Integrating Tactics and Gunnery Training

Integrating Tactics in Gunnery Training by Lieutenant Colonel William W. Hansen and Captain Anthony M. Coroalles Introduction The ultimate direction of any unit’s gunnery program must be focused toward winning on a future battlefield. To accomplish this end requires the melding of many individual, crew, and unit skills. All these skills, however, revolve around two basic functions: the ability to kill enemy tanks, and the ability to survive. Ideally, gunnery skills (those skills that allow you to kill tanks) and tactical skills (those skills that allow you to survive or put you in a position from which to kill) should be inseparable. In practice, however, gunnery skills have traditionally been given the greater priority and attention over the requisite tactical skills. The traditional Tank Table VI11 (TT VIII), Crew Combat Qualification Course, has as much in common with armor combat as trap shooting does with infantry combat. It is generally a sterile course, run on range roads and fired from predetermined locations. It gives no value to the proper use of terrain, good map reading, or any other tactical skill. Unfortunately, for many units this is the high water mark of their gunnery program. In many units a successful gunnery program is not determined by how well a tank crew performs its kill/survive mission, but rather, on how many tanks distinguish, qualify or bolo. However, the trend is changing in the armored cavalry community and this article hopefully will add fuel to the fire in improving realism in gunnery training. During the past two years, 1st Squadron, 10th U.S. Cavalry, 4th Infantry Division, has experimented with a training program designed to break the traditional gunnery training mold. The program was developed around the scoutltank team but can easily be modified for use by a tank section. The underpinning of this program is the inseparability of tactics and gunnery. The inherent trade-off is a much tougher but more realistic qualification course for the scoutltank team. Pre-gnnnery training A year-round gunnery program is the basic foundation for well-trained crews and units. Yet with limited resources in terms of time, training areas and ammunition, how a unit trains and what it trains on are as important as how often the unit trains. To use a well-worn cliche - we must maximize our training time and resources. To this end we conducted an analysis of all the individual and crew tasks that relate to tank gunnery. From these tasks we then identified those tasks which we believe are most directly related to gunnery performance, and those tasks that, though important, are only indirectly related to performance. On the most critical tasks, we train intensively all year; the supporting tasks are trained on a moderate basis throughout the year. The vehicle for the intensive training is a two-phase Tank Crew Gunnery Skills Test (TCGST) (Table 1). The first phase of this TCGST is an evaluation of those individual skills that directly relate to gunnery performance. Each individual in a crew trains to standards on each of these tasks. When each member in a crew receives a satisfactory rating on the individual phase, the crew then proceeds to Phase 11, crew skills test (CST). The CST is conducted on a cross-country course using standard NATO targets, and is evaluated by a master gunner. Two devices that have proved of immense value in the conduct of this course are the Thru-Sight-Video system and the Talissi device. The use of the Thru-Sight-Video system allows the master gunner to critique each run while the crew sits around a television set and observes and hears a playback of their actions during each engagement. The television picture can be frozen and the gunner’s sight picture at the time that he gave “On the way” analyzed for proper lay of the gun (cross-hairs). Each fire command and the subsequent crew response can in this manner be analyzed and critiqued. Table 1. Tank Crew Gunnery Skills Test Individual Skills Test

