Welcome to Cold War Gamer, a blog I am using to record my Cold War wargaming projects. These range from fictitious Cold War hot projects to historical conflicts that took place around the globe throughout the Cold War era, all modelled and gamed in 20mm. The blog includes links to various resources useful to the Cold War Gamer.

My current projects include: Central Front; British & Soviet. South African Border War; Angolans and South Africans. Soviet Afghan War; Soviets and Afghans
Showing posts with label War Games. Show all posts
Showing posts with label War Games. Show all posts

Sunday, 23 September 2018

Review Book - Red Armour an Examination of the Soviet Mobile Force Concept, R Simpkin, 1984





So this was the summer reading, all part of a project called Deep Battle that I have yet to really start writing about or indeed executing but have been researching since about 2015. Over a wet week in Wales I have been ploughing my way through the 12 essays in this book by Brigadier Richard Simpkin who wrote a series of books on military manoeuvre warfare theory in the mid to late 80s and participated in the wide ranging discussion that went on at that time within NATO with regard to managing the Soviet threat.  Of the essays I am interested in I have now read most of them 2-3 times.  The ideas are complex and Simpkin is rarely an easy read.  Working at it in order to understand what he is saying can be very rewarding. 

Red Armour, an examination of the Soviet Mobile Force concepts does pretty much what it says on the tin in that it provides, in its 12 essays, a thought provoking and revealing analysis of Soviet Operational doctrine.  Unlike the Race to the Swift which looks at a variety of maneuver warfare concepts and extrapolates these into the future. This collection of his work focuses on Soviet operational concepts as they had evolved by the height of the Cold War in 1982-83.

The Three parts of the book cover, resources procedures and concepts and each part contains four essays which  discuss at varying levels of detail the following topics:

Part 1 Resources
  • Manpower
  • Philosophy
  • Technology
  • Ground
Part 2 Procedures
  • Control and Support
  • Movement and Deployment
  • Obstacle Crossing
  • Parameters of Tank Force operations
Part 3 Concepts
  • The deep battle
  • The tank force concept
  • Soviet mobile operations
  • The NATO centre
For me the nuggets are in part 2 and 3 which focuses on the procedures and the concepts and illustrates the Soviet thinking by contrasting it to NATOs more positional approaches.


In Part 2 I found the particular essays on; Control and Support, Movement and Deployment and Obstacle Crossing the most useful as they really start to drive at the how at the operational level. examples of points of interest include the Soviet use of Primary routes at high traffic densities whilst holding secondary routes in reserve and clear of significant traffic to enable the flexibility to restructure the order of march accelerating assets and units as needed, this together with the the ability to line switch elements between axis of advance provides the conditions for achieving surprise.  Whilst Simpkin challenges the Soviets ability to achieve the levels of flexibility the approaches could deliver and highlights the tactical risks this exposes them to, I am not clear that he considers these objections in the light of Soviet control approaches which include dedicated movement control organisations deployed along routes at relatively high densities in comparison to Western Armies.

In Part 3 his summary of the deep battle discussion he provides one of the most succinct descriptions of both the theory and the terms that I have come across and his articulation of Soviet Mobile Operations in contrast to the more positional and ground focused doctrines of NATO really start to drive home the key differences between the two.  This starts to highlight what the Soviets focus on in terms of objectives - the enemy rather than the ground, and whilst I have read this in many books the way he contrasts this with the ground focused objectives of NATO doctrines really drives the point home.



His treatment of the principal periods of the Cold War and how the Soviets shifted from the use of Nuclear weapons to provide the conditions for maneuver to the need to exploit strategic surprise in the later period to a similar effect is thought provoking and credibly illustrates the potential impacts that could be achieved even in the absence of Nuclear weapons.  He reasonably challenges the effectiveness of interchangeability of resources in a non nuclear phase although he does not explore the increased scale of indirect fire assets or their increasing effectiveness as the book was written in 1983 and pre dates a number of these changes.

