• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Informing the Army’s Future Structure

We still issue Silva Compasses lol. This idea that map and compass work is some lost art is farcical.
Issued and occasional practised is one thing, but I know from bitter experience, that having to make timely decisions based on compass and map reading can be very hard. Particularly when your operating in an area you never been before.
 
So my train journey took me along these stops:


For airborne, shipboard, and terrestrial applications, we also supply daylight star trackers to give you attitude and position knowledge when GPS is not available. Whatever your mission, we can quickly customize star trackers to your specs.

In 2016, at the request of the French Military acquisitions agency (DGA), Sodern joined forces with the Safran group, a European leader in inertial references systems, to design daytime star trackers. The aim is to create a star tracker which operates in the Earth’s atmosphere even in daytime, and which can be used on board military vehicles (planes, drones, etc.) to determine a position with a high degree of accuracy, without depending on the information provided by satellites.

The solution
designed by Sodern and Safran combines a star tracker with an inertial reference system which measures the plane’s movements in the finest detail. In particular, this system will be fitted to military aircraft whose satellite positioning systems are often scrambled by hostile forces in theatre. Our solution will enable French armed forces to increase their autonomy and provide them with operational superiority in crisis situations.

The system has been used on ICBMs for over 50 years.

On-Off-On again with the USAF and USN
  • Celestial Navigation discontinued in 1998 (circa GW1)
  • Celestial Navigation re-instated in 2015
So the reliance on the GPS system lasted 17 years.

The U.S. Air Force and U.S. Navy continued instructing military aviators on celestial navigation use until 1997, because:

  • celestial navigation can be used independently of ground aids.
  • celestial navigation has global coverage.
  • celestial navigation can not be jammed (although it can be obscured by clouds).
  • celestial navigation does not give off any signals that could be detected by an enemy.[10]
The United States Naval Academy (USNA) announced that it was discontinuing its course on celestial navigation (considered to be one of its most demanding non-engineering courses) from the formal curriculum in the spring of 1998.[11] In October 2015, citing concerns about the reliability of GNSS systems in the face of potential hostile hacking, the USNA reinstated instruction in celestial navigation in the 2015 to 2016 academic year.[12][13]

The US Merchant Marine never stopped teaching Celestial Navigation.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Celestial_navigation#cite_note-13
At another federal service academy, the US Merchant Marine Academy, there was no break in instruction in celestial navigation as it is required to pass the US Coast Guard License Exam to enter the Merchant Marine. It is also taught at Harvard, most recently as Astronomy 2.[14]

Sometimes archaic knowledge is useful - knowledge like how to pile rocks on top of each other - some of it comes in handy sometimes. ;)
 

Attachments

  • 1688836922638.png
    1688836922638.png
    1.1 MB · Views: 2
Bomber Command mid war stopped teaching celestial navigation thanks to the introduction of radio beams, but a fair number of bombers were lost when their equipment broke or got shot up. When a few bombers returned with shot up equipment thanks to their Coastal Command navigators who brought their own sextants with them, then Bomber Command started teaching it again.
 
Bomber Command mid war stopped teaching celestial navigation thanks to the introduction of radio beams, but a fair number of bombers were lost when their equipment broke or got shot up. When a few bombers returned with shot up equipment thanks to their Coastal Command navigators who brought their own sextants with them, then Bomber Command started teaching it again.
How do you do navigation of celestial bodies that are moving while flying ? Didn’t they just dead reckon off bearing, known origin, air speed ect ?

Oh it appears that they did actually. This is a good article, that out lines the navigational difficulties and why celestial navigation was a far from ideal method. Bomber Navigation—The Blind Led the Blind
 
How do you do navigation of celestial bodies that are moving while flying ? Didn’t they just dead reckon off bearing, known origin, air speed ect ?

Oh it appears that they did actually. This is a good article, that out lines the navigational difficulties and why celestial navigation was a far from ideal method. Bomber Navigation—The Blind Led the Blind

Seems that NASA has figured that one out too ;)

 
How do you do navigation of celestial bodies that are moving while flying ? Didn’t they just dead reckon off bearing, known origin, air speed ect ?

