No announcement yet.

Your understanding of urban warfare

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Your understanding of urban warfare


    just wondering how everyone rates their understanding of urban warfare, or MOUT, FIBUA, or whatever your country wants to call it.

    just form certain posts it appears people have (to me) an unrealistic expectation of how things should go down.

    I myself am not a good example because I base everything on my experiences in Chechnya, and as such, miss a lot when it comes to the individual factor(a squad of Russian conscripts doesn;t really compare to a squad of US soldiers).

    Just curious as to how most people see it (Ie Three Block War, LIC, OOTW etc)
    Now listening too;
    - Russell Robertson, ruining whatever credibility my football team once had.

  • #2
    Well, my opinion on MOUT is quite harsh. First step: level the area of operation (artillery, air raids etc).
    Second step: let infantry, supported by heavier weapons like IFV's, move on and give 'em the support they need that in case of heavy resistance we have a couple of mortars or something ready to provide the enemy a nice day. I guess effective in this cases should be FAE's or similar warheads.

    AFAIK the first part happened in Chechnya but the problem is lack on the other point. (just what I've seen on TV here).
    If you have to storm a building or something I think the good old WW1 variant still works here: Just cover your way with ample of handgranades...
    "A platoon of Chinese tanks viciously attacked a Soviet harvester,
    which was peacefully working a field near the Soviet-Chinese border.
    The harvester returned fire and upon destroying the enemy
    returned to its home base."


    • #3
      surround the city so no one can escape or enter then throw plague infested cadivers over the walls
      Not lip service, nor obsequious homage to superiors, nor servile observance of forms and customs...the Australian army is proof that individualism is the best and not the worst foundation upon which to build up collective discipline - General Monash


      • #4
        My understanding of urban warfare is such that I don't want to engage in it. The attacker loses his manouver advantage and any tactical brilliance at the formation level will be very much impaired. If the defender is given time to prepare his position and also has a will to die then the attacker can only expect large casualties significantly in excess of that of the defenders.

        When there is a technology difference in the attackers favour then the losses can be reduced but more time and equipment will be required. Each defensive position has to be identified and destroyed one at a time and booby traps have to be searched for and disabled each time a postion is captured. Chemical warfare has a use here too, as well as robots and surveilance tools. And all this is assuming that civilians have fled. If the civilians stay then I would be even more reluctant to attack, preferring to isolate the position until the civilians can be removed (or driven off).

        As for the soldiers engaged in such warfare, I think they need an issue of body armour, sniping rifles, M79's and laser designating equipment. Also make sure everybody from private to general gets a double ration of patience.


        Latest Topics