From the Wargames perspective what this all enables is the development of the framework of operational concepts that you need to develop in order to set tactical scenarios in the operational context.  In replicating historical battles in other periods this context is provided by the historical events, in gaming the Cold War, you need an operational and strategic picture to set the action against in order to create realistic scenarios, this is particularly true when dealing with the Soviet Union.  

The driver for this is the subject of Red Armour the Soviet Unions thinking at the operational level. Understanding their focus on the operational rather than the tactical is critical to understanding how they would deal with different situations and the forces that would be brought to bear. In short why NATOs tactical and equipment superiority would be nullified by one of the more sophisticated approaches to maneuver warfare available.  Translating that to table-top games is a challenge all of its own.

I snapped up my copy of Red Armour for £40 about a year ago and at that price I think its a worthwhile addition to the collection if you have an interest in developing table top scenarios in the wider operational context, if you are looking for the detail of what the Soviets did rather than the thinking behind it that can be accessed more cheaply and effectively elsewhere. Current prices on Amazon are running at £200 plus and at that price I would be inclined to leave it on the shelf.





AFM Volume 2, Part 2, A Treatise on Soviet Operational Art, 1991








Posted by at 2 comments:
Labels: , , , , ,

Sunday, 25 March 2018

Review Models - 1/72 S&S Kraz Truck






First post for over a year I think, nothing earth shattering, a review of S&S's Kraz 255.  The 7.5 ton Kraz 214 and 255 trucks provided extreme off-road logistic capacity to the Soviet and Warsaw Pact forces from 1959 through to the end of the Cold War.  The Kraz 214 was produced between 1959 - 1963 and the Kraz 255 entered mass production in 1967 and remained in production until 1994. The Trucks are visually similar, so models in 1/72 can be broadly used to represent either. 




The vehicle provided the platform for a range of variants which included; the TMM vehicle launched bridge from 1974, The carriage and launch vehicle for the PMP ribbon bridge, and the carriage vehicle for the BMK-T bridging boat, together with a number of engineering earth moving and construction variants.  I am using them to provide the transport capability in the Headquaters of my MRR Engineering Company.



The S&S Model is a robust but effective war-games model and is cast in resin and white metal. It can be purchased with or with out the canvas tilt and I have both versions, it cost at the time of posting £11.50 which included P&P.  The models I received were cleanly cast with limited holes and flash.


Other manufactures produce versions of this vehicle notably Armory and Armada but both these manufacturers produce for the modelling fraternity with associated complexity and price.  The model whilst cleverly constructed would provide challenging to convert as the chasis is effectively a component of the truck body so would need to be replaced in order to produce either a TMM or PMP variant. 






After some minimal clean up construction was straight forward and completed quickly with no significant issues, the only thing that slows you down is the amount of time it takes for the super glue to set.  Images of the vehicle show little in the way of stowage so I have left the model in its original state.



I have painted the vehicle in line with my other Soviet equipment in green, although I have been working on evolving my style
  • The Vehicle underside is sprayed in NATO Black XF- 69 before being fixed to the base
  • The vehicle is given an overall coat of Tamiya XF-13 JA Green, and is then oversprayed with NATO Black XF-69 to create an overall dark green colour.
  • The panels were then sprayed with JA Green.
  • The Tilt was painted with Olive Drab XF-62, the areas between the tilt supports were oversprayed wit Nato Black and the ridge was over sprayed with Olive Drab. The whole activity was a bit iterative until the required effect was achieved.
  • The detail was then picked out with a pin wash using Humbrol Black Wash.

