1
1
0
I'm interested in some opinions here. While at first I thought this was a horrible idea at face value, considering the fact that many units have used their Team Leaders as their grenadiers for years now successfully, we're really talking about cutting three riflemen. Is it feasible to fight a squad with just a Squad Leader, two Team Leaders/grenadiers, two SAW gunners, and a rifleman? I think there would be some serious implications in a high intensity fight when you're down 33% of your strength to start, but from a purely capabilities standpoint, there is some logic to the argument. Thoughts?
Posted in these groups: Infantry Center (Army)
Downsizing
Downsizing
Posted >1 y ago
Responses: 7
4
4
0
Sir, I'd like to address the team leader as grenadier issue. Over a decade ago when I was in the Infantry, many fire team leaders, to include myself, did carry the M203. I even opted to carry it as a squad leader. You're probably aware that the intent was for those leaders to use that weapon to mark targets. There was never an intent to just have the team leader be the grenadier. If you could get away with it, you'd have two 203's per fire team. I even finagled it so that I had one fire team with two SAWs. I just don't want folks to think, "Well we've done this anyway. Therefore it's a good idea." without considering the original intent.
(4)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
SFC Callen, absolutely. I've seen units where the PL carried a 203/320 to mark targets. In my company, I had TLs that didn't attack the 320 to the M4, and would sling it on their back, so that when it was needed, they could focus on marking targets or putting HE on target. In grape rows or pomegranate orchards, where you are always a terrain feature away, it makes a world of difference.
(1)
(0)
3
3
0
That seems pretty light. Less men to maneuver with, less rounds on target, less hands to carry special gear. We don't just have riflmen because the army doesn't want to buy all saws and 203s, they have there place in the fight. And heck, if your squad has a crew served weapon then what? Your pretty much just a big fire team.
Doctrine calls for us go engage with a numerical advantage of 3 to 1 typically, doesn't it? Your taking 3 rifles out but not adding anything as a force multiplier. Unless the army is going to start issueing ironman suits or something for that single riflmen, I don't see shrinking squads as a good idea.
I mean, who's going to carry all the extra ammo to feed the saw? That stuffs heavy.
Doctrine calls for us go engage with a numerical advantage of 3 to 1 typically, doesn't it? Your taking 3 rifles out but not adding anything as a force multiplier. Unless the army is going to start issueing ironman suits or something for that single riflmen, I don't see shrinking squads as a good idea.
I mean, who's going to carry all the extra ammo to feed the saw? That stuffs heavy.
(3)
(0)
SPC Christopher Morehouse
I get what you’re saying, but reality is when I was in Iraq no one in my squad ever carried their "basic combat load". My biggest fear in the world was to run out of treats for my saw, and I never went out with less than 1200 rounds on me, and my squad mates always had some around as well. Also, if you have a SDM in your squad, your only true rifleman left ends up being the squad leader himself.
I’m not saying there might not be some units or situations where it could make sense, but I can’t think of any off hand. I mean if you shrink the squad and have one squad per vehicle your pretty much turning each squad into a large fire team, so maybe that’s fine. Maybe that’s the true intent, but they don’t actually want to say that because then we’d be copying the marines.
I’m not saying there might not be some units or situations where it could make sense, but I can’t think of any off hand. I mean if you shrink the squad and have one squad per vehicle your pretty much turning each squad into a large fire team, so maybe that’s fine. Maybe that’s the true intent, but they don’t actually want to say that because then we’d be copying the marines.
(2)
(0)
SPC Christopher Morehouse
ok commenting on my phone was an obvious mistake here, I'll have to clean this up when I get on an actual computer tomorrow.
(2)
(0)
(0)
(0)
2
2
0
My last deployment to Afghanistan I was a Rifle Team Leader and as a PLT we all decided that the Team Leaders would carry the M320's to mark and engage targets. My Team typically consisted of Team Leader (M4 and M320), Rifleman (M4), Automatic Rifleman (SAW M249) and the occasional Gunner (MK48) and we where a very affective team, so it can be done with only 6 soldiers in a squad and also be affective.
(2)
(0)
MAJ (Join to see)
SSG Beach, absolutely. I think the challenge is that we run into arbitrary numbers required for patrol due to risk aversion. Personally, I don't think that six guys should be out, alone and unafraid, but arbitrarily saying that you need 12 to go on patrol, it's suspect to me.
(1)
(0)
Read This Next
Continue with Facebook 
Continue with Google