Mike Robel

The US Army doesn't have any public release manuals on other Armies anymore. However, you can access some of the Fm 100-60 series on OPFOR at the ATDL site. http://www.adtdl.army.mil/atdls.htm You can access a variety of manuals approved for public distribution.

It was after the breach and well afte we passed the 1 (UK) AD. Sometime after day three...

I know that the S-3, 1-4 CAV took out two T-55s with his TOW and then the remaining one with his 25mm. Flank shots into the hull. 25mm can do some damage on the right target at the right angle. Of course, Tom said that he would have rather not have been in that position. The three tanks in question, split the boundry between A and B Troops and were wandering around unmolested. Tom won the Bronze Star with V. We all thought he should have got the Silver Star.

Well, a LAV,no matter how bad it is, is better than a battle dress shirt, even with a kevlar vest or a HMMWV. It is not as good as an M1, but I think I could defeat a T-72/BMP Division with the IBCT in the defense and take out the same combination in the defense. It is a matter of knowing how to fight the systems, use the ground, and use the weaknesses of the enemy.

Your estimates are probably too conservative. The M1A1/A2 are probably pretty impervious to fire from anything on the front slope and many on the flanks. The only M1s killed in the Gulf were by other M1s.

I like writing about wargames almost as much as I like playing them. Sadly, there are few wargames I like to play anymore, so writing has dried up a litte....

Lets just say that the armor on the turret, while it doesn't have much of a slope, is REALLY thick. When my battalion got IP M1s, you could see the weld where the additional armor was welded. No, I don't remember how much thicker, but it was really thick. I am not sure anyone on the forum really needs to know how thick, even if I did remember.

OH-58Ds are in service, but they are the "light" attack helicopter. There are no(or soon will no longer be)aero-scout platoons. EVeryone is a scout and everyone is an attack pilot. It just depends on what the PL or CO tells you to do. Major, the big difference would be one of Ph while hovering.

Steel Panthers has surviving crew dismount and run to the rear. It is more of an annoyance than it is a positive addition to the gaming experience. If you could bind them into squads, evacuate them, or put them into tanks that are short crewman, it would be more realistic, but probably less enjoyable, so I prefer the way TacOps handles the probelem.

In contrast to everyone else who has replied to this question, I think the student asked a legitimate question. To reply that she needs to be horsewhipped and other such comments merely indicates that some may fail to understand how learning takes place. As to whether or not it is moral to play the game, I would say that, of course, it is perfectly moral to playe whatever game you like, so long as it does not hurt you or other players. It is played for fun and a wargame is no less fun than is, say high school football, and it has much less chance of hurting anyone. As a game, TacOps has much less inherent violence displayed than Quake, DukeNukem, and many other much more explicit games. Second, since you appear to be a Marine reservist or a part time teacher, another part of your answer would concern that your other job is to lead men into battle. TacOps in some way can help you do that and be a better soldier. If you are a better soldier, than fewer of your men (who may be her, her friends, brothers, and one day children) will die in the course of fighting and winning the nation's wars. Third, if you study history, then wargaming in general, and by carefully setting up scenarios, TacOps in particular, can help you gain a better understanding of historical events - a study which is more interactive than reading and merely looking at a map and can provide an insite to how a leader thinks and acts as well as a better understanding of the weapons systems of the period under study. Fourth, you missed the opportunity to talk about the morality of war in general. Is war moral? Perhaps or perhaps not; there is a whole series of just war discussions that can be engaged in, more than I can even begin to go into here. While moral may be immoral and irrational (a rational army would RUN AWAY) you can then discuss whether it is morale to stand on the street corner and watch someone be robbed or killed. Finally, you could bring up the role of many other games in study and personnel development. The Sims would be a good game for a family development course. Rollar Coaster Tycoon would give insite into running a corporation, just as SimCity would give some insite into city management. Flight simulators help train pilots. There are many other examples. High school kids are supposed to be idealistic. Maybe the world would be a better place if more people were idealistic. I worry that you as a teacher consider her "an idiot kid otherwise." This girl does not need to be horsewhipped, ridiculed, or made fun of. She asked a legitimate question, that deserved a serious answer. The game in no more or less moral than violent movies, games, or any other form of recreation. It has positive virtues just as do many other things.

Oh, the 7.62mm protection was based on publisehd data about the LAV-25. The LAV III apparently has better armor. On the other hand, my friend Al Huber states that the LAV III, even in its turrettless version, exceeds the capability of the C-130. While i think the LAV based unit would be effective, I probably, if I got to make the decision, go with the M113/M8 combination.

Glad you liked my articles. I also ran tests with a 7.62mm version of the LAV and was relatively successful. The key point here is that you MUST dismount to fight. Only that lets you use your javelins to any effect. Short bounds, massive use of overwatch fires and suppression of the enemy with artillery and screening your own force with smoke are crtical.

