Can We Create A Deep Recon Strike Battalion?

[Majestic12]

So the British have this new and official brigade which intrigues me as a wargamer. I am struggling to create/sim in Shockforce 2 as the brits. Now I know that it's outside of the restructuring and the operating part is the the recon elements. I don't what to pick to simulate Recce in QB, can someone help me?

[domfluff]

Sure, I've been playing around with it, in various combinations.

I haven't found an up-to-date orbat for the current Strike plans (and I don't know if they're even finalised), but he's a 2019 paper that is an attempt to optimise them (since it's an "optimisation", it presumably does *not* represent the default or the reality, but it's a really easy place to start.

https://static.rusi.org/201906_op_strike_web.pdf

From that paper, your Combat Team might look like this:



In CMSF terms, the IFV Boxers can be Warriors, and the HMG Boxers can be FV432 with minimal issue.

The British do not have 120mm mortars in CMSF, so you're either looking at using the FV432 81mm mortars or 155mm artillery. The "one mortar" above is really three - since the idea is that these are co-ordinating as a single unit, whilst being dispersed.

Individual two-man Javelin teams can be added, and DMRs can be two man sniper teams.

There are no air defence vehicles or manpads in CMSF. To translate the above, I'd give them an FV432 and a US manpad team.


The step above this:



Ajax is being used as a drop-in replacement for the Scimitar CVR(T), since they do the same job - in CMSF terms (and presumably real life, if they can't get the problems with Ajax sorted), Scimitar is the way to go for now.

For context, the above "platoon"-sized CT would have a fighting box of up to 4km x 4km, and would be expected to be able to defeat an enemy mechanised infantry company, which would not be easy.

In the paper, they argue against embedding Ajax at the CT level. This would be counter to British Cold War practice, since the British emphasised depth, counter attack and low-level embedded recce to a much greater extent than the rest of the NATO.


For that context (since it's still very much rooted in that kind of idea), your typical Cold War Combat Team might be:

2 x FV432 mech infantry platoons (4 APCs, 3 rifle + 1 HQ in each platoon, 8 total)
2 x Tank Troops (2 platoons of 3 Chieftains, 6 total)
2 x Scimitar recce vehicles

In infantry CT: 1 x Infantry CT HQ in FV432
In armour CT: 1 x Troop of 3 Chieftains

1 x Blowpipe manpad team in Spartan

Plus support assets (an ambulance, recovery vehicles) and any attached ATGM options (Milan, Swingfire, Striker)


So an Infantry CT would have 6 Chieftains, and the Armour CT would have 9, and Cold War BAOR doctrine was heavily based around Chieftain (much in the same way that US doctrine was really centred on TOW).

The Battlegroup (more or less a battalion) above that would be a combination of Infantry and Armour CTs, with the emphasis on depth and counter-attack - 1 forward, 2 back, 1 in reserve, in a formation which is deeper than it is wide. The forward CT takes the brunt, and the two back (north and south) then consolidate to slow down the Soviet advance. When this is stymied, the fourth element counter attacks in the flank (whichever flank is exposed). The fifth element of the Battlegroup is the artillery.
 

In terms of Strike - I'm still very much at the stage of trying to get a feel for things, and to understand the advantages and limitations. I'm not currently at the stage where I can form defensible opinions about it, although that seems pretty typical in discussions of it across the internet.

[domfluff]

Now, the actual "Deep Recon Strike BCT" as currently planned, is mostly just a combination of the recce assets, as I understand it - that'll currently (and in CMSF) be a combination of Scimitar CVR(T) and Jackals, backed by a *lot* of artillery. MLRS is above scale, but AS90 155mm isn't.

[Majestic12]

I see. So how many jackals do I need?

[domfluff]

"Regiments" in this sense are battalion-sized forces.

The Ajax/Scimitar would then be in four recce squadrons, each with three reconnaissance troops of four Scimitars and four Striker ATGM vehicle, plus supporting assets.

I don't have the orbat of the light recce regiments to hand, but it'll be similar, just replacing Scimitars with Jackals. There's an interim formation that has mostly CVR(T), but one of the squadrons is wheeled.

In the Cold War context, the all-wheeled formations were used for larger scale reconnaissance, often by the reservists. The Scimitars would be carrying most of the load.

[Combatintman]

11 hours ago, domfluff said:

"Regiments" in this sense are battalion-sized forces.

The Ajax/Scimitar would then be in four recce squadrons, each with three reconnaissance troops of four Scimitars and four Striker ATGM vehicle, plus supporting assets.

