Author Topic: Heavy Infantry in the Order of Battle  (Read 197 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline rangerrebew

  • America defending Veteran
  • Mod
  • *****
  • Posts: 106,670
  • �It�s easier to fool people than to convince them
Heavy Infantry in the Order of Battle
« on: February 07, 2019, 08:18:04 AM »

Heavy Infantry in the Order of Battle

Michael Gladius

CPT Matthew Allgeyer wrote an article on Heavy Infantry in 2018, in which he argued that body armor has made heavy infantry viable again. His analysis is excellent and focuses mainly on their unique equipment and employment requirements, particularly for urban combat. One issue that was not raised, however, was how these would fit into the order of battle. Here, I propose a solution.

When fighting combined-arms warfare, three traditions exist: The French, German, and Russian. In the French Tradition, combined-arms warfare is at the tactical level, with infantry and armor mixed in units as small as companies.[ii] In the German Tradition, this is conducted at the operational level, with separate divisions for infantry and armor. In the Russian Tradition, combined-arms is conducted at the strategic level, with Deep Battle Doctrine designating separate armies for breakthrough and exploitation.
“A society does not ever die ‘from natural causes’, but always dies from suicide or murder – and nearly always from the former….”
    ― Arnold Joseph Toynbee’s A Study of History.

Share me

Digg  Facebook  SlashDot  Delicious  Technorati  Twitter  Google  Yahoo