RE: Platoon Leaders in SG2

> From: 	 Kueck H <KueckH@aol.com>
> Reply-to:	 FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk
> Date: 	 Wed, 22 Apr 1998 19:11:04 EDT
> To:		 ftgzg-l@bolton.ac.uk
> Subject:	 RE: Platoon Leaders in SG2

Wow!!  Thanks for the input.  Having the actual organizations and
NAMES for the command levels is great.	I believe that Nic at Eureka
is doing some figures for NSL light infantry - perhaps we could use
this organization for those troops??

KR, Geo-Hex

> Hi everyone !!!
>
> Thomas Barclay wrote:
>
> >I believe (when I was in CF Infantry Reserve) we used (at least
> >locally) an organization of three sections (didn't call them squads)
> >to a platoon. Typically each section was about ten guys (varied
> >depending on available strength). And then there was a platoon
> >weapons det that consisted of about another 8 guys. We had each
> >section led by a MCpl or Sgt, and the platoon was lead by a Sgt. or a
> >Warrant Officer (a bigger better Sgt. to those used to American
> >ranks). The Platoon was commanded by a 1Lt. or a 2Lt. depending on
> >what officers were available.
>
> Just to give a german (i.e.: Bundeswehr) perspective on platoon
> organisation (I served in the Jaeger Kompanie of a Panzergrenadier
Btl.
>  from 1986 to 1988):
> At least up to the end of the Cold War a German Jaeger-Zug (light-
resp.
> foot-infantry) was organized of two ''fighting'' Gruppen
(squads/sections...
> whatever) and one Zug-Trupp. All consisted of around 10 men, incl. one
> Milan-ATGM, two snipers (trained for independant action as a team, but
> normally operating with the squad) and one Panzerfaust each. The main
> difference was, that the Command Squad had a longer ranged radio
> (in addition to the ''Walkie Talkie'') and no MG.
> The Platoon Leader was a Hauptfeldwebel (senior NCO) with a Felwebel
> as second in command, the squads were led by junior NCOs
(Unteroffiziere).
> Only the first platoon would be led by an Officer (Leutnant or
Oberleutnant),
> who would have taken command of the company if the Company Commander
> (Kompanie Chef) was disabled (i.e. there are only two officers per
company).
> The main reasons behind these small platoons were:
> 1.) a better control/flexibility of the platoon in the ''heat of
battle''
> 2.) the german ''Stosstrupp'' doctrine
> 3.) unfavourable experiences with five-vehicle PzGren platoons
>
>
> >Although the point of the command squad is to command, I'd point out
> >a couple of things:
> >1. It tends to immobilize the squad. That means the commanders tend
> >to not lead from the front, or even close to it. In real life, I
> >found our platoon officers didn't lurk way at the back. Now, you can
> >acheive this by not giving any orders and moving, but then what's the
> >point? Maybe if the Platoon Commander was allowed to move with the
> >squad, and the squad was lead by the Platoon Sgt (something that I
> >saw a lot of anyway....), then maybe you wouldn't get the 'lead from
> >the rear' syndrome that the rules tend to encourage. In real life,
> >this is bad for morale. (I know I wouldn't be in a hurry to follow
> >orders from a stay-behind....).
> The Jaeger Zug operated according to the two up, one behind principle,
> i.e. the platoon command squad (and the deputy platoon commander)
> would hang a little bit behind the other two. The platoon commander
> (Zugfuehrer) was normally where the ''action''was, which meant that
the
> possibility of both platoon commanders being put out of action
> simultaneously was minimized.
> So the ''hanging back'' of the command element to transfer actions
> in SG2 would be similar to ''real-life'' Bundeswehr Doctrine.
>
> >2. We rate our leader with a leadership level. We should (or could)
> >also rate the 'next in command' (usually the Warrant/Sergeant for the
> >platoon) too. Then if the officer was killed, there'd be a quick
> >chain-of-command replacement and no confusion.
> Same thing in the Bundeswehr...plus: all level of command are trained
> (and are expected) to act on their own initiative if deemed necessary.
>
>
> In my opinion the Jaeger-Zug would give a very effective organisation
for SG2:
> -All fighting squads could be ''double activated'' by two Transferring
> Actions.
> -The lack of the MG in the command squad results in less ''wasted
> firepower'' in the case of two Transferring Actions.
> -Higher flexibility through smaller platoons.
> -Not to mention the high percentage (maybe too high for SG2) of
> snipers (Scharfschuetzen).
>
> That's all I can think of at the Moment (it's one o'clock in the
morning).
>
> Tschüss !!!
> Hauke
>
> P.S. the same holds (in most aspects) true for Panzergrenadiere and
> (I think) for all german infantry units... and I'm not aware of any
> significant
> changes in this nowadays.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>