this may be incredibly autistic, but right now i'm composing a table of organization for a fictional military.
pic related is a mech inf division.
me what assets, specifically
>HMG
>mortar
>AT
>Field Artillery
are available at the following levels
>platoon
>company
>battalion
>regiment
>division
Also, how the fuck do I use compose the symbol for Aerial Recon (dirigibles, which are neither fixed wing, rotary wing or unmanned aerial vehicles)
HMG at company/battalion level
Light mortars at company level, medium mortars at battalion, heavy mortars as division-level
AT: depends on whether or not it's man-portable. ATGMs and handheld missiles would be company level or lower, maybe even squad level. AT guns are probably company/battalion, or a separate AT gun battalion at division-level.
Field artillery is regimental level at least, likely a separate battalion or regiment (as a corps-level asset)
Interesting thought experiment!
>>28019257
>Light mortars at company level, medium mortars at battalion, heavy mortars as division-level
What constitutes light/medium/heavy classification? Calibur of the round?
Also, does the US even use light mortars now adays? Or have they been effectively replaced by M203/320/Mk19?
>>28019269
Yeah, grenade launchers have replaced the "light mortar" role. Think 50mm direct support grenade launchers in WW2 at the platoon level for light mortars.
Medium mortars and heavy mortars are both used in the artillery roles, caliber and logistics are the difference. ~81mm is medium and 100+mm is heavy IMO.
Maybe you could add a separate artillery regiment to your TO, and have those assets distributed as necessary to the individual regiments?
>>28019288
>Maybe you could add a separate artillery regiment to your TO, and have those assets distributed as necessary to the individual regiments?
First of all I'm not sure if mortars belong under ordnance, artillery, or heavy weapons regiment.
And does it have to be a regiment? Can is just be a battalion with the companies distributed into the regiments, with platoons attached at the battalion level (am i saying that right? attached at the battalion level?)?
>>28019257
>>28019269
Depends on the type of unit. Light infantry != mech infantry.
If you're mostly foot-mobile, light weapons [60mm] at co lvl (but usually split up down to plt lvl), medium [81mm] or heavy [120mm] at BN level. If you're mostly mechanized, heavy at co and BN level. Division mortars aren't a thing. Many units will have access to both the larger mortar for their official role and the next step down for training.
Medium mortars are kinda a worst of both worlds today. In ww2 era, battlefronts moved slow and jeeps were shit, but today, an 81mm is too big for infantry and too small for vehicles.
>>28019311
>First of all I'm not sure if mortars belong under ordnance, artillery, or heavy weapons regiment.
It could be all of the above, those all seem like different names for an artillery unit. HW regiment seems most fitting as you've got a tank battalion thrown in there, or you can just call it a headquarters regiment.
>platoons attached at the battalion level
Yeah, that could work. Think about your fictional doctrine and how artillery plays into that, greentext implies to me that it's used very tactically, at least in this division. For a more operationally-focused use of artillery, I think they'd go under regimental control.
>>28019320
Good corrections on the medium mortars dude. 120mm is definitely more common in the US military nowadays.
>>28019320
>Depends on the type of unit. Light infantry != mech infantry.
Hmm didn't consider that.
>Medium mortars are kinda a worst of both worlds today. In ww2 era, battlefronts moved slow and jeeps were shit, but today, an 81mm is too big for infantry and too small for vehicles.
Huh, so the US doesn't have a dedicated mortar vehicle, like the German Sd.Kfz. 250/7 w/ 81 mm mortar.
>>28019337
>HW regiment seems most fitting
Probably, but wouldn't I have to balance out HMG/AT/mortars/other HW in that regiment? Effectively making the HW regiment a jack of all trades, but too little numbers of HMG/AT/mortars/etc.?
>Think about your fictional doctrine and how artillery plays into that, greentext implies to me that it's used very tactically, at least in this division. For a more operationally-focused use of artillery, I think they'd go under regimental control.
Ok thanks, didn't think of that of either. The effectiveness of mortars generally goes up with the number of mortars right?
>>28019224
>this may be incredibly autistic, but right now i'm composing a table of organization for a fictional military.
You could just organize the unit into a combined arms battalion which would consist of 2x company's of mech infantry and their IFV and 2x company's of tanks which would negate the need for a separate tank battalion.
Each company consists of 3 maneuver platoons and a HQ platoon.
Each Mech Infantry Platoons TO&E:
2x Javelin missiles (if missiles are in your timeline...)
