|
Post by panzer0170 on Oct 20, 2014 12:09:58 GMT -5
OK bottom line, if you are a small 4-man team caught in a near ambush, life expectancy is not good. There's no arguing that point. Agreed.But I would beg to differ on the amount of troops and weapons available. You cannot just operate the same way as a light infantry platoon when you are a 4-man call sign. Especially when you don't have automatic weapons, claymores, grenades, etc. Yes the concepts may be the same, or very similar, but how you execute them may be entirely different. I've done this with 4 people & simunitions, though I admit never 'for real'. You can 'comfortably' handle 10-12 EF 'in' the ambush.My "actions on" drills may be entirely different for a small 4-man team, patrolling the retreat perimeter, than what I would do as recon team in the military. Actions on should rarely be the same for 2 missions. I'm talking things like Actions on EF Pre-seen (You've seen them, they haven't seen you; Do you leave, hasty ambush, engage? Do you radio back or do you maintain radio silence? Actions on are so specific, they need to be read out before each 'mission' - Be that an hour long patrol by a 4 man team or a 3 day battalion assault through a small town. I cannot just ASSume the opfor is armed and dangerous, and fire up any intruders coming my way, just for starters. You see, I think this is a massive doctrine difference from the US to the UK - I know FOR SURE your militaries rules of engagement are... pretty damned free. This is something we've trained into everyone, certainly in the last decade. There IS no 'Army' to fight. And when the locals carry the same weapons as the EF, and by day the locals are locals, and by night the locals are EF.... Assume everyone is armed and dangerous, but treat them friendly. Then, once I do determine I had certified bad guys, I have to determine just exactly what I'm up against. Can they shoot? Can they actually maneuver as a unit? Or is this just a collection of random individuals that will scatter to the wind? And, again I don't have automatic weapons and explosives to play with. Automatic weapons and explosives just make things easy, but there is a (again, MILITARY) automatic response, it seems, for the US to go 'what toys do we have to acheive X', and again - It's only recently we've started having toys, so we're used to doing without. When I first started and did Infantry training, EVERYTHING we trained was with personal weapons only, or if GPMG etc exists, it's at platoon level (which, by our doctrine, means it only ever gets used for deliberate assaults, or harbour sentry)So how does this all affect how I will respond in an actual WROL sit? First of all, as Winter (and myself) has said, a small 4-man team is relying on stealth as the primary weapon. We are going to AVOID all the shit as much as possible. Totally agreed. I have been working under the assumption that if I've detailed something, it's because we've been forced into it, not because it's what I did as a soldier. We will also be moving low and slow, to see and hear the other guy first. So our movement technique becomes our first line of defense against being caught in ambush. If it's a chance contact, then it's who discovers they other guy first, and sets up a hasty ambush; this tilts the odds in our favor. If it's a deliberate ambush patrol we stumble into, then it's worst-case scenario, and we may be screwed. But we may also be able to use our small size and mobility to escape the kill zone, if luck is on our side that day. Or your goose may be cooked. I agree - But I don't beleive in chance, only odds. I am aiming to decrease the odds at all opportunities. peeling left minimises enemy arcs, which lowers the odds of getting shot.But again, let's take a look at how this might fit into a plausible scenario. If we are patrolling low and slow around our retreat perimeter, chances are any contact will be either a chance contact, where we both see each simultaneously, or due to the fact that we are probably moving slower with frequent security halts, we see them first, and set up a hasty ambush. Someone MAY see us first and set up, but in all probability it will not be a perfect ranger school ambush, complete with belt fed on the short "L", claymores down the middle, and security on the flanks and back. Although this is the worst case scenario, the probability of it happening is very low, IMHO. Totally agree. And quite frankly, anyone good enough to get within 200m of your retreat & setup a quality ambush would probably be capable of just making a direct assault on your retreat, probably around patrol changeover, right when you're at your worst.When on patrol, we frequently "button-hook" on our back trail to make sure nobody is tailing you. It looks like a big Shepard's crook laid out on the ground. You simply patrol back around in a circular fashion until you are back parallel to