Ground Vehicle Recce

[Bzzliteyr]

When I was teaching my AFV at the Armour school, I'd "freeze" the projector to black, go to google images and start digging up pictures to review.  I'd then "snap" the image on screen and give students a split second to look.  It was challenging and fun at the same time and to me, seemed to make a dry lesson a little more entertaining.

The big thing to remember for AFV is what the information is needed for? Detailed reconaissances require more information but basic Int may only require that you can identify a tank vs APC.  IE pilot vs dismounted recce.

 

[SupersonicMax]

Our tests are 100 pictures shown at a 7s interval.  We have to write down the answers as well as ID the vehicles.  7s may look like a lot of time but it isn't (for me anyways)

 

[George Wallace]

When I was teaching my AFV at the Armour school, I'd "freeze" the projector to black, go to google images and start digging up pictures to review.  I'd then "snap" the image on screen and give students a split second to look.  It was challenging and fun at the same time and to me, seemed to make a dry lesson a little more entertaining.

The big thing to remember for AFV is what the information is needed for? Detailed reconaissances require more information but basic Int may only require that you can identify a tank vs APC.  IE pilot vs dismounted recce.

When we trained for Boeselager, we would black out most of the slide and show only parts of the vehicles.  A fender.  A rear Sprocket.  A gun barrel.  A nose cone.  A Tail Fin.  The competition itself was excellent, as depending on the host unit, perfectly detailed miniatures/models were used and put in camouflaged positions on an IMR.  Very realistic through binos.

The thing about AFV Rec is that according to an Enemy ORBAT various units and sub units will have "Signature Equipment".  It it these types of equipment that Recce and INT guys have to know by heart.  What makes up a CRP?  What makes up a MOD?   What makes up a MSG?  What AD Artillery are located at what level of Command.  What Radar is associated with what AD equipment.  All of this is important info.

 

[Bzzliteyr]

George, I remember us doing that training in 96.. it was fun.. using the small Roco miniatures and putting them at a good distance then using binos to check them out.  Uniforms, rank structures, map symbols, etc being studied in detail.  I wasn't selected for the team but it was great training nonetheless.

However, we have to move away from the good old "russian bear" AFV as we are now in three block war status and need to really know the equipment of the forces we will be working with, not only the badguys.  I mean, in Bosnia for example, the badguys and the goodguys had some of the same equipment.  It is just as important to know the details in what seperates the two as it does to know what each use.  Suprisingly, I don't remember any AFV action for the work up training for Afghanistan.  Oh yeah, they all look the same.

I highly doubt we will ever experience the cold war battles we trained for(and continue to train for in some cases, AFV for example) and need to put that stuff to use, but the defence on that is always "at least it's a basis to start with".  In that case, why don't we start with a three block war base and retrain for Cold war tactics once they ever arise?

My 2 cents.

 

[George Wallace]

That is why we no longer do the "Friend or Foe" tests.  With the proliferation of arms and former foes now allies, and all, one now needs a greater skill at AFV.  Everything from Ships to Aircraft to AFVs to small arms can be found in anyone's "Backyard". 

I find it unusual that you say you never did any of this during your workup trg.  We usually do whatever Foreign Wpns we can get our hands on as part of ours.  Wpns SMEs could find full time work teaching the differences in AKs, AKMs, PKMs, etc. in all ways: Countries of Mfr, calibre, etc.  Strip and Assemble and IAs would also be good.

There are also a lot of Russian wpns systems still to be found in Afghanistan.  Rockets.  Anti-tank guns and launchers.  Mines.  New wpns coming in from Iran.  Wpns smuggled in from Pakistan. 

 

[Good2Golf]

The SA-12A is a more obvious now that you pointed out the tracked vehicle, but the SA-20 and SA-10 are still hard to identify. I`ll show you 2 pictures, and you tell me which is which.

Thanks for your input, RBD.  I'd love to have a good study package.  All I have is powerpoint slides with vehicles and a word document that identifies every slide.  Better than nothing I guess! 

I'm very new at indentifying ground vehicles (started seriously yesterday with the Ground-to-Air defence), so please, don't think I'm an idiot.  Still trying to find tricks to identify them...