I don't have the orbat of the light recce regiments to hand, but it'll be similar, just replacing Scimitars with Jackals. There's an interim formation that has mostly CVR(T), but one of the squadrons is wheeled.

In the Cold War context, the all-wheeled formations were used for larger scale reconnaissance, often by the reservists. The Scimitars would be carrying most of the load.

Nope.  True in terms of the platform but not the crewing for most of the Cold War until the introduction of the CVR series in the mid-70s.  From then CVR(W) Fox was designed to operate with the mostly light role (Type A and Type B Battalions) UK-based Field Forces/Brigades and their two counterparts in Germany.  The four armoured divisional reconnaissance regiments fielded CVR(T) Scorpion and battlegroups either had their own organic recce platoons/troops with CVR(T) Scimitar or were allocated those elements from the formation reconnaissance regiment when these were regrouped under the latter following the 1975 Defence White Paper from about 1976-1981.   CVR(W) Fox was a divisional asset when 2 Armoured Division moved to the UK and became 2 Infantry Division in 1982/1983.  So from this point forwards your statement is partially correct with one of the four divisions fielding wheeled recce assets for larger scale reconnaissance.

[Majestic12]

Found this article for those that are interested:

https://wavellroom.com/2020/01/07/strike-brigades-more-than-just-a-medium-weight-capability/

[nathangun]

On 1/9/2022 at 1:54 PM, domfluff said:

Sure, I've been playing around with it, in various combinations.

I haven't found an up-to-date orbat for the current Strike plans (and I don't know if they're even finalised), but he's a 2019 paper that is an attempt to optimise them (since it's an "optimisation", it presumably does *not* represent the default or the reality, but it's a really easy place to start.

https://static.rusi.org/201906_op_strike_web.pdf

From that paper, your Combat Team might look like this:



In CMSF terms, the IFV Boxers can be Warriors, and the HMG Boxers can be FV432 with minimal issue.

The British do not have 120mm mortars in CMSF, so you're either looking at using the FV432 81mm mortars or 155mm artillery. The "one mortar" above is really three - since the idea is that these are co-ordinating as a single unit, whilst being dispersed.

Individual two-man Javelin teams can be added, and DMRs can be two man sniper teams.

There are no air defence vehicles or manpads in CMSF. To translate the above, I'd give them an FV432 and a US manpad team.


The step above this:



Ajax is being used as a drop-in replacement for the Scimitar CVR(T), since they do the same job - in CMSF terms (and presumably real life, if they can't get the problems with Ajax sorted), Scimitar is the way to go for now.

For context, the above "platoon"-sized CT would have a fighting box of up to 4km x 4km, and would be expected to be able to defeat an enemy mechanised infantry company, which would not be easy.

In the paper, they argue against embedding Ajax at the CT level. This would be counter to British Cold War practice, since the British emphasised depth, counter attack and low-level embedded recce to a much greater extent than the rest of the NATO.


For that context (since it's still very much rooted in that kind of idea), your typical Cold War Combat Team might be:

2 x FV432 mech infantry platoons (4 APCs, 3 rifle + 1 HQ in each platoon, 8 total)
2 x Tank Troops (2 platoons of 3 Chieftains, 6 total)
2 x Scimitar recce vehicles

In infantry CT: 1 x Infantry CT HQ in FV432
In armour CT: 1 x Troop of 3 Chieftains

1 x Blowpipe manpad team in Spartan

Plus support assets (an ambulance, recovery vehicles) and any attached ATGM options (Milan, Swingfire, Striker)


So an Infantry CT would have 6 Chieftains, and the Armour CT would have 9, and Cold War BAOR doctrine was heavily based around Chieftain (much in the same way that US doctrine was really centred on TOW).

The Battlegroup (more or less a battalion) above that would be a combination of Infantry and Armour CTs, with the emphasis on depth and counter-attack - 1 forward, 2 back, 1 in reserve, in a formation which is deeper than it is wide. The forward CT takes the brunt, and the two back (north and south) then consolidate to slow down the Soviet advance. When this is stymied, the fourth element counter attacks in the flank (whichever flank is exposed). The fifth element of the Battlegroup is the artillery.
 

In terms of Strike - I'm still very much at the stage of trying to get a feel for things, and to understand the advantages and limitations. I'm not currently at the stage where I can form defensible opinions about it, although that seems pretty typical in discussions of it across the internet.

 

It'd be interesting to see how it would work in a campaign.