Help support TMP


"It's dark, and I am cut off. How long?" Topic


46 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Cold War (1946-1989) Message Board



1,584 hits since 18 Nov 2017
©1994-2018 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

UshCha18 Nov 2017 5:54 a.m. PST

OK so it has not gone well. I drove off an enemy platoon attack just at a river crossing, later I got am engineering section in an M113, with a truck load of supplies. Bad news is along with a motor at platoon with no ammo I am cut off. Assuming the enemy don't come looking too hard how long can I survive as an effective unit. Being by the river water is not an issue. I would guess as the platoon was a semi permanent position a week would be OK, with extra mouths and some rating maybe 5 days before things get critical? If shooting stars item will be a lot shorter.

Opinions.

UshCha18 Nov 2017 5:54 a.m. PST

OK so it has not gone well. I drove off an enemy platoon attack just at a river crossing, later I got am engineering section in an M113, with a truck load of supplies. Bad news is along with a motor at platoon with no ammo I am cut off. Assuming the enemy don't come looking too hard how long can I survive as an effective unit. Being by the river water is not an issue. I would guess as the platoon was a semi permanent position a week would be OK, with extra mouths and some rating maybe 5 days before things get critical? If shooting stars item will be a lot shorter.

Opinions?

UshCha18 Nov 2017 5:54 a.m. PST

OK so it has not gone well. I drove off an enemy platoon attack just at a river crossing, later I got am engineering section in an M113, with a truck load of supplies. Bad news is along with a motor at platoon with no ammo I am cut off. Assuming the enemy don't come looking too hard how long can I survive as an effective unit. Being by the river water is not an issue. I would guess as the platoon was a semi permanent position a week would be OK, with extra mouths and some rating maybe 5 days before things get critical? If shooting stars item will be a lot shorter.

Opinions?

Lion in the Stars18 Nov 2017 7:18 a.m. PST

You can fish as long as you have grenades or other demo charges. Also, at least with US troops, they always carried about a week's worth of food in the vehicles, plus another 2-3 days in their packs and one day's food in their pockets.

You should still be in comms, so staying put shouldn't be required unless your commander is a total moron. A motorized AT unit out of AT ammo should be falling back to a resupply point if cut off. If your commander is demanding that you stay in place, he should be pushing an armored platoon escorting a logs unit full of ammo your direction in less than a day.

Personal logo Saber6 Supporting Member of TMP Fezian18 Nov 2017 7:33 a.m. PST

Unless you are leg, or you are on Key Terrain there is little reason to stay in place.

Legion 418 Nov 2017 3:42 p.m. PST

As long as you commo with higher, at least support, etc. maybe available soon.

And I agree with both Lion's and Sabre's posts/options.

However:

What is/was your mission ?

What's is higher's guidance/intent.

If you have fuel, you may want to look for a way to exfil back to your own lines. But terrain will be somewhat critical for this option.

Can you call-in FA, CAS, etc. ?

Usually combat units don't just hang out and wait … at least not for too long …

This ain't WWII and it ain't Bastogne …

UshCha19 Nov 2017 12:57 a.m. PST

Lion in the stars, thanks. Currently there is a lot of enemy between the unit and safety. There position is such that they can still provide Intel and are holding a vital bridge. Given the information on time I can proably get one chopper in for casualtie evacuation and drop off some ammo. They should be OK for fuel.

Rakkasan19 Nov 2017 5:59 a.m. PST

If there are enemy between safety and you then the bridge is no longer vital and the information would be best passed using a small observation team. Calling in a helicopter will give away your position to the enemy that have seemingly bypassed you.
As to the question, the unit in question survived a tough fight so ammo, fuel, and batteries are in short supply. Therefore food and water aren't your problem but a diminished and diminishing ability to shoot, move, and communicate. If the enemy makes no contact, does not intercept your radio transmissions, and the platoon maintains optimal noise and light discipline then 5 to 7 days seems plausible for a scenario in moderate weather. Much longer then things like hygiene and latrine placement, illness, and stress/lack of sleep will make then ineffective. But in the scenario you describe the enemy will take them out well before that.

Legion 419 Nov 2017 9:29 a.m. PST

Calling in a helicopter will give away your position to the enemy that have seemingly bypassed you.
Is definitely a double edged sword with helicopters.

They can go a lot of places.

But make a lot of noise in doing so.

