To my fellow light Red Legs, what is your opinion on the use of nets with the M119A3?

In HIMARS, we drilled on setup, take down and moving to the next site. We had an hour to dig in and set up including defensive positions (that'll wear out your e tool pretty quick) and then less than an hour to break down, fill in the holes we just dug and move out. We learned how to put up nets in a hurry.

My opinion on the nets on the m119a3 is as a plain 4 Sargent and soon to be first Sargent, first they are a necessity for concealment from aerial surveillance. Secondly for the saftey aspect they are needed to provide shade for the troops. Joe's will complain about putting them up however after they are up they chance of reduced heat related injuries sre drastically reduced. They are not part of the basic BII because they serve no purpose, as field artllery were should shoot move and communicate. We dominate rhe battle space, as we do so we are the most sought after target on the battlefield. All the new manuals to include the new .50 the replacemnt 6-50 still illustrates the use of the camouflage net system.

The M119A3 is a small maneuvering toad weapon. Natural camo is better when available. I've been retired for some time now but I was one of the first to bring into training at Fort Sill when we first received the M119 from Margaret Thatcher. Nets are okay, in my option, when natural camo is not available. Remember: Shoot, Move & Communicate.

Our TTPs for nets rely heavily upon the threat brief from S2. if counter-fire is likely then No nets so that we can quickly displace. If enemy ISR and/or air is within the AO we utilize nets. We also have very well defined displacement criteria based on the enemy threat. Ultimately though, every artillery certification I've ever taken part in has a successfully performed hasty displacement as one of the criteria for a certified section. Worst case, if the shit really hits the fan, yell "blitz" and leave the damn nets behind.

Here's my question: how effective are camo nets at concealing thing with all the modern surveillance tech in the first place? it may fool the Mk1 eyeball (maybe), but will if fool IR, or satellite or any number of modern tools we use today? If it's not effective, then ditch them. If you roll big, loud self-propelled arty into an area, everyone and their mom are going to know you are there....

658 views and only two comments. I thought I would get more feed back than this.

I feel that the nets on any artillery piece should be removed, the nets take away from the ability for a unit to make move quickly as a form of defense. With the army going back to the DATE rotations we need to get back to shoot, move, and communicate. The art of shooting and moving is lost because we are so focused on staying in one position for long periods of time.

On an offensive or raid mission nets are absolutely ludicrous. It drives your emplacement time up making a raid mission almost impossible. Displacement time can be deadly when your expecting Radar Counter Battery Fire. You have two options recover your nets and get blown up in the process or just drive off and leave your nets. In a defensive position it makes sense but you better have Radar in play.