1. Identify ammunition.

2. Load, clear, and immediate action on M240.

3. Load, clear, and immediate action on M85.

4. Givelrespond to initial and subsequent fire command.

5. Lay main gun for direction.

6. Range a target with a rangefinder.

7. Estimate range to a target.

8. Load main gun.

9. Prepare a range card. Crew Skills Test

1. Prepare-to-fire checks to include: boresight/calibrate weapons, place

2. Occupy a range card position and engage targets from range card

3. Engage targets stabilized mode (battlesight).

4. Move from a target-down to hull-down firing position.

5. Engage targets (precision).

6. Engage targets simultaneously. R/F into initial operation, perform computer checks. information.

march-aprill985 31

"All training needs to be focused Figure 1 The Talissi device is a laser-based training tool that provides immediate hit/miss feedback to the crew and also provides the mil error on each engagement. A simplified explanation follows: A reflector is mounted in the center of each target silhouette and a number of sensors are mounted around the turret of the firing tank. These feed into a computer/display system inside the turret. When a 'shot' is fired, the laser beam reflects off the target reflector and back to the sensors on the tank turret. The computer analyzes the angle of reflection and provides the hit/ miss data to the crew and the evaluator. The impact of these two devices is that good, interesting, gunnery training can be conducted year-round without training area or ammunition constraints. Additionally, the scouts are totally integrated in this course since the course is run as a combined tank/scout effort. Neither the Thru-Sight-Video nor the Talissi device are very good simulators for machinegun engagements. While the Thru-Sight-Video can be used for evaluating a coaxial machinegun engagement, neither training aid is useful in evaluating simultaneous machinegun engagements. Therefore, at regular intervals throughout the year, the squadron also conducts machinegun assault ranges for scouts and tanks. This course is similar to the old TT VI and consists of a variety of simultaneous, moving, and stationary coaxial and M85 machinegun engagements. Again, each crew is evaluated by a master gunner to strict performance measures and if necessary the course is re-run until completed in a satisfactory manner. The combination of individual skills testing (IST), CST and regular machinegun assault courses has enabled the squadron to move from calibration to TT VI11 qualification without firing the intermittent tables. This conserves ammunition and allows the squadron t o conduct additional TT IXs throughout the year. Comparing qualification rates when the squadron fired TTs VI & VI1 prior to VIII, and the current program are very favorable toward the current system. Table 2. Engagement 1. Move from a turret-down to a hull-down position. One moving T-72 tank (NATO No. 58),900-1,100 meters, and one stationary 7-72 tank (NATO No. 701, 900-1,300 meters using battlesight engagement from a stationary tank. Engagement 2. Two stationary tanks (NATO No. 58s),900-1,200 meters from a moving tank (stab mode). Engagement 3. Two stationary/T-72 tanks (NATO No. 70s). 1,400- 1,600 meters under precision engagement from a stationary tank (NBC environment). Engagement A Move from a turret-down to a hull-down position. One stationary T-72 tank (NATO No. 70), 1,400-1,600 meters using precision gunnery from a stationary tank (9man crew). Engagement 5. One stationary BMP (NATO No. 591, 400-900 meters using battlesight engagement. One RPG team, 100-300 meters using TC's sight from a moving tank (stab mode). Engagement 6. Two sets of troop targets, 400-600 meters using area engagement techniques from a moving tank (stab mode). Engagement 7. Move from a turret-down to a hull-down position. TWO stationary BMPs (NATO No. 59s), 1,400-1,600 meters, using precision engagement from a stationary tank (NBC environment). Q

MOVER

LD /'z / \ .. I Figure 2, Example 1 LD The Qualification Course As was pointed out earlier, all training needs to be focused toward winning on a future battlefield. Qualification courses that are run on range roads with engagements fired from clearly marked positions, at blatantly obvious target locations, fail to meet the criteria of combat realism. These courses develop bad crew habits and foster an atmosphere of gamesmanship among all concerned. A contributing factor is the unwillingness of commanders to make quali-fiction more realistic and subsequently harder to achieve. In command climates where career success or failure rides on the performance of crews during gunnery, this reluctance is understandable. No commander is going to put his neck on the line and make a qualification course tougher if he is going to be penalized when his results are lower than his peers running a standard course. In the 41D no statistics were kept on tank gunnery and although each TT VI11 is approved by the division G3, there exists the necessary latitude to innovate. A description of the cavalry scouthank qualification course follows: The qualification course began with a night tactical upload of ammunition in troop assembly areas. The scout/tank teams were then issued a platoon operations order and an overlay (figure 1). The operations order directed the scouthank teams to conduct a movement to contact in sector as part of a 32 march-aprill985