There position is such that they can still provide Intel and are holding a vital bridge.
Again … If they have good commo with Higher HQ. They not only could provide intel, but IMO more importantly they call-in FA, CAS, etc. Which could be critical if they need to exfil back to friendly lines.

hygiene and latrine placement, illness, and stress/lack of sleep will make then ineffective. But in the scenario you describe the enemy will take them out well before that.
Another good reason not to stay too long in that location, etc. as I said.

Again … If they have good commo, call in FA, CAS etc. … And get the Hell out of there when the time is right. After a well thought out/coordinated, etc. withdrawel/exfil plan. Of course this all is generally easier said than done …

UshCha19 Nov 2017 10:39 a.m. PST

Legion 4 you got that right, it's now a long way to home and most of the route is controlled by enemy. I can get a counterattack that works I can get them out. I don't want to resort to escape and evade as I will lose at least 3 trucks and a Marda and a mortar battery. Not lots in the grand scheme of things but a lot for my forces.

Not all plans go well even wargames ones! Amazing how much chaos you can get on a virtual board now proably 24 ft by 6 ft . . I lost on the 16 ft board but the enemy was having none of it far too much fun, so I have to write a longer story so it can continue. Hence we may have to invent a bit and hence the need for your help.

Legion 420 Nov 2017 7:52 a.m. PST

Of course another option the unit spikes it vehicles, equipment, etc. Dismounts and exfils/E&E on foot, moving thru very thick woods, etc., at night, etc. Where the enemy probably won't be. And again maintain commo. You can call-in a lot more firepower that you can carry.

When A Plt Ldr in the 101, this sort of situation may have come about in actual combat. We were very "good" moving with stealth, at night, etc. As we were dismounted already, once we were dropped off by the choppers.

But even in the Mech units[3 Bns] I served with. The US Army Infantry was generally very good at moving dismounted. As a Co Cdr, I even ran some Company dismounted FTXs.

Because regardless of being Light or Mech, Infantry does it's "best work" dismounted on, the ground, in the weeds, etc. I always had a predilection for dismounted night ops. If the situation called for it and the terrain allowed it.

lincolnlog Inactive Member21 Nov 2017 4:04 a.m. PST

Helicopters often flying NOE will travel up rivers and such. It might be possible to do a no touch down supply. Of course this won't work for resupplying ammo on your AT vehicles.

I agree with Legion that exfil on foot might be the only option. Destroy your heavy weapons and vehicles. On the bright side, you'll finally get to use some of those thermite grenades!

Legion 421 Nov 2017 6:55 a.m. PST

On the bright side, you'll finally get to use some of those thermite grenades!
LOL ! Very True !

IIRC Lincolnlog was a US ARMY Grunt around the same time I was. So we may have similar "ideas", etc. thumbs up

RudyNelson21 Nov 2017 8:54 a.m. PST

Did I miss the mention of friendly casualties? While you may not want to E and E or call in a helicopter. The condition of the wounded may require a chopper request. Ignoring the wounded will not be good for the morale of your men. Being German will make E$E easier.
Enemy troops holding a bridge in your territory. The Soviets already know your position and will launch an attack to capture the bridge or it is not vital them them as you think. By passing and mopping up pockets later is common during a WP major attack. You should be under constant artillery bombardment. The request for chopper support is not a problem of giving positions away but can they effectively support you. You are now in the Soviet rear area so enemy AA assists are numerous.. you cannot hold the position in reality so get out whether mounted or on foot.

Legion 421 Nov 2017 9:47 a.m. PST

Ignoring the wounded will not be good for the morale of your men.
Leave no man behind … I took it that the WIAs would E&E with the rest of the troops. Even if some have to be carried out. That is what I would do …

You are now in the Soviet rear area so enemy AA assists are numerous.
SEADS … but even with that it will be dicey and NOE or Contour would be about the only/best methods to do/get away with it. Again this won't be easy …

you cannot hold the position in reality so get out whether mounted or on foot.
That is really the bottom line … And as I said, commo coordination with FA, CAS, etc. will be critical …

UshCha21 Nov 2017 10:59 a.m. PST

What is interesting in these reply is the assumption that Russians have lots spare to get rid of me. The truth is he does not have that amount spare. I am well positioned and now have a section of sappers rigging the bridge and a lorry load of wire and other stores. It will take in this limited area, a company plus a lot of artillery. His major push is going well (regrettably too well :-) ) so success is being supported. In the backwater it's a stand off. Neither can sensibly attack unless the other does something stupid.

