VIDEOs illustrating infantry maneuver
I had a comment a while back on one of my posts, asking if I had video to illustrate infantry attack and maneuver, break contact etc. I have been looking for what is available on YouTube. Here is what I have found so far:
Plt Sgt’s Course live firing on C range Brecon
This video(above) is of either a company or platoon attack on a live firing range at the British infantry training ranges. It is difficult to get the bigger picture but what you are seeing is clips of live fire support and maneuver as each squad goes through and assaults the next objective.
It is the assault cycle of : ASSAULT – FIRE SUPPORT – RESERVE
The guys walking around with the luminous helmet covers or vests are the safety; they are also telling the soldiers to “switch fire” for safety reasons as the assaulting squads go in on the objective.
When Max Velocity served with the British Army, I was fully qualified to plan and conduct such Stage 5 Field Firing Ranges. Still am! That’s why I bought land, so I can put in some tactical live firing maneuver, which is just not provided at commercial ranges.
This is an interesting one:
It is good to show the anatomy of a squad (section) at work under fire. They do a break contact and some peeling. Note how weighed down they are with gear – not only weapons and ammo, but their day packs also contain electronic counter measure equipment against IEDs, and you can see how heavy they are. Take what you can from the video, obviously you will not have the heavy weapons and support that they have.
This one shows some Royal Marine recruits doing a blank section (squad) attack. You can see how they come under fire, suppress the enemy position, leave a base of fire team in place, send an assault team to the flank and then fire and move as they fight through. Basic drills.
That’s all I have for now. I’ll keep looking!
It looked like a live fire exercise stressing aggressive fire. No schwerpunkt, n pining group and no maneuver group? There is no evidence that the NZ troops were using an envelopment. The instructors followed the vanguard but did not take enough care to avoid friendly fire incidents. No smoke? No RPGs, No machine guns?
I assume you are referring to the NZ clip only? Just to stress that I have no relationship to these clips, it’s just what I pulled from from YouTube.
The NZ exercise is a jungle style attack, which can also be relevant to heavily forested/wooded areas in more temperate climes. From what we can see it is pretty much a straight-on style attack using firepower and movement to close with and destroy the enemy. They did appear to have some form of squad automatic weapons. But you just don’t know what they were doing that day on the ranges when they filmed it, and what equipment they had. They certainly were not trying to satisfy an internet observers quest for all things tactical rolled into one!
What I will say is that clip demonstrates some good fire and movement in close jungle country with some good ‘speed crawling’ rather than running.
Also be aware that in jungle environments with the close cover it is often not possible to use a flanking attack, simply due to visibility and fratricide issues. Some camp-style attacks can use fire support and an angle of attack, but in close country you often have to adopt a skirmish line with flank protection that will advance on the enemy using integral fire and movement. It’s just how it is, and that appears to be what the NZ troops were doing.
I also noted that although the attack was ‘sporting; the safety did have some of the soldiers check fire as groups moved forwards. In professional units you find that paper safety angles often get infringed and there is a lot of trust involved – firing your buddy into the objective. These are clearly not recruits.
Thanks for posting these. They are a good start. Videos of training, with commentary on what is being done and why, would also be good.
Joe: these are what I could find that had some utility beyond footage of soldiers blazing away at an unseen enemy. I have it in mind to create some footage myself, using a trained team, for the purposes you mention, illustrating some tactical concepts. I have posted some video of training on Fallujah Ranges earlier on this blog, if you want to take a look at that.
Sounds good!
I don’t know what kind of production you’re planning on doing, or have the capability for, but based on what was shown in these videos here, two things that would be VERY helpful for people not well versed in tactics would be a simple graph/powerpoint/chalkboard illustration to explain the tactic[s] being used (there was an older Military Channel series that did this- I think it was “Battleplan”) before the actual “doing” of the tactics- sometimes seeing it all planned out prior to the “doing” video helps it to make more sense.
I suppose this sort of falls under the “commentary” side that Joe mentioned.
Also, if at all possible, some sort of either splitscreen, or small inset corner view for certain portions- for the times that the demonstration team[s] are split up, the watchers can still see and understand what’s going on, on both ends at the same time.
I see me in the basement with a white board and a video camera…I’ll have to loom into the technical aspects!
Noooooo! Don’t be that guy! :D
Interesting videos.
A question- it seemed in the top two videos of the Brit. units, it seemed most of the covering/supporting fire was laid down by the GPMG/SAW guys.
Now, it seemed these were a little spliced together, so maybe the rest of the riflemen firing wasn’t shown…? I hear some single shots, but especially in #1, I see a lot of riflemen NOT shooting.
If you’re working with an unconventional unit armed with standard rifles only, how does this come into play?
Because in the NZ clips, it seemed they had ALL riflemen moving & shooting. So is this simply just a different set of tactics between the two forces, or again, just not shown in the first two videos?
I know that’s kind of a dumb question, but it was a difference I just had to ask about.
Good question: Its nor really a difference in tactics, it’s just the scenario and terrain are different. On the Brit range it was open ground with bigger formations rotating through. The guys you see sitting around or kneeling are waiting in dead ground (cover from view and fire)for their turn through the mill, assaulting the next objective. That’s an echelon attack. There is dedicated fire support going in from the GPMGs, some on the hilltops. Rifleman will be firing, and will be most active during their own section’s turn to assault an objective.
The NZ video is close country so it is very basic level assault line. There is no/little scope for flanking fire from hilltops etc. It is a good illustration of tactics in close country.
The other side of that is that in the Brit video, it may have been that whoever was controlling fire in those groups had the Guns/SAWs “going on” while the riflemen checked fire. If the enemy is suppressed, continued controlled bursts from such weapons will keep them suppressed while others maneuver.
The rest is lost in the editing of the videos.
If you don’t have the automatic support weapons then the same principle applies, and you rely on accurate rifle fire to suppress. This is where accuracy over volume is paramount. If you think about it, a few guys with rifles can suppress more effectively than one guy with a machine gun, if that gunner is firing wild long bursts that do not effectively kill or neutralize the enemy i.e. force him to put his head down and take cover. On the other hand, a good gunner with tight bursts can free up a bunch of riflemen to do other things.
I’ll stick my neck out and say that the reason I don’t show videos of US Units, at least not often, is because (I generalize) mostly what I see is just massive volumes of fire. When looking at available combat footage that is also a problem, a lot of it is just guys loosing off huge volumes of fire, with little maneuver. Such troops in contact events then become prolonged exchanges of fire, lacking determined infantry maneuver.
P.S. I will be our of comms at the training site Saturday thru Monday but will answer any further questions when I get back.
I see. Thanks for the explanation.
So then technically, for a group without real machine guns, since the focus is more on “suppresive accuracy” than volume of fire, any DMRs could be deployed in much the same role as the MGs?
It seems like alot of bunching up. My little contact with operating with infantry it seemed the leaders spent a good portion of their time spreading men out. As for US units my time in the USMC it seemed as get on line charge lift arty. I have no idea how they have come along since then, being the only video I have seen is on the NatGeo channel where a company was tasked with retaking a town without destroying it, so it was a steady grind of moving out the poorly trained taliban. robroysimmons