I . toward winning on a future battlefield ... Figure 3, Example 2 platoon. From the LD to PL Blue, the length of the course was approximately 7 kilometers. The next morning, each tank boresighted, and with its scout moved to the attack position. The range OIC, acting as platoon leader, then gave the order to cross the LD and move to the first checkpoint. A detailed look at some of the engagements will follow. When told to move, the scout and the tank team had to look to their map, locate the checkpoint they were being directed toward, and using the terrain to their best advantage, move to that location. The course engagements were based on the new MI tables. However, the times were modified to suit the characteristics of the M60AI RISE/Passive tank. The engagements are shown on Table 2 and a modified MI scoring matrix is shown on Table 3. The maximum points possible for each engagement was 100. To qualify, a tank had to achieve a score of 700 points or better on the combined daylnight phases. Example 1, figure 2. The OIC calls TM A on the radio and tells him to move to CP. The scout, using the low ground by the stream bed, moves out to CP 1 as the tank overwatches from the attack position. The scouts dismount at the foot of the high ground on CP 1 and reconnoiter the crest of the hill. The scouts then guide the track to a good hull-down position on the checkpoint. At this time the OIC presents a moving and a stationary target to the scouts on CP 1. The scouts call the tank, report the enemy targets to their front, and recommend the tank move to a firing position on their left. The tank, using the terrain, moves into a turret-down position on CP 1, identifies the targets and engages them. The tank crew evaluator, riding on the firing tank, starts timing the engagement when the tank uncovers itself. The time stops when the tank moves back into a turret-down position. Using the scoring matrix (Table 31, if the opening time for the engagement was 6 seconds (target hit on 1st tank), and the closing time was 16 seconds (target hit on the moving tank), the tank would have received 85 points for this engagement. Example 2, figure 3. TM A is now at CP 1. The OIC calls and tells the TM to move to CP 4. The scouts move out, using the folds in the ground for cover, dismount, reconnoiter and take up a position on CP 4. Observing that there are no enemy targets in sight, the scouts call the overwatching tank to move up to CP 4. As the tank is moving toward the CP, two targets are brought up on the tank's left flank. Since the tank is moving, this engagement is fired in a stabilized mode. The TCE starts the engagement time when the targets come up and stops the time when the last target is hit. Points are calculated as they were for example 1, but a different table is used. As the reader can see, this type of course molds the tankkcout team into one effective system. The scouts reconnoiter for targets, call the tanks forward and emplace them. Additionally, they can sense for the tank and suppress any additional targets that come into view. There is also a great amount of benefit in terms of safety habits in training with live ammunition. Conclusion. Although it is true that courses such as the one described here cannot be conducted everywhere (particularly in Europe) because of terrain and range fan constraints, the attempt must be made to blend tactics with gunnery whenever firing is conducted. Only by doing this will crews have the skills and confidence required to win on future battlefields. The key ingredient, however, is the chain of command. If an atmosphere prevails where TGATS and statics determine the conduct of gunnery training, then tactics will always take a back seat and innovation will remain non-existent.

LIEUTENANT COLONEL

WILLIAM W. HANSEN is commander, 1 st Squadron, 10th Cavalry, 4 t h Infantry Division. He was commissioned in infantry from OCS and has served as tank platoon leader and XO. H e commanded armored cavalry in Vietnam and Germany and served as squadron XO. H e holds a master's degree in international relations and secondary education from the University of Utah. H e is a graduate of the Naval Command and Staff College, Newport, RI.

CAPTAIN ANTHONY M.

COROALLES is a lialson officer with the Ranger Brigade at Ft. Benning, GA. A graduate of the University of San Francisco, he has served as an infantry platoon leader, scout platoon leader, Ranger company XO and rifle company commander. H e served as aide-decamp to t h e deputy commander, CACDA, and t h e CG, 4th Infantry Division. He was S3, 1 st Squadron, 10th Cavalry, 4th Infantry Division at the time of this writing.

march-april1985 33