"Duties of a platoon on picket duty" Topic

This is another topic as I want a more general understanding of what can be achieved realistically.

The scenario is a bit wargames oriented but I wil do my best.

The Russians have taken a small village which is on a key route. They have left a platoon of infantry with BTR 60's (thanks shipyards) to guard it. The flank of the village has a suspected platoon guarding a bridge about 900 m distant well within a heavy wooded area, This bridge is not currently a key route and an earlier attempt to dislodge the German troops guarding the bridge in the woods failed at some cost. Hence, Russians not wanting to commit more have left the troops in the village to,protect the flank. There is close on 500m of clear terrain between the outskirts of the enemy wood with the bridge guarded by the Germans. The Russians don't want to lose their strength defenders and may be on the defensive for a while.

How and with how many would they set out as troops to set up OP's for the unit. Would they in reality risk patrolling which could lead to unwanted casualties?

sorry it's a bit vague but on this one I have n o idea what the real world approaches might be. Obviously both side would like s o me folk to get some sleep and food and 30 odd men is not many even if it's full strength.

Note in responding to this, neither side has access to any additional forces. The Russians are winning (depressingly well) and cannot at this time provide any more resources to the guarding platoon.

I am on holiday (though I does not feel like it as I have lost my wallet and SWMBO has had her phone stolen on the same day) so I cannot post a picture of the situation.

Thanks in advance Brian.

PS this is not a rules question it's about what should happen. Even at 1 to 1 there can be problems. The Russians have proably got the equivalent of 2 battalions but the need to replace losses and refuel/rearm means he is strapped for combat forces.

I am not sure I understand the situation. Are you saying that a Russian platoon is in the town and, 900 meters away there is a bridge that has a German platoon defending it? 900 meters is contact. A key position will have more than a platoon assigned to it.

I don't recall that it was Soviet doctrine to deploy OPs, in the way that NATO forces did. The platoon itself would be a defensive "combat outpost" with an observe and delay mission.

Also, in a flank security situation like you seem to be describing, the platoon would likely be reinforced by towed antitank guns.

This is a situation that is trained for by NATO troops.
The first question is KOCOA. As an Armored Cavalry scout I would have had to scout many factors.
Key terrain, does a road lead from the bridge to the town. Where do the other roads go leaving the town. What is the rating of the bridge? What is the Ford ability of the river?
Are there other covered or concealed pathways between the locations?
Are there hill tops in the area to improve the function of the OPs?
What is the composition of the enemy? For example the Soviets would be regarded as second rate troops since they are in BRDMs rather than BMPs. This may give intel the impression that they would take a defensive posture rather than an aggressive one.
A few recons and maybe ne in force to determine if the enemy was in a temporary posture or long term which would require digging in and at least blocking the road.

Gotta agree with 79thPA: 900m is in contact. It's within PKM and SVD range (and conversely, within MG3 and 7.62NATO rifle range).

First thing would be to id any other routes in order to bypass this strong point.

Tally Ho!

LP/OPs are pretty much standard in most Armies. And generally active patrolling as well. However, again, it all comes down to terrain and situation.

And good point Nick. That goes along with the USSR's doctrine and somewhat even the original German "blitzkrieg" concept. By pass and keep moving into enemy real areas, cut off LOC, destroy C & C, etc.

Depends on the platoon commander, a gung ho keenie meenie might be tempted to 'impress' his seniors by aggressive patrolling……a grizzled veteran (deputy PC?) might be more willing to 'live and let live'…….

Again, it depends on the Cdrs' intent and guidance. And of course the terrain & situation. Generally if Higher wants/orders aggressive patrolling it usually will be done.

Bottom line the leadership ability of the Plt Ldr and at times the "advise" of his Plt Sgt[grizzled Vet?]. Is also a factor.

Sometimes even you may be just too tired from constant movement, etc. And maybe giving the unit a little time to recoup a bit. And that maybe just what the enemy would like you to do. But again it depends on terrain and situation first off.

79 PA sometimes a general does not have everything he wants. The bridge Is not key at the moment and is being rigged for demolition.
Gaze 45 I think at the moment both side are in live and let live. Platoons now dug in will not be able, without more resources to dislodge the other and losing combat power in defence is not ideal foe either side.

sometimes a general does not have everything he wants

Many Cdrs throughout the ages have said or thought that.

both side are in live and let live

I think during the Bulge something like that happened in some locations. And remember the Christmas Truce of 1914 …

Again not enough info. Does the bridge lead to your rear area? In which case the route would be a vital position.
If it leads to another sector of the Soviet front, then the bridge is still vital.
A bridge is more often than not more critical than a town and road intersection.
We had a two page evaluation form on just how to evaluate a bridge capacity and nearby Ford ability.
It is clear that you do not know how to evaluate KOCOA. In case you do not know it means Key Terrain Observability Cover/Concealment Obstacles options Avenues of Approach.
This is different than Moose Muss.
In Recon we had a long list of formulas to evaluate road to determine weight capacity. This was vital to determine MSR, main supply routes as well as enemies attack vectors.
Rivers depth was not as much of a hindrance to APCs as the slope and rocky nature of the banks. APCs can swim. Heavy tanks do not, though our M551 s could if needed.

Okay, have to enter my .02.

First, in the 80's, Soviet NCO's were unlikely to be grizzled vets, and either were LTs. Unless they served in Afganistan, which then seems unlikely they would have been available for operations against NATO. Under the Soviet reserve system, these vets would come to NATO as CAT B and C reinforcements. Assuming they failed to discharge a class when their terms ended, NATO intel apparatus would have picked up on that, which would have provided NATO more time to respond.

On the other hand it was Soviet doctrine in an armored breakthrough to place depleted units on the flanks. They generally picked points where they could create fire sacks with minimal manpower. If you've ever maneuvered against a well trained OPFOR unit, and stumbled into one of these fire sacks, man it sucks!

Soviet Army soldiers were drafted in 2 classes per year, about 6 months apart. NCO material was identified in each class and given special training. This means that Soviet NCOs were no more experienced than many men they served over, and sometimes less so. The officers provided the professional backbone in their Army. This was one of the huge flaws with an all conscript system, no competent middle management. Combat of course has it's own natural selection process. Darwin would have run rampant on the battlefields of Central Europe, and not only in the Soviet formations.

As far as the two positions being so close together, hmmm, depends on sight lines. If both forces know each others positions (and we have to assume that the Soviets at least know where the West German position is) there would have to be patrolling and/or harassment to ensure the security of your own position. You'll want to update your SALUTE report constantly. The tactical position is clear, but what is the strategic situation. Once the Soviets are past that bridge, I don't see their forces stubornly holding for no reason. They would want to get back into the fight. The West German position was fanatically stopping the Soviets, and allowing as little ground to fall into their hands as possible. Once the battle moves past that bridge, they would probably blow it, and move on.

All you ex-grunts know, you don't Re-organize and Re-consolidate right on the objective for obvious reasons. You fight through and perform these actions on the far side.