I am a former Armor officer and I can understand the uncomfortableness about the LAV, especially when we have M113s lying about ready to be used. However, from extensive gaming, examination of the vehicles, and my experience as a cavalryman with M113/M551 and M113/M60A1 and a tank company commander with M113/M60A1&A3, I have to say that I believe, properly employed these vehicles could successfully defeat the attack of an MRR. However, they are closer to an airmobile infantry battalion then they are an M1/M2 Task Force. You simply can't fight them the same way. I would prefer that the LAV have a a 25mm cannon then the M2 or MK19 and I have serious reservations about the infantry schools determination that the IBCT prevails through dismounted infantry combat, but I still think it can accomplish the mission. I would accept command of such a force with pleasure. Mike Robel LTC, AR USAR

Actually, I was thinking more along the lines of you defeat the enemy MRR, but you only have three vehicles left. Technically a win, but terrible for your troops and tis easy picking for the 2nd echelon. Concur about scenario design.

Well, well, well. Tis a small world. I was teaching ROTC at Cal State San Bernardino from 87 - 90, so we were there at the same time. With regards to tactics. You will find that what works in the real world, works in the game. What I find useful is to print out the map of the scenario, cover it with acetate, and then draw the avenues of approach and key terrain on them just as I would have in the field. You should find that at the school, you will find people playng the game slightly differently than most people do on the forum. Hobby players tend to pay more attention to victory conditions, while former/current military players are perhaps less focused on the victory conditions and more concerned with (1) defeating the enemy and (2) preserving their force. These game vs real life goals can lead to different styles of play. Again, if use the tactics and techniques found in FM 71-1, FM 71-2, and FM 71-123, then you should have a high degree of success. Mike Robel LTC, AR USAR

ADJ is adjust. Basically, the battery shoots one round till the observer gets it onto the target, then the Fire For Effect, which showers the target with rounds Smoke is adjusted with HE, then you switch to Smoke for the FFE I usually don't adjust, prefering to hit the target with FFE on the first round hoping to get killing effects right away. I usually let each mission last 3 to 6 volleys.

In TACOPS, there are Task Force size scenarios using an Armored Cavalry Squadron. Squadron, of course, is the cavalry term for battalion. Task Force in the army indicates a battalion or brigade size unit that has been task organized. In the case of a battalion, it would give away 1 or 2 tank or infantry companies and recieve 1 or 2 of the other to make it a combined arms unit. A cav squadron is by its nature, already a combined arms unit. Dragon, in general you are correct, except insofar as the cavalry regiments (2nd, 3rd, and 11th are concerned, as well as an ACR in the TN National Guard. Some aviation units are also organized as regiments.)

The difference between Regiments and Brigades in the US Army is fairly easy. There are only three ground combat regiments in the Army and they are the Armored Cavalry Regmients. They have a fixed organization of a headquarters, three ground squadrons (hq, three cav troops, a tank company, and a how battery) an air squadron, a support squadron, and several seperate troops/companies/batteris such as ADA, engineer, NBC, etc. Cav Regiments are commanded by Colonels. There are two kinds of Brigades in the Army: divisional and seperate. divisional brigades in theory have no assigned units beyond their headquartes and now their recon troops. They can control from 2 to 5 battalions. They are frequently semi-permanently configures with three manuever battalions. When they go to the field, they also receive an FA battalion, a support battalion, Engineer Battalion or company, signal company, etc. Most of these extra units are not assigned to the brigade but are placed in direct support, meaning that the brigade does not have to provide any support to them (in fact it can't) but gets to tell them what to do. A divisional brigade is commanded by a colonel. When they are configured with all their support units, they are usually referred to as a Brigade Combat Team or BCT. US Army seperate brigades are organized much like their divisional brigades, except that the support structure is organic. They can control from two to five manuever battalions and can be attached to a division or directlry to a corps. They are commanded by Brigadier general. The only active duty seperate brigade is the 172 SIB (Light) in Alaska. Most of the combat units in the National Guard are seperate Brigades, except for the 6 or so Divisions. The seperates are generally aligned with an active duty division and are in war plans. Selected units are to be able to deploy in 90 days. The divisions are in no war plans and have a much longer deployment time. They may be considered a sort of strategic reserve. Interestingly enough, the 49th Armored Divison (TXARNG) is now the controlling HQ in Bosnia. Prior to World War I, the Regiment, then a fixed organization, was the primary combat unit of the army, consisting of 3 or 4 battalions. In World War I, divisions were square, and had two brigades, each with two regiments, in order to survive the slaughter of the Western Front. Just prior to WWII, the Army reorganized its divisions into triangular units, with three regiments, each with three battalions. These were fixed units and also included a cannon company, a recon troop, a hq, and some other units. They could also receive supporting arms, and then were called Regimental Combat Teams. Armor divisions in WWII were more like divisions today. They had three Combat Command HQ (A, B, and ®eserve). The divisiion had 6 battalions assigned - 3 tank, 3 armored infantry, and 3 armored artillery. These were grouped into the three combat commands. CCR was supposed to be a rest and refit hq and a reserve hq, but was sometimes pressed into service, as was CCR/4th AD, when it broke into Bastogne, to link up with the beleaguered 101st Airborn during the battle of the Bulge. THe marines are somewhat simlar to the Army, but their regiments are usually assigned to a Marine Expeditionary Brigade and don't, (I think, but would certainly defer to any soliders of the sea in the auidence) normally deploy them as brigades. The Soviets organized into Regiments, each with three motorized rifle battalions, a tank battalion, and an SP FA battalion, plus some other supporting units. There were three Motorized Rifle Regiments per Divison, and then a tank regiment as well, organized as the mirror image of the MRBs. Some divisions also included an Independent Tank Battalion of 4 - 7 companies. Hope this helps.