TTP - Soviet, Forward Detachments as a Covering Force

Soviet Defensive Doctrine called for the destruction of enemy forces in order to create the conditions for the offensive to be resumed as quickly as possible. In transitioning to a defensive posture the Soviets would create a security zone forward of the main defence in order to:

• Attrit enemy reconnaissance and main force units.
• Gain time to prepare the main defence.
• Deceive as to the location and structure of the main defence.
• Gain intelligence on the enemy.

As part of this activity they task organised Units and Sub Units to provide the covering force. These could be forward detachments based on Motor Rifle or Tank Battalions and Regiments reinforced by a range of Divisional, Army and Front Assets. Command and control of the assets would largely reside with the Combined Arms Commander in this case the Motor Rifle Battalion CO. Forward detachments would be provided from units with more able commanders, though what that meant in the cultural context of the Soviet Military I am less than clear on.

Recce. Divisional Recce would work forward of the Security Zone with Regimental, Engineer, Chemical and Artillery Recce and Locating elements working with in it, once contact with the enemy had been established these elements would pull back to the flanks and maintain contact with and monitor the enemy's activity as they moved into the security zone. In addition the recce components enabled early engagement with air aviation and indirect fire assets and continued engagement throughout the enemies depth as the battle progressed.

Engineers. Divisional and Regimental Mobile Obstical Detachments would construct the Obstical plan, enhancing natural obsticals and aiming to channel and slow the enemy as they moved through the security zone. Their efforts would be enhanced by the deployment of Scatterable mines from Mi-8s and BM - 27s. In addition the Soviets would consider the use of persistent chemical weapons as a means of enhancing the Obstical plan allowing rapid dynamic adjustment as the battle unfolded.

Each Regiment could generate a MOD and Division could generate an additional one from the independent Engineer Battalion, upto 2 MODs supporting a single Battalion deployed in this role would seem reasonable. The composition of a Mobile Obsticle Detachment is covered here.

Artillery. Routinely in this role the forward battalion would be reinforced with between one and two battalions of artillery in addition Artillery from the RAGs and DAG would deploy forward in order to provide effective fire support of the screening force and Recce elements, Given the passing forward of artillery between Division, Army and Front and the additional elements passed forward from the second echelon a representation of the Supporting Fires available would be as follows:

• 4 Bns of 2S1 ( 1 in each of its TR and MRR), organic
• DAG 2 Bn 2S1, 1 Bn 2S3, 1 Bn MRL BM21, organic
• From Army 2 Bn 2S5, attached,
• From Front 3Bn 2S3, 1Bn MRL BM 27, 1 Bn 2S4 240mm Mortar, 1 Bn 2S7 203mm Guns, attached

The detail of this would be dependent on the posture being adopted by the remaining units in the formations and where the commanders main effort lay. Most Fire Missions would be applied with a minimum of a battalion. The central control of the allocation of the fires would allow rapid concentration of significant fire where requiered, the Soviet commander could in the words of Maximus Decimus Meridius - Unleash Hell. In addition the Soviets would position artillery units to provide direct fire engagement on to routes on secondary axis and to the rear of the main strongpoints. This effectively gives Artillery a primary task of indirect fire support and a secondary task of anti tank engagement in their immediate vicinity and adding depth and density to the defence.

Motor Rifle Battalion. The Forward detachment would either be constituted from a MRB or TB depending on the situation. With an MRB the aim would be to set up a series of defended strong points supported by ambushes and fires from artillery and anti tank systems, coordinated within the context of the obstacle plan. The unit would then withdraw to its alternate positions as the attack develops with the intent on each withdrawal being to cause the enemy artillery to move. The final position is designed to convince the enemy that they have reached the main defence

The physical positions and obstacles are designed to lead the enemy into a series of fire pockets where a range of direct and indirect fire weapons can be used to best effect once the enemy has been fixed. Choice of positions will aim to exploit Natural obstacles and Company strongpoints will be situated along the most likely avenues of advance with other assets such as Artillery units, Anti Tank Units and obstacles covering the subsidiary approaches.

Tank Companies. Upto two Tank companies might be allocated to a single battalion and they are used to manoeuvre and mount counter attacks around the infantry strong points. In addition at critical stages in the battle such as the need for an in place unit to withdraw they can take over the fight from the in place force and supported by Artillery Air and Aviation assets create the conditions to enable withdrawal from the strongpoints.