I think (for the moment) the Germans will wait. It may come to E & later on but I have comms. and will sit tight. Enough of a threat that he needs to tie down troops to watch me.

RudyNelson21 Nov 2017 11:43 a.m. PST

No amount of hasty built entrenchment can be effective against a Soviet bombardment. The amount of artillery planned to be used by the Soviets cannot be imagined by Western people especially those with no military experience. This is a confined area and the intense and repeated concussions, would leave no vehicle undamaged. All commo would be destroyed, antennas gone, all personnel would be wounded to some degree due to the concussions.
Soviet second and third level units level units would be assigned to secure the bridge. Since the Soviet artillery tactical doctrine does not use danger close restrictions. They will drive their APCs onto the midst of the artillery and overrun the position while the NATO troops are still trying to seek cover from the artillery impacts.
All Soviet APCs have troop gun ports so that they fire out the side while moving and in cover.

Legion 421 Nov 2017 2:58 p.m. PST

Yes, the Soviets always liked the concept of "hub2hub" artillery. IIRC it takes a minimum of 18inchs of solid cover if you have any hope to survive a barrage from USSR FA.

And the rounds will not only include HE, but possibly chemicals/gas, e.g. VX …

RudyNelson21 Nov 2017 5:38 p.m. PST

Legion4 is correct. The Soviets regarded all chemical munitions as standard artillery rounds. The Americans on regarded WP as standard.

Legion 422 Nov 2017 8:32 a.m. PST

Yep, SOP was(is ?) if you were getting incoming, go into MOPP. At least get your ProMask on if you are not in MOPP already. And sometimes they will use Incendiary in the mix too. Like WP but worse, IIRC … old fart

UshCha22 Nov 2017 2:42 p.m. PST

So the question is if the Soviets use such concentrations where does the ammo come from? If you use all that ammo and weapons on such a small area you either have vastly more undamaged artillery or you outage while you rearm is much longer. As I understood it the air War and long range artillery of the west was to take out artillery.

Some US studies on the motor rifle regiments when operating independantly did not show vastly more artillery weapons so high concentrations come at the expense of many less targets attacked.

In an initial attack pre planned for some time may be very heavy but on low value targets this seems unlikely.

Legion 422 Nov 2017 2:53 p.m. PST

As I understood it the air War and long range artillery of the west was to take out artillery.
If all things go right yes. And anytime you use CAS you really should SEADS.

The USSR was known to have a lot of ADA/AAA … everywhere.

As far as the rest you may be "assuming"/guessing too much:

What do the USSR units have in support ? I.e.: attached FA units, etc.

Is there a USSR ammo resupply problem in sector ?

You may be assuming what the Russian Cdr will do ? You know what the FMs say about the Russians. But the local Cdr may just decide to do otherwise.

To paraphrase Sun Tzu Warfare is about deception.

But I believe I'm safe in saying … If you stay there too long you'll end up KIA/WIA/POW …

RudyNelson22 Nov 2017 4:17 p.m. PST

The Soviets increased their number of MRL weapons for a reason. The use of concentration density with fewer vulnerable vehicles.

RudyNelson22 Nov 2017 5:33 p.m. PST

As a none veteran civilian, ushcha, you have no idea astoo how much ammo we had stored in mountain bunkers. I examine Ned one which held the ammo for a division including our MI battalion. It took hours just locate and inventory our allotment. Our concern as MI was that the security guards and staff were attached to the German army and were Czech ex-soldiers. How much motivation did they have to defend it or not sabatoge it. As we drove through the grain field to ge there, an old wagon, horse drawn, with three young men in it, were on the path. As we left they were still there and as we passed I was interested in looking at the two wheel wagon and stared at it out the back window. For some reason the Colonel wanted to drive. Anyway they had pulled out large cameras and was taking our photos. The Colonel said they did it as we entered too. We also inventoried all the pre-positioned equipment for when we deployed by plane.

Anyway, if we had such large ammo dumps, I am sure that Soviets have them as well.

Legion 423 Nov 2017 8:06 a.m. PST

Good points Rudy …

IMO, ushcha your long range hope of survival in your current situation may just rely on peace breaking out. But don't bet on it …

Lion in the Stars24 Nov 2017 4:49 p.m. PST

Too bad Barin1 isn't very active anymore, he was a Russian artilleryman.

