"Platoon actions" Topic

The platoon engagement is a staple of wargame scenarios, but how common was that in Vietnam? Were platoon strength fighting patrols a normal event other than in movies or on wargame tables or would a company manoeuvre be more the way of things?
Also…reading James McDonough's book 'Platoon Commander'…were platoon bases such as he describes a standard practice? I'd have thought it would be terribly vulnerable to being overrun in the night and thus providing the bad guys with a neat little victory for propaganda purposes if nothing else. …Your thoughts and observations greatly appreciated

youtu.be/8gUSq7pxux4

Here's a good doco to watch. Meeting engagement in the field. Company, with light armour and artillery support verse a main force VC battalion. It's pretty full on. It one of the best Vietnam War docos going.

I did not serve in combat in Vietnam, but in my ROTC classes I remember an example of company patrols with platoons going out in a clover leave pattern.

Also, from my reading, platoon actions by the Blue Platoon (aerorifles) of an air cavalry company were very common. The company had its own scout and gunships. The scout ships would locate the enemy and call the gunships in. If it looked like the situation was worthwhile, the Blue Platoon would be inserted. Oftentimes that led to a larger action with a battalion being committed.

The risk to platoons was there, but air and artillery support helped a lot.

Tom

There were a great series of book on this, think they were called small unit actions in viyenam, official army books if I remember

I have read somewhere that post Tet 68, after Abrams took over, the US started to use platoon sized 'bait' because the PAVN/NLF would not bite off more than it could chew.

I have also read that there was no appreciable change in tactics/strategy on the ground due to the changeover – just a change in 'spin'.

Pre-Tet '68 the company was the basic maneuver unit though it would be possible to find a platoon out on a limb. In the terrain even a few hundred metres is a long way.

I think you can design scenarios based around a platoon though it was never the norm.

An issue I found is the PAVN/NLF would not fight unless they had the upper hand. So you'd have a 3:1 or better PAVN/NLF:US advantage OR the engagement would be fleeting.

I suspect platoon engagements are popular becasue (a) fewer figures to paint (b) smaller table still works and (c) that's mostly what you see in movies

YouTube link

Listen to commentary as reporter states this platoon was little less than 30 men in strength.

I was thinking A & B & C Extra Crispy. Our rules are focused on the company rather than the platoon Skarper, but the balance of the company may be a ways off and a platoon exposed accordingly!

Generally especially in closed terrain it is a Plt Ldr's war. You probably have commo with the Co. Cdr [I hope so !]. As the most powerful weapon I had as a Plt Ldr, '80-'81, was my radio to call for fire support. The same could be said when I was a Co. Cdr '87-'89.

As I had said in another post. TMP link
A Plt usually operates as part of the Company, based on the Co. Cdr's OPORD, guidance, etc. On the modern battlefield, in many cases you don't see the other elements in your Company, you just have radio commo.

And yes, my Rifle Plt was authorized IIRC about 36. But it was no unusual we operated a less than that. I remember as low as about 17 as one time.

Even as a Mech Co. Cdr my authorized strength was 112. But at times was as low as 65 or so …

@tabletopwargamer
Small Unit Action in Vietnam, Summer 1966, by Captain Francis J. West, Jr., USMCR

Legion4 +1

An individual platoon may be the point for a company operation, bait as mentioned earlier, reconnaissance,
or often sent out to establish a small patrol base which later would be expanded. Even though it is US Army unit,if you watch the movie Platoon Leader, that very much resembles a Platoon Patrol Base, although a very fortified one. Again, I can only speak for the Marines. As Legion mentioned, company sized operations were the norm. Now if you get into major operations,such as Mameluke Thrust, Houston, Rice or Meade River you are looking at multiple battalions.

Yes, in bigger ops at least a Bn if not 2,3, or more. Under CnC of a Bde HQ.

Given the terrain in which most of the offensive actions took place battalion and company sized actions soon devolved into platoon/squad actions separated by stands of jungle/bamboo/hedgerows/treelines.

If you want to get a feel for a wide range of unit actions, ranging from platoon to battalion I suggest picking up any number of books by Keith Nolan. Nolan, who unfortunately died too young, has chronicled a variety of different units, regular army, armored and Marines. Through extensive interviews with many of the veterans he provides great examples of actions that can be used as the basis for miniatures gaming.

Yes in the closed terrain of the jungle it came down to at many times Sqds and Plt actions. As I said in many cases you don't see the other elements in your Company, you just have radio commo. Hopefully …

I have read some of Nolan's books, very good, highly recommended.

Got a couple on order. I think the platoon-sized base as per McDonough's 'Platoon Commander' book has great potential for what we call a 'narrative' game…not really quite a campaign as such, more just a continuous table for a week or so with a number of engagements.

I would suggest "Comanche Six: Company Commander in Vietnam" by James Estep for a good account of a US Infantry Company's experience in the field.