Anti Tank Battalions. The MRR possess an Anti Tank Battery and the divison a battalion, additional assets may be allocated from the AT Regiments at Army and Front level allowing for upto 3 Battalions to support the forward detachment. As well as supporting the primary strong points these units can be used to cover the gaps between strongpoints and some part of the manoeuvre element. It was likly that the Anti Armour reserve would be provided by a single Anti Tank Battery.

The long range fire available from missiles either from the gun or GW batteries allowed significant concentration of fire from widely dispersed units, like their air defence the anti armour defence would be layered but in this case would be optimised to achieve maximum effect once the enemy was fixed in the fire pocket. So the MRBs anti armour weapons RPG, AT 4/5, and SPG 9 would be sited to allow them to maximise fire effect with the AT Battery and Battalion systems once the enemy had hit the obstical belts that restricted their exit from or movement through the fire pockets.

Air Defence. An air defence battery or battalion could be deployed to cover the area and supplement the battalions organic SA7 assets.

Aviation. Aviation from the Army Attack Helicopter regiment could provide significant flexibility and stopping power to deal with the main force once identified and fixed. The speed of deployment and manoeuvre allowing it to focus on the main need. The intent would be to fix and slow down with strong points and obstacles close down with artillery then clean up with anti armour systems, the range and speed of deployment of the air assets allowing rapid concentrations of fire to be built up.

Air Assault. Whilst I have no specific references siteing the use of air assault in direct conjunction with a security screen they are given blocking missions to flanks and in enemy rear it seems likely that in stabelising a fluid defensive situation they might be deployed at the forward end of the security zone to give the security zone time to establish.

The Soviets understood that in fluid situations you would have units in different states (offence, defence, transition) simultaneously and the bigger the meeting engagement the clearer this would be. I have assumed for the purposes of the Wisenberg Scenario which conceptualises an armoured brigade counter attacking into the flank of an MRD that had broken through the forward NATO divisional defence that the concepts outlined above for the security zone would apply equally to the blocking action that the Soviets would make against this threat.

This allowed me to build a Soviet hasty defence in the context of a Soviet attack and build the force structure for the Soviet element. The assumption being that the blocking force would be slightly less lavishly equipped than the task organisation described, would have less time to deploy obstacles and might have less supporting artillery available as other forces would be in contact on critical axis of advance.

The aspects of this that I find interesting is the level of force packaging done by the Soviets in this mission context which is far greater than I'd conceive for most NATO armies with the exception of possibly the Germans.

References:

ORBAT Soviet MRR and TR, Part 1, Deployement and ORBAT
ORBAT Soviet MRR and TR, Part 3 Engineer Support
ORBAT Soviet MRR and TR, Part 4 Artillery
ORBAT Soviet Divisional Units, Part 1 MRD Anti Tank Battalion
Wargames Unit - Soviet Late 80's MRB
Wargames Unit - Soviet MRR, Anti Tank Reserve
Wargames Unit - Soviet MRD, Anti Tank Battalion
Wargames Unit - Soviet MRR, Air Defence Battery
Wargames Unit - Soviet MRR, Recce Company
Wargames Unit - Soviet MRR, Regimental Artillery Group
The Soviet Conduct of Tactical Maneuver: Spearhead of the Offensive, D Glanz
Soviet Airland Battle Tactics, WP Baxter
Weapons and Tactics of the Soviet Army, D Isby
FM 100-2-2 Specialised Warfare and Rear Area Support, Chapter 3 Heliborn Operations
FM 100-2-3, Soviet Troop Organisation and Equipment
Defending Forward Soviet Activities in Advance of the Main Defence, DTIC 1989
Scenario - The Weissenberg Counter Attack

Terrain - Modern Supermarket

Part of the look at what makes things modern said you can't really beat a supermarket, probably a German one for the central front and ideally something that fits in with the period.  I picked this one having looked at a lot as it said Modern and at the same time was a manageable size and shape given this was going to be a scratch build.

