Creating the Helicopter Tank Destroyer Force
Vložit
- čas přidán 25. 06. 2024
- Become a Patron to support us & get exclusive perks: / battleorder
Or Sign-Up as a CZcams Member: youtube.com/@BattleOrder/memb...
Check out our merch shop for new prints, apparel and other stuff!: battleorder.myshopify.com/
If you'd like to make a one-time donation to Battle Order: www.paypal.com/donate/?hosted...
Other Platforms
• Website: www.battleorder.org/
• 2nd Channel: / battleorder2
• Twitter: / battle_order
• Instagram: / battle.order
• Facebook: / battle.order
• Tiktok: / battle.order
Chapters:
0:00 - Introduction
0:62 - Howze Board (1962)
1:37 - Tank Destroyer Comparison
2:28 - Maneuverist Mindset Shift
4:08 - TRICAP Experiment (1971)
4:27 - 6th Cavalry Brigade
4:57 - Air Cavalry Squadron (ACCB)
5:44 - Attack Helicopter Battalion (ACCB)
6:37 - Attack Helicopter Employment
7:35 - Recon & Security Missions
9:02 - Attack Helicopter Employment (cont'd)
Sources:
• FM 1-15 "Aviation Reference Data" (1977)
• FM 17-50 "Attack Helicopter Operations" (1977)
• FM 34-35 "Armored Cavalry Regiment and Separate Brigade Intelligence and Electronic Warfare Operations" (1990)
• U.S. Army Tactical Mobility Requirements Board Final Report (20 August 1962)
• 1967 Infantry Reference Data
• ST-1-100-1 "Reference Data for Army Aviation" (May 1973)
• ST 17-1-1 "Armor Reference Data, Volume II, Nondivisional Organizations" (1978-79)
• McGrath, J. "Fire for Effect: Field Artillery and Close Air Support in the US Army"
• Simmons, J. (1989) "The Attack Helicopter Battalion: Ready for the 60's or the 90's?"
Part 2 will be more focused on the specific employment of the Air Cavalry Combat Brigade in a corps fight, and a more detailed organizational history from the Howze Board to its beginnings under TRICAP in the early 1970s, the introduction of the Apache in the 80s and its deactivation in 2005.
And don't take the comparison with Tank Destroyer Battalions *TOO* seriously. The platforms were obviously very different but I found the doctrinal parallels between the *UNIT* types to be interesting (i.e. being mobile anti-tank units with organic scout elements working for the corps or attached to a division). Kind of like how an AH-1 Cobra is obviously different from a BM-21 Grad, but certain Cobra units were used as "aerial rocket artillery" under the DIVARTY in some contexts.
Great video man
Yeah and Tank Destroyers were a doctrinal thing, not a type of vehicle.
What’s the relationship between the ACCB and the ACR?
@@gabagool2055 Both were corps-level cavalry formations. While the ACR was dedicated to reconnaissance and security and the ACCB was dedicated to destroying armor, the ACCB’s antitank capabilities and organic Air Cav Squadron also lent it to conducting a cover for the corps, which is a security mission that requires significant combat power. So that’s why I think the ACCB sort of merges capabilities of a tank destroyer unit and an ACR
These sorts of comparisons are just vibes though
I’ll be interested to see how you handle the confusion of attack battalions (especially those assigned to the 6th ACCB) being reflagged in the mid-80s. Most books get it completely wrong! And cover how 6ACCB got the nickname “stay-behind brigade”! 😂
Crazy to think that all of these tactics and aerial cavalry teams employed by the US military were developed to the minute detail in just less than a century.
tbh with that budget anything less would be disappointing. What is really crazy is how wealthy the us is but how shit their social state is
There's your answer - 20% of the budget. Not to mention how a really big part of the GDP isn't taxed through tax havens or corruption.
@@buckplug2423this is another one of those myths that has absolutely no relation to reality. the average US military expenditure is less than 3% of GDP a year (at some years during the height of the Cold War it broke 5%). it is not even the largest line item by far, Social Security and many other programs are many multiples larger
@@Laotzu.Goldbug I said budget, not GDP
@@buckplug2423 it is still not anywhere near 20% of the Federal budget either. it's closer to 11%
I served in the 55th Signal Troop of the 6th ACCB in the mid 1970's (just after the Brigade was formed). One cool feature of the Scout units was that they experimented with tying a motorcycle to each landing strut and dropping off motorcycle scouts behind the FEBA. I left the unit before the experiment ended so I don't know if it was considered successful or not, but the motorcycle scouts loved it.