Oh it appears that they did actually. This is a good article, that out lines the navigational difficulties and why celestial navigation was a far from ideal method. Bomber Navigation—The Blind Led the Blind
Coastal Command had to do it, given that their patrol areas were devoid of convenient landmarks. In fact it persisted for a long time post war and you see older transport aircraft with a little bubble. Found this online:

When the RAF bought the C-130K Hercules C.1s back in the mid '60s it was a requirement to have an astrodome fitted, or some other means of using a sextant (periscope mounted in the higher performance transports).
Navigation by the stars was still used as back up and was (is?) the only fool proof system of Navigation. I know a Brittania (periscope sextant) nav who actually used this system in the mid '70s.
The slower transports, Hastings, Varsity, Shackleton (secondary role) and Hercules had them fitted.
 
1689205420231.png


Based on my read of the Latvian press releases and the assertion that enablers are a Latvian responsibility I don't expect to see any of those in New Brunswick any time soon.

On the other hand we might join with the Aussies

 
And assorted Infantry Vehicles




And one for the none of the above crowd

Apparently the newest MRAP version of the Roshel Senator is STANAG Level 2/2a/2b
It is designed to withstand calibers up to 7.62×39mm API BZ at 30 meters with 695 m/s as well as 6 kg (explosive mass) blast AT Mine activated under any wheel and under center. With its innovative V-shaped hull, the Senator MRAP maximizes crew survivability by deflecting blasts away from the cabin and dissipating explosive energy.

And from this walk around video I really like the look of the interior layout for a General Duties TCV type vehicle. Cargo, troops or casualties.

Vehicle independence.
 
GPS, I am reminded doesn't just tell you where you are but when you are.

Celestial Navigation is working on that as well.


Maybe not a direct read from the Pulsars to your car but perhaps a benchmark or reference point for cuing the net and assist in minimizing disruptions?
 
In the face of poor recruiting and retention results the US Army wants Bill Slim's Corps of Tree Climbers to rejoin The Line.

But while numbers are down, Army leaders, including George, have been examining where the service could make cuts to better use the soldiers they have, including a possible 10 to 20 percent reduction to its special operation force (SOF).


More GD Infantry vice Specialized Infantry?
 
In the face of poor recruiting and retention results the US Army wants Bill Slim's Corps of Tree Climbers to rejoin The Line.




More GD Infantry vice Specialized Infantry?
No one is going to go back to the CF from SOF.
 
No one is going to go back to the CF from SOF.

Nobody said that.

But when people leave the SOF will the CF replace them?
Or will they be kept on Regimental Rolls?

Bill Slim, who I referenced, was of the opinions that he wanted all those good Corporals and Sergeants retained in their parent units to improve the quality and capabilities of the General Duties army.

The argument may well be that in the absence of SOF billets those keen NCOs may well release. To which the counter would be, how is that any different than having them move out of the army to CANSOFCOM?

In my mind the key elements are CSOR and the Naval Tactical Groups.

On the other side of the divide are the Army's Light Infantry Battalions.


Yesterday I was talking about the nuance of terminology with respect to vehicles and types of infantry and combat arms. In my view there were only two defining characteristics and everything else was 50 shades of grey: Equip the man or man the equipment.

I take the same position with the SOF/Army debates.

The SOF has multiple tiers with various elements claiming superiority in certain skill sets. But, as you move "down" the tiers towards the Support Groups/Rangers level you start to have more and more difficulty discerning the difference between a Ranger and a Para and any of the other Light Infantry types. When do you cross over from Special to Army?

In my view, again, the SOF is the extreme embodiment of the "Equip the Man" end of the spectrum.

Was Wolfe's ad hoc amalgamation of Light Companies and Grenadier Companies at Louisbourg good enough or did Howe and Moore have to make specialized corps of Light Bobs and Rifles?
 
Nobody said that.

But when people leave the SOF will the CF replace them?
Or will they be kept on Regimental Rolls?

Bill Slim, who I referenced, was of the opinions that he wanted all those good Corporals and Sergeants retained in their parent units to improve the quality and capabilities of the General Duties army.

The argument may well be that in the absence of SOF billets those keen NCOs may well release. To which the counter would be, how is that any different than having them move out of the army to CANSOFCOM?

In my mind the key elements are CSOR and the Naval Tactical Groups.

On the other side of the divide are the Army's Light Infantry Battalions.


