Should there be conversion of 19D MOS back to 11D?

First off I am a little confused on your 11C comment. I was/am an 11C and I have done more Infantry shit than most Infantrymen, when I take a piss it comes out blue. I have carried more weight and walked just as far as any 11B in any of my units. I have cleared buildings/rooms with my mortar section/platoon. I have place indirect and direct fire on objectives from support by fire positions. I think your misconception of 11Cs is very skewed.

I will give you this, there can be a difference between a light mortarman and a mechanized/Stryker mortarman. This difference is also noticeable between the mechanized/armor and light Scouts. To answer your question I think the Cav should keep their own MOS if not for anything else, for tradition.

Only if they quit wearing those ridiculous hats.

As a former 11C in the 82nd, I have to say mortar teams do primarily Infantry work, with a little indirect fire in support of their Infantry mission. Cavalry Scouts primarily perform reconnaissance in support of mechanized units, whereas Infantry units have elements assigned to perorm that task for them. I think 19D is a pretty hardcore MOS, and I think it should be celebrated as it is, and not moved to the Infantry series.

I am sure that this question has been around the block a time or two, for exactly the same reasons.
However in American military parlance, they (the 19Ds) are cavalry (dragoons - mounted infantry).

Depends, will they get to keep their Stetsons and spurs?

No. Not at all. Cav primarily use Bradleys while the basis of infantry revolves around dismounted tactics.

Imagine a world where Soldiers had so much pride in their profession that their focus was on mastering just that...their profession.

A conversion? No, I don't think so. Cavalry is Cavalry. Maybe make two separate MOS for the separate duty types(As in 11D Infantry Scout/19D Cavalry scout).
Personally, no Cav Scout I ever met did much "11B work"....Conversely, 11C's definitely do grunt stuff...especially in light or Airborne units. They carry a hell of a load.

Why not stop screwing around with the Army and let them do what they do

Actually a little adjustment on timeline and the decision. 19D was created as a MOS in 1979, I believe, Full conversion from 11D did not really complete until sometime in 1982-1983 (this I watched with my own eyes). I was a member in one of the last National Guard units to convert from 11D to 19D, they did not have to recycle via AIT because they didn't change much in the training manual. The decision was made at the General Grade level because overall and across the Army the number of Cavalry Soldiers and units were declining........had nothing to do with Armor or being with Armor. It was Generals nostalgia at the time to preserve Cavalry units which where in fairly short supply in 1979 and dwindling. So in my view a rather dumb decision that has cost real money that could be used elsewhere. I have no idea what they teach about the History at Ft. Benning or about reactivation of the MOS 19D. I know what I heard in 1982 on how it was communicated to me the decision was made. At any rate once the decision to shift to an entirely new MOS, the Scout Section attached to our NG TOW Company, then wanted out of the TOW Company and wanted to be in their own Scout Company because they stated our training for 11H was so different they were not being trained to 19D standards (which I think was partly BS)...........and there it began. Realignment of 19D's out of Infantry Companies happened and when I went on Active Duty in 1984. Scouts were part of HQ Company in a Mech Infantry BN and had a Bradley M3 vs the Infantry Bradley M2.

If you ask me it doesn't really matter if they are a seperate MOS or in the 11 series job family, the only real difference is one approach spends more Taxpayer money over the other. So I am fairly neutral on rolling them back in. I think though from an administrative and career perspective rolling them back together might be better because it would make lateral transfers easier when one MOS gets short handed vs the other. However, since I was never 19D it does not make a difference to me.

Back when I had a Armored Cavalry platoon we had 2 scout squads (11D), 2 Sheridans (11E), 1 Infantry squad (11B) and a 4.2 Mortar squad (11C). It was the smallest combined arms team in the Army

Sp4 Byron Skinner…The straight answer to this question is NO, the reason is the CIB is the Infantry. In 1967 the requirements for the CIB were laid down, a soldier had to have been awarded 11B MOS through completing Infantry AIT, 30 days of Combat or getting a combat wound. The Enlisted ranks eligible were E-1-E-6. I understand now E-7 and E-8 can be awarded the CIB. The 11D's of my era have made the augment that they sometimes pulled Infantry missions, while true it was always the exception. The only time I can remember 11D's going on an Infantry mission was when the Rifle Squad was short men due to combat wounds or KIA's…When the Platoon Leader called over the horn "Dismounts to two six" he meant the 11B's…Being an 11B is the crappiest job in the Army. In garrison you are always the ones who gets the shit details and were always last in line for passes, but first in line for weekend guard duty, weekend CQ or KP…In Combat the 11B is the one in font of the tip of the spear and the first to make contact and enviably the first to take casualties. The CIB was created to recognize that sacrifice that is only asked of the Infantry…The Combat Action badge was created for those who are less the Infantry.

It really doesn't matter to the scouts which career field they are in, though that was the actual reasoning behind moving them to armor. If you go back far enough you will find that even tankers were 11E at one point. Tactics are driven by terrain, available weapons systems, and the enemy you are facing. But the actual job of serving as a scout doesn't really change all that much. Scouts for a light infantry Bn or Cavalry Squadron screening a Division, you keep doing the same mission. And in case you are curious, they didn't fit in with the infantry any better than they do with the tankers.

I dont Know what scouts you guys have been talking too, but as for me and bwing a former scout all we did was infantry work. We just had fewer men. Oh and by the way there is a reason the cav is always at the front of a battalion run. We are the first in.

I served with 11th ACR in Vietnam and held the mos of 11D. I think 19D should be changed back to 11D. As 11D40 we did everything 11B does plus act as scouts, pulled security for convoys, set up night and auto mic ambushes. As such I was awarded a CIB which a 19D is not allowed to receive.

Never been a part of a cav unit, so i thought cav brought strykers? And their roots is armour isnt it? They would lose all their heritage.

Heavy Mortars are definitely Artillery, New ones shoot as fart and have the punch of what was light Artillery. 13F and 19D are similar but identical

Infantryman or more politically correct, Infantry persons like to talk shit about cav and then try to get into "recon platoon". The fact is this conversation is a waste of time. A better conversation is why are 19ds taking over the MGS strikers.

Speaking as an 11B who served at JRTC as OPFOR with the 1/509th at Fort Chaffee, AR during the early years; I feel that 11B and 19D are very similar. The BN was a combination of both MOSes and we worked quite well together. In my assignment in the SCOUT PLT as a TM LDR I was filling a 19D slot as a 11B and we had no problems in our mixed 11B and 19D PLT.

I never understood the reasons for creating MOS 19... in the first place. I was an 11E from 60-67 and then became a 11B40, a 11D40 and again a 11E4H. I liked the idea of all the Real Combat Arms, sorry Artillery, sharing the same MOS and have never agreed with the change.