your back trail. Sit in hasty ambush position, and wait. So in this instance, if I was seen moving straight north, I would button hook back around to the east, south, then west, until I intersected my original line of travel north. The terrain will dictate how big of a loop you need to pull this off. Never really had a name for this. This is just something we do as part of a snap ambush. This is very similar if not identical to what I know/understand already Bottom line, I think we have to consider how we may have to operate, and how is that different from how we did it active duty. So I ask again, what would you guys do in a WROL situation? You have 4 guys out on night patrol. You have AR's with 7 mags each. You have Glocks with 4 mags each. That's it. You are fired up in near ambush. You estimate 8-10 rifles/pistols of various sorts, all semi auto. You are approx. 200m from the retreat itself. You have comms with base camp, and 4 more guys available as a QRF (but they're sleeping right now). They will all have the same weapons and equipment as you guys (when they get their shit together). It's the middle of the night, which means it's pretty dark out in the woods, even with some moonlight. You have lots of cover from trees all around. You estimate the enemy is about 10m away on your right flank, according to muzzle flashes. What would you do? Turn and face, and peel back the way we came. I stand by my original decision, here. To add further detail; At 200m with the QRF asleep without gear (that's not a QRF, it's just an RF) in an ambush? Radios, and the retreat, means nothing to me. IF and WHEN I managed to break that contact, I would radio and make a hasty retreat.
HOPEFULLY, assuming you're leaving appropriate spacings, then by the time the first 2 guys have bounded, again assuming you haven't taken casualties (because quite frankly, given this situation, I expect that all 4 of us are dead...) you're starting to get into something akin to cover, and from there.... I will say what I'll say about every scenario I've ever found myself in. Sitrep & QBOs based on whatever I get back from that sitrep.
|
|
|
Post by panzer0170 on Oct 20, 2014 12:15:33 GMT -5
I'm going to assume the following in SHTF. I will likely have 2-4 on patrol with me that have little experience, just what I can teach them in a day. Patrolling the property, slow and deliberate patrol with much observation is the key. Any force that tries to ambush is likely to even less trained and equipped and should be assaulted if close in a mad minute or bounded away from using Panzers method (although those are long bounds) and speed of vacating is more important than being a better target,considering the hopefully poor shooter that is assaulting. If they got skilz you are dead in a close ambush. They are big bounds; But the first one HAS to be big enough to get you to the far end - Once everyone has done a single bound, you can shorten the bounds to make it better fit 'up, seen, down'. The key, as you say, is speed of vacating - You either get short bounds and more time in their arcs, or big bounds but you clear their arcs a lot faster, and at least you're keeping (again, assuming no casualties, I truly don't think that will ever happen, but...) 3/4 of your firepower trained, and firing, BACK. I think it's important to make sure there is a heavy weight of fire (not magdumping, aimed, but rapid) in the direction of the ambush, because they key to survival is to win the firefight. That doesn't mean kill everyone. It means gain the upper hand. Once you've got the upper hand, you can retreat, attack, flank, get on comms and maintain your local and supression etc... But for me.... GTF out.
|
|
winter
Junior Member
Posts: 479
|
Post by winter on Oct 20, 2014 13:55:46 GMT -5
Knowing that even poorly skilled and equiped enemy will still ruin you in an ambush, all we can really do is mitigate getting ambushed.
One technique is that your point man is way out in front. Say 50 yards or the limit of your vision.
The other is buddy teams in overwatch.
Those limit your casualties only. Stealth is the only real way to not be ambushed, but it relies on almost as much luck as skill.
I was teaching an 11B MOSQ at Ft Rich and we fired up the students. We were maybe 50 ft away and the students assaulted. After the smoke cleared we walked down to them and did a little AAR on the spot.
Was it a close ambush? Yes, kinda. I could throw a snowball to where we, the opfor, were set up, but it was a high point in 4 ft of snow across a ditch on the side of the road they were walking down.
After them flopping around trying to assault us for 2-3 minutes, I just stopped the whole thing. Realistically, a close ambush is an enemy close enough to get hands on within 3 seconds of contact.
One of the conundrums of martial matters is sometimes doing the "right" thing is wrong. Experience and training will win the day.
