the other armored and mech. infantry units along the Inter-German Border would just be expected to DIP (die in place), to gain time for others to mobilize, deploy, and defend/attack.

Thanks for the link, Mark. I suspect it will be very useful.

Hmmm, found this when looking up minimum and max. ranges, so, perhaps this explains why a single one can be deployed per platoon:

link

20 rounds per minute for the first two minutes of firing is a pretty respectable rate of fire for a single tube.

100 rounds in 20 minutes.
80 rounds per hour in sustained fire.

Min. range = approx. 500m
Max. range = 4,000m

Now, to figure out how to make that work within various rules systems, which really only account for artillery batteries of 4 – 6 guns, most of the time.

You could definitely use them against point targets, walking the rounds in. I know of several instances in WWII, one with 105s that drove off a Tiger, which scooted before it could take a direct hit.

As for area fire, many times you just want the enemy infantry to hit the dirt, instead of really caring about inflicting casualties.

The ACRs were also heavily reinforced for their covering force missions. A divisional tank battalion would be in reserve for counter attacks. Multiple artillery brigades and Lance battalions would be in direct support of the squadrons. The M106 was the platoon leader's immediate hip pocket artillery.

For any Cav scenarios if you do dig into the manuals you need to make sure to get the correct manual for the time period you are gaming. The Divisonal Cavalry squadrons especially went through equipment, organizational and doctrine changes a few times throughout the Cold War.

Suggest you lookup and be familiar with the definition of COVERING force, SCREEN and GUARD mission for those units.

Were the mortars really parceled out to the platoons? Thought they were all consolidated at troop?

Thanks for those ideas.

Looking at doing 1950s – 1970s, and/or 1980s. In some cases attack helo support might be available, but not in the earlier periods. Artillery would be though, and was thinking about some supporting M48s, and/or other armored cav. platoons.

Yes, they M106s were sometimes/frequently(?) parceled out to the platoons, though it was recommended that if they were operating close enough together, they be kept together at the troop level.

With only a 4 – 5 km range for the mortars, if the platoons were separated to cover a wide patrol/defense area, it'd be hard to keep them all together and still provide the needed support.

Our mortar section (2 vehicles) always operated together out in the field when I was with 2nd ACR.

They did not generate enough firepower to be used like regular arty, but were great for smoke or quick suppression missions. Mainly for smoke though…

Very much regarded as hip pocket arty.

I agree with what many have said here. And it's always nice to have rapid response support in all cases. The mortar is an Infantry weapon. The MOS for Mortar crewmen was 11C. The standard Grunt was 11B.

As we saw with the J-series TO&E conversion in the mid-'80s. The withdrawal of the M125s at Company level. And taken out of the Mech Bn TO&E. IIRC the M125 was removed from the Army inventory totally. The Mech Infantry Bn only had and M106, 4.2 inch Mortar Plt in the HHC. To, as was said, be "hip pocket artillery". And this was also the same with Tank Bns.

I think the M125's 81mm was just too small and lacked the range for mobile Tank/Mech Co. Tm operations. Plus improved technology and techniques made the call for fire from assets outside of the Bn. Much more effective.

However, sometimes those assets would not be available. So the 4.2s literally just up the road or closer would certainly be welcomed. And even if FA, CAS etc., was available. The 4.2s could add to the firepower to targets in range.

A bit out-of-period, but the current Stryker organization runs 120mm mortars as part of the company (section of 2 tubes) and at the battalion level (platoon of 4 tubes), plus 60mm (company) and 81mm mortars (bn) stuffed in the trucks for dismounted ops. Only have enough mortar crew to fire one or the other, though.

I'm really surprised they didn't just swap the M125s' 81mm mortars for 4.2", or 120mm ones.

I think I mentioned this before. With the J Series TO&E, More M113s for the Grunts were required. We turned in the 81s and used the M125 hulls as M113s. By basically placing plywood or something else over the hole where the 81 would be mounted.

fyi, for the record we didn't call them M106s.

We just called them the "four deuces" (for 4.2 inch morters)

;)

Same way the M113s were just called "one one threes"

Yes, that was my experience too … Just like sometimes the M2 50.cal HMG was referred to as "Ma Deuce" …

In an AC Platoon, who observed for the mortar(s)? I haven't seen an AOO/FO listed.

All 19D Cavalry Scouts are trained to call for fire.

The troop's mortar section would be on a separate freq. Just switch over to their freq and request call for fire.

So basically any scout teams or scout vehicles are trained artillery observers.

Any 19D that cannot pass this task or others during basic training (or OSUT-One Stop Unit Training when I went through at Ft Knox) or yearly certification no longer qualifies as a 19D…

In Infantry units, the officers, NCOs and many of the troops are trained to "call for fire". Plus in many cases at Platoon level there is a Forward Infantry Support Team [FIST](FO). And at Company level you get a FIST Chief who coordinates those fires. As a PL and CO you could just point to the target or give grids to the FIST. The fires would come in. Or were supposed to …

And all FIST Members are from the Field Arty branch. And they were attached from the FA Bn that was in Direct Support of the Infantry or Tank Bn.

I second those comments on the 19Ds.

Also I don't ever remember the .50 Cal being referred to as the "ma deuce". Most folks called them "50s" or "50 Cals",

I'm not saying "ma deuce" is wrong; just not what I heard used with any frequency in the 1980's in the units I was in.

That may have been just my experience in '79-'90. "Ma Deuce" was probably sometimes used by the older soldiers. And may have been picked up by some of the young "newbies" …

Having served in 4 Infantry Bns. "GI Jargon" would sometimes vary. Like some "terms" used in the ROK were not heard in the USA. And vis versa …

Mortar rounds (usually firing White Phosphorous rounds) were VERY often used to mark targets for close air support in the 80 and 90s, before laser designators and GPS guided munitions were common. I suspect that could be one of the uses. I'm speculating though.

Everyone called it "Ma deuce" in the USMC in the 80's – 90's.

We called White Phosphorous rounds – "Willy Pete". And yes, they could be used for marking targets, etc., … Plus in dry foliage, it could start a pretty good fire.

Everyone called it "Ma deuce" in the USMC in the 80's – 90's.

Good to know … I was just not imagining things …