  • The wheels were painted with Vallejo Black grey 70852 and then washed with a mix of Vallejo Khaki Grey 70880 and Buff 70976, before being dry brushed with Vallejo Black grey
  • Windows were painted with Vallejo Black Grey
  • The lights front and back were painted with Vallejo Flat Red 70957, Light Orange 70911 and Sky Grey 70989.
  • The doors then received a coat of clear before decals were applied with micro sol then the whole vehicle was sealed with a coat of Tamiya Matt clear.
  • A small amount of chipping was carried out on selected areas of the vehicle using Vallejo Black Grey, Mahogany sand 70846 and Sky Grey
  • The vehicle was then weathered using an overspray of Tamiya XF-59 Desert Yellow.


The truck has been based on laser cut MDF base supplied by East Riding Miniatures,  being a bit of a beast this is 6 cm x 13 cm in order to accommodate the size of the vehicle. These are covered in a mix of sand and white glue before painting.  The base is painted with Citadel Gorthor Brown and dry brushed with Vallejo Desert Yellow 70977.  Once dry a range of basing materials have been used to create the vegetation on the base.






All up a great little model that provides a useful addition to my Cold War Collection and provides a degree of variety in the truck options otherwise available for a Cold War Soviet Army.


References:

Posted by at 6 comments:
Labels: , , , , , ,

Sunday, 5 March 2017

ORBAT - NATO's Northern Army Group, 1 BR Corps Deployment






The 1 Br Corps deployment zone sits between Hanover in the North to Einbeck in the South. Deployed to the North is 1 GE Corps and to the South covering the more broken terrain of the Harz Mountains and the Saurland is 1 Be Corps.  The detail of NORTHAGs deployment was previously covered here.

The Corps area is dissected by the Rivers Weser and Leine and has the Harz mountains on its Southern boundary and the Teutoburger Wald to its rear.  The city of Hieldesheim sits in the center of the Corps area of responsibility with the ground to the south of Hieldesheim being more broken and to the North more open.  The Corps sits astride an Axis of Advance to the Ruhr industrial conurbation.

The Corps concept of operations saw a covering force fighting a delaying action from the Inner German Border back to a Main Defensive Position that sat forward of the River Weser and across the River Leine.  The covering force battle would buy time for the preparation of the MDP and potentially the deployment of units from the UK if this had not happened in transition to war.  To the rear was the reserve Division with the primary task of launching a counterstroke into the advancing Soviet Armies once the main axis of advance had been identified and this would create the conditions for a counter offensive by the NORTHAG reserve to restore the Inner German Border.


  • The Covering Force was provided by 2 Armoured Reconnaissance Regiments from 1 and 4 Divisions together with 644 Squadron AAC.  The Recce Regiments at this time were 1st The Queens Dragoon Guards and The 16/5th Queens Royal Lancers. They were effectivly under command 1 Br Corps in this phase.
  • The Northern MDP Division was provided by 1st Armoured Division covering the more open ground South of Hanover and North of Hildershiem.
  • The Southern MDP Division was provided by 4th Armoured Division deployed in the Southern part of the corps area covering the more broken around the Sibbessa gap.  
  • The Parachute Regiment Group deployed to Hildershiem in the centre of the area and I would imagine they intended to stay put regardless of the developing situation.  Hildersheim and the Parachute Regiment Group came under command of 1st Armoured Division.
  • Corps Reserve was provided by 3rd Armoured Division. The corps reserve supplied its reserve Brigade to enable the withdrawal of the covering force through the main defensive position by securing crossing points over the Rivers forward of the Leine.  Once the covering force had withdrawn 3rd Division's reserve Brigade would join the rest of the Division West of the Weser and launch its counter stroke.
  • The Corps Rear area was secured by 2nd Infantry Division, which also included 24 Airmobile Brigade which would primarily be used for counter penetration tasks into the forward areas and could be deployed in support of either the MDP or Covering Force Battle. Of Interest during Ex Lionheart in 1984, the German 53 Heimatschutz Brigade reinforced 2nd Division and 24 Brigade (at the time a Mech (W) Brigade) was released for deployment else where.
  • The Rear Combat Zone and Communication Zone sat behind the Corps rear boundary.