As I understand the organization, about the only non-planned shooting that Red Army arty would do is when the arty battery/battalion commander called in a strike (kinda like the British FOO model, but with fewer officers allowed to call for fire).

But I'm pretty sure that EVERY bridge and river crossing in Germany was on someone's preplanned fire mission list.

Legion 425 Nov 2017 8:19 a.m. PST

Yes, I'd certainly like to hear his input. And there was another gent from Russia, though served after the Cold War who was a Tanker. I forget his name … old fart

And I doubt the USSR FA units would be absent in many ops. Attacking, defending, H&I fire, etc.

lincolnlog Inactive Member27 Nov 2017 11:10 a.m. PST

You do realize the vets on here will assume MI is Military Intelligence? Since every maneuver Division has an MI Battalion, you see where confusion might creep in. I suspect you meant Mech Infantry?

Ammo for units in Europe was stored at NATO sites. Each Brigade normally had a local NATO site That provided ammo for the units in that Brigade size unit. 1st Brigade 3rd ID Mech's NATO site was located on Conn Barracks just outside Schweinfurt. Our BN Support Platoon would go and get our ammo during unplanned alerts and drive the ammo to our GDP Assembly area. We would top off on POL and ammo if we ever had to move into our forward GDP.

The Russians wouldn't waste tons of artillery on an ineffective enemy bypassed position. Also, Russian doctrine was not to have AA units wandering out in the middle of nowhere, but guarding bridgeheads, HQ's, airfields, and forward attacking echelons. Further, we at least thought most Soviet AA was ineffective against aircraft flying NOE. The Soviet battle drill was not finesse but rather an overwhelming armored fist.

Russian Artillery would have mainly supported deliberate attacks, not hasty attacks. Lower level commanders would not have had a lot of clout getting assets above Regimental level. And is they managed it, it would have taken quite some time to coordinate. Higher level commanders would not have had the patience in a hasty attack to allow a lower level commander to coordinate these fires. Remember the Soviet command system was professional but clunky.

RudyNelson27 Nov 2017 4:00 p.m. PST

Nope, I was a Quartermaster captain attached to an Military Intelligence Bn as the S4. So I would never call Mech Inf MI. In fact the MI Bn attached to the division was often referred too as the CEWI Bn rather than MI since Counter-Electronic Warfare was the function. At that time in the early 1980s, the discussion on women in front line units was still a topic. This was funny to use as both of our GRS (ground Surveillance Radar) platoon had female platoon leaders and EM. GRS were actually deployed in the front lines or ahead of the front lines with the Armored cavalry. Making them among the first to engage enemy recon.

When I was an Armored Officer my attached infantry never called themselves mech even though they had a M113. Of course my senior Sgts were Vietnam veterans, so they made the troops do a lot of walking.

Rear areas are a lot more fluid than you see on paper. The use of pre-positioned supply points by Americans was a common practice in the 1970s and 1980s.
As I stated before due to my experience with OPFOR and Cavalry, I was attached to the committee tasked with the job of summarizing all of the possible THREAT options to the American rear area supply bases and PPSP.

Legion 427 Nov 2017 4:22 p.m. PST

Ref : MI … I think Rudy meant Mil Intel, I think that was his branch ? Rudy ?

The Soviet battle drill was not finesse but rather an overwhelming armored fist.
Pretty much their standard since the later years of WWII.

Russian doctrine was not to have AA units wandering out in the middle of nowhere, but guarding bridgeheads, HQ's, airfields, and forward attacking echelons.
Agreed, and those leading, following, etc. units would have SPAA and SPFA. In/along with those lead, etc. units. So based on where the Russian units are deployed. There could be a lot of both in the area. Along with lots and lots on Infantry, APCS and MBTs.

The Russians wouldn't waste tons of artillery on an ineffective enemy bypassed position
Probably not, but that small of a unit wouldn't take that much to make it ineffective, I'd think. Of course if it is near an MSR, etc.. The Russians could see them as a real threat.

Further, we at least thought most Soviet AA was ineffective against aircraft flying NOE.
That was why NOE would be considered effective. But as a former 101 Rifle Plt Ldrs then Bn Air Ops Ofc. We would have always liked to use SEADS if possible.

But as in all cases it depends on terrain and situation. You may want to "stealthfully" insert a small flight of helicopters 3-4 birds, flying NOE or maybe even flying Contour. For some sort of extraction mission or even resupply. But the closer you get to enemy units, the bigger chance of being seen, etc.

