Soviet reconnaissance, artillery, and Air defence

[PincerDK]

The principle is still the same, whether you call it a "Reconnaisance Group" or what ever you choose to call it Wink: The commander (from army to regiment) organizes a self contained combined arms detachment that can fight independently while keeping the rest of his force in reserve thus preserving freedom of maneuver. Its job is to recon (a bit) but is primary mission is to protect the unit behind it and facilitate its manuever and commitment at a decisive point in time and space.

Enig

How they choose to compose the detachment depends on what its mission is, what forces are available and the overall tactical and operational stance of the unit sending out the detachment. And if the detachment itself is a large one

Enig ;)

(or tasked with a mission independently of its parent unit) it might also choose to send out a combined arms subunit in front of itself in order to facilitate its freedom of maneuver and so on. It is the principle more than the exact terminology one needs to understand.

The principles of a Soviet "Forward Detachment" or if you will, a recon detachment with a mission. ;)

But do you have an idea how the recon battalion operates? I mean does it operate in simple company columns, or does it have different task groupings it can form out of its units?
That was the reason why I looked in the reconnaissance chapter, to enlighten me on how the reconnaissance assets of army, division and regiment operates. :chin:

People watching this thread are free to join in and share information ? this isn't only for danes. :)

[JDR Dragoon]

The principles of a Soviet "Forward Detachment" or if you will, a recon detachment with a mission. ;)

Somewhat. The Forward detachment (or Operational Manuever Group as it is sometimes called) is not so much meant as an economy of force, recon, security and freedom of movement measure, but as a "Strike Force" dedicated to taking a single objective. What that objective might be and how far in the enemy rear it resides depends on the scale of the forward detachment. A Motorrifle Division using its Tank regiment or independent Tank battalion might be using it to strike for a critical bridge or piece of ground in the divisions immediate area, while an Front might use an entire Tank Army waiting to strike for an important strategic objective.

But do you have an idea how the recon battalion operates? I mean does it operate in simple company columns, or does it have different task groupings it can form out of its units?
That was the reason why I looked in the reconnaissance chapter, to enlighten me on how the reconnaissance assets of army, division and regiment operates. :chin:

It has 3 companies (plus some EW and signals intelligence company sized units, but that isn´t really important regarding how it conducts ground recon). Each company will usually get a major route to scout along or a major area to scout into. That means the division can uitilize up to 3 main routes of advance at the same time, but will usually only use 2. These two routes will each get a company (typically the BMP/BRM/Tank equipped ones). The last company might be held in reserve, to take over one of the routes if one of the other companies take debiliating losses or if it is the BRDM equipped company it might be tasked with sneaking even further ahead than the BRM/BMP equipped ones in order to get into the enemy rear areas quickly. Som older types of units might only have BRDM equipped recon battalions (typically backed up by PT 76 light tanks). In that case the procedure is similar, but the combat potential of the unit is even less and it will rely much more on quickly using its vehicles to infiltrate dismounted scouts forwards.

Tactically they do this by sending out scouting patrols of perhaps a platoon along the major route itself and patrols 1-2 vehicles driving along secondary roads/logging trails etc. parallel to the main route. Patrols of 1-2 vehicles might also be sent out to recon particular pieces of ground (large farm complexes, large tracts of forest, villages etc.) that might house a hidden enemy presence waiting for the recon units to roll past so that they can get a crack at the units following behind.

Movement wise the units tend to move forwards continously if no heavy enemy resistance is expected. They then gradually become more cautious, beginning to employ bounding and stationary overwatch. The BRM equipped units will also use their ground search radars. If enemy resistance is expected to be imminent the movement will be by short bounds from cover to cover, typically stopping in defilade and sending out dismounted scouts to quickly check out just what lies ahead over that hill before driving the vehicles across.

[PincerDK]

Somewhat. The Forward detachment (or Operational Manuever Group as it is sometimes called) is not so much meant as an economy of force, recon, security and freedom of movement measure, but as a "Strike Force" dedicated to taking a single objective. What that objective might be and how far in the enemy rear it resides depends on the scale of the forward detachment. A Motorrifle Division using its Tank regiment or independent Tank battalion might be using it to strike for a critical bridge or piece of ground in the divisions immediate area, while an Front might use an entire Tank Army waiting to strike for an important strategic objective.

Correct, although even a Forward Detachment has its own security measures, which equals that of an Advance Guard.
But its main task is still acting as a "Strike Force" as you put it.

Actually, have you ever heard of regimental battalion sized forward detachments? or divisional regiment sized forward detachments? I know a division can form a battalion sized FD and an Army can form a regimental sized FD.
I read somewhere, that those options are possible, although it depends on the commander.