Behind the forward deployed Corps of NORTHAG sat III US Corps, once it had completed its deployment from the US it would conduct subsequent operations to restore the line of the Inner German Border.


By the close of the Cold War NORTHAG reserve included a multinational Airmobile division that included:
  • UK 24 Airmobile Brigade
  • Ge 255 Luftlande Brigade
  • Be Para Commando Regiment
Over the duration of the Cold War I suspect this plan changed a number of times but this is what I intend to use as the operational context for games involving my British forces.

The Essentials of the 1 BR Corps plan were therefore:
  • Covering Force - Recce and 644 Squadron AAC Forward
  • Main Defensive Position Battle including Divisional Covering Force and Divisional counter attacks/penetration.
  • Counter Penetration by 24 Brigade (88/89) after formation of Brigade and prior to move to multinational Airmobile Division.
  • Counter Stroke - 7 Panzer Division & 3rd Armoured Division
The unifying purpose being to achieve the destruction of the first operational echelon between the R Weser and the R Leine.
UK based components would deploy during transition to war or in the opening stages of the conflict, these included.
  • 3rd Armoured Divisions Recce Regiment
  • 4th Armoured Divisions 19 Infantry Bde
  • 665 Sqn AAC
  • 2nd Infantry Division



My intent is to set a number of Scenarios within the 4th Armoured Divisions area of responsibility primarily as it had a slightly more diverse force structure than 1 Armoured Division deployed in the more open ground to the North and therefore holds a little more variety in the type of actions and forces that can be used.  19 Brigades deployment area around Bockenem is shown on the map below.



The Divisions were tailored in their task organisation to their areas of responsibility. The 4th Armoured Division included 2 Armoured Brigades and an Infantry Brigade.  The table below outlines exactly what this meant in terms of the detailed composition of the different divisions in 1 Br Corps.


So essentially the 4th Armoured Division was a Mechanised Division with 1 Mech (T) Brigade, 1 Mech (W) Brigade and an Armoured Brigade.  The organisation of the 4th Armoured Division was as follows:


The Unit composition and equipment distribution of the Combat and Combat Support units around 1988/89 were as follows:

  • 16/5th Queens Royal Lancers, Divisional Recce Regiment (CVR(T))
  • 4 Regiment Army Air Corps (Lynx/Gazelle)
  • 45 Field Regiment RA (FH70) 19 Bde (Assumed)
  • 26 Field Regiment RA (M109/Javelin) 11 Bde
  • 49 Field Regiment RA (M109) 20 Bde
  • 35 Regiment Royal Engineers (FV 432)
  • 11 Armoured Brigade; 

  • 5th Inniskilling Dragoon Guards (Chieftain) 
  • 3 Royal Anglian (FV 432)
  • 2 Queens (FV 432)

  • 20 Armoured Brigade; 

  • 15/19 Hussars (Challenger)
  • 4/7th Royal Dragoon Guards (Challenger)
  • 1 Royal Regiment of Wales (FV 432) replaced by 1 RIRISH in 1990 (Warrior)

  • 19 Armoured Brigade; 

  • 1 Kings Own Scottish Borderers, (Saxon)
  • 2 Royal Anglian, (Saxon)
  • 1 Staffords, (Saxon) 
  • Royal Hussars (Chieftain, Less 1 Sqn to UKMF)

    • Engineers and artillery would tend to be attached to the brigades, recce squadrons could be attached to brigades but tended to operate as a divisional asset along with the AAC Regiment. Additionally the division would have a squadron from 32 Armoured Engineer Regiment with troops being attached to brigades as required.