The first thing I do having decided on the type of building and found a suitable structure to work on is knock up a rough sketch of the building showing its major features and extending it to cover the space not covered by the imagery.  I then draw a scale plan of each of the buildings facades dimensioning the pillars etc against my available plasticard stock and the overall size of the piece I am aiming for.  I then produce a MDF base much as I did for the trees and mark that up with the main wall locations and dimensions. By the end of this work I know the building will look OK and fit the base.

The Building is constructed using foam core, cardboard, plasticard; sheet, rod and strips along with MDF.  The first step in construction is the establishment of the basic shape and structure using foam core cut to the dimensions on the plan then attached to the base and each other using white glue.

The structure is then set aside to dry and each facade is built on to card board or plasticard sheet depending on the construction required.  I do this as constructing the detail is generally easier on a flat surface rather than trying to build direct onto the sides of the structure, it is also relatively easy to adjust.  In this case the Roof side was built onto plasticard sheet because it was easier to attach all the small strips to it, the lower posrtion of the wall and windows was built onto cardboard.  Rough card was used for the concreate walls and plasticard for the window

The rear facade had a drain pipe and gutter attached for which i used plastic rod, the roller door was cut from a sheet of corregated plasticard and the roof was cut from a sheet of molded card that was then mounted on card stock and braced with foam core to hold it in place.  The facades were then glued onto the foam core structure the concreate areas were washed with a dilute solution of wall filler to texture them and the base of all the walls and all the gaps were then filled using the same material

Then it was on to the painting, the trick to painting things white is not to in my book, this one I started from a grey base and washed and dry brushed white, where I over acheived on the white colour I would wash with black grey.  The aim in this was to create a building that looked like it might be white but which had a degree of colour variation and shading, avoiding the deadening effect of painting just white and also acknowledging that buildings are seldom of a uniform colour.

The Ground work was produced by masking the MDF with masking tape cut to shape before gluing sand on using white glue, this produces very sharp edges to the green areas.  The sand was painted brown before being covered with static grass and tufts.  The MDF was painted black grey then washed with increasingly lighter shades of the same.

The building produced was used in action for the first time for the Wissenberg counter attack scenario which we played in August.  Here its used in conjunction with a small car park produced from MDF with foam core walls and some of the very nice Byzantium buildings the main roads are home produced by Mausman from the guild forum and the tracks are some excellent sets produced by Fonzie also from the guild forum, the armour is from the very talented hands of the Guilds Panzerfaust 200

References:

Terrain - Byzantium 20mm, German Buildings

Terrain - Modern Farm Buildings

Terrain - Hikki Trees, Pine Forests

Terrain - Making It Modern

Terrain - Camouflaged Hides 

Review - Books, Soviet Airland Battle Tactics, W P Baxter

The title of this book is a complete misnomer it was selected at a time when "Air Land Battle" was a euphemism for doctrine.  Ultimately this book is about Soviet War-fighting doctrine, written by an acknowledged expert in Soviet Military affairs it is an outstanding treatise on the subject of the Cold War Doctrine of the Soviet Army. Chapters 1 and 2 are probably not to everybody's taste and neither are they that relevant to wargaming dealing as they do with the relationship between military doctrine and Marxist Leninism and the soldiers relationship with the communist state.

Thereafter the book contains a host of relevant detail as subsequent chapters deal with the Command and Staff, Offensive Operations, Defensive operations, Supporting Operations and logistics,  I have read fairly widely on the Soviet Armed forces and I found that this text adds significant insight into their way of doing business from a detailed description of how communications was managed in different phases of war to a description of the approach by which soviet officers were taught to appreciate military problems.  This includes namogrames that enabled soviet staff officers to rapidly consider complex problems for which western Staff officers lacked the tools to consider the problem in sufficient detail at speed.

Like Lt Col Glanz, Lt Col Baxter highlights the inappropriateness of the standard western view of a Soviet military driven by simplistic solution templates to standard problems and hypothesises that if the cold war had gone hot we may well have been in for a nasty shock if thats what we were expecting. This book compliments Lt Col Glantz's text on tactical manoeuvre providing the context that enables the reader to better understand the discourse on the forward detachment.  In comparison to the freely available texts in the FM 100 series this is eminently more readable, digestible and informative.

