LUCASWILLEN05 Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 (edited) This probably applies more to light infantry units like 173rd airborne than to heavy forces although some issues raised in the article may well apply there. In the real world complacency in peace time will be paid for in blood in war http://www.politico.com/story/2017/09/02/army-study-173rd-airborne-brigade-europe-russia-242273 In game terms perhaps scenario designers will have to consider downgrading thE troop quality of at least some US units to take account of relative inexperience in high tech conventional warfare, skills that may have atrophied over years of COIN. Maybe we should be more regularly giving the Russians an EW advantage over US forces early in the war. We can assume that over the opening weeks US forces will learn lessons (at a significant cost) and rduce or remov these penalties later Edited September 7, 2017 by LUCASWILLEN05 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MOS:96B2P Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 Interesting article. Especially the part that reported GPS will be unreliable for the duration of the conflict if against a near-peer OpFor. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LUCASWILLEN05 Posted September 7, 2017 Author Share Posted September 7, 2017 I found the issues around lack of training/experience in high intensity warfare most interesting Then the EW challenge. Finally confirmation, at least in terms of leg infantry units the deficiency in AA capability. If these problems also exist in 82nd Airborne, 101st Airmobile then, given these are the Rapid Deployment forces the US military may face a "nasty little Kasserine" in the event of war with Russia or even a second rate army like North Korea. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thewood1 Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 So my question is...lot of criticism around US capabilities. How about the other side of the front? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
c3k Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 True, the US Army is very bad at air defense. In related news, the US Air Force refuses to state their readiness levels for MOUT campaigns. Rumors swirl that they are not ready to physically take possession of contested buildings. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 14 minutes ago, c3k said: In related news, the US Air Force refuses to state their readiness levels for MOUT campaigns. Rumors swirl that they are not ready to physically take possession of contested buildings. You rogue you! Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sgt.Squarehead Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 Made me chuckle. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cool breeze Posted September 7, 2017 Share Posted September 7, 2017 (edited) Meanwhile Germany continues to impress the world with their level of commitment to a united defense. Wait is Lucas really german or am I thinking of someone else Edited September 7, 2017 by cool breeze 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LUCASWILLEN05 Posted September 8, 2017 Author Share Posted September 8, 2017 15 hours ago, cool breeze said: Meanwhile Germany continues to impress the world with their level of commitment to a united defense. Wait is Lucas really german or am I thinking of someone else Half Swiss on my late Father's side actually. Which means I stay neutral, sell arms to both sides and make huge profits. And gt vry offended if you call me GERMAN! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.