E.g. we were trying to MEDEVAC a seriously injured troop in our Mech Bn near the DMZ in '85. But the two Dust-Offs as soon as they approached. North Korean radars painted them and locked on. We had to pull the wounded further back to get the MEDEVACs on the ground. And out of the LOS of the North's radars and in turn their ADA/AAA, etc. …

And any behind the line insertion can be very "dicey" as we all know. E.g. the successful UBL Raid, with only 2 MH60s actually inserting on the OBJ, i.e. UBL's compound.

RudyNelson27 Nov 2017 6:04 p.m. PST

Short history since it was asked. I was Armor as a LT for about four years but the M551 Sheridan 152mm short barrel gun destroyed my hearing.
Worked in the G1 shop at First Cavalry as the Safety Officer while awaiting for the QM Advanced course to start.
Then sent to Fort Riley 1st Infantry Division as the MI/CEWI S4. I was assigned because of a tremendous amount of lost property including Soviet items from the OPFOR. A lot of researching and looking to put hands on all items. It say is was millions is about right.


Back to the G1 shop when I went to Germany at the VII Corps HQ but it was only a short stay full of inspections as my wife got cancer and they sent me back to the States.
.
Finally to a TRADOC unit as a lost property specialist and investigator for the post commander, and as a even a court appointed lawyer (which I won the case) as my wife went through Chemo at Fort McClellan. One task there was to examine Deployment plans for the Army and reserves to Korea.

lincolnlog Inactive Member27 Nov 2017 7:06 p.m. PST

Okay, sorry I jumped to a false conclusion, but you have a history of using the wrong acronyms.

When I was in we called ourselves Mech in Mechanized units and Legs in Light units. I served in both. There is inter-service rivalry between mech and Leg even though they are both Infantry. I always preferred Mech simply because of the requirement to be more professional. Lots more to coordinate and skills must be more instinctive in the Mech. For example, map reading a 3-4 miles per hour is a lot easier than at 25 miles per hour. Not as much maintenance on LPCs as on APCs.

Leg units were not organized, equipped or armed to deal with Soviet motorized or armored formations. Mech units were.

By the way, I'm in full agreement with Legion4, Air Defense Suppression would have been a number one priority of both Army and Air Force ground attack units. The Air Forces would have used ARM to disable long range platforms, and the Army would have used TOW for shorter range platforms.

RudyNelson27 Nov 2017 9:16 p.m. PST

Of course, I will have to ask for examples of wrong acronyms.
Thanks, not perfect but with poor vision, I wonder which ones I messed up on.

lincolnlog Inactive Member28 Nov 2017 4:45 a.m. PST

Rudy once again I apologize. I had burr in my butt from a post last year. No sweat brother.

We all have to keep things in context. The WWIII in Central Europe is SciFi to some extent, because it didn't happen. We had faulty intel on the Soviets in many cases. I'm sure they had better intel on us. The T72 was a feared weapon by NATO until the First Gulf War. And yet, those were M models, exports.

RudyNelson28 Nov 2017 12:04 p.m. PST

AS most folks do not realize how many different TOE changes and equipment changes there were in the 1970s and 1980s.
They adopted the H- series TOE in the mid 1970s which we had at Fort Hood with the 1st Cavalry. Changing them from a Tri-Cav to a traditional armor unit but being a DRS testing division, none of the brigades had the same structure.
Our Armored Cavalry unit had gun jeeps, and ground TOWs for the scouts, other equipment M113; M551 were normal. Then in 1978 we swapped gun jeeps for M113 and TOW tracks. In late 1979 we swapped the M551 for M1 Abrams. In 1980-81 w swapped the M113 for Bradley's. So as you can see turmoil at one unit level.
The Second Brigade was reduced to one Mech and one Tank Ben which only had three Tanks per platoon.the tank Ben was disbanded and the tanks sent to the battalions with four tanks per platoon which brought them up to five each.

Legion 428 Nov 2017 4:32 p.m. PST

See that is why we wear our branch on some of our uniforms ! evil grin

I started out as an INF LT, with the 101 and then was with 3 Mech Bns. And frequently attached to Armored units when a Mech Co. Cdr. So I think among the 3 of us, we got a pretty well rounded group, of former GIs … thumbs up

lincolnlog Inactive Member29 Nov 2017 4:42 a.m. PST

For sure, there is a lot of experience on these boards, covering many periods of the last 40+ years.