All these patrolling issues and the training requirements for patrolling to be effective are why I support LP/OPs as the primary site security method.
|
|
|
Post by Diz on Oct 20, 2014 15:00:28 GMT -5
Thanks for the come-backs. That's what I'm looking for. Practical application vs school house theory.
Yeah Panzer, I can see much doctrinal differences between us. I had neglected to figure in your experience in Northern Ireland. For me, active duty, if we bumped into anyone on patrol, it was assumed to be enemy. Nowadays, it is much more akin to the bandit country you guys operated in. Might be just desperate people passing through. Maybe armed, maybe not. But not necessarily meaning us harm.
To your point, the scenario might be hopeless, but then again maybe not. We're assuming here that these guys can shoot and/or are organized enough to take you all out. I'm thinking of our recent experiences, where many have said that we would have had many more casualties if the ragheads could actually shoot worth a shit. Perhaps we have the same sit here with your average hood rat. They may have you dead to rights and miss every one of you. Who knows really. I'll give ya a B+ for up the Brits, and allow for the language/doctrinal differences here.
Winter: A+ my man. Very good analysis of the security patrol vs the OP/LP. The answer very well may be to sit tight in "permanent security halts" rather than loly-gag around the property. Perhaps patrolling would be better spent going to, and coming from, set night ambush positions on likely avenues of approach. Duly noted.
OK to be fair, here's my solution. We are fired up at basically point-blank range. No real choice but to fight through it. All four guys on line and an assault through the ambush. If this is just a meeting engagement, which I'm petty sure is the most likely bet, they will be just as disorganized as us, at this point. So it's 50-50 once we are locked in H2H. Perhaps white light here to "jacklight" them, like a poacher does game? Your rifle is now your club, or other weapons such as pistol, knife, hawk come into play. This where your PT is gonna pay off. Mosby would be proud. Once the ambush is broken, and they take casualties, I'd say it's a pretty good bet untrained personnel are gonna break and run. But you might get the crazies. They might LIKE this kind of shit. Then you're in the hurt locker. Who knows. But again, no real choice here. We have to try and break the ambush, or die trying. You want a bullet in the front, or in the back. That's your choice here.
Some other random notes. With just 4 guys, I am really liking the peel right/left method of moving off the X. If they don't hit you with the first volley, then you have a good chance of getting to a flank before they re-orient to your movement. It might be easier or have more flow at night, for 4 guys to just peel individually, rather than trying to leapfrog as buddy teams.
DISTANCE! As Winter noted in his example, charging into an ambush that's really far enough out, or has terrain masking for you to maneuver in, is a pointless exercise. It really needs to be seriously up close and personal for you to charge into. The old grenade range rule may need to be revisited here, for our purposes.
Good point that, if guys are good enough to set up an ambush on your patrol, they're good enough to assault your retreat perimeter. Either way, you're in some deep doo-doo. More likely that you will be in a meeting engagement, with neither side in prepared positions. They are either patrolling in on you to check you out (leader's recon?) or maybe preparing for the assault, and you just interrupted their approach march (maybe one of their security teams going in?).
The only caveat I would add is that relying on OP/LPs alone, will give you perimeter warning all right, but, patrolling is the only way you are going to know WTF is going on around you. If at all possible, I would like to extend my "range of influence" as far out as possible. The patrol becomes an extended "trip wire" for the perimeter, giving them more time to get ready, versus trying to repel an attack that's already on top of you. Just saying. There's pluses and minuses for each COA.
Good stuff guys.