    The Divisions operational concept had the Armoured Brigade and the Armoured Recce Regiment deployed forward as a covering force. The Armoured Recce Regiment being initially under command of 1 Br Corps as a component of the Corps covering force.  The 2 Mechanised Brigades then developed and manned the Main Defensive Position with the covering force withdrawing back into reserve where it would be reconstituted by replacement crews and vehicles from the Armoured Delivery Regiment. The AAC regiment would take a very active role in counter penetration as the ground lent itself well to HELARM anti tank ambushes. I expect it would have been active in both the divisions covering force battle and the MDP battles.
    19 Brigade the Mech (W) Brigade would deploy in the North of the area around the Bockenem bowel at the entrance to the Sibbessa gap and 11 Brigade, the Mech (T) Brigade to the South around Bad Gandershiem and Seesen. 20 Brigade would provide both the covering force and the reserve.  




    References:

    Web:

    M136 Exercise Picture Archive
    British Army Units since 1945
    Fire and Furry Cold War Orbats and Modern Resources
    Staff Rides 1Br Corps Material and Maps

    Books:

    The Royal Armoured Corps in The Cold War
    The British Army in Germany, an Organisational History 1947 - 20
    British Army of the Rhine,  TJ Gander
    The Royal Engineers, TJ Gander
    Other Posts of Interest:
    Posted by at 11 comments:
    Labels: , , , , ,

    Saturday, 4 February 2017

    Review - Web Resources, Voroshilov Academy Lectures





    The Voroshilov Academy lectures cover a range of material presented at the Soviet General Staff academy during the 1970s.  The Content was translated in the late 80's from the Notes of an Afghan Army Colonel who attended the academy.  They are presented in the Xenophon Archive along with notes from his attendance at the  Frunz Military Academy for the Ground forces in the 60s.  As such the material presented presents a view from the 60s on the Tactical/Operational level Division and below and the 70s on the Operational/Strategic level, Army and Front.  This needs to be born in mind when reading, as whilst the general scope and intent of the doctrine presented had a degree of consistency with the the late 80s period organisational constructs, equipment and in a number of areas core operational doctrine varied over this time frame.



    Having said that they present a wealth of detail that whilst some of it is readily available elsewhere there are significant components that are not. As an example I found the archive whilst hunting for material on Soviet Air Defence Electronic Warfare units at Army and Front level. They were covered here at a level of detail along with their operational deployment and use, in other sources only the existence of the unit is acknowledged at best. So a useful source but one that needs to be consumed with an understanding of the Historical context of the evolution of the Soviet Armed forces across the 60's 70's and 80's if it is not going to lead to further confusion.

    In terms of content the Archive covers:
    • Front, Army and Division Operations
    • Air Army Operations
    • Operations of Specialist Branches including: Artillery, Engineer, Signal and Reconnaissance
    As such this rounds out the extensive free material on the Soviet Armed forces provided else where and covered in previous posts.
    The detail as might be expected focuses on those things that are the business of the staff;
    • Planning
    • Staff procedures
    • Orders, 
    • Control of operations 
    • Organisation structure and deployment of headquarters
    Whilst these things are not of direct interest to the gamer, unless you are planning a raid on an Army, Divisional or Front Headquarters the information required to support the staff is also included such as organisation, doctrine and perhaps more interestingly planning yardsticks.

    The archive presented offers a great way to consume the material but the same material has also been published as a number of books which can be found on line or can be purchased from Amazon amongst others.




    The online source for the books is the DTIC repository:
    and the CIA broke the content up into a number of papers focused on specific areas with additional analysis and comment.  Examples include:
    All up a number of very useful resources if your interested in setting games in the context of the wider operational and strategic picture or understanding the types of resource available at higher formation level and working out how you could get them on a table top, which is always a bit of a challenge.