To my mind this is one of the undiscovered texts on cold war soviet operations and doctrine, its about how the Soviet Army thought, approached problems and would fight, there are some excellent second hand prices which make it a steal............how wrong could you be! I enjoyed it and found it useful and informative and the price I got mine for was nuts for a text of this quality.

Lt Col Baxter was a Soviet Foreign area officer, who wrote extensivly for Army magazine on Soviet Doctrine tactics organisation and technology......he knew his stuff.

Soviet Airland Battle Tactics, WP Baxter 1986 @ Amazon

Other Book Reviews

The Military Balance
Encyclopaedia of the Modern British Army
The Soviet Conduct of Tactical Manoeuvre
First Clash
The Third World War
The British Army in Germany

The Cold War Bookstore contains links to over 60 Cold War titles covered in my book list

Review - Model, A Models 1/72 Mi 6 Hook

The Mi-6 entered service with the Soviet Armed forces in 1960 and set some impressive records from the moment it started flying mostly associated with being big heavy, fast and a Helicopter.  It remained the mainstay of the Aviation Heavy lift capability until the arrival of the Mi 26 in the 1980's but remains in service today.  Some 500+ were built and these were used in the Frontal Helicopter Transport Regiment.  The carrying capacity of the beast allows it to carry one BMD or a variety of light trucks and support weapons or a 70-100 men.

The model is produced by A Models a firm of Eastern European origin with the usual caveats that come with products from that space - Great models when they are built, building them can be fun and this one is no exception.  The Kit is massive measuring some 43 cm in length.  I usually leave all the internal components out of my aircraft and paint out the windows but in this case some of those internal components provide essential structural strength to the model.

Form and fit of parts was generally good, the crux of putting this kit together hinged around fitting the cabin roof, forward bulk head and the floor into the left and right side aircraft hulls and tail sections, This involved considerable pairing and filing of the roof and floor sections.  Without these components  the model would probably flex too much to stay together for any period of time.

Once you have achieved a fit the gluing of the components together needs to be done in stages.  I located the bulk head floor and ceiling to the right hull and let it cure overnight before attempting the rigerous filing and pairing to achieve fit with the left hull side.  I then glued and held the hull sections around the engines using tape and clamps and left to set before repeating the process for the nose section  and lower hull.  This approach allows the hull to be forced into a fit position as the large and relatively thin sections of the hull allow considerable flex from the natural position they are presented in.

Once you have that cracked the remainder of the assembly is straight forward, given the weight of the model it is important to give the glue time to set on the landing gear before standing the aircraft on its own feet.  I Intend to field all my Helicopters for the Soviets without rotor blades or disks as they break easily and take up a lot of space on the battlefield so I have not fitted the aircraft with any.

I have yet to find any images of aircraft other than in light Grey schemes as shown below But I am still in the process of researching this prior to painting the beast up

The end result is a great looking representation of this impressive aircraft.  I intend to use mine as part of the Front Helicopter Transport Regiment's heavy lift squadron along with a number of Mi 26s being built as I write.

References:

Global Security MI 6 Pages
Wings Palette - Mi 6 Markings
All The Worlds Rotorcraft - Mi 6

ORBAT - Soviet Task Org, Fronts in the Western TVD

In considering the development of War Games scenarios for the cold war a few context elements are requiered in order to be able to consistently develop them in a logical way that allows the war gamer to create realistic task organisations at the level of play. My principal area of interest is NATO Brigade or Soviet Regiment and below. The easy way to do this are to use the unit peacetime Orbats, in both NATO and the Warsaw Pact there was specific mission orientated force tailoring that went on and for the Soviets in particular this could be significant when looking at the Regiment or Battalion in the context of the Divisional, Army and Front level operations.

In adding the extra bits it's difficult to justify the composition without some level of definition of the high level plan, through developing a high level plan for both sides you can quickly start to develop a number of scenarios in a linked campaign in which the force structures for each side, for each engagement are logical within the wider operational and force context. I find that it also stimulates the thinking around different types of organisation and games specifically when there are no historical events around which to base the scenario development.

This post will aim to set out the structure of the Fronts in the Western TVD that I will then use to drive the overarching campaign context for a series of linked scenarios set in different parts of NATOs Central Front.