|
|
|
Post by panzer0170 on Oct 20, 2014 15:49:13 GMT -5
Even with all the people in the world, using OPs only is why Bastion/Tombstone got wrecked - No one patrolled the right areas and cleared the threat. I think the grenade range rule is nice - If you've all got grenades, and winter makes a VERY valid point here. Clearance patrols are definitely important - IF you can help it, it's nice to have good line of sight to as much of the patrol route as possible from OP/LP. Obviously this is annoyingly location dependant, but with some preperation BEFORE SHTF then you can control this to SOME degree. I would add that you can limit the requirement for patrols by clever and skillful placement of obstacles. Razor wire, barbed wire, ditches (for vehicles, mostly) and the list goes on till forever. If you can stop someone getting in range on 2 flanks, you can focus on the other two flanks. A big part of my job historically has been the understanding of this sort of shit to (using good solid military terms;) Fix, turn, canalise and block EF movement. IDEALLY you can either stop them getting near you (Good overwatch of obstacles) or make it so hard to come in that way that you only need to clear the area once every couple of days, OR make it so they have to come past your OPs in the first place. A couple of basic trenches in the right place and you're starting to set up a solid defensive area, so long as you're not facing anyone with armour/air/all the stuff that you'd lose to anyway, chances are.
|
|
winter
Junior Member
Posts: 479
|
Post by winter on Oct 20, 2014 18:25:27 GMT -5
Use of area restriction and movement manipulation to make sure "they have to come past your OPs" makes an lp/op (position) based defense even more logical.
You can also harden the lp/ops so that they become fighting position if the need arises.
I may be trying to justify my lack of resources here or just planning based on current resources. Active patrolling needs a QRF and medevac capabilities of some sort, even if just walkie talkies and a stretcher team.
That said, you need people. 4 pers team out, 4 pers team in qrf, at least 4 pers pulling guard duty, and another 4 sleeping.
I can't get one fucker to train with, I sure can't find 16. The idea of patrolling with 3 newbs scares the shit outta me.
|
|
|
Post by USMC0331 on Oct 20, 2014 18:59:59 GMT -5
winter, Not much choice as I see it. I can't rely on an alammo approach and need to see what's poking around the property limits. I'd rather have one SQd dude with me than 3 newbs though.
I hear ya about practice. Today was PR day and I was alone in the rain again and it was a simple couple of drills, no getting down in the mud or anything!
Since we are sharing... todays drills. That Chaos drill is a good one!
|
|
|
Post by Hawkeye on Oct 20, 2014 19:04:37 GMT -5
I am a big advocate of never underestimating your enemy... that said, I don't personally think, based on my experiences, that hungry/starving looters, gangbangers, Joe the I.T. guy, etc..., who somehow end up being smart enough to team up to pillage and plunder or otherwise loot for supplies, are going to be quite as organized, equipped, and trained (especially as a team) as what some of you are giving them credit for. I think there will be a very stark difference between what you do in regards to defense and protection from MZB's (to borrow from J.W. Rawles) [#1 threat in my book], and a military opfor [#2 threat/concern].
|
|
|
Post by USMC0331 on Oct 20, 2014 19:22:45 GMT -5
Normally I would agree except that we now have ton of combat vets to contend with. When their families are starving, they will do what needs done.
|
|
|
Post by Patriotic Sheepdog on Oct 20, 2014 19:33:33 GMT -5
Okay, I'm a med guy so I'm out of my league here, but I'll throw something in for y'all to laugh at likely.
Team of four ambushed from the right. Night, in the woods with brush and trees (sounds like my AO).
Why not have the patrol divided into team one and team two. The first two in the line is team one and the last two is team two. When contact occurs team leader (TL) would call split (or whatever the term might be). Then each two man team would do a bounding type drill. One member would move and at least in my AO would likely find a big tree to take cover fairly quick, while the other member lays down covering fire. Once behind cover, the second man bounds to cover. Now the two teams would split, team one to the left, and team two to the right. Would this split cause some confusion to the OPFOR? In my AO, the two teams would not be that far apart, maybe 10-15 yards tops. So essentially you still have two men (one from each team) laying down covering fire while two are moving...they are just moving in opposite directions. This would allow cover while calling for (Q)RF, or now they have cover to lay cover fire while breaking contact. Each team would have been advised on this prior to patrol.
Just my two cents. It's okay to tell me to "stick with the IVs man" and let the tactical gurus do their thing! Lol
|
|
|
Post by USMC0331 on Oct 20, 2014 21:52:02 GMT -5
PS, Assuming you are talking about a "far" ambush, I think you are describing a break contact drill. RTR drill?
