Mobile Fire Support
Hi MikeSevens,
Yes; arty support in Vietnam was very good and particularly where Fire Support Patrol Bases had overlapping gun ranges. But that concept of operations is pretty predictable and patrolling from garrisons somewhat advantages the enemy who can generally move freely beyond artillery range. Same lessons learned by the French in Vietnam apply in Afghanistan today.
Some contend 1 Australian Task Force dominated their TAOR by frequently establishing FSPBs to support patrolling, but debatable. The local Viet Cong infrastructure was severely dented but the North Vietnamese Army still roamed into the area when it suited their strategies.
Many ex-military worldwide question why there has not been broader use of air mobility in Afghanistan to minimize the IED threat, but that appears to be a resources issue with some political constraints. What seems lacking for the Australian ISAF component (apart from own utility helicopters) is more suitable integral armoured cavalry support to enable mobile immediate fire support response.
The M113 light armoured cavalry vehicle, as operated in Vietnam by Australian forces, allowed greater operational flexibility. Fitted with a 76mm gun turret and mortar, it could provide immediate fire support response out to about 10k. But, the heavy weapon capability has been excluded in an ongoing (botched) enhancement program for 431 M113 vehicles, although some will be adapted for mortar carriage (120mm?). Too many negatives in employing cumbersome behemoth tanks.
Last edited by Bushranger 71; 23rd Oct 2010 at 23:22.