Yesterday I was talking about the nuance of terminology with respect to vehicles and types of infantry and combat arms. In my view there were only two defining characteristics and everything else was 50 shades of grey: Equip the man or man the equipment.

I take the same position with the SOF/Army debates.

The SOF has multiple tiers with various elements claiming superiority in certain skill sets. But, as you move "down" the tiers towards the Support Groups/Rangers level you start to have more and more difficulty discerning the difference between a Ranger and a Para and any of the other Light Infantry types. When do you cross over from Special to Army?

In my view, again, the SOF is the extreme embodiment of the "Equip the Man" end of the spectrum.

Was Wolfe's ad hoc amalgamation of Light Companies and Grenadier Companies at Louisbourg good enough or did Howe and Moore have to make specialized corps of Light Bobs and Rifles?
The main reason why Rangers are in USASOC now is co-ordination, due to the issues from Gothic Serpent. However during GWOT, they were eventually allowed to do a lot more on their own, including HVT opts.
Before they where generally the Outer Cordon, or the expendable crewmen on airfield seizure missions, and congrats 82nd that's your role now ;)

Para's/Abn are not SOF, as they are still a conventional infantry force, and organized as such.

Look at the SOF Core SOF Core Activities

Core Activities​

  • Direct Action
    Short-duration strikes and other small-scale offensive actions employing specialized military capabilities to seize, destroy, capture, exploit, recover, or damage designated targets.
  • Special Reconnaissance
    Actions conducted in sensitive environments to collect or verify information of strategic or operational significance.
  • Unconventional Warfare
    Actions to enable a resistance movement or insurgency to coerce, disrupt, or overthrow a government or occupying power.
  • Foreign Internal Defense
    Activities that support an HN's internal defense and development (IDAD) strategy and program designed to protect against subversion, lawlessness, insurgency, terrorism, and other threats to their internal security, and stability, and legitimacy.
  • Civil Affairs Operations
    CAO enhance the relationship between military forces and civilian authorities in localities where military forces are present.
  • Counterterrorism
    Actions taken directly against terrorist networks and indirectly to influence and render global and regional environments inhospitable to terrorist networks.
  • Military Information Support Operations
    MISO are planned to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals in a manner favorable to the originator's objectives.

    United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) conducts internet-based MISO in partnership with United States Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM) to expose, counter, and compete against adversary malign activity and disinformation throughout USSOUTHCOM’s area of responsibility. These on-going and enduring activities are coordinated with U.S. government agencies and implemented in accordance with U.S. law and DoD policies.
  • Counter-proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction
    Activities to support USG efforts to curtail the conceptualization, development, possession, proliferation, use, and effects of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), related expertise, materials, technologies, and means of delivery by state and non-state actors.
  • Security Force Assistance
    Activities based on organizing, training, equipping, rebuilding, and advising various components of Foreign Security Forces.
  • Counterinsurgency
    The blend of civilian and military efforts designed to end insurgent violence and facilitate a return to peaceful political processes.
  • Hostage Rescue and Recovery
    Offensive measures taken to prevent, deter, preempt, and respond to terrorist threats and incidents, including recapture of U.S. facilities, installations, and sensitive material in overseas areas.
  • Foreign Humanitarian Assistance
    The range of DOD humanitarian activities conducted outside the US and its territories to relieve or reduce human suffering, disease, hunger, or privation.


The entire history of SOF down here has been rife with CF Generals trying to gut SOF and pull the NCO's and O's back into units.
But if you've been an E-7 in a SOF unit you aren't going to want to return to a CF unit - and as a result the personnel drain will be massive.

Down here, if you go to Ranger School there is no guarantee as an O or E that you will get to a Batt, but guys going to Q Course are gone from Big Army -- so there is a loss to the CF, but not to the force as a whole.

On a psychology level, a great deal of SOF personnel aren't well suited to CF roles, as free thinkers, and those who question a lot of status quo do well there, and dont generally do well in CF trades.
 
The main reason why Rangers are in USASOC now is co-ordination, due to the issues from Gothic Serpent. However during GWOT, they were eventually allowed to do a lot more on their own, including HVT opts.
Before they where generally the Outer Cordon, or the expendable crewmen on airfield seizure missions, and congrats 82nd that's your role now ;)

Para's/Abn are not SOF, as they are still a conventional infantry force, and organized as such.