Needs more likes
What a ballsy move
I wonder if this has been tried recently, or with ATVs.
@@recoil53 They probably use small drones for this now. Cheaper and safer.
@@taun856 They aren't getting rid of human scouts yet.
“ I bought a manual with my Patreon money” I love hearing people coming together for the sake of deadly knowledge 🎉
Interesting. The Chieftain has talked about Tank Destroyer doctrine alot, and pushed back against the idea that it was some sort of failure, merely that the TDs used in WW2 were too slow to match the doctrine's theory (although they were also very successful, just didn't work as theorised exactly). Anyways, he has mentioned a couple times that more recently that the TD doctrine with helicopters works really well, alot more speed and maneuverability to get to were the tank is to make it not anywhere anymore.
Anyways, really cool! A collab would be cool if that ever works out!
It must be meaningful that every army got rid of tank destroyers.
just about every army still has tank destroyers, they just evolved. You can see this evolution in action with West Germany's Jaguar tank destroyers. Initially externally they wouldn't have looked out of place on a World War 2 battlefield, but they ended up having their guns removed, the mantley plated up and beong given a mounting for SS 10 ATGWs. Since then just about every army has some sort of vehicle mounting ATGWs to give infantry formations a mean of engaging tanks and other armour.
@@recoil53 That's not quite the angle I was going for. The US use of the term "Tank Destroyer" has historically been somewhat different to the commonly-used meaning of the term today. Even in WW2, when tank destroyers existed as a branch, the US Army distinguished between tank destroyer units and anti-tank units. Today people usually refer to tank destroyers meaning "anti-tank vehicles", a term used by the US. For example, "Stryker AT" is what many would consider a tank destroyer, though the AT obviously means "Anti-tank".
Thus when I have said that the attack helicopter battalion was in effect the tank destroyer doctrine in modern application, that means specifically the manner of use for which the unit was intended, not that it's a light 'vehicle' with the ability to destroy tanks.
Outstanding video. I was fortunate enough to witness these Air Cav units in action, during REFORGER exercises during the 1980s. The skills of the US and German scout pilots was amazing to behold. The US flew the Kiowa, and the German flew the even better BO105. They would through the German countryside, often under 10 feet from the ground.
But, the proliferation of shoulder fired anti-air missiles forced major changes in air mobile tactics. You may want to consider doing a video on that.
There's something just so appealing about Hueys and Cobras. What a cool period.
For the crayon eaters it never ended
I lived through those days and there was literally nothing cool about it. The limitations of both systems were frightening. Life was FAR better in the Apache/Blackhawk years.
@@CB-vt3mx No doubt Apaches and Blackhawks are superior. But given the relative infancy of helicopter operations back in those days and how Hueys and Cobras still tackled it, one can't help viewing it as something rather impressive.
03:53 These manuals are not only useful for the missions but are also enjoyable and the concepts easy to understand thanks to all those drawings. It's almost like reading a comic book.
Loving these air cavalry episodes
To me, tanks and mech infantry are the equivalent of heavy cavalry and heavy/light infantry in ancient armies, mortars and artillery were like foot bound archers while attack and scout helicopters performed the role of light cavalry.
Hmm, well archers were never really used like mortars, more like rifles. That volley fire thing is pretty much a myth from movies. Archers picked a target and aimed for that target, didn't shoot in large groups into the sky, waste of arrows (which were a precious resource with a very finite supply).
Ancient also refers to a specific period, antiquity, roughly 1500 years ago. Alotta what you are describing is more like medieval.
But yes, aside from that nitpicking, I agree, lotta similarities, superficial and otherwise and it's all pretty cool.
@@Lowlandlord I learned something new today about how medieval archers are used. Thanks
WOW , WHAT A COINCIDENCE!! this video dropped right whilst I was watching "Apache Warrior" on Prime , which is the 6th CAVALRY BRIGADE, on the opening day of IRAQ, 2003. Crazy. Highly recommend watching it
Animation getting better and better
I have to say your videos are insanely cool and interesting. Thank you.
Fantastic choice of music
Great video. In the early 80s, I was in one of the attack helicopter troops of the 6th ACCB. It was renamed the 6th CBAC, Cavalry Brigade (Air Combat), pronounced See-Back. We trained with A10s in Nevada against pretty sophisticated AAA threats and our NOE tactics were surprisingly effective. At the time we weren't as well equipped as the video suggests and in our squadron, most of our Cobras were the older S Modified. Our unit patch was a red & white shield with crossed sabers and known as the crossed backstabbers.