Company TO&E:
2x HMG
2x grenade machine guns (Mk-19)
1 or 2x 60mm mortars (assigned from HHC)
Battalion TO&E:
4x HMG (at the Headquarters and Headquarters Company)
2x Mk 19 (at the HHC)
2x 120mm mortars (HHC)
2x 81mm mortars (HHC)
The battalion mortars are the organic fire support for the unit. A field artillery battalion would also be needed for your division.
Also ADRP 1-02 "Terms and Military Symbols" is the reference for all symbology used by the US Army and you may find Chapter 5 onward useful. http://armypubs.army.mil/doctrine/DR_pubs/dr_a/pdf/adrp1_02.pdf
>Also, how the fuck do I use compose the symbol for Aerial Recon (dirigibles, which are neither fixed wing, rotary wing or unmanned aerial vehicles)
Pic related.
Also if there is not a specific unit symbol with modifiers available you are allowed to use the closest representative symbol with local modifications to identify the unit in question, ie. make one as close as possible to what it is on your own.
>>28019550
>You could just organize the unit into a combined arms battalion which would consist of 2x company's of mech infantry and their IFV and 2x company's of tanks which would negate the need for a separate tank battalion.
Perhaps I should have mentioned that, but this fictional military is based on 1920's tech.
Hence, why I need the symbol for a dirigible.
Also, are you basically talking about pic related, x3?
>>28019591
No more like pic related.
Also see >>28019550 where I used ADRP 1-02 to give you a unit symbol for your dirigibles. Also I mentioned in that post:
>if there is not a specific unit symbol with modifiers available you are allowed to use the closest representative symbol with local modifications to identify the unit in question, ie. make one as close as possible to what it is on your own.
Its okay by me, OP. I'm probably just as autistic coming up with technical cards for the equipment used in my webcomic.
>>28019635
not autistic enough actually
>>28019659
>that dude cut in half
>>28019609
What's the left branch of the Battalion, labled OPCON? I get the symbol for engineers and mobile supply, but what is OPCON, FSC, and SPT?
And I'd love to use combined arms, but the fictional setting simply doesn't allow for such advanced organization, at least for another 20 years.
>>28019731
also i cant access that .pdf
probably because i'm in a certain country that restricts many DNS.
>>28019738
forgot pic
>>28019731
>What's the left branch of the Battalion, labled OPCON? I get the symbol for engineers and mobile supply, but what is OPCON, FSC, and SPT?
Field Support Company -- the mechanics, cooks, recovery vehicles, etc. that are attached to a battalion to keep its weapons and vehicles functioning.
Also pic related.
>And I'd love to use combined arms, but the fictional setting simply doesn't allow for such advanced organization, at least for another 20 years.
You could try modelling it off the Triangular Division Model from just prior to WWII and replace one Infantry regiment with armor instead.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triangular_division#/media/File:United_States_World_War_II_Infantry_Division_1942_Structure.png
>>28019701
I have never noticed that before.
>>28019701
Such is life
>>28019701
>borris, why is gunner half cut
>man is part of machine yuri, if machine is dissect, so man is
>>28019372
No, more like vehicles are almost always mounted with 120mm. 81mm is considered shit because no one wants to carry it and why slap it on a vehicle when you can go the next size up.
>>28019809
>Combined arms doctrine has all but eliminated regimental purpose, and regiments generally exist only as traditional designations.
huh, that's interesting.
> Many European armies now place greater emphasis on the brigade and in some cases, such as the Portuguese and the Belgian armies, have eliminated the division entirely as a tactical unit.
I should also probably mention that I'm modelling this military with East European influences.
As you can see in the picture, I cut out the corp level of command (something the Soviets did in 1941 I believe, as it slowed down orders and maneuvering).
I remember reading something about Soviet divisions using 3+1+1 structure. 3 obviously stands for the 3 inf regiments, not sure about +1 parts.
>>28019958
>I should also probably mention that I'm modelling this military with East European influences.
>I remember reading something about Soviet divisions using 3+1+1 structure. 3 obviously stands for the 3 inf regiments, not sure about +1 parts.
Hopefully you will have better luck with this link.
FM 100-2-3 "The Soviet Army: Troops, Organization, and Equipment"
http://fas.org/irp/doddir/army/fm100-2-3.pdf
This is an excellent resource for you anon as it lists not only the organization at each level but also the equipment/weapons numbers at each level.
Pic related.
>>28019999
Wow, thanks a lot
also nice squads
