1. Stick to terrain that the vehicles can't reach.
or
2. Blow up the vehicles with whatever you've got.
Really that is what it boils down to, and so let us discuss option 1. If you force the enemy to dismount and come to you then what range you decide to engage the enemy has more to do with terrain and opportunity than tactics. Dismount to dismount tactics are well documented, and here marksmanship is very important to allow maneuver.
The second option, blowing stuff up, requires you to close with the enemy. John Mosby has written here http://mountainguerrilla.blogspot.com/2012/07/stealth-is-survival-or-victory-is-in.html about getting close, hitting hard, and getting out. What he writes is sound, and I would simply like to add on my thoughts to the matter.
To hit hard against a better equipped force you need explosives, or something that provides the same "shock" and damage effect on your enemy. Honestly the old RPG-7 is too small for this role anymore with the anti-armor cages and nets on armored vehicles. We are talking things like an anti tank recoilless rifle, a shoulder launched anti tank missile, a command detonated anti vehicle mine, an anti tank grenade. Here is an example of Iraqi Insurgents using the RKG-3 anti tank grenade. This is what closing with a mounted armored force looks like in an urban area.
What the Iraqi Insurgents failed to do was capitalize on their initial "boom" with follow on effects. Remember, there is no silver bullet in warfare, what you need is the right mix of tools in the toolbox to build your victory, and while I stress rifle marksmanship it is just one tool in the box.
8 comments:
Some kind of sling would give these parachute grenades more range. Wonderful, brilliant yet simple Russian technology.
Rifle Parachute Grenades with downward shaped charge for penetrating armor. Countermeasure: chicken wire above roof armor that detonates grenade beyond range where shaped-charge effect works. Boom, not hole.
Rifle Parachute Grenade with downward-facing Explosively-Formed-Projectile that will be pretty-effective (not as good as a correct-distance detonated shaped-charge) at up to several hundred diameters (4" dia. unit could still work if intercepted up to 30 feet away, which is not going to happen). Countermeasure: high-speed computer-driven short-range AA gun on roof of vehicle.
Price: for user of parachute grenade (low), for armored vehicle operator (high). Conclusion: worthwhile cheap/effective tool to defend your home against invaders with heavy armor.
Anonymous, yes there are ways to counter the RKG-3 threat. That is how warfare works. Which means that if throwing the damn thing doesn't work you turn it into a limpet mine of some sort. There is no such thing as a surefire always successful tactic, hence don't get too fond of any single one of them.
Speaking of brilliant Russian technology & rifles, do they make depleted uranium rounds in 7.62x54R & how effective would they be against light-armor vehicles (anything less than a tank)?
I've not seen DU rounds for anything less than 25mm in any arsenal. Most other countries use Tungsten penetration rounds as it is a lot less toxic to work with.
As far as a standard caliber rifle round goes, it would offer no benefit as DU is used largely because of increased density allowing greater sectional density for penetrating armor. Standard rifle rounds, even overbore magnums, do not have the ability to take advantage of that extra density. So rifle rounds with "armor penetrating" properties are usually a steel insert, extra thick copper jacket, or some other modification of a standard round.
And against modern vehicle armor "armor piercing" rifle rounds are fairly useless. The armor is simply too thick.
AM,
A pie plate w/ a stick coming out of the top semi-buried in the middle/on the side of a road appears to be a mine/other dangerous item beyond a certain distance & will usually stop vehicles long enough for an attack w/ a genuine command activated device of the military/commercial/impromptu type. Vehicle personnel might even dismount to inspect the item thus providing an opportunity for a combined small arms/incendiary/energetic materials ambush. Saw an M-60A3 almost do a front roll-over trying to stop in time to avoid hitting such a decoy, & when the guys got out to inspect the 'device' they/the vehicle were summarily rendered defunct via the described method. The blue force commander was less than amused at the loss of said vehicle & its personnel &, if what I was told is true, described the tactic as "something the Red Brigades would do, not soldiers". I thought that quite an odd thing for a BG to say given the recent cessation of the Southeast Asian War Games & the widespread use of that tactic & its associated equipment.
A standard pint-one liter plastic water bottle w/ the appropriate amount of energetic filler, coated w/ adhesive like white glue/rubber cement, rolled in BBs/screws/pea gravel/etc for the frag jacket, wrapped in one layer of lightweight cloth to protect jacket. Initiator inserted into filler thru cap which is taped/glued, then affix a short length of cord to the neck. While not the same as the WW2 'sticky', it nevertheless could be quite useful for vehicular motive disruption & many other purposes. A variation of the Intifada comes to mind & if combined w/ a Fougasse-type assault would be rather troublesome for vehicles/operators.
The previous is just my opinion, your more informed assessment would be appreciated.
Left Coast Funster
The "pie plate" anti-armor mine decoy was successfully used in Hungary in 1956, vs. Soviet T-55s.
Any Army armor BG not conversant with that fact is a historical ignoramus and a tactical jackass.
An even lower-tech approach is to spray paint a shipment of frisbee-type throwing discs with OD paint, with or without a pound or so of concrete filler on the bottom.
A truly nasty sneaky SOB would also mix a few live IEDs with identical external appearance, just to keep things interesting for EOD troops.
Combining all that with a Barrett SASR attack on armored vehicle cmdrs, optics, antennas, and various and sundry high tech geeaws hanging on halted IFV and tanks would be a real pisser, and seriously degrade vehicle operations.
For a grand slam, you set up a crapstorm set of dismounted ambushes on likely approaches to your long range DM position, and wait for the gung ho cavalry reaction force.
The Apache and VC would be proud of you.
This is all info that's open source.
-Aesop
Aesop/29July12@3:43,
"Any armor BG...jackass."
Indeed, my thoughts exactly, & the Afghans later made that point very nastily against the Red Army. The same attitude was encountered on the LMW course. It was the early 80s, after all, & as Ivan was the likeliest adversary, it was deemed that 'ungentlemanly/unsportsmanlike' behavior would be unnecessary for a 'stand up' conflict. Luckily, there were Nam combat vets as plat daddies who did their tours w/ the more irregular parts of the Army & passed on some of their wisdom.
"The Apache and VC would be proud of you."
They, along w/ the Gurkhas, Skorzeny, & Mao, are some of my gurus.
Left Coast Funster
Post a Comment