My father was 6th Cav. He was in the 34th support, A company. He was out in 82.
Great video! Desert Storm, 1/7 Cav, 1st Cav Div. AO in an OH-58C.
Great video brings back memories!!
Battle Order's Air Cav Arc is, honestly, just the best
Idk if this is feasible or viable, but I would love an expansion into revolutionary, or foreign civil war forces. I’m sure most were intentionally irregular or at least elude historical record. But coup forces, insurgents, etc would be so cool to learn about through your format!
awesome channel
Always happy to see you upload sir.
Btw Cheems is looking as distinguished as ever. His blues are always on point.
NAFO Expansion is non negotiable.
Kinda sad he passed away yesterday.
if the US invades any superpower nation, it's subsonic aircraft would fall like rain
@@christophercao7027 Yes. He shall live forever in our hearts!
It would be cool if the Howze Board report was actually implanted.
Awesome 😎, glad u used the Patreon money for this 😮
Medal of Honor song 🔥🔥🔥
Yet another great video! I was wondering how the channel and your interest in the field came about?
I also like to collect army manuals so I appreciate the way this video opened
Nice Video
Can you do a video on US attempt to relive their tanks and armored vehicles for the Korean War, how they scramble to reactivate the M4A3E8 Shermans in tank depots, M24 Chaffees and kind of small amount of M26 Pershing tanks available for deployment to Korea?
what is song at introduction 0:45 please?
Medal of Honor Allied Assault main theme
Thank you@@BattleOrder
For that classic Battle Order feeling 😗🤌
Well done.
Please do more a video on all carriers strike groups formations (exssmples) why there orgonized that way and some from all countries with them to understand the different dictrines
My father was apart of 6th Cavalry, 34th Support, A company, as their Munitions Specialist.
It is shocking how effective tank destroyers and heavy infantry guns were in holding up and killing tanks if the paired up with just enough light jeeps or infantry
Cool video man
I can totally see another air assault brigade being useful if permanently stationed in Europe. Right now we have 173rd AB which can jump into the eastern border of nato, 2nd cav & 41st FAB will then convoy in behind them. An air assault brigade could fit in between working alongside the 12th CAB, being much faster then a train of strykers
I was wondering how well would a unit like this fare in a battlefield with no total air superiority. Not being able to hold ground really limits what a formation like this.
Artillery and fixed wing air can’t hold ground either, but they and attack helicopters can deny ground by fire. No one’s arguing helicopters can do it all
When Apaches came around, this mission would be done at night. The Soviet airforce wasnt going to come and hunt helicopters in nap of the earth at night.
Medal of Honor theme, nice music choice.
The fundamental issue is that the deep strikes that the Army aviation community loves had limited real-world success, and some major real-world failures. The "Ambush at Najaf" raises the question as to whether this was a one-off or a systemic issue. Which is discussed in CGSC paper "US Army Attack Aviation in a Decisive Action Environment: History, Doctrine, and a Need for Doctrinal Refinement"
For the period that this doctrine was designed for the helicopters would have been fighting defensively against a big soviet push - so much less chance of a najaf style ambush.
If I’m not mistaken I believe all US Military Manual of arms are available for free online.
You are mistaken. Only current ones are all available online. Old ones rely on people taking the time and money (if its an institution) to scan and upload them so many are not online. In fact, some collectors made it a business im web 1.0 to sell their scans of old manuals and did not out them online for free
@@BattleOrder Ah I see, thank you for the clarification! Love your videos and look forward to the next!
Great video. And a welcome Metal Gear Reference at 2:00. I will look out for cardboard boxes in the next few videos.
anyone know the background music at 1:30?
Make a video abaout the hungarian army organization.
Enjoy how all variants have Native American origins for each crafts designation.
I can't find the FM 17-47 pdf file. Could you make one? Please
I may scan it and release it on my site when I get it
Ok. I thank you
Can you please make video on navy subs and mq9 reaper.