Look at the SOF Core SOF Core Activities

Core Activities​

  • Direct Action
    Short-duration strikes and other small-scale offensive actions employing specialized military capabilities to seize, destroy, capture, exploit, recover, or damage designated targets.
  • Special Reconnaissance
    Actions conducted in sensitive environments to collect or verify information of strategic or operational significance.
  • Unconventional Warfare
    Actions to enable a resistance movement or insurgency to coerce, disrupt, or overthrow a government or occupying power.
  • Foreign Internal Defense
    Activities that support an HN's internal defense and development (IDAD) strategy and program designed to protect against subversion, lawlessness, insurgency, terrorism, and other threats to their internal security, and stability, and legitimacy.
  • Civil Affairs Operations
    CAO enhance the relationship between military forces and civilian authorities in localities where military forces are present.
  • Counterterrorism
    Actions taken directly against terrorist networks and indirectly to influence and render global and regional environments inhospitable to terrorist networks.
  • Military Information Support Operations
    MISO are planned to convey selected information and indicators to foreign audiences to influence their emotions, motives, objective reasoning, and ultimately the behavior of foreign governments, organizations, groups, and individuals in a manner favorable to the originator's objectives.

    United States Special Operations Command (USSOCOM) conducts internet-based MISO in partnership with United States Southern Command (USSOUTHCOM) to expose, counter, and compete against adversary malign activity and disinformation throughout USSOUTHCOM’s area of responsibility. These on-going and enduring activities are coordinated with U.S. government agencies and implemented in accordance with U.S. law and DoD policies.
  • Counter-proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction
    Activities to support USG efforts to curtail the conceptualization, development, possession, proliferation, use, and effects of weapons of mass destruction (WMD), related expertise, materials, technologies, and means of delivery by state and non-state actors.
  • Security Force Assistance
    Activities based on organizing, training, equipping, rebuilding, and advising various components of Foreign Security Forces.
  • Counterinsurgency
    The blend of civilian and military efforts designed to end insurgent violence and facilitate a return to peaceful political processes.
  • Hostage Rescue and Recovery
    Offensive measures taken to prevent, deter, preempt, and respond to terrorist threats and incidents, including recapture of U.S. facilities, installations, and sensitive material in overseas areas.
  • Foreign Humanitarian Assistance
    The range of DOD humanitarian activities conducted outside the US and its territories to relieve or reduce human suffering, disease, hunger, or privation.


The entire history of SOF down here has been rife with CF Generals trying to gut SOF and pull the NCO's and O's back into units.
But if you've been an E-7 in a SOF unit you aren't going to want to return to a CF unit - and as a result the personnel drain will be massive.

Down here, if you go to Ranger School there is no guarantee as an O or E that you will get to a Batt, but guys going to Q Course are gone from Big Army -- so there is a loss to the CF, but not to the force as a whole.

On a psychology level, a great deal of SOF personnel aren't well suited to CF roles, as free thinkers, and those who question a lot of status quo do well there, and dont generally do well in CF trades.

Accepting that a bit of spice is a good thing to season the pot, how much is enough and when is it too much?

When everybody is special ...
 
The main reason why Rangers are in USASOC now is co-ordination, due to the issues from Gothic Serpent. However during GWOT, they were eventually allowed to do a lot more on their own, including HVT opts.
Before they where generally the Outer Cordon, or the expendable crewmen on airfield seizure missions, and congrats 82nd that's your role now ;)

Just my little rant for the day....

I have seen very 'Not Special' troops do an excellent job of cordons on a regular basis. With a little workup training, anyone can do it well.

I have no idea why we feel the need to elevate such tasks to the Semi-Specials.
 
1689292590220.png

For some National Servicemen it was their primary task.
 
PS

while looking for an online version of the Division's organization in Palestine (2nd and 3rd Para Brigades and 6th Airlanding Brigade) I came across this gem from the wartime establishment:

13th (2nd/4th Bn The South Lancashire Regiment) Parachute Battalion

For those that worry about reorgs and regimental titles and such. ;)

The South Lancs apparently had two 4th Battalions, one of which was volunteered to become the 13th Parachute Battalion. Just lucky I guess.
 
Back
Top