    Other Web Resource Reviews:

    Review - Web Resources, SSVC on You Tube 
    Review - Web Resources, Soviet 16th Air Army
    Review - Web Resources, Fire and Furry Cold War Orbats and Modern Resources
    Review - Web Resources, M136 Exercise Picture Archive
    Review - Web Resources, Armoured Acorn Web Site
    Review - Web Resources, War for Slow Readers
    Review - Web Resources, CIA FOIA Site
    Review - Web Resources Airpower Australia
    Review - Web Resources, DTIC on Line
    Posted by at 2 comments:
    Labels: , , , , ,

    Sunday, 17 July 2016

    ORBAT Soviet Late 80's Breakthrough Capability, Part 4 Frontal Aviation




    As part of the Breakthrough battle the front could allocate elements of Frontal aviation in support of the depth fire battle enabling the simultaneous engagement of the enemy throughout his depth and to increase the effectiveness of the engagement of the enemy in the immediate combat zone.


    Frontovaya Aviatsiya  FA was the largest component of Soviet Air Power comprising some 5,000 aircraft and 5,000 helicopters distributed across 16 Air Armies.  A Tactical Air Army was an integral part of a Front which for the purposes of my Cold War representation consisted of 2 Combined Arms Armies, 1 Tank Army and 1 Tactical Air Army.




    The purpose of Frontal Aviation was to provide Air Support to the front throughout the fronts area of operations and the enemies depth this area can be described as a box approximately 300km wide to 500km deep. In addition to the ability to deliver Air to Ground attack from Aircraft or Helicopters, the Air Army also possessed Reconnaissance, Electronic Warfare, Air Superiority and Transport Assets.




    The Primary role was Air Support to the Ground Operation with the Tactical Air Army being subordinate to the Front, the other assets within the Air Army, Fighter Divisions and Reconnaissance Regiments, being used to create the conditions under which this could occur. The principal uses of the Air Armys assets were:
    • Striking targets beyond the range of Artillery
    • Increasing tempo by adding air delivered ordnance to direct and indirect fires
    • adding flexibility through quick response in fluid tactical situations
    Composition, Organisation and Equipment

     The Various Air Armies composition varied depending on where they were. Based on Suverovs model of the Front and his view on the force composition and structure in the Forward Group of Forces then 16 Air Army would split into two with one supporting each of the two fronts.




    An outline composition for an Air Army supporting a single front could look like this:
    • 3 Fighter Divisions ( IAD )Mig-23 Flogger, Mig-29 Fulcrum (90% of the Force), 
    • 2 Fighter Bomber Divisions (IBAP) Mig 27D Flogger (60%), Su-17 Fitter (40%)
    • 1 Independent Air Attack Regiment (OShAP) SU-25 Frogfoot
    • 1 Bomber Division (ADIB) Su -24 Fencer
    • 3 Attack Helicopter Regiments (OBVP) Mi 24 Hind. Mi-8 Hip
    • 1 Fighter Recce Regiment (ORAP) Mig-25R Foxbat, Mig-25BM (ECM) Su-17M4R, Su 24 MR, Su-24MP
    • 1 Helicopter Transport Regiment (OVP) Mi-24, Mi8, Mi-6
    • 1 Mixed Helicopter Regiment (OVP) Mi-8, Mi-6/26
    Aircraft are organised in flights of 4 with 3 Flights to a Squadron (12) and 3 Squadrons to a Regiment  (36) and 3 Regiments to a division (108).  There was some mixing of aircraft types within Squadrons and regiments but in general a regiment tended to operate aircraft of a single type for fighter, Fighter Bomber.  The range of aircraft covers the types that could have been used against the role stated at the back end of the Cold War.


    Like Artillery covered in the last Post on Breakthrough operations the great thing about Aircraft is that they are very easy to concentrate on an axis or in support of a mission and can add considerable weight of fire at critical moments in the battle.


    weapon systems
    A wide range of air to ground munitions were available to fighter ground attack aircraft in the late 80's.  Like NATO the Soviets had been improving the effectiveness of aerial delivered munitions through both precision guidance from the air, precision guidance from the ground and the development of a range of Scatterable mine and submunition capabilities.

     The critical developments from the perspective of Breakthrough were those that could be used to break down a formed defence and could be used to replace the dependence on Nuclear weapons seen in the 60’s.  To my mind this puts the focus on the improvement of bombs rather than in developments of Surface to air missiles which because of cost and availability would tend to be used on higher value targets. 