Legion 429 Nov 2017 8:27 a.m. PST

For sure, there is a lot of experience on these boards, covering many periods of the last 40+ years.
Sure is, I enjoy discussing our training and experiences, etc. with other Vets. As this is primarily a war game and military modelling site. So it lends itself to the overall usefulness, etc., of the site. And sharing of those experiences, etc. among all here.

Even though there were & are detractors, critics, etc. here and elsewhere. But I liken it to a site about cooking and "chefs", short order cooks, fast food servers, etc. talk about their experiences, training, techniques, etc. And share those with others. And some then say, "All you guys talk about it cooking and baking !" huh? LOL ! evil grin

AS most folks do not realize how many different TOE changes and equipment changes there were in the 1970s and 1980s.
Yep was the Bn Log Officer in a Mech Bn when we converted to "J" … Was very "challenging" to say the least ! evil grin

Barin129 Nov 2017 8:44 a.m. PST

I guess amount and type of shells, available to Soviet artillery will depend on a number of factors. Each "constant dislocation" place had a huge amount of ammo. during the drills all these ammo went to trucks/lorries, so each gun will have their own shells for a certain period of fighting.

I can't recall how many shells we were loading in our GTT,but nobody was happy moving these crates around :)
Later supply will be handled by other specilaized units. If Soviet Artilley positions will be on a territory we're holding for a long time, we'll have lots of ammo, as apart of unit storage you had front, region and other larger scale storages, and they will be moving, following the troops. If it is a freshly captured territory and you had heavy fighting to get it, you might be out of ammo for some time. Motorized infantry had its own artillery detachments, mortar units, recolless artillery pieces, BMP/BTR and even tanks. Therefore, once they will be aware of your existence, it will not last long…unless they had something more important to do.

Legion 429 Nov 2017 5:58 p.m. PST

Hey good to hear from you ! Good to hear from the "Other Side" in this discussion ! thumbs up

Ushcha … this is the guy you should ask about your scenario … What he and or his military would do, etc. ? You got the US/NATO POV … Now got it from the former Warsaw Pact. evil grin

Motorized infantry had its own artillery detachments, mortar units, recolless artillery pieces, BMP/BTR and even tanks. Therefore, once they will be aware of your existence, it will not last long…unless they had something more important to do.

But I think I came a little close to Barin1's evaluation …
I.e. "But I believe I'm safe in saying … If you stay there too long you'll end up KIA/WIA/POW … "

"IMO, ushcha your long range hope of survival in your current situation may just rely on peace breaking out. But don't bet on it …"

evil grin

lincolnlog Inactive Member30 Nov 2017 10:57 a.m. PST

@RudyNelson – Do you happen to remember what the max cross country speed of the M551 was? I can find a road speed.

RudyNelson30 Nov 2017 3:56 p.m. PST

Fast, real fast. Due to the high chance of breaking road wheel arms, they not only put governors on the engines but gave use a max operational speed to go in training.
In gunnery speeds were limited anyway as they were in Vietnam due to the terrain.
It was during ARTEPS training that guys pushed the governor. Even swiming we went faster than expected. LOL>
No I do not remember what the cross-country rate was.

lincolnlog Inactive Member02 Dec 2017 8:55 a.m. PST

Thanks, I saw the road speed was high, I made a best guess.

RudyNelson02 Dec 2017 11:25 a.m. PST

I checked the Janes book of modern vehicle. It only had road speed listed at 70 mph.

I found about a dozen of the DIA books on the Soviets and one on vehicle identification by the USAREUR 1973. The DIA are 1979-1981. The book on the Soviet Rifle Division is very good reading for a designer.

RudyNelson02 Dec 2017 7:52 p.m. PST

The diagram that I am looking at on the Soviets in 1979, on the Motorized Rifle Division, shows two sectors of one of 4 and a wider sector of 5-6km. Two regiments in each sector plus a battalion or more of artillery.

lincolnlog Inactive Member03 Dec 2017 8:51 a.m. PST

Yes, that matches with my info. The division level artillery regiment would also support the forward regiment(s) deliberate attack. Division Artillery would not likely be used in a hasty attack situation, their call for fire approval and execute path was simply not streamlined enough in the 70's and 80's.

Barin1 may be able to elaborate on this. But we estimated about 5min for Soviet Division Artillery assets by a battalion HQ, and 3min for Regimental HQ. A hasty attack is getting close to a decision by then.

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.