Comment for statistics
I feel that I’m qualified to add to this discussion but I know there’s many others out there with my background. I’m a retired US Army 11H/11B (1983-2009) and I served in D co. 2/502 INF, 101st ABN. As a tank destroyer, we anticipate a massive push of enemy armor to penetrate as deep as they can before they’re attrited. I’m the ground level tank killer using the TOW system with a maximum range of 4,000 meters so when it’s time for me to fire on the enemy, it means they made it through a gauntlet of strikes and these are the lucky ones. We rely on stealth and maneuverability to efficiently kill and survive. A section of AH-64’s can quantify my effectiveness as well as provide me time to displace sideways or backwards to set up a new defense/fighting position. We prefer to call in an artillery strike on an attacking enemy with a mix of WP, HE and smoke rounds to keep the enemy confused while my thermal sights can see through the smoke (not so good with WP though) and can allow me to fire a couple missiles before I displace to a secondary firing position because if the enemy knows where I’m at, my chances of survival is lowered dramatically. For this reason we prefer to keep the vehicle in a hide position that’s about 100-150 meters behind the firing position then after a shot we move back to the hide position, reload and move to our secondary firing position. The 101st has an Air Cav squadron as well as an AH-64 squadron that can provide support when needed. We have to anticipate the enemy’s likely actions on contact and use key terrain to our advantage such as some type of bottleneck the enemy has to pass through that if I take out a couple of his tanks, it’ll clog that avenue which is like a Turkey dinner to an Air Force pilot or AH-64, they’ll rip everything to scrap in a heartbeat. Obviously, I’ll already have AT and AP mines set up along that bottleneck and any possible ways around it. Infantry scare tank crews to death so always play into those fears, this is why you won’t see enemy tanks driving through built up communities unless their Infantry is ahead of them. Always remember that it takes 4 enemy combatants to dislodge one defender, that’s when both are equally trained, supported and equipped. From what I’ve seen from the Ukrainian forces, they’re even worse than the Russian Girl Scouts. I’ve seen factual numbers on the conflict to date as well as numerous first person videos where Ukrainian Infantry conduct assaults and I’m shocked how dull they are, I guess they’re tired of living. Soviet bloc tanks are very easy to kill, just aim for the turret ring.
So you probably know about this already, but in case you don't; The Army makes a lot of its manuals available online for free if you don't mind PDF or EBook format. I think its just current manuals so it probably won't help with older stuff, but just about anything current you can find once you learn how it is all organized.
I know where to find the current pubs but older ones basically relies on someone, sometimes an archivist or a collector, scanning and uploading them so not all of them are online
if the US invades any superpower nation, US subsonic aircraft would fall like rain
@@kingsman3087keep coping lol
Why? Cause it’s awesome.
So cobras (Marines) were scouts snd cav 😮🤯😲
No the Marines and Army both operated Cobras.
Hear me out… Ariel mortars
Everyone thumbs up if the music brings you memories.
what does "HQ & HQ" mans ? like an HQ I get it, the HQ of other "subordinate" HQs, is fine too, but a doubled HQ ? what would be the point of such and difference from a regular HQ ?
There is the Battalion/Squadron HQ, which is like the Battalion Commander and their staff. The tactical control and planning for the battalion.
The HQ Company is a separate entity that supports the Battalion HQ and will sometimes have some other stuff under it. A battalion-level mortar platoon or scout platoon for example will be administratively supported by the HQ Company, but tactically employed by the Battalion HQ.
@@BattleOrder That's an interesting differenciation to keep in mind, thanks for the explanation :D
🥵 My kind of spicy content
I doubt you'll see this but I got a soviet FM-100-2-3 PDF off the internet, you could probably find similar stuff for free as i did
Why do you say troop when the symbol you are using is squadron?
In America company-sized cavalry units are troops, not squadrons like in the UK and other places
@@BattleOrder thank you for the swift answer, it got me confused
Yeah this is a strange oxymoron
Seems like advanced MANPADs and autocannons have weakened this doctrine dramatically.
j ust f inishing watching a ll the videos i'd missed in the past few months like an hour ago lol
Do a video on Irish army. Please!!!!
>i bought w manual
Lol, they are free. You can DL them. Publicly available.
Most FMs are. You just wanted to waste money
Manuals that are not current (and thus not available on Army Pubs) are only online if someone has put them online. Either a collector, an archivist, or now content creators with Patreons, like vickersmg.blog. There are many old manuals that are not available for free online because no one has bothered to scan and upload theirs. Some people in the 90s/early 2000s even had their little Web 1.0 business of selling photocopies of old manuals/TOEs and not posting them for free, and a lot of them are dying off/stopping that
Wait you can buy books on how to fight wars ? Good thing Russia doesn't know.
"The Book" only good up until the 1st shot of the next war.
The future is just filling V-22s or similar aircraft to the brim with switchblades. Especially when drone launched manpad missiles become a thing
stinky