    Guided Bombs



    The Soviets developed a range of precision guided munitions in the late 70s and by 1979 had deployed a number of 500kg Laser Guided Bombs these included Bunker Busters, HE-Frag and Thermobaric munitions. These systems were used in Afghanistan and by 1987 they had up scaled these to include 1500kg bombs.



    Collectively known as KAB (Korrektirujemaja Aviacionnaja Bomba) the weapons have a significant stand off range.  The KAB-500 series having a maximum range of 10 km and can be delivered by MiG-27K, Su-22M3/M4, Su-24M and Su-25. The KAB – 1500 series can be from altitudes of 1 km to 15 km providing a maximum standoff of 18 - 20 km from the higher altitudes with the delivery platforms being primarily the Su 24 during the Cold War. 

    • KAB-1500L-Pr-E Penetrating bunker buster with sub calibre war head
    • KAB-1500L-F-E Blast Fragmentation warhead
    • KAB-1500-OD-E Thermobaric warhead
    The LGB - KAB 500 L was deployed from 1979 and the KAB 1500 L from 1987 the weapons used a semi active homer which delivered a 7m CEP they were  Air Designated and I have found no reference to ground designation.  The improved LG variants were not delivered until after the end of the Cold War. 



    The 4.5m long KAB-1500L guided bomb is a bit of a beast designed to hit stationary ground and surface targets, these include:
    • Railway and Motorway Bridges
    • Dams
    • Defence Enterprise
    • Large Ammunition Depots
    • Fuel and Lubricant Storage
    • Railway Junctions
    In my mind it would also be a useful weapon to deploy against static battlefield targets such as defended positions and as such offers the potential to deliver Nuclear like effects from a more conventional platform. 



    The TV Guided KAB 500 KR and KAB 1500TK entered service from 1987 and delivered an improved 4m CEP. The Satellite guided systems were not deployed until 2003 so more Bear Resurgent than Cold War. The SU 24 cleared for 3 KAB 1500 or 7 KAB 500 with the Su 17 capable of carrying 2 KAB 500



    Cluster Bombs
    The other set of weapons of interest in the Breakthrough context are Cluster Bombs.  Cluster munitions release or eject smaller submunitions and were deployed extensively by all sides during the Cold War, primarily they increased the area of effect of the payload and more efficiently distribute the effects within that area than a single equivalent sized bomb can achieve.  As such they are more efficient at engaging area targets.  The Soviet Union was a pioneer in the development  of the Cluster bomb with use from the 1930's, The principal family of munitions available to them in the Cold War was the RBK 250 family of bombs. Sub Munitions carried include:


    • Anti Personnel AO 2.5RT 2.8Kg Pre fragmented, designed to split on impact bounce then explode. 
    • Anti Personnel  AO-1 SCh, 
    • Anti Personnel PFM-1 2.5 lbs, AP Mine 
    • Anti Tank PTAB 2.5, 5lbs Heat
    • Airfield Cratering


    The RBK Razovaya Bombovaya Kasseta is a single use bomb cassette which could then be loaded with a number of sub munitions generally either the fragmentation or Anti Tank sub munitions.




    In the 1990s details of a larger and improved RBK 500 bomb were released with new sub munitions its not clear if these were available in the later years of the Cold War. But if like me you stretch the back end of the Cold War though to 1993 when the Soviets withdrew from Germany then they fit. New sub munitions included:
    • AO-2.5 RTM pre fragmented anti personel/anti materiel
    • BETAB airfield Cratering cluster bomb
    • PTAB-1M anti tank,  2lbs Heat penetrates 9" of steel fin stabilised
    • SPBE anti tank, 30 lbs anti tank with EFP warhead, Drouge stabilised
    • SPBE-D anti tank
    The munitions can be carried by Mig 23/27, 29, Su 17, 24, 25, 27


    Command and Control


    The Soviet system to control air assets in the fronts area of operations occurred at two levels.  The first of these dealt with the routing of aircraft to and from their missions and the second the allocation of assets to missions and the prosecution and selection of targets.

