The Commander Series Forum

Hi Guys,
I have been using this rather detailed (if difficult to read) TO&E as the basis for a 1985 Russian Tank Division (building the division 1 regiment at a time for obvious reasons).

Trouble is, as far as I can tell, the ATGW unit is not present in a Russian Tank Division nor regiment ORBAT (see page 138 and 140).
[In fact I have just read this]:

"The one major exception is that this Tank regiment, like that of the motorised rifle division, does not have an antitank missile battery." p138. This is repeated for the Tank Division structure.

Is that accurate and do people play it out that way? I can kind of understand the logic, you have tanks, you have BMP's (in the case of a TB/TD) so why do you really need the ATGW battalion. That said, it would have been nice for a few ATGW units.

Has anyone else encountered this, if so what did you choose to do? Note that (as far as possible) I am trying to stick to historic ORBATS.

-Sharpe

Yes as far as the Tank Rgt is concerned. The Motor Rifle Rgt has 8-12 T12 or M1944 100mm ATG and 12 BRDM2S or BRDM3. BRDM may just be replaced by the MTLB equivalent. Far as I know that applies to all MRR, regardless of transport, although truck mounted Cat C rgts may not have ATGW.....

IanS

Ah that's a shame as they are nice models too.

Thanks Ians, ill just have to live with the disappointment of (when the division is complete) having 80+ T80's on the board

-Sharpe

Soviet Tank Divisions did not get the anti tank Bn
A tank regiment was made up of 3 Tnk Bns 1MR Bn and a Artillery Bn.
As seen on my blog a division is a big beast.
http://seanstoysoldiers.blogspot.co.uk
Regards
Sean

If the tank division is part of a Combined arms army then you could have an AT be attached from the army AT Regt. Also the MMR in the tank division would have a AT battery.

http://www.fireandfury.com/orbats/modcwsov.pdf
Hope these are easier to read.
Regards
Sean

From what I have read, the MRD AT battalions were meant to protect open flanks of attacking forces. Tank Divisions (in the Operational Manoeuver Group role) were meant to deploy through the gaps the MRDs had created and rip into the enemy rear areas behind the line of resistance at maximum speed, so weren't considered in need of a flank guard.
MarkJ

The sources I have, Modern Spearhead, Combined Arms, and GHQ, all show the BMP regiment of the tank division as having a BRDM company, usually equipped with BRDM-3

The joy of Russian organisations...

BMP units -

Basically if it's a battalion sized unit within the tank regt. it doesn't get the dedicated ATGW/AT stuff. If it's the FULL regiment it does. But note half it's stands should be equipped with AT guns not missiles!

Also note GSFG MR companies were substantially larger than ones in the rest of the Soviet military districts - they had an added MMG platoon with two more BMP/BTRs per company!

Try the MSH revised TOE for GSFG - lot of primary sources used, and several Russian natives with some handy access to very useful records.



http://modernspearhead.net/images/stories/...

Not too certain the BMP Coys had the MMg platoon, which also had the AGL's. BTR Rgts did have 2 AT4 per company, BMP didnt. All had at least 1 SA-7 per coy, add 1-2 stands to the Btn. Agian look on the battle Group Yahoo group for more info.
Beware MSH TOE - these use fixed no's - so you get 2 tanks in a Russian company, or 4 guns in an 18 gun battalions.


IanS

Ian - I'd rate the MSH TOE for GSFG as accurate - it's based off the actual Russian sources of the time

One thing to bear in mind is your comment on the numbers - MSH is very rigid, breaks down to one stand per five vehicles with no exceptions (basically). Which does bear watching with CWC's much more fluid approach to what constitutes a "stand"...

The SA-7's moved around - the Russians found trickling them down didn't work, so they concentrated at Battalion, then changed their minds back and forth. IIRC the dates of the changes are on the MSH doc so you should be able to sort out

The AGL's were a different weapon system to the MMGs in the infantry companies - they were a 'commanders reserve artillery' sort of thing, at least in the western based units. Like all things Soviet it gets very woolly with the other stuff. You're right they wouldn't exist together with the MMGs in other areas, becuase other areas didn't have the MMGs to start with

Oh yes, and the MMG units were removed late in the 80's, so the battalions would only have the AGL's then!

Sadly GSFG didn't (generally) use the excellent Vasilek auto-mortar, which I used to make great use of in Command Decision to drop acres of hot smoke to try and blind the hordes of M1 Abrams we always ended up against Nothing spoils TI like dropping a mile of hot smoke in front of them

Not questioning the accuracy, as I said before, due to MSH rules constants they produce odd units, like Russian Tank coys with 2 bases, since each base represents 5 elements.

And you cant always have what you want....

IanS

Yeah, if you're working on something a little more stretchy than MSH then you want to be aware of that

I like CWC for it's stretchiness with that, tbh - it's elastic enough in scale I can stretch my credibility far enough to make units playable in game AND feel plausible to my sense of reality.

Actually the MMG platoon in the motor rifle company was the standard Soviet org from the 1960s on. For whatever reason NATO intel missed it or wished it away for a period.

If you have the early version of FM100-2-3 then it doesn't appear. But if you have the far more accurate 1991 version then it is there as it should be. Ironically, as toxicpixie points out, by that stage the MMG platoon had been withdrawn as part of drawdowns at the end of the Cold War.

Same with the 1981 version of Isby as opposed to the later 2nd edition. You're much better off with the 2nd edition from an orgs point of view.