Combatintman

Sorry mate, that film is an utter shocker.

Who, perhaps appropriately, is sat in Kabul typing this 😏

Peace loving peoples of the Soviet Union - bound to happen mate ... 😏

Have a like - me too, at least the OP has an answer to the question he actually asked.

Given the poster is talking about dismounted infantry employing a man portable Dragon, I'm not sure that it is a consideration at all.

Nothing automatic about it.  NATO forces in Germany were under strength and needed time to round out.  For instance most of the NL and BE corps were based in their respective countries.  1 (BR) Corps' 1 Armoured Division's peacetime locations were a good deal north of their wartime AORs and, depending on the time frame, two of the 1 (BR) Corps roled Field Forces and latterly one of it's divisions was based in the UK.  Same for the US, who had even further to move their reinforcements.  Soviet exercises plus the routine rotation of conscripts were watched closely because if GSFG/WGF went for the standing start option a lot of NATO would be in the wrong place.  It would be naive to assume that the Soviets didn't know this and didn't have a planning option for the standing start scenario.

Linear deployment of mortar and observer to line up with a target is something I have never heard of.  So, while I am not expertly versed in mortar procedures, I suspect it is something that doesn't happen or is taught as the 'ideal' solution.  With all observed fire, so long as the observer can read a map accurately, see the target and can then communicate that to Fire Direction Center/mortar line you are well on the way to getting rounds where you want them.  So long as the people at the FDC/mortar line transcribe those grids accurately and they are passed on to the individual mortars accurately you are further down that path.  If the mortars/guns are correctly sited and even better, surveyed, and the crews know how many turns of the dial = 'up 100 - left 50 etc' on the aiming mechanism and how many charges are needed for the required range, then they should hit the target.  Gunnery is lots of sums and works best if you know where the target is, what the weather's like and where your guns/mortars are so does not need mortar, observer and target to be in a nice straight line.

Neither is it determined by being the most persistent and vocal person in the debate.  One of the people with whom you are disagreeing @Ultradaveis or was responsible for the planning and execution of indirect fires as a profession.  You, on the other hand, appear to lack the same credentials, so guess who is more likely to be believed.

Then why did he mention an FO (forward observer) and indirect fire in his question smarty pants?

Neither is it determined by being the most persistent and vocal person in the debate.  One of the people with whom you are disagreeing @Ultradaveis or was responsible for the planning and execution of indirect fires as a profession.  You, on the other hand, appear to lack the same credentials, so guess who is more likely to be believed.

Neither is it determined by being the most persistent and vocal person in the debate.  One of the people with whom you are disagreeing @Ultradaveis or was responsible for the planning and execution of indirect fires as a profession.  You, on the other hand, appear to lack the same credentials, so guess who is more likely to be believed.

Neither is it determined by being the most persistent and vocal person in the debate.  One of the people with whom you are disagreeing @Ultradaveis or was responsible for the planning and execution of indirect fires as a profession.  You, on the other hand, appear to lack the same credentials, so guess who is more likely to be believed.

@markshot - no issues with the question from me either @LukeFFhas pretty much summed the situation up.

@markshot - no issues with the question from me either @LukeFFhas pretty much summed the situation up.

@markshot - no issues with the question from me either @LukeFFhas pretty much summed the situation up.

You didn't offend anyone or do anything wrong - it was a good question. There's just another participant in this discussion that doesn't like being corrected. 

Have a like - me too, at least the OP has an answer to the question he actually asked.

Whatever. He asked for experience virtual or real. I gave him real world. And I'm quite well aware of the definition of indirect fire, thank you.
I'm done here. 
Dave

Streams are generally fordable, the only time they shouldn't be is if the tile on which they are painted or tiles on either side of the stream contain impassable terrain.  You just have to move your cursor over the area you want to cross and see whether it shows it as being impassable.  I accept that this is fiddly but it is the only way to be sure.

When in doubt ... read the pam ...

Except dismounts can cross some types of terrain that vehicles can't.

When in doubt ... read the pam ...

Returned Services League - an Australian veterans organisation of which I am a card carrying member.

Blue has limited assets and, is working under the same time constraints as Red, has the same objectives as Red and beyond knowing that there are a couple of BRDMs in the village, knows that a flank security element  of unknown strength and composition is on its way.  That means moving armour into the village without infantry support is a reasonable calculated risk to take particularly when you don't have too many dismounts and a tank is better at zapping a BRDM than an infantry unit is.  And of course you will want to get your infantry onto that objective as quickly as you can because that is your main objective.  Its easy to be a smart and clever after you know what's going to happen and now that you've finally won after losing at least 10 times.  And of course if you don't like the AI plan, crack it open in the editor, fill your boots and change it.

Blue has limited assets and, is working under the same time constraints as Red, has the same objectives as Red and beyond knowing that there are a couple of BRDMs in the village, knows that a flank security element  of unknown strength and composition is on its way.  That means moving armour into the village without infantry support is a reasonable calculated risk to take particularly when you don't have too many dismounts and a tank is better at zapping a BRDM than an infantry unit is.  And of course you will want to get your infantry onto that objective as quickly as you can because that is your main objective.  Its easy to be a smart and clever after you know what's going to happen and now that you've finally won after losing at least 10 times.  And of course if you don't like the AI plan, crack it open in the editor, fill your boots and change it.