Max

Max, without knowing the radar units associated with these two TELs, there is no way or reasonably telling which is the SA-10 and which is the SA-20.

The only armament difference between the two, is that SA-20 is the only one equipped with 48N6 variant rockets, the SA-10 only uses variants of the 5V55, and you can't tell which is loaded from externally viewing the TEL rocket tube.

I have a bone to pick with people who try to make such differentiation seem important (the difference between what the two TEL's are) when the substantive difference lies not only in the rocket itself (which you can't determine visually) and the associated fire control systems and guidance radar (which is not provided)...thus the question of SA-10 or SA-20 is not only moot, it's not really a value added question at all, because the important elements of the system as an air defence system are entirely lost for somebody being a dick about how many bolts there are on the license plate of the TEL truck as a "dead giveaway".

My other pet peeve is how the NATO designation system often loses the essence of the overall capability of systems by trying to divide variants up into some neat, code-named table.  The SA-10, SA-12, SA-N-6, SA-20, SA-21 systems are a perfect example.  If you looked at the original Soviet S-300 system and tracked the way the Russians grew the S-300P into the S-300V (land army), S-300PM/PMU/PT (army AD, site ABM) and S-300F (naval) you would have a much better appreciation of the overall system, in particular where SA-10 became SA-20 for NATO, but was still the PM, PMU and FM, just with a 5V55 to 48N6 rocket upgrade, and also seeing where the S-300VM and S-300PM linked together into the S-400/M upgraded system (now called SA-21) with improved FCS/Radar and the 9M96 missiles (the small one you occasionally see trebled up, replacing one 48N6 tube on the earlier SA-10/20 TEL.

Attached below is a handy chart for developing a good understanding of the S-300 family.

Cheers,
G2G

 

[TangoTwoBravo]

I took a US Army course about ten years ago and the Company Defensive test was set in Germany against a Soviet foe.  The enemy division had T-72s but there was also an independent tank battalion with T-80s.  I passed this stuff on in company orders with the added bit of how seeing T-80s would be very important information and that the platoon commanders should let me know.

My DS asked me how my tank and Bradley crews were going to tell a T-72 from a T-80.  I offered up the AFV method of counting the driver episcopes, the differences in the exhaust and the nuances of roadwheels to which he answered "How would you tell that at 2,000m in combat?"  

I think that we can also lead ourselves down a garden path when we make too many assumptions based on incomplete information.  Everybody wanted to call a tank and three BMPs the CRP.  Is it?  I'm not sure.  Maybe it is one tank and three BMPs that belong to a company that you can only see part of.  I would prefer that people tell what they see and not add too many editorials.  Have the guys at the CPs who have a somewhat broader view make those calls.  Still, saying CRP was easier.

p.s. G2G - Excellent points.  The SA-10 and SA-20 test seems (to this ground guy) like asking someone to tell a Large Double Double from a Large Double Cream and Three Sugar by looking at the coffee on a carrying tray.

 

[SupersonicMax]

G2G, thanks for the inputs, very informative.  If you have any other chart for other systems (russian or not), please fire away!

Cheers

Max

 

[Blackadder1916]

While it may not assist Max in his AFV test, this may be similar to a perspective that one in his profession gets a view of these systems.

 

[George Wallace]

While it may not assist Max in his AFV test, this may be similar to a perspective that one in his profession gets a view of these systems.

Now you are getting into a different type of "Recognition".  Soviet style defenses, common to all countries who have had Russian Advisers/Training, are "standardized".  So a good Imagery Analyst will be able to tell you the wpns systems and radar systems simply by looking at the layout of the installation and its' equip.

 

[Good2Golf]

G2G, thanks for the inputs, very informative.  If you have any other chart for other systems (russian or not), please fire away!

Cheers

Max

Max, not all-encompassing, but good information...a lot is in German.

DTIG - Defense Threat Information Group

Cheers
G2G

 

[SupersonicMax]

Thanks for the link.  I'll read it over the next week.

So far, I think I could identify most of today's SAM systems.  Incredible the amount of progress I've done in 2 days with you guy's help!

Thanks a million!

Max

 

[Franko]

It gets a bit trickier when you get into the support vehicles and radar systems....

Regards