Victor Suverov in his book inside the Soviet Army, proposed in part 3 Combat Organisation, that the peacetime deployment of forces in the Western TVD did not represent the structure of the force that would appear and this basic tennent is reinforced in a number of other sources. Suverov went onto suggest that:

• A Soviet front has a clear structure essentially two combined arms armies, a tank army and an air army, along with a variety of supporting units and sub units.
• Units of the Warsaw Pact would be incorporated in detail into the structure of the Soviet commands below army level. The numbers suggest that this would be at Army level and below ie: some Armies would only contain Warsaw Pact Allied units particularly with CGF and the CSLA and NGF and the PPA.  
• His analysis of the forces available within GSFG, CGF, NGF and the Russian MDs of the Western TVD including those of the Warsawpacts CSLA, NVA, and PPA suggested that they contained sufficient force to create 4 Fronts and a Group of Tank Armies.  Where 3 Fronts would sit in the first echelon and 1 in the second.
• He asserted that in order to acheive this some redeployment of Divisions Units and HQs would be requiered.

This has always made a degree of sence, particularly given the level of effort the Soviets always went through to decieve there enemies, It was logical that the Army and Front structures observed in East Germany were unlikely to be what we would fight.  Some High level analysis of the units available demonstrates that his concepts were indeed feasible with minimal additions from the MDs of the Soviet Union within the Western TVD.

For my Scenarios I intend to represent a Front containing 2 CAA, 1 TA and an Air Army, with a subordinate Army structure for:

 CAA's as:

• 4 MRD
• 1 TD 

TA's as 4TD.

This is more structured than what was seen on the ground in GSFG and CGF and represented by the TO&Es presented by the US FM 100 series of manuals. Ultimately it makes Scenario design a lot easier and seems to fit the Soviet way of doing buisness passing units between the echelons within an organisation and supporting forward from the higher formation assets determined by the mission need and the definition of the principal axis of advance.

For my Scenarios in Southern Germany I have organised the Central Group of Forces into a single unified front of two combined armies and a tank army as follows:

22 CAA (Soviet)

• 30 Gds MRD
• 18 Gds MRD
• 48 MRD
• 15 CSLA MRD
• 31 TD

4 CSLA CAA

• 2 CSLA MRD
• 19 CSLA MRD
• 20 CSLA MRD
• 3 CSLA MRD
• 1 CSLA TD 

1 CSLA TA

• 15 TD (Soviet)
• 4 CSLA TD
• 9 CSLA TD
• 13 CSLA TD (T-55)

In respect of the supporting troops my general assumption is that these are deployed as represented in FM 100-2-3.

Given The way Soviet Artillery, Engineering, Anti-tank capability and reserves of Armour, Aviation and Air Assault units were allocated from front to Army to Division and the manor in which Forward detachments were task organised and deployed I find that some understanding of where the Front was going and what it was unto helps to structure my thinking for Scenarios and put some context on the very wide scope for task organisation which existed within elements of the force on the main effort between the echelons or when representing exploitation forces such as Operational Manoeuvre groups.

GSFG can be similarly structured into Two Fronts around five balanced Soviet Armies reorganised in line with Suverov's assertion and an Army formed from the NVA each consisting of two CAA and 1 TA.  With the broad outline of the supporting elements again reflecting Fm 100-2

I have not examined the NGF nor the Western Military Districts in detail yet as the scenarios I am currently interested in creating would involve NATO forces from Canada, Germany and Britain and the bulk of that action sits either on the North German Plain, or on the Southern flank of CENTAG on the boundary between II Ge Corps Area and XX US Corps.

The interesting part of this exercises is that whilst the numbers quoted in Suverovs book don't add up, when that evidence itself is examined the theory seems highly plausible. Which just leaves the T-64, T-72, T-80 debate to resolve.

References:

ORBAT - Soviet Air Assault Capability, Part 1 Overview and Lift
ORBAT- 1980's MRR and TRR, Part 1, Part 2, Part 3, Part 4

Warsaw Pact Orbat 1988
FM 100-2 Specialised Warfare and Rear Area Support, Chapter 3 Heliborn Operations
FM 100-3, Soviet Troop Organisation and Equipment
Weapons and Tactics of the Soviet Army, Isbey, 1988
The Third World War, August 1985: A Future History
The Soviet Conduct of Tactical Maneuver: Spearhead of the Offensive
Inside the Soviet Army