Now I include myself in the "out of my league" group on infantry tactics, but the thing to remember is that in SHTF, infantry tactics will only work of the infantry. Limited people, no crew serves, not demo, and likely hardly trained or at least not gelled teams are the norm so tactics need to be simple and few IMO.
Again, near ambush I don't see any option but to assault. Either you overwhelm them or you were toast to begin with. The question is how much fight do they have in them? If they are thugs, they will look for easier targets to begin with most likely. If they are semi-trained and have superior FP, they likely will win, same as you.
I don't know about anyone else, but I need tactics that will work with 2-4 men and are simple to implement in a week. I think most can be forced into a break contact or ambush scenario. Break contact (I like the peel as a simple solution) will work for far ambush, and mad minute and trying to flank for near ambush is what my mind is set on.
So far that's all I got, I'll keep listening for more on this excellent thread though.
|
|
winter
Junior Member
Posts: 479
|
Post by winter on Oct 20, 2014 22:46:18 GMT -5
I find it almost impossible to discuss team drills without us all standing around a sand table with a plastic soldier in hand.
|
|
|
Post by panzer0170 on Oct 21, 2014 0:52:41 GMT -5
Okay, I'm a med guy so I'm out of my league here, but I'll throw something in for y'all to laugh at likely. Team of four ambushed from the right. Night, in the woods with brush and trees (sounds like my AO). Why not have the patrol divided into team one and team two. The first two in the line is team one and the last two is team two. When contact occurs team leader (TL) would call split (or whatever the term might be). Then each two man team would do a bounding type drill. One member would move and at least in my AO would likely find a big tree to take cover fairly quick, while the other member lays down covering fire. Once behind cover, the second man bounds to cover. Now the two teams would split, team one to the left, and team two to the right. Would this split cause some confusion to the OPFOR? In my AO, the two teams would not be that far apart, maybe 10-15 yards tops. So essentially you still have two men (one from each team) laying down covering fire while two are moving...they are just moving in opposite directions. This would allow cover while calling for (Q)RF, or now they have cover to lay cover fire while breaking contact. Each team would have been advised on this prior to patrol. Just my two cents. It's okay to tell me to "stick with the IVs man" and let the tactical gurus do their thing! Lol I think the issue here is that if you lose the two central guys, you now have no clear direction in which the first and last man are going to bound; And now you're making a decision in an ambush. I think that regardless of the specifics, everyone needs to be moving in one direction with a clear brief before the patrol as to whether thats going to be away from the threat, through the threat, forward down your patrol route or back the way you came. That way, if my buddy goes down, I can bound with the other team, or if you're peeling individually you're just kicking the next guy who is still in the fight.
|
|
|
Post by panzer0170 on Oct 21, 2014 0:54:17 GMT -5
PS, Assuming you are talking about a "far" ambush, I think you are describing a break contact drill. RTR drill? Now I include myself in the "out of my league" group on infantry tactics, but the thing to remember is that in SHTF, infantry tactics will only work of the infantry. Limited people, no crew serves, not demo, and likely hardly trained or at least not gelled teams are the norm so tactics need to be simple and few IMO. Again, near ambush I don't see any option but to assault. Either you overwhelm them or you were toast to begin with. The question is how much fight do they have in them? If they are thugs, they will look for easier targets to begin with most likely. If they are semi-trained and have superior FP, they likely will win, same as you. I don't know about anyone else, but I need tactics that will work with 2-4 men and are simple to implement in a week. I think most can be forced into a break contact or ambush scenario. Break contact (I like the peel as a simple solution) will work for far ambush, and mad minute and trying to flank for near ambush is what my mind is set on. So far that's all I got, I'll keep listening for more on this excellent thread though. I think this is why I'm being so stubborn with my uptake on this one; I've been taught something, and if it happened right now, I know exactly how I'd react. If I get to train a load of new folk in how to do this, I want to teach them ONE thing, and get practise in, not overcomplicate things with decision making.
|
|
|
Post by Patriotic Sheepdog on Oct 21, 2014 6:29:12 GMT -5
@usmc and @panzer....I appreciate the comments. Makes sense. winter...I agree. Sometimes I'm thankful I'm a visual learner when I read some of these posts.
|
|