The BRM equipped units will also use their ground search radars

Have you any idea on how those works?

1. Is it better to have sources about Soviet Organisation before 1991 or after 1991? I know after the Cold War, much information from the Soviet Army was published.

Depends on the timeframe you are looking for information on ;)

During the 80's ;)

[JDR Dragoon]

I read somewhere, that those options are possible, although it depends on the commander.

Yes. Again notice, that the Forward detachment/OMG is usually also a combined arms force (usually quite tank heavy though), at most consisting of 1/3 of the superior formations fighting power. 1/3 here and 1/3 there. Begin to see a pattern? ;)

Have you any idea on how those works?

The same way every other radars work; by bouncing rays off objects. Only instead of bouncing rays off things in the air the GSR bounces rays off things on the ground. The problem here is, that a lot of things bounces the rays back on the ground (houses, large rocks etc.) so it is usually best at discovering enemy units in motion. Although getting a return of a platoons worth of "blips" sitting still in an extended line in otherwise flat ground can be a dead giveaway.

[PincerDK]

Yes. Again notice, that the Forward detachment/OMG is usually also a combined arms force (usually quite tank heavy though), at most consisting of 1/3 of the superior formations fighting power. 1/3 here and 1/3 there. Begin to see a pattern? ;)

Yeah, that seems to be the rule ;)

The same way every other radars work; by bouncing rays off objects. Only instead of bouncing rays off things in the air the GSR bounces rays off things on the ground. The problem here is, that a lot of things bounces the rays back on the ground (houses, large rocks etc.) so it is usually best at discovering enemy units in motion. Although getting a return of a platoons worth of "blips" sitting still in an extended line in otherwise flat ground can be a dead giveaway.

Hmmm, just didn't think, that using standard radar techinques were optimal, since it would have to go through forest, which would probably give a lot of returning echo's. :chin:

Oh well, they probably got some way to distinguish between a tree and a Bradley IFV.

[Ricky B]

At least when I was in, back in the late 70s early 80s, the radar primarily worked on doppler effects, basically meaning they showed movement. It was very ineffective in picking up statinary units, the key was to see things moving and thus be able to determine where things were headed, but rarely to know what you were seeing, or to see it when sitting still - but that was fairly early generation systems in the US Marine Corps also.

Rick

[JDR Dragoon]

Oh well, they probably got some way to distinguish between a tree and a Bradley IFV.

Yes, but only if the Bradley is moving. More modern radars will give a better size estimate of the target being scanned, but if the rock you are scanning is the same size as a stationary Bradley the radar can´t tell the difference.

[PincerDK]

At least when I was in, back in the late 70s early 80s, the radar primarily worked on doppler effects, basically meaning they showed movement. It was very ineffective in picking up statinary units, the key was to see things moving and thus be able to determine where things were headed, but rarely to know what you were seeing, or to see it when sitting still - but that was fairly early generation systems in the US Marine Corps also.

hmmm...interesting. did the Marine Corps have any equivalent to the radars found in the soviet recon battalion (Tall Mike radar)
or some kind of portable radar?

Yes, but only if the Bradley is moving. More modern radars will give a better size estimate of the target being scanned, but if the rock you are scanning is the same size as a stationary Bradley the radar can´t tell the difference.

Of course, that would seem likely too.

[Ricky B]

At least when I was in, back in the late 70s early 80s, the radar primarily worked on doppler effects, basically meaning they showed movement. It was very ineffective in picking up statinary units, the key was to see things moving and thus be able to determine where things were headed, but rarely to know what you were seeing, or to see it when sitting still - but that was fairly early generation systems in the US Marine Corps also.

hmmm...interesting. did the Marine Corps have any equivalent to the radars found in the soviet recon battalion (Tall Mike radar)
or some kind of portable radar?
...

No idea how the radar may have compared in capabilities, etc. So I really can't answer that, beyond saying the the US Army would have had more state of the art equipment, probably better than the Soviet equipment, and the Marines a bit older stuff, maybe equivalent to the Soviet radar - but purely a guess there. It has been a LONG time since I was in and I never worked with any of the radar my knowledge of them was strictly from classroom training at OCS.

Rick

[PincerDK]

No idea how the radar may have compared in capabilities, etc. So I really can't answer that, beyond saying the the US Army would have had more state of the art equipment, probably better than the Soviet equipment, and the Marines a bit older stuff, maybe equivalent to the Soviet radar - but purely a guess there. It has been a LONG time since I was in and I never worked with any of the radar my knowledge of them was strictly from classroom training at OCS.

Allright, just wanted to hear. ;)