    The Control and Target Identification post was equipped with Radar and signals equipment and communicated with the air assets to control their movement, it was primarily a battlefield air traffic control system which had no role in mission planning. 

     The forward air liaison teams deployed to the forward CPs at each level of command from front to regiment and occasional battalion dealt with the target selection and prosecution of engagements. The Air assets like artillery assets could be allocated in support of specific formations and units and I suspect it is these units that received the Forward Air Liaison teams.  Targeting like artillery would be conducted through the direction of assets by the controlling HQ ie the combined arms commander in conjunction with the Liaison team, rather than by request.


    The Air Controllers at Regimental level would clear targets and identify friendly troop locations for attacking aircraft, these air controllers were usually experienced Pilots, I have yet to find any evidence of ground target marking capability.  All the teams would be equipped with either BTR Series or MT-LBu command and Observation post vehicles which were supplied to both artillery and air observation parties, the specific BTR 60 variant being the BTR 60R-975.


    The Soviets tend to employ aircraft to engage deeper targets and aviation to attack closer targets all though assets of both types will be utilised for pre planned operations and air delivered fire strikes can be used to superimpose fire effect on top of artillery fires.

    Modeling and Gaming


     The purpose of the research was of course to enable me to expand the Soviet horde to include some air support that could help deliver some serious effects on to the NATO position in the event of a breakthrough battle developing on a table top near me.  To this end I will be adding:
    • 2 Su 17 representing two flights of 4 Su 17 equipped with  Kab - 500L and CBUs from the IBAP
    • 1 Su 24 representing 1 Flight of 4 Su 24 equiped with 2 Kab - 1500L and CBUs from the ADIB
    • 1 BTR 60 Forward Air Control Command and Observation Post
    Having spent the time researching the aircraft munitions it would be good to create models with the Weapon load outs required. Since I started  writing this article back in 2014 a number of new weapons sets have been released along with a number of aftermarket resin accessories that enable that to be acheived the main ones I am using are:
    For this project the main sets used are the Hasegawa Russia Weapons Set which supplied 2 Kab 1500Ls for the Su 24. The Dragon Modern Soviet Aircraft Weapons set 3, Rockets and Bombs which supplied the CBUs and the North Star Kab-500L set which supplied the load for the Su 17s.

    when completed these birds will join my existing Frontal Aviation assets which include:
    • 1 Mig 29 representing 1 flight of 4 aircraft from the IAD
    • 1 Mig 23 representing 1 flight of 4 aircraft from the IAD
    • 2 Su 25 representing 2 flights of 4 aircraft from the OShAP
    • 2 Mig 27 representing 2 flights of 4 aircraft from the IBAP
    • 5 Mi 24 representing an Attack Helicopter Sqn from the OBVP
    • 5 Mi 8 representin an Assault Helicopter Sqn from the OBVP
    • 4 Mi 8 representing a Medium Transport Helicopter Sqn from the OVP
    • 2 Mi 24 and 1 Mi 6 representing a Heavy Transport Helicopter Sqn from the OVP
    key elements of the Air Armies together with the DsHV and a range of Engineer capabilities were amongst those hit by the change to a more defensive doctrine in the late 80's as Glasnost and perestroika started to bite. I generally view this as a politically instigated doctrinal change motivated by the changing political landscape that evolved in the closing moments of the Cold War, in a timeline that would have led to war these changes may well have not occurred, it is also worth remembering that up scaling aircraft assets can be relatively easy given that the ground support and logistic elements can accommodate it. Which I suppose is my justification for playing late Cold War scenarios using assets such as those described in this post.

    References:

     Books

    Posted by at No comments:
    